The Talent Debate - 2017 Edition

[Mavric]

Mostly recruiting rankings.  While far from perfect, they are the best gauge we have to compare programs.  There is a reason there is a strong correlation between the teams in the Top 10 any given year and the teams in the Top 10 recruiting rankings the previous 4-5 years.  

 

There are simply too many variables - and biases - to make an accurate judgement about the players based on what we see once they get on campus.  Not the least of which is some coaches are very good at putting players in a position to succeed such that they can play "better" than their talent level would indicate (Wisconsin and Kansas State come to mind).  Conversely, if coaches aren't putting players in a position to succeed, they may appear to be not very talented (I'll just stick to Banker as an example).  

 

And all of that is before you get to things like injuries, academic issues and players being sent home for smoking dope.

 

According to 247's numbers, Nebraska has been in the mid-20s each of the last three years in talent on the roster - using rankings out of high school but adjusting for attrition.  That usually means that we are at a talent deficit compared to one team on our schedule, similarly talented to 1-2 teams on our schedule and noticeably more talented than the rest of our schedule.  I wouldn't say that is talented enough to win national championships.  I'd say that's fringe talent for a B1G championship.  But compared to our conference/schedule, I'd say we are talented.

[Redux]

I feel like we are better off talent wise than we were 3 or 4 years ago, mostly from a depth perspective.  I feel more confident today if someone goes down, someone will be able to fill the spot without seeing a major dropoff.

[Mavric]

1 minute ago, 1995 Redux said:

I feel like we are better off talent wise than we were 3 or 4 years ago, mostly from a depth perspective.  I feel more confident today if someone goes down, someone will be able to fill the spot without seeing a major dropoff.

 

Like I said, there's a lot of bias that can go into things like this which makes it tough to be objective.

 

We had the fewest scholarship players we've had in .... I don't know .... forever on the roster this summer.

 

For some of fall camp we had three scholarship receivers suiting up for practice.

 

We're not exactly stocked at OLB.

 

So I don't know how you can really claim the depth is any better than it's been.  I'm not saying it's any worse but I don't see better.

[Redux]

Just now, Mavric said:

 

Like I said, there's a lot of bias that can go into things like this which makes it tough to be objective.

 

We had the fewest scholarship players we've had in .... I don't know .... forever on the roster this summer.

 

For some of fall camp we had three scholarship receivers suiting up for practice.

 

We're not exactly stocked at OLB.

 

So I don't know how you can really claim the depth is any better than it's been.  I'm not saying it's any worse but I don't see better.

 

Offensively we are deeper at QB, RB and WR overall than we had been, making it even more frustrating we are sucking at offense in general.  Defensively we are seeing a lot of guys playing and contributing.  Just my opinion, not going to debate you over it.  1) You are far more invested in it than i and 2) You have a different bias than I so we tend not to see eye to eye anyways

[Mavric]

10 minutes ago, 1995 Redux said:

Offensively we are deeper at QB, RB and WR overall than we had been, making it even more frustrating we are sucking at offense in general.  Defensively we are seeing a lot of guys playing and contributing.  Just my opinion, not going to debate you over it.  1) You are far more invested in it than i and 2) You have a different bias than I so we tend not to see eye to eye anyways

 

There is no rational basis for saying we are deeper at WR now than we were a few years ago.

[Mavric]

And if you're going to say we're deeper at RB now when a few years ago we had names like Helu, Burkhead and Abdullah on the roster, I think I'll stay away from what you're having.

[Redux]

See, not worth it.  You're right man, our current talent and recruiting is worse off than it was under Bo.

[LumberJackSker]

3 minutes ago, 1995 Redux said:

See, not worth it.  You're right man, our current talent and recruiting is worse off than it was under Bo.

Neither of them were good enough

[Toe]

The top few guys at WR are decent enough, but depth? Not really. Some people keep hearing about so many highly-rated recruits that are interested in Nebraska in the Riley era, but it's like they're completely oblivious to the fact that Lindsey is about the only one that's actually made it to the field.

[SouthLincoln Husker]

3 minutes ago, Toe said:

The top few guys at WR are decent enough, but depth? Not really. Some people keep hearing about so many highly-rated recruits that are interested in Nebraska in the Riley era, but it's like they're completely oblivious to the fact that Lindsey is about the only one that's actually made it to the field.

2 are injured and won was brought home by dad.   We are thin now, because we lost 3.

[Toe]

^ ....yes? The 'actually made it to the field' part is kind of important, don't you think? That's why I put it in my post.

[SouthLincoln Husker]

2 minutes ago, Toe said:

^ ....yes? The 'actually made it to the field' part is kind of important, don't you think? That's why I put it in my post.

No, you recruit a position.  You do not what is going to happen.  We had 7 WR in spring football and lost 3 before season started, so we have to use walk-ons who would never see the field.

[alwayshusking]

We have some talent but definitely need more. Undersigning hasn't helped that goes for Riley and Pelini. Riley also should have explored juco transfers and grad transfers to fill some of the talent/experience gap. That's on Mike.

 

Bottom line things should look much better than they do in year 3.

[SouthLincoln Husker]

1 minute ago, alwayshusking said:

We have some talent but definitely need more. Undersigning hasn't helped that goes for Riley and Pelini. Riley also should have explored juco transfers and grad transfers to fill some of the talent/experience gap. That's on Mike.

 

Bottom line things should look much better than they do in year 3.

And you know that he did not do this?

[alwayshusking]

2 minutes ago, SouthLincoln Husker said:

And you know that he did not do this?

 

Because he hasn't taken a juco player since he got here or a grad transfer?