Recruiting grades

[Nebfanatic]

No but for Wisconsin a 40th class isn't an F. If we had a recruiting ranking of 45 would you really give that a passing grade? For US that doesn't cut it. For Wisconsin it does. They work with what they have. We have to do the same but that doesn't mean we need to have less to work with just because we can get more.

[Nebfanatic]

Also do you disagree that recruiting success is relative to each program? I mean it's not like every school has the exact same expectations

[Making Chimichangas]

No but for Wisconsin a 40th class isn't an F. If we had a recruiting ranking of 45 would you really give that a passing grade? For US that doesn't cut it. For Wisconsin it does. They work with what they have. We have to do the same but that doesn't mean we need to have less to work with just because we can get more.

 

1. But.....the supposition is, as stated by bnilhome and agreed to by others within this thread, is: a class rated at 40th or below is an F.

 

2. According to my grading scale, a 44th rated class nationally would be a B-.

 

3. I am in no way suggesting we should accept "less" to work with. In point of fact, I agree we need to recruit at the maximum level because I want the best players we can get.

 

However, again, people are suggesting that ANY recruiting class rated 35th - 40th, and lower, nationally is an F. And that type of grading is preposterous.

[Mavric]

 

I agree with Drunk Off Punch here. In theory you are correct Making Chimichangas, but recruiting success is relative to situation. For example, UCF had a great recruiting class this year, they finished 58th I believe. If we recruited 58th we would be like 8th in the BIG or worse. UCF had the best recruiting class in their conference. That is an A for them. Would you consider 58 an A for us?

 

If Nebraska had the 58th rated class, that would be a C+ class.

 

I'll ask again: If we take the notion that any recruiting class below 40 is an F...

 

Then does that mean that since 2011 Wisconsin has been kicking our collective arses up and down the field, every single year, with consistently "F" rated classes?

 

I would love for someone to address this question without moving the goalposts.

 

And remember that Northwestern, Purdue, Illinois, and Iowa (whom we've supposedly out-recruited by a wide margin every single year) consistently play us tough and down to the wire every year.

 

Or, could all you guys just admit that the level of separation from a class rated 20th to a class rated 11th is a matter of perception? Naw, you wouldn't do that...cause seeing all those stars nest to recruits names are pretty.

 

I am not saying we shouldn't recruit the best talent out there, but you guys take opinion (recruiting rankings) and state them as absolute fact.

 

Doesn't ring any "alarm bells" when recruiting analysts say you could, in a given year, swap the #10 team for the #1 team? I mean seriously, these rankings are nothing close to absolute.

 

It is not moving the goalposts to say that recruiting grades are different for different schools. This should be obvious. Alabama is not in the same recruiting boat as Eastern Michigan.

 

Please stop with asinine argument.

[Scott Tenorman]

 

 

I agree with Drunk Off Punch here. In theory you are correct Making Chimichangas, but recruiting success is relative to situation. For example, UCF had a great recruiting class this year, they finished 58th I believe. If we recruited 58th we would be like 8th in the BIG or worse. UCF had the best recruiting class in their conference. That is an A for them. Would you consider 58 an A for us?

If Nebraska had the 58th rated class, that would be a C+ class.

 

I'll ask again: If we take the notion that any recruiting class below 40 is an F...

 

Then does that mean that since 2011 Wisconsin has been kicking our collective arses up and down the field, every single year, with consistently "F" rated classes?

 

I would love for someone to address this question without moving the goalposts.

 

And remember that Northwestern, Purdue, Illinois, and Iowa (whom we've supposedly out-recruited by a wide margin every single year) consistently play us tough and down to the wire every year.

 

Or, could all you guys just admit that the level of separation from a class rated 20th to a class rated 11th is a matter of perception? Naw, you wouldn't do that...cause seeing all those stars nest to recruits names are pretty.

 

I am not saying we shouldn't recruit the best talent out there, but you guys take opinion (recruiting rankings) and state them as absolute fact.

 

Doesn't ring any "alarm bells" when recruiting analysts say you could, in a given year, swap the #10 team for the #1 team? I mean seriously, these rankings are nothing close to absolute.

They're much closer to absolute than not. Are you saying there's no correlation between recruiting rankings and the top 25? I don't think anybody takes them as complete absolutes, but they're pretty close on average. Some under achieve and over achieve every year, that doesn't mean recruiting rankings are total crap.

[Making Chimichangas]

Mavric said: It is not moving the goalposts to say that recruiting grades are different for different schools. This should be obvious. Alabama is not in the same recruiting boat as Eastern Michigan. Please stop with asinine argument.

 

​Of course recruiting grades would be different for Alabama versus Eastern Michigan. Alabama is in the top 5 so they'd be an A+ and Eastern Michigan is probably in the 90's or lower so that would be a D or lower.

 

Saying that a recruiting class ranked 40th nationally is an F is as asinine as it gets.

 

And I notice that literally NO ONE has addressed my question: If a recruiting class ranked 40th or lower nationally is an F, then explain to me how and why Wisconsin beats us like a damn drum every single year?

 

And how do schools like Northwestern, Purdue, Illinois, Minnesota, give us all we can handle every year with consistently F-rated recruiting classes?

 

I'll answer my own question since obviously you all are avoiding it: It's because recruiting rankings are nothing more than educated guesses and opinions. But the industry has convinced too many people that an opinion of who's the "#1 player in the country" is the same thing as a fact.

 

The hard truth is that there is legitimately no way to rank players. The "#1" player is more often than not, not the #1 player.

 

Two examples: Melvin Gordon and Ameer Abdullah. In 2011, Melvin Gordon was the 24th "best" RB and Ameer Abdullah was rated as the 53rd or so "best" RB coming out of high school. Fast forward to the '15 NFL draft, and Melvin Gordon was the only RB taken in the first round. Ameer Abdullah was the next RB taken in the 2nd round. So was Melvin Gordon really the "24th" best RB? Was Ameer Abdullah really the 53rd best RB?

 

The takeaway: Yes, Nebraska needs to recruit the most talented players possible. But relying on some recruiting services opinions that we signed the #3, 6, 43, etc rated player at a given position is crazy. It is even crazier to rely on that once you realize these player rankings are mothing more than someone's opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[MinnwiscowaSker]

40 for Nebraska is an F.

 

40 for Eastern whoever is an A+.

 

This is a Nebraska message board. Therefor 40 is an F.

[Making Chimichangas]

40 for Nebraska is an F.

 

40 for Eastern whoever is an A+.

 

This is a Nebraska message board. Therefor 40 is an F.

 

Circular reasoning at it's "best".

 

Tell you what, if Nebraska, as a team, played with half the heart and intensity that Wisconsin and the rest of the Big 10 played with, we would have ended the conference title drought years ago.

 

40th nationally rated recruiting class is an F.........

[The Dude]

40 is a D- in my opinion.

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

40 for Nebraska is an F.

 

40 for Eastern whoever is an A+.

 

This is a Nebraska message board. Therefor 40 is an F.

Circular reasoning at it's "best".

 

Tell you what, if Nebraska, as a team, played with half the heart and intensity that Wisconsin and the rest of the Big 10 played with, we would have ended the conference title drought years ago.

 

40th nationally rated recruiting class is an F.........

We get it, you are going to defend your scale until you die no matter what reasoning is put before you. If you want to give a passing grade to a 40th ranked recruiting class at Nebraska, go right ahead but most of us here know that isn't going to get it done. Fortunately we won't have to see the results of something like that any time soon.