Fire Cavanaugh

[Hedley Lamarr]

7 hours ago, LaunchCode said:

"Awhile" is understatement.  O'line recruiting has gotten worse last few years.  Not same, not better, worse and downright abysmal this year.  At this rate 2033 could be promising.  

Explain how O-Line recruiting has got worse the last few years? Benhart, Corcoran look like two Tackles that will end up being very good. Piper looked solid. Jurgens appears to have finally cleaned up his snaps which is all he was struggling with. In the 21 class we signed another 4 star tackle and a couple other massive 3 stars. Seems like OL is trending in the right direction compared to say RB where you could very easily say it has gotten worse in my opinion. 

[Mavric]

8 hours ago, LaunchCode said:

"Awhile" is understatement.  O'line recruiting has gotten worse last few years.  Not same, not better, worse and downright abysmal this year.  At this rate 2033 could be promising.  

 

[Hedley Lamarr]

9 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

it has got so bad that at the end of the year we had Riley recruited Sr Oline transfer because they were getting beat out by Freshmen. Oh how terrible our Oline recruitment has been. 

[Hedley Lamarr]

11 hours ago, LaunchCode said:

"Awhile" is understatement.  O'line recruiting has gotten worse last few years.  Not same, not better, worse and downright abysmal this year.  At this rate 2033 could be promising.  

Additionally, 

 

Nebraska OL Recruiting by Year

2008- **** Steinkuhler (played DT his whole career) *** Thompson (miss), *** Henry (hit), 

2009- ***Sirles (hit), *** Ash (miss), *** Qvale (hit), *** Coffey (miss)

2010-  **** Rodriguez (debatable), **** Hardrick (hit), *** Moudy (miss)

2011- **** Moore (hit but left after 1 year), **** Reeves (debatable), **** Klachko (miss), *** Sterup (ended up decent) *** Price (miss)

2012- **** Thurston (miss), *** Whitaker (miss)

2013- *** Knevel (debatable), *** Hannon (miss), *** Johnson (miss), *** Finnin (miss), *** Kondolo (hit)

2014- **** Farmer (hit), **** Gates (hit) **** Foster (hit)

2015- **** Barnett (N/A), *** Gaylord (miss), *** (hit/quit)

2016- **** Raridon (miss), **** Farniok (hit), *** Brokop (miss), *** Wilson (hit/just left)

2017- **** Jaimes (hit), *** Sichterman (miss), *** Bando (currently miss but may get shot this year) *** Walker (currently on DL)

2018- **** Jurgens (hit so far), *** Farniok (miss), *** Canty (never made it)

2019- **** Benhart (hit), *** Lynn (N/A), *** Banks (N/A) *** Anderson (transfer), *** Piper (hit), *** Fritzsche (N/A) *** Bland (never made it)

2020- **** Corcoran (hit), *** Conn (N/A), *** Nouili (N/A) **** Miller (N/A)

2021-  **** Prochazka (N/A)  *** Lutovsky (N/A), *** Yager (N/A)

 

 

I find it hard to imagine that you wont see a couple more hits out of the 2019-2021 class when it is all said and done. 

[LaunchCode]

3 hours ago, Hedley Lamarr said:

it has got so bad that at the end of the year we had Riley recruited Sr Oline transfer because they were getting beat out by Freshmen. Oh how terrible our Oline recruitment has been. 

 

It's fairly common for players recruited to fit one system/style of offense to not fit what a new coach/system is looking for.  A major reason why constant coaching, scheme, and system changes is a self inflected guaranteed setback for most programs.

 

If as some are suggesting the hog recruiting/talent is so much better now, then it would lead one to conclude the play calling/system and development are worse. 

 

2016 we were #1 in BIG for sacks allowed.  Since 2017 we average 9th.  Stats are for losers however and that's our most glaring stat as of late, the L column.  

[Hedley Lamarr]

14 minutes ago, LaunchCode said:

 

It's fairly common for players recruited to fit one system/style of offense to not fit what a new coach/system is looking for.  A major reason why constant coaching, scheme, and system changes is a self inflected guaranteed setback for most programs.

 

If as some are suggesting the hog recruiting/talent is so much better now, then it would lead one to conclude the play calling/system and development are worse. 

 

2016 we were #1 in BIG for sacks allowed.  Since 2017 we average 9th.  Stats are for losers however and that's our most glaring stat as of late, the L column.  

So that stat alone leads you to believe our OL recruiting and development etc are worse based off of a single stat around sacks allowed in the B1G? Who was our starting OL in 2016? Our OL took a dump over the Riley years in terms of depth and any kind of stocking of the cupboards. 

[LaunchCode]

14 minutes ago, Hedley Lamarr said:

So that stat alone leads you to believe our OL recruiting and development etc are worse based off of a single stat around sacks allowed in the B1G? Who was our starting OL in 2016? Our OL took a dump over the Riley years in terms of depth and any kind of stocking of the cupboards. 

The short answer to your question is no.  If I'm being honest, it's the constant losing, dumb mistakes, repeat turnovers and player defections that has me questioning development and coaching.

 

The sacks allowed stat comes to my mind only because when I think of the SF era,  a video loop pops up in my head of the opponents defense taking the ball away from A.M. in the backfield.  Our 22 fumbles (in 8 games) is an improvement over last years total 27.  The bad news is, there was actually a per game increase this year.  

[BigRedBuster]

16 minutes ago, LaunchCode said:

The short answer to your question is no.  If I'm being honest, it's the constant losing, dumb mistakes, repeat turnovers and player defections that has me questioning development and coaching.

Wait....I thought you were questioning recruiting.  Now it's development and coaching?

 

I'm so confused.

[Hedley Lamarr]

7 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Wait....I thought you were questioning recruiting.  Now it's development and coaching?

 

I'm so confused.

You see, once you show that it isnt a recruiting issue you have to go to the next culprit of coaching and development. Unfortunately when the last game of the year you start 3 Freshmen and a Soph on your OL it shows at minimum some ability to develop and get your young ones to play ball. 

[Gorillahawk]

30 minutes ago, Hedley Lamarr said:

You see, once you show that it isnt a recruiting issue you have to go to the next culprit of coaching and development. Unfortunately when the last game of the year you start 3 Freshmen and a Soph on your OL it shows at minimum some ability to develop and get your young ones to play ball. 

 

Plus our last game may have been against a poor rutgers team, but a bunch of freshmen and sophomores played pretty darn well against a P5 team. I'm usually a pretty optimistic guy, so it's no surprise I think the line has a bright future and we'll see improvement next year

[Hedley Lamarr]

1 minute ago, Gorillahawk said:

 

Plus our last game may have been against a poor rutgers team, but a bunch of freshmen and sophomores played pretty darn well against a P5 team. I'm usually a pretty optimistic guy, so it's no surprise I think the line has a bright future and we'll see improvement next year

I think we have a fantastic foundation of young OL. I also predict Lutovsky from this years class will end up being the steal of the class. He is already built like a P5 OG, the way he has recomped his body over covid is pretty impressive for a human his size. 

[LaunchCode]

10 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Wait....I thought you were questioning recruiting.  Now it's development and coaching?

 

I'm so confused.

Wasn't a question, was a statement.   I was stating my opinion contrary to others views in this thread,  I'm not seeing an improvement in OL recruitment. 

 

Others responded in disagreement, so I asked, if the Oline recruiting has improved as much as they suggest, where's the proof.  So far the only "proof" offered is, well a bunch of young guys started late in the season therefore OL recruiting must be amazing.    Maybe you buy that reasoning, but not a convincing for me therefore calling other factors such as development and coaching into question.

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, LaunchCode said:

Wasn't a question, was a statement.   I was stating my opinion contrary to others views in this thread,  I'm not seeing an improvement in OL recruitment. 

 

Others responded in disagreement, so I asked, if the Oline recruiting has improved as much as they suggest, where's the proof.  So far the only "proof" offered is, well a bunch of young guys started late in the season therefore OL recruiting must be amazing.    Maybe you buy that reasoning, but not a convincing for me therefore calling other factors such as development and coaching into question.

Let me ask this.  How long would you expect recruits to be in a program as an incoming O line high school recruit before they can make a major impact on the production of the O line?

[Hedley Lamarr]

49 minutes ago, LaunchCode said:

Wasn't a question, was a statement.   I was stating my opinion contrary to others views in this thread,  I'm not seeing an improvement in OL recruitment. 

 

Others responded in disagreement, so I asked, if the Oline recruiting has improved as much as they suggest, where's the proof.  So far the only "proof" offered is, well a bunch of young guys started late in the season therefore OL recruiting must be amazing.    Maybe you buy that reasoning, but not a convincing for me therefore calling other factors such as development and coaching into question.

I literally posted every OL recruit over the last decade for you....

[LaunchCode]

45 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Let me ask this.  How long would you expect recruits to be in a program as an incoming O line high school recruit before they can make a major impact on the production of the O line?

Good question, and tough to answer with certainty because it's my view lines play and develop best as units not a collection of individuals. Any good D is going to expose and attack where they think the weakest/least experienced link in your line is.    

 

This gets to part of my thought process in recruiting, have we recruited in a manner which allows for development of a unit versus a piecemeal approach that's a constant revolving door of players?  Obviously players come and go in college so how is this being accounted for in recruiting of Olinemen?  Is factoring in both natural and unnatural attrition being properly addressed so our stockpile of depth and continuity as units is developing as it should? I'm in serious doubt of this.

 

What do you think?