Do we have better athletes (across the board) than UCF?

[LaunchCode]

"Do we have better athletes (across the board) than UCF?

 

The true and only correct answer is, it's unknowable. 

 

Of course that doesn't prevent us message boarders from opining, because that's what we do.  Any attempt at an answer however reflects the biases and motivations of the poster more than providing us with a meaningful answer to the question. 

 

Can the vast majority even agree what constitutes "better" and "athlete" in the first place.  Now add the two together, better-athlete, and the waters go from murky to muddy.

 

What should be given higher value; strength, size, speed, effort, dedication, fb IQ, desire, experience, coachability, leadership, balance, agility, explosiveness, team mindedness, skill, injury avoidance ability, and the list goes on............. 

[Isle of View]

3 hours ago, RedDenver said:

How am I making your argument exactly? I've said repeatedly that there are lots of factors, so it makes sense that just having a good coach or just having talent isn't always enough.

 

As for the bold: except for the examples where I've showed that the coach won with players he didn't recruit. If you really want to prove your point, then you'd need to show where good or great coaching overcame talent deficiencies. My point is shown when even good to great coaches like Bill McCartney and Bill Snyder didn't win until they had good talent, and again when mediocre to lousy coaches like Larry Coker and Gene Chizik won national title with exceptional talent.

I already pointed out Petersen at Boise among others.  And Snyder is another argument in my favor.  He never had high rated Recruiting classes. He is a great coach who maximizes his team's results. 

[Xmas32]

6 minutes ago, Isle of View said:

I already pointed out Petersen at Boise among others.  And Snyder is another argument in my favor.  He never had high rated Recruiting classes. He is a great coach who maximizes his team's results. 

 

Snyder never reached true national prominence until he had elite talent coupled with his excellent coaching.  Michael Bishop comes to mind. 

[Moiraine]

On 10/5/2017 at 7:36 PM, speedtoburn said:

you are an older fan who was around for the Osborne era.

 

 

[84HuskerLaw]

Comparing athletes NU vs UCF is perhaps difficult but I'd suggest that UCF is a great place to recruit to being in the middle of Florida (about 15 or 20 times as many players to recruit from as NE and being in the middle of that state, it is close for all.  Not bad to recruit southern half of Georgia and Alabama as well.  All easy driving distance for families and players alike."

 

Most high school players would prefer to stay closer to home as opposed to traveling far away to play in a conference whose games, home and away, will also be far away from family, friends, girlfriends, etc.   

 

It is harder to recruit nationally, in my opinion, than it used to be (circa 1980 - 2001).  The economy was so much better then and of course after 9/11, travel and security became a major pain and concern.  As the economy had neen stuck in the doldrums the past decade or so, it hasn't helped either.   These are factors that get completely overlooked in these discussions.   Simply put, times were better during the Devaney, Osborne, Solich (pre 9/11) and it was easier to recruit without the academic limitations.   The grade and ACT scores, etc. were not so critical which opened doors to many players who are simply not going to go to college as they did back then (at the upper divisions anyway).   

 

I think also there are perhaps fewer top notch athelets today than back then and the 'haves' like NU and the blue bloods - who's who types - NOT located close by the large population centers have a real advantage.   Steve Pederson may have made major mistakes but he was a recruiting wiz  that found many of those championship Husker teams' players.  He knew recruiting and he was correct in observing Solich's failures.   After 9/11 things dropped off fast and the team Frank had when he left was cleary not the same caliber as the one he took over.  As Barry Switzer was so fond to say - it's not the Xs and Os, it's the Jimmys and Joes.   

 

To resurrect Husker power, we have got to out recruit the best for the best.   Therefore, the most critical consideration in hiring a new coach, if we should in fact change once again, is to get the best darn recruiter out there and invest whatever it takes to get us competitive with everybody.  Not sure how but that is the MOST IMPORTANT factor. 

 

 

 

[DrunkOffPunch]

16 hours ago, LaunchCode said:

 

 

What should be given higher value; strength, size, speed, effort, dedication, fb IQ, desire, experience, coachability, leadership, balance, agility, explosiveness, team mindedness, skill, injury avoidance ability, and the list goes on............. 

So athletic ability...

[DrunkOffPunch]

16 hours ago, LaunchCode said:

 

Can the vast majority even agree what constitutes "better" and "athlete" in the first place.  Now add the two together, better-athlete, and the waters go from murky to muddy.

 

16 hours ago, LaunchCode said:

 When you win at a place like WSU or OSU people copy what you're doing and do it with better athletes.

 

[Stumpy1]

16 hours ago, Isle of View said:

I already pointed out Petersen at Boise among others.  And Snyder is another argument in my favor.  He never had high rated Recruiting classes. He is a great coach who maximizes his team's results. 

Petersen at Boise St. isnt a very good arguement.  He was the OC there under Dan Hawkins and took over when Hawkins left for CU.  He was already familiar with and recruited a lot of the players. 

[LaunchCode]

1 hour ago, DrunkOffPunch said:

So athletic ability...

That's fine if that's your definition, however mine would include the traits on my prior list as well as these that you leave out:  vision, heart, toughness, ability to anticipate, great hands, ability to change direction quickly, and "nose for the ball".

[Red_Payne]

Athleticism is defined as "the physical qualities/characteristics that makeup/define an athlete..."

 

I think mental aspects are just as important (more so at certain positions); but shouldn't just be mushed into the category of athleticism.

 

Size, strength, speed, quickness & agility (change of direction, hip mobility), hands (catching ability, avoiding fumbles ability), Low center of gravity & leverage, tackling ability...

These are all physical characteristics that define a player; thus, are athletic abilities.

 

Factors such as anticipation & awareness, toughness (although this can be physical as well) & heart, vision, ability to go through progressions & make proper reads...

These are all more mental factors that don't necessarily make you a better athlete, but certainly make you a better football player.

 

Just my opinion.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Does UCF have better athletes than NU? At certain positions; yes.

Does UCF have better athletes than NU, across the board? From what I've seen (and I've only seen 1 1/2 UCF games); I'd say it's pretty close; but UCF has it's athletes more evenly distributed throughout every position group. NU seems to be stacked at skilled position, and lacks at other position groups.

[Isle of View]

1 hour ago, Stumpy1 said:

Petersen at Boise St. isnt a very good arguement.  He was the OC there under Dan Hawkins and took over when Hawkins left for CU.  He was already familiar with and recruited a lot of the players. 

And he's maintaining his rep as a great coach at Washington.