Mavric Posted April 14, 2017 Author Share Posted April 14, 2017 Wow! Gonna be a ton of recruits there. Remember a few years back that coach we had who didn't even want to hold the spring game? Times have changed! Do you remember the coach who wouldn't even go after anyone ranked a 4 star, because we had no chance? As usual, don't let the facts get in the way of a good argument. LOL. slight sarcasm, but since you thought it was a challengable post, what do you have to say with substance? Also, I believe Bo was on record talking about highly ranked recruits and saying it wasn't worth his time, because they couldn't land any of them in the middle of nowhere Nebraska. ~roughly He didn't say they weren't worth his time. They said they needed to be selective in who they went after and not waste resources on guys that they are not in it with. They went after the big fish with a connection, either a teammate on the team, coach familiar with Nebraska, or a fan of Nebraska. That is really what all of recruiting is. It appears Riley has more connections with the West Coast and therefore can pursue more kids with those connections. Also, he had done a good job of hiring recruiters to expand that impact from not just west coast kids. But to say the other staff just said it is not worth our time is ridiculous. Even Riley regrets the time they spent recruiting Sarrell last year bc Stanford was his dream school and had he known that they wouldnt have wasted the time and resources on him. Knowing where to put your work in is the name of the game in recruiting. That is why we have been burned a bit at the WR position the last few classes. We have turned away solid prospects chasing big fish and havent quite cashed in like we wanted. It is about balance and if we could win some big games we will win more of those battles than we lose. Every thing you stated is spot on - and yes saying that BO didn't recruit top guys is "over stating" the facts. However this staff seems to relish the challenge and the last staff showed signs of not liking the challenge and went as far on more than one occasion to state that NU and many disadvantages when it came to getting these guys. Well it depends on your definition. Miles Rileys staff has been in on more top guys already in a shorter time as Head Coach. Now that's a fact for you Mav. Being in on top guys <> landing top guys. Through 2 years, the numbers tell us Riley recruiting = Bo recruiting That's a ban'able offense in my opinion. Riley recruiting is not = to he who must not be named... Once again, see Post #15. 1 Quote Link to comment
Red Five Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Is Riley's recruiting process/organization better? I would say 'yes'. But the end results so far under Riley have been pretty much the same that we saw under Bo. And one could argue that Bo brought in higher level talent (more 4*s) than what Riley has done. 2017 #23 / 5 4*s / 20 commits 2016 #24 / 5 4*s / 21 commits 2015 #30 / 4 4*s / 21 commits (transition class) 2014 #36 / 2 4*s / 25 commits 2013 #22 / 7 4*s / 24 commits 2012 #31 / 8 4*s / 17 commits 2011 #16 / 9 4*s / 21 commits 2010 #27 / 5 4*s / 20 commits With that said, hopefully it changes this year and we get that breakthrough top 10-15 class. 1 Quote Link to comment
ScottyIce Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Wow! Gonna be a ton of recruits there. Remember a few years back that coach we had who didn't even want to hold the spring game? Times have changed! Do you remember the coach who wouldn't even go after anyone ranked a 4 star, because we had no chance? As usual, don't let the facts get in the way of a good argument. LOL. slight sarcasm, but since you thought it was a challengable post, what do you have to say with substance? Also, I believe Bo was on record talking about highly ranked recruits and saying it wasn't worth his time, because they couldn't land any of them in the middle of nowhere Nebraska. ~roughly He didn't say they weren't worth his time. They said they needed to be selective in who they went after and not waste resources on guys that they are not in it with. They went after the big fish with a connection, either a teammate on the team, coach familiar with Nebraska, or a fan of Nebraska. That is really what all of recruiting is. It appears Riley has more connections with the West Coast and therefore can pursue more kids with those connections. Also, he had done a good job of hiring recruiters to expand that impact from not just west coast kids. But to say the other staff just said it is not worth our time is ridiculous. Even Riley regrets the time they spent recruiting Sarrell last year bc Stanford was his dream school and had he known that they wouldnt have wasted the time and resources on him. Knowing where to put your work in is the name of the game in recruiting. That is why we have been burned a bit at the WR position the last few classes. We have turned away solid prospects chasing big fish and havent quite cashed in like we wanted. It is about balance and if we could win some big games we will win more of those battles than we lose. Every thing you stated is spot on - and yes saying that BO didn't recruit top guys is "over stating" the facts. However this staff seems to relish the challenge and the last staff showed signs of not liking the challenge and went as far on more than one occasion to state that NU and many disadvantages when it came to getting these guys. Well it depends on your definition. Miles Rileys staff has been in on more top guys already in a shorter time as Head Coach. Now that's a fact for you Mav. Being in on top guys <> landing top guys. Through 2 years, the numbers tell us Riley recruiting = Bo recruiting That's a ban'able offense in my opinion. Riley recruiting is not = to he who must not be named... Once again, see Post #15. Let me know when you start posting info again... 1 Quote Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 I'm not sure what the argument here is but I think the better comparison test between Riley and Pelini is going to be who retained more of the higher rated prospects. Just a thought. 3 Quote Link to comment
GBRFAN Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Wow! Gonna be a ton of recruits there. Remember a few years back that coach we had who didn't even want to hold the spring game? Times have changed! Do you remember the coach who wouldn't even go after anyone ranked a 4 star, because we had no chance? As usual, don't let the facts get in the way of a good argument. LOL. slight sarcasm, but since you thought it was a challengable post, what do you have to say with substance? Also, I believe Bo was on record talking about highly ranked recruits and saying it wasn't worth his time, because they couldn't land any of them in the middle of nowhere Nebraska. ~roughly He didn't say they weren't worth his time. They said they needed to be selective in who they went after and not waste resources on guys that they are not in it with. They went after the big fish with a connection, either a teammate on the team, coach familiar with Nebraska, or a fan of Nebraska. That is really what all of recruiting is. It appears Riley has more connections with the West Coast and therefore can pursue more kids with those connections. Also, he had done a good job of hiring recruiters to expand that impact from not just west coast kids. But to say the other staff just said it is not worth our time is ridiculous. Even Riley regrets the time they spent recruiting Sarrell last year bc Stanford was his dream school and had he known that they wouldnt have wasted the time and resources on him. Knowing where to put your work in is the name of the game in recruiting. That is why we have been burned a bit at the WR position the last few classes. We have turned away solid prospects chasing big fish and havent quite cashed in like we wanted. It is about balance and if we could win some big games we will win more of those battles than we lose. Every thing you stated is spot on - and yes saying that BO didn't recruit top guys is "over stating" the facts. However this staff seems to relish the challenge and the last staff showed signs of not liking the challenge and went as far on more than one occasion to state that NU and many disadvantages when it came to getting these guys. Well it depends on your definition. Miles Rileys staff has been in on more top guys already in a shorter time as Head Coach. Now that's a fact for you Mav. Being in on top guys <> landing top guys. Through 2 years, the numbers tell us Riley recruiting = Bo recruiting That's a ban'able offense in my opinion. Riley recruiting is not = to he who must not be named... i'm not sure what's more ban-able the post or the two that gave it a +1 Quote Link to comment
RedDenver Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Is Riley's recruiting process/organization better? I would say 'yes'. But the end results so far under Riley have been pretty much the same that we saw under Bo. And one could argue that Bo brought in higher level talent (more 4*s) than what Riley has done. 2017 #23 / 5 4*s / 20 commits 2016 #24 / 5 4*s / 21 commits 2015 #30 / 4 4*s / 21 commits (transition class) 2014 #36 / 2 4*s / 25 commits 2013 #22 / 7 4*s / 24 commits 2012 #31 / 8 4*s / 17 commits 2011 #16 / 9 4*s / 21 commits 2010 #27 / 5 4*s / 20 commits With that said, hopefully it changes this year and we get that breakthrough top 10-15 class. I agree with your point that they're basically the same so far. But even if Riley only lands a top 25 class, that'll be three in a row, which is better than Bo who was really up and down in recruiting rankings. Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted April 14, 2017 Author Share Posted April 14, 2017 I'm not sure what the argument here is but I think the better comparison test between Riley and Pelini is going to be who retained more of the higher rated prospects. Just a thought. This is a fair point. To me, that's not the same thing as recruiting but it's related. Quote Link to comment
ScottyIce Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Is Riley's recruiting process/organization better? I would say 'yes'. But the end results so far under Riley have been pretty much the same that we saw under Bo. And one could argue that Bo brought in higher level talent (more 4*s) than what Riley has done. 2017 #23 / 5 4*s / 20 commits 2016 #24 / 5 4*s / 21 commits 2015 #30 / 4 4*s / 21 commits (transition class) 2014 #36 / 2 4*s / 25 commits 2013 #22 / 7 4*s / 24 commits 2012 #31 / 8 4*s / 17 commits 2011 #16 / 9 4*s / 21 commits 2010 #27 / 5 4*s / 20 commits With that said, hopefully it changes this year and we get that breakthrough top 10-15 class. 2018 MR- 89.5 (so far) 2017 MR- 87.5 2016 MR- 87 2015 MR- 86.1 2014 Bo - 84.7 avg 2013 Bo- 86.5 2012 Bo- 87.7 2011 Bo- 88.3 2010 Bo- 78 (lol) Pretty laughable that you tried to use Team Ranking, when you basically have no control over who other teams get to get in front of you and it bases it off of how many recruits you land. Besides that, MR proving he can get better and better, while Bo fell off a cliff. Now, will you please stay off my lawn? 1 Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted April 14, 2017 Author Share Posted April 14, 2017 Let me know when you start posting info again... You usually disappear when I post info because you don't have a argument against it. But anyway, this is from a thread that has been going for over a year. It was brought up that average ranking may be a better indication that class ranking. the reasoning for that is it - to some extent - corrects for different class sizes. With 2017 Class Final Class Average Recruits (# 4*+) 02 .8316 18 (2) 03 .8316 19 (2) 04 .8237 20 (2) 05* .8523 32 (7) 06* .8493 22 (5) 07* .8587 26 (6) 08 .8449 29 (3) 09 .8580 19 (2) 10* .8642 20 (5) 11 .8832 21 (9) 12 .8773 17 (8) 13 .8655 24 (7) 14 .8601 25 (2) 15 .8617 21 (4) 16 .8707 21 (5) 17 .8758 20 (5) * 2005 - Leon Jackson isn't on 247's list but was a 4* on Rivals * 2006 - Major Culbert doesn't show a rating on 247 but was a high 3* on Rivals * 2007 - Armando Murillo (JUCO) not included in 247's list * 2010 - Stanley Jean-Baptiste and Chase Harper (JUCOs) not included in 247's rankings 2 Quote Link to comment
swmohusker Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Wow! Gonna be a ton of recruits there. Remember a few years back that coach we had who didn't even want to hold the spring game? Times have changed! Do you remember the coach who wouldn't even go after anyone ranked a 4 star, because we had no chance? As usual, don't let the facts get in the way of a good argument. LOL. slight sarcasm, but since you thought it was a challengable post, what do you have to say with substance? Also, I believe Bo was on record talking about highly ranked recruits and saying it wasn't worth his time, because they couldn't land any of them in the middle of nowhere Nebraska. ~roughly He didn't say they weren't worth his time. They said they needed to be selective in who they went after and not waste resources on guys that they are not in it with. They went after the big fish with a connection, either a teammate on the team, coach familiar with Nebraska, or a fan of Nebraska. That is really what all of recruiting is. It appears Riley has more connections with the West Coast and therefore can pursue more kids with those connections. Also, he had done a good job of hiring recruiters to expand that impact from not just west coast kids. But to say the other staff just said it is not worth our time is ridiculous. Even Riley regrets the time they spent recruiting Sarrell last year bc Stanford was his dream school and had he known that they wouldnt have wasted the time and resources on him. Knowing where to put your work in is the name of the game in recruiting. That is why we have been burned a bit at the WR position the last few classes. We have turned away solid prospects chasing big fish and havent quite cashed in like we wanted. It is about balance and if we could win some big games we will win more of those battles than we lose. Every thing you stated is spot on - and yes saying that BO didn't recruit top guys is "over stating" the facts. However this staff seems to relish the challenge and the last staff showed signs of not liking the challenge and went as far on more than one occasion to state that NU and many disadvantages when it came to getting these guys. Well it depends on your definition. Miles Rileys staff has been in on more top guys already in a shorter time as Head Coach. Now that's a fact for you Mav. Being in on top guys <> landing top guys. Through 2 years, the numbers tell us Riley recruiting = Bo recruiting That's a ban'able offense in my opinion. Riley recruiting is not = to he who must not be named... Once again, see Post #15. Let me know when you start posting info again... I hope your optimism is right, but the info doesn't back your claim. 1 Quote Link to comment
Red Five Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Is Riley's recruiting process/organization better? I would say 'yes'. But the end results so far under Riley have been pretty much the same that we saw under Bo. And one could argue that Bo brought in higher level talent (more 4*s) than what Riley has done. 2017 #23 / 5 4*s / 20 commits 2016 #24 / 5 4*s / 21 commits 2015 #30 / 4 4*s / 21 commits (transition class) 2014 #36 / 2 4*s / 25 commits 2013 #22 / 7 4*s / 24 commits 2012 #31 / 8 4*s / 17 commits 2011 #16 / 9 4*s / 21 commits 2010 #27 / 5 4*s / 20 commits With that said, hopefully it changes this year and we get that breakthrough top 10-15 class. I agree with your point that they're basically the same so far. But even if Riley only lands a top 25 class, that'll be three in a row, which is better than Bo who was really up and down in recruiting rankings. Bo's 2014 class was abysmal ranking wise. And that class comprises a lot of starters on our current squad. The only reason the 2012 class is ranked in the 30s is due to only taking 17 commits. Half of that class as 4*s, so it was plenty packed with talent. Quote Link to comment
ScottyIce Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 I'm not sure what the argument here is but I think the better comparison test between Riley and Pelini is going to be who retained more of the higher rated prospects. Just a thought. This is a fair point. To me, that's not the same thing as recruiting but it's related. Riley beats Bo both ways. Riley has already done more for the program than Bo ever did. Quote Link to comment
ScottyIce Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Is Riley's recruiting process/organization better? I would say 'yes'. But the end results so far under Riley have been pretty much the same that we saw under Bo. And one could argue that Bo brought in higher level talent (more 4*s) than what Riley has done. 2017 #23 / 5 4*s / 20 commits 2016 #24 / 5 4*s / 21 commits 2015 #30 / 4 4*s / 21 commits (transition class) 2014 #36 / 2 4*s / 25 commits 2013 #22 / 7 4*s / 24 commits 2012 #31 / 8 4*s / 17 commits 2011 #16 / 9 4*s / 21 commits 2010 #27 / 5 4*s / 20 commits With that said, hopefully it changes this year and we get that breakthrough top 10-15 class. I agree with your point that they're basically the same so far. But even if Riley only lands a top 25 class, that'll be three in a row, which is better than Bo who was really up and down in recruiting rankings. Bo's 2014 class was abysmal ranking wise. And that class comprises a lot of starters on our current squad. The only reason the 2012 class is ranked in the 30s is due to only taking 17 commits. Half of that class as 4*s, so it was plenty packed with talent. I don't give a sh#t about team ranking. You're proving my point. It's fun to be ranked high, but it's not really under your control. It depends on other teams and how many commits you get in your class. Talk average ratings. And we're going to include how players panned out in this discussion? Goodness gracious. Quote Link to comment
ScottyIce Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Is Riley's recruiting process/organization better? I would say 'yes'. But the end results so far under Riley have been pretty much the same that we saw under Bo. And one could argue that Bo brought in higher level talent (more 4*s) than what Riley has done. 2017 #23 / 5 4*s / 20 commits 2016 #24 / 5 4*s / 21 commits 2015 #30 / 4 4*s / 21 commits (transition class) 2014 #36 / 2 4*s / 25 commits 2013 #22 / 7 4*s / 24 commits 2012 #31 / 8 4*s / 17 commits 2011 #16 / 9 4*s / 21 commits 2010 #27 / 5 4*s / 20 commits With that said, hopefully it changes this year and we get that breakthrough top 10-15 class. 2018 MR- 89.5 (so far)2017 MR- 87.5 2016 MR- 87 2015 MR- 86.1 2014 Bo - 84.7 avg 2013 Bo- 86.5 2012 Bo- 87.7 2011 Bo- 88.3 2010 Bo- 78 (lol) Pretty laughable that you tried to use Team Ranking, when you basically have no control over who other teams get to get in front of you and it bases it off of how many recruits you land. Besides that, MR proving he can get better and better, while Bo fell off a cliff. Now, will you please stay off my lawn? Here you go Mav. Didn't go run and hide anywhere. Quote Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Is Riley's recruiting process/organization better? I would say 'yes'. But the end results so far under Riley have been pretty much the same that we saw under Bo. And one could argue that Bo brought in higher level talent (more 4*s) than what Riley has done. 2017 #23 / 5 4*s / 20 commits 2016 #24 / 5 4*s / 21 commits 2015 #30 / 4 4*s / 21 commits (transition class) 2014 #36 / 2 4*s / 25 commits 2013 #22 / 7 4*s / 24 commits 2012 #31 / 8 4*s / 17 commits 2011 #16 / 9 4*s / 21 commits 2010 #27 / 5 4*s / 20 commits With that said, hopefully it changes this year and we get that breakthrough top 10-15 class. I agree with your point that they're basically the same so far. But even if Riley only lands a top 25 class, that'll be three in a row, which is better than Bo who was really up and down in recruiting rankings. 2010: 3 out of 5 of the 4 stars completed their eligibility. One of those being a JUCO. Cooper was the only standout 2011: 4 out of 9 completed eligibility. None were standouts 2012: 4 out of 8 completed eligibility. Cross, Westerkamp, Rose-Ivey, and Armstrong were the standouts. 2013: 4 out of 7 completed eligibility. Newby, Banderas, and Newby standouts 2014: 2 for 2 so far. Gates and Farmer 2015: 3 out of 4 so far still on the team. Only Jordan Stevenson is gone 2016: 5 out of 5 still here 2017: 5 for 5 but obviously it's early. So Bo was 17-31 on 4 stars staying through their eligibility. Riley is currently 13-14 but again it's early 1 Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.