Jump to content
The Scarlet Pimpernel

Extremely impressed with the new staff on the recruiting trail

Recommended Posts

Half of the 5 stars are just early bloomers. Full grown beards, basically fully grown adults playing against high school kids that aren’t developed yet.  Then they go to college and flop because the late bloomers catch-up with them, and they lose their maturity advantage.

 

it’s them 3 stars you have to look-out for.  

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nebfanatic said:

The recruiting rankings do matter. I love how when Riley was here there was moaning we didn't recruit well enough to compete for titles. Now that Frost is here none of that matters? B.S. Frost may be able to develop players at a higher level, but don't kid yourself. The only way we will be winning this conference multiple times in a decade is if we are consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes. 

Wisconsin has already proved the bolded part false.

 

1 hour ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

Recent data (past 13 years) shows that in order to WIN a national championship, you must have at least 2 Top 12 classes in the years prior to winning, including at least one Top 5 class. Like it or not, stars DO matter.

Not this argument again. People need to realize this is an unreliable metric due to small sample size and causation vs correlation.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

Everybody in the lynch mob wanted Riley strung up and got their way.  They insisted on Frost.   Now I read how great his recruiting is already but I am just asking where is the meat?    What's new?    I am not criticzing Frost.  I am asking direct questions of all the Frost backers to show me the 'new and improved' is all!

 

I admit I have not bothered to look at the current state of the recruiting class as I figured it was too soon to make any kind of fair assessment   But everybody was raving about how great things are going and I am wondering what all the excitement is actually about.   i also admit that I have been uncomfortable with the Frost fanfare and while I want more than anybody for Scott and Company to succeed and Make Nebraska Great Again, I also recall feeling that same way with Solich, Callahan, Pelini and Riley (not so much in fairness in the beginning).

 

Spiehlman (don't know the star rating but he was Minnesota high school player of the year) so he was and is a qulity, elite caliber player.   We need to recruit the best players from all the area (great plains, midwest, etc) states.   We used to pick those up quite often.    

Coaches have relationships with recruits and it usually starts their junior year.  To ask Frost to get us studs now is not realistic.  Frost has to create relationships with the underclassmen within the 500 mile radius as well as high school coaches in that region.  It doesn't hurt that he has some experience in Florida, but he recruited kids in Florida for UCF.  Probably not the same kids he wants to have at DONU.  Let's practice patience.  

 

 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

Wisconsin has already proved the bolded part false.

 

Not this argument again. People need to realize this is an unreliable metric due to small sample size and causation vs correlation.

You are aware this isn't really a debatable topic. right?

 

Wisconsin is the leper in that group, they last won the conference in 2012 because the top two teams in their division at the time were ineligible. Go take a look at the rankings of the teams in the playoffs and get back to this topic.

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

Watch the tape and tell me where you see any resemblance of Wisconsin, besides big white guys on the offensive line.

No you look at the tape and tell me the differences you think you see. And don't tell me about X' and O's because that's not what makes a program. 

 

Anyone who has spent even a little time reading up on Wisconsin is immediately struck by how much of an influence we had on it. That influence being mostly from Devaney.

 

Alvarez couldn't get the Nebraska job, so he took what he learned form Devaney/Fry and went to a team with colors like ours and made his own little mini Nebraska. They are a poor mans version of us. Us before Bob and Tom won it big.

 

What makes a program is culture, and theirs is based heavily on ours. And that culture is why they succeed still to this day with programs that have triple the blue chippers they do. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, husker98 said:

No you look at the tape and tell me the differences you think you see. And don't tell me about X' and O's because that's not what makes a program. 

 

Anyone who has spent even a little time reading up on Wisconsin is immediately struck by how much of an influence we had on it. That influence being mostly from Devaney.

 

Alvarez couldn't get the Nebraska job, so he took what he learned form Devaney/Fry and went to a team with colors like ours and made his own little mini Nebraska. They are a poor mans version of us. Us before Bob and Tom won it big.

 

What makes a program is culture, and theirs is based heavily on ours. And that culture is why they succeed still to this day with programs that have triple the blue chippers they do. 

 

 

 

 

:lol::facepalm: 

 

We're not talking about program culture. We were talking about the need for talent. So as it's related to what we were discussing, you're delusional (still) if you think Wisconsin resembles what Nebraska used to be on the football field.

 

And whether we agree or not on Nebraska/Wisconsin similarities, it isn't up for debate on whether Wisconsin is good enough to compete for National Championships. They are not. They lost to the only real team they played this season.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frost will do fine recruiting. He known what he wants to do on both sides of the ball and will recruit to a specific system from day one something our last two coaches didn't which will be a huge advantage.

 

He'll sign a bunch on jucos this class maybe next year as well to stabilize everything.  then in year three in four when all the jucos have used up their time and frost has established Nebraska as the power in the west he'll sign a class of 25+ guys that are top 15 quality.

 

It's gonna be fine.

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, krc1995 said:

I think we can and should expect championships every single year. Stars dont play football. 

No, but @The Scarlet Pimpernel is right - current trends suggest you need to be an elite recruiter if you want to win a national championship. I don't think it does anybody any good to stick their feet in the dirt and suggest the recruiting rankings don't matter because they do to a degree.

 

They're just not the end all be all. Coaching, culture and scheme play a significant role, as well. Nebraska has always been a school that needed to get the most out of presumably 'less' talent and that's what Frost is going to have to do if he wants to win a conference championship (let alone a national championship) at Nebraska. NU will likely never consistently recruit at the level of tOSU and Michigan. But, they never have to begin with.

  • Plus1 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some of you are underestimating Frost. He's one of the hottest names in CFB right now, and if he comes to Nebraska and is able to WIN next year and the buzz continues, players will start to come.  Just think: if Nick Saban was our coach, do you still think we wouldn't get a Top 10 class? I think we would. Kids are willing to go wherever the coach they want to play for is.

  • Plus1 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

:lol::facepalm: 

 

We're not talking about program culture. We were talking about the need for talent. So as it's related to what we were discussing, you're delusional (still) if you think Wisconsin resembles what Nebraska used to be on the football field.

 

And whether we agree or not on Nebraska/Wisconsin similarities, it isn't up for debate on whether Wisconsin is good enough to compete for National Championships. They are not. They lost to the only real team they played this season.

 

 

Man that sounds familiar, where have I heard that before? Didn't we used to go 11-1 and 10-1 and lose to somebody? I can't remember who.................... Oh yea! People said the same thing about our program in the 80's and Early 90's when we got plowed by OU and the florida schools every damn year.

They said we had the talent to win the CCG, but not enough for that NCCG. We don't have the speed, the athletes, we are to far away from the talent epicenters.

 

Thank god for that 15th ranked recruiting class, that got us over the hump to win 3 NC's.

 

Like I said they are us before we won the titles in 94 and minus the other NCG appearances. The difference is will they get over the hump? I don't think so IMO.

 

On a final note regarding the second bolded part lets not kid ourselves, Wiskey lost 27-21. They weren't blown out, or out classed by the OSU, a team that has guys who have NC rings and talent to win more.

 

They picked off JT twice. And most of OSU's scoring came in the first half, they only had 6 points in the second half.

 

Wiskey wins that game if they had some balance on offense with a QB that doesn't go 19-40 with 2 INT's.

 

They have weaknesses, but correctable ones.

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RedDenver said:

Wisconsin has already proved the bolded part false.

 

Not this argument again. People need to realize this is an unreliable metric due to small sample size and causation vs correlation.

Wisconsin may have but teams like Wisconsin, Michigan State, ect. get exposed in playoff type competition. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Wisconsin may have but teams like Wisconsin, Michigan State, ect. get exposed in playoff type competition. 



This is your quote he's replying to:

 

"The only way we will be winning this conference multiple times in a decade is if we are consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes. "

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

You are aware this isn't really a debatable topic. right?

 

Wisconsin is the leper in that group, they last won the conference in 2012 because the top two teams in their division at the time were ineligible. Go take a look at the rankings of the teams in the playoffs and get back to this topic.

 

23 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Wisconsin may have but teams like Wisconsin, Michigan State, ect. get exposed in playoff type competition. 

Wisconsin has won the B1G three times in the last decade; therefore, the statement "The only way we will be winning this conference multiple times in a decade is if we are consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes." is provably false. I guess @Dr. Strangelove is right, not debatable.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because its possible doesn't mean we should try and win that way. Those teams are outliers but if you want to act like that is the path to success go right ahead. The Huskers haven't won a conference championship that way any time in the recent past so until we do it the Wisconsin way im going to say upping pur recruiting a hair is a more sure fire way to championships as the data proves it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nebfanatic said:

Just because its possible doesn't mean we should try and win that way. Those teams are outliers but if you want to act like that is the path to success go right ahead.

 

No one is really doing that. They're refuting your false statement and saying it's possible.

Edited by Moiraine
  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Just because its possible doesn't mean we should try and win that way. Those teams are outliers but if you want to act like that is the path to success go right ahead. The Huskers haven't won a conference championship that way any time in the recent past so until we do it the Wisconsin way im going to say upping pur recruiting a hair is a more sure fire way to championships as the data proves it. 

We've been outrecruiting Wisconsin for years. Maybe we should worry about just filling the 85 schollie limit with decent players and beating Wisconsin before worrying about elite recruiting.

Edited by RedDenver
  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t know about you all but I’m ready to win even if it means using monkeys riding ponies wearing tutus. 

 

And by winning mean a conference championship. I’m ok with lowering my expectations a bit. 

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

 

Wisconsin has won the B1G three times in the last decade; therefore, the statement "The only way we will be winning this conference multiple times in a decade is if we are consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes." is provably false. I guess @Dr. Strangelove is right, not debatable.

 

Actually that doesn't make any sense at all. 

 

We are not Wisconsin.  We would need to beat Wisconsin before getting a chance to play for the conference championship. What Wisconsin, a longtime and connected member in the Big 10 has accomplished, is no guarantee of what we can accomplish if we were even with them in talent.  We don't get the benefit of calls in head to head games, as was easily identifiable this year, so we actually need to be quite a bit better than Wisconsin just to win the division let alone the conference.  Matching their talent is a formula for letdown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, krc1995 said:

I don’t know about you all but I’m ready to win even if it means using monkeys riding ponies wearing tutus. 

 

And by winning mean a conference championship. I’m ok with lowering my expectations a bit. 

 

Wait -I'm confused.  Are the monkeys wearing the tutus or the horses wearing them?  Because that changes everything.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dilly Dilly said:

 

Wait -I'm confused.  Are the monkeys wearing the tutus or the horses wearing them?  Because that changes everything.

In my mind the ponies are. The monkeys are are in spanx. 

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

 

Wisconsin has won the B1G three times in the last decade; therefore, the statement "The only way we will be winning this conference multiple times in a decade is if we are consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes." is provably false. I guess @Dr. Strangelove is right, not debatable.

Not close. Wisconsin is an outlier, the vast majority of schools that don't recruit in the top 30 don't stay in the top 30.

 

Don't look at Wisconsin as your one example, look at the 90 or so teams that don't recruit well and evaluate their rankings.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, LaunchCode said:

 

Actually that doesn't make any sense at all. 

 

We are not Wisconsin.  We would need to beat Wisconsin before getting a chance to play for the conference championship. What Wisconsin, a longtime and connected member in the Big 10 has accomplished, is no guarantee of what we can accomplish if we were even with them in talent.  We don't get the benefit of calls in head to head games, as was easily identifiable this year, so we actually need to be quite a bit better than Wisconsin just to win the division let alone the conference.  Matching their talent is a formula for letdown.

 

9 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

Not close. Wisconsin is an outlier, the vast majority of schools that don't recruit in the top 30 don't stay in the top 30.

 

Don't look at Wisconsin as your one example, look at the 90 or so teams that don't recruit well and evaluate their rankings.

You guys have to be joking. Someone says, and I quote, "The only way we will be winning this conference multiple times in a decade is if we are consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes." I show a counter example from the last decade, and that's not enough to say that the quoted statement is false? Another team can do it but Nebraska can't? Or somehow another team being an outlier means it didn't happen?

 

Are you two really signing on to the notion that the only way Nebraska can win the conference multiple times in a decade is consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes?

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

Not close. Wisconsin is an outlier, the vast majority of schools that don't recruit in the top 30 don't stay in the top 30.

 

Don't look at Wisconsin as your one example, look at the 90 or so teams that don't recruit well and evaluate their rankings.

 

 

This reply doesn't make much sense. Wisconsin recruits in the top 30-40. We're not talking about teams with the 90th ranked recruiting class here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New commit: Jaron Woodyard the #2 rated WR out of JUCO. 3 star on 247 but 4 star on other rating systems. He is also VERY fast. Would be the top 3 fastest player on our roster (which i'm guessing the other two are tyjon lindsey and spielman)

 

 

Edited by FearAmeer
  • Plus1 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, FearAmeer said:

New commit: Jaron Woodyard the #2 rated WR out of JUCO. 3 star on 247 but 4 star on other rating systems. He is also VERY fast. Would be the top 3 fastest player on our roster (which i'm guessing the other two are tyjon lindsey and spielman)

 

 

For some context:

 

The Maryland native ran a 10.68 in the 100-meters and a 21.50 in the 200-meters in high school. He's a home run threat nearly every time he touches the ball with that kind of speed.

 

From Huskers Online

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

 

You guys have to be joking. Someone says, and I quote, "The only way we will be winning this conference multiple times in a decade is if we are consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes." I show a counter example from the last decade, and that's not enough to say that the quoted statement is false? Another team can do it but Nebraska can't? Or somehow another team being an outlier means it didn't happen?

 

Are you two really signing on to the notion that the only way Nebraska can win the conference multiple times in a decade is consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes?

Not necessarily. Just that there's a 100 example of teams not being as successful with recruiting in the 40s or worse.

 

You're citing one of the very, very few counter examples.

 

It's not impossible to win recruiting at that level, but it's considerably harder. If you want to hope for Wisconsin like success recruiting at their level, fine. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wisconsin/MSU winning or sharing five of the last 10 B1G conference championships is not an 'outlier.' It may coincide with down time from Michigan, PSU and tOSU, but that's football.

 

There's some give and take on this topic. There has to be. If Nebraska aspires to win conference titles, recent history suggests that's an incredibly achievable goal based on their current recruiting level. If Nebraska aspires to win national championships, recent history suggests their recruiting needs to experience marked improvement.

 

Nebraska, much like the program's history shows us, will likely almost always have to find a way to do more with less.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

Not necessarily. Just that there's a 100 example of teams not being as successful with recruiting in the 40s or worse.

 

You're citing one of the very, very few counter examples.

 

It's not impossible to win recruiting at that level, but it's considerably harder. If you want to hope for Wisconsin like success recruiting at their level, fine. 

I think we're talking passed each other a bit. I agree that having more talent is better than having less and that having higher recruiting rankings is better than having lower. But I'm pushing back against this obviously incorrect statement: "The only way we will be winning this conference multiple times in a decade is if we are consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes."

 

You're drawing the conclusion that I want us to recruit like Wisconsin, but that's untrue as I'd prefer us to have the #1 recruiting class every year. However, I also don't want people to freak out that we can't win the conference because we get a #30 class, or several 20-25 classes, etc.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RedDenver said:

 

You guys have to be joking. Someone says, and I quote, "The only way we will be winning this conference multiple times in a decade is if we are consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes." I show a counter example from the last decade, and that's not enough to say that the quoted statement is false? Another team can do it but Nebraska can't? Or somehow another team being an outlier means it didn't happen?

 

Are you two really signing on to the notion that the only way Nebraska can win the conference multiple times in a decade is consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes?

What you showed is an example of a team we would have to beat to accomplish what they've accomplished in the past.  They are also one of the 6 founding members of what is now the BIG 10 and don't think for a minute that doesn't matters in a lot of ways.  We're the Johnny come lately in comparison. 

 

I'm not trying to be confrontational and hope you don't take it that way.  I may be wrong, and you may disagree and be right, however I think we will need to be better than Wisconsin not just equal to even have a chance at a division title.  To win the conference, barring some strange circumstances, I think we will need to be significantly better talent wise.

Edited by LaunchCode

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History shows that is much more important to recruit talented players that fit your program than it is to land as many *stars* as possible. 

I feel extremely confident that Coach Frost and his staff are going after guys that are highly competitive, aggressive and wherever appropriate, blazingly fast.

 

I love that this staff already has one juco in the fold and will undoubtedly have more very soon (Huskers haven't had one since 2014). These kids aren't fresh out of 12th grade. Most were studs in high school and have been humbled. In general, they are ready to prove themselves on the big stage.

 

If Frost can land the right players for his system (not just the most highly rated players) his teams will be able to compete with everyone in the B1G.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, LaunchCode said:

What you showed is an example of a team we would have to beat to accomplish what they've accomplished in the past.  They are also one of the 6 founding members of what is now the BIG 10 and don't think for a minute that doesn't matters in a lot of ways.  We're the Johnny come lately in comparison. 

 

I'm not trying to be confrontational and hope you don't take it that way.  I may be wrong, and you may disagree and be right, however I think we will need to be better than Wisconsin not just equal to even have a chance at a division title.  To win the conference, barring some strange circumstances, I think we will need to be significantly better talent wise.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills, so let me pose the question to you. Is it possible for the Huskers to win the B1G multiple times in a decade without consistent top 18 recruiting classes? For example, if the Huskers had recruiting classes ranked #20 every year, it would be impossible to win the conference more than once every ten years.

Edited by RedDenver
  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills, so let me pose the question to you. Is it possible for the Huskers to win the B1G multiple times in a decade without consistent top 18 recruiting classes? For example, if the Huskers had recruiting classes ranked #20 every year, it would be impossible to win the conference more than once every ten years.

I never made the argument we needed classes ranked inside a certain range.  Rankings can also be misleading in a lot of ways.  A team could have a highly rated class, but not fill any of the position needs they have.  That's probably an extreme example however not so uncommon for classes to miss on positions where depth is needed the most.  Outside of QB when we played Wiscy I'm not sure there were any positions I saw we had a clear talent advantage.  Not sure what class rank will be required, but we have some work to do just to be on par with them up front.

 

 

 

 

Edited by LaunchCode

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok you got me my one statement was hyperbole. Goodness gracious if i knew i would be scrutinized this much about it i wouldn't have said it. I'll revise and say this. If we want to be an elite team year in and out we need to hit on at least 2 top 20 (closer to 15) or so every 4 years. I didn't think what I was saying was that ridiculous. Just because those 2 teams have accomplished what they did doesn't necessarily mean that we can. And until we do i would be much more confident in pursuing higher recruiting rankings rather than go the Wisconsin model. We really need something in between and that can take us to national title contenders. 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, commando said:

another new recruit.  speedy juco wr woodyard

 

2 hours ago, FearAmeer said:

New commit: Jaron Woodyard the #2 rated WR out of JUCO. 3 star on 247 but 4 star on other rating systems. He is also VERY fast. Would be the top 3 fastest player on our roster (which i'm guessing the other two are tyjon lindsey and spielman)

 

 

 

Expect this to be a central part of the calculus that the Frost regime uses for offering players, and not only the skill players.  IIRC, one of the big turning points in the ascension of the Osborne teams from consistently very good to great was the decision to recruit speed, esp. defensive speed.  Taking big safeties and moving them to LB and big LB and moving them to DE.  I suspect that speed will be an essential trait of the offers that they make.  The other point is likely to try to go back to getting more practice reps for the younger players.  That was also a key in the past.  Part of the reason for the large walkon emphasis was to have enough players to get 2nd, 3rd, and 4th teamers some real reps in practice instead of standing around and watching the ones 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RedDenver said:

 

You guys have to be joking. Someone says, and I quote, "The only way we will be winning this conference multiple times in a decade is if we are consistently pulling top 15-18 recruiting classes." I show a counter example from the last decade, and that's not enough to say that the quoted statement is false?

 

 

I think that most people in here realize that that statement was not necessarily intended to be considered completely factual and demonstrably true, and was more of a general expression of a relative truth that generally speaking, teams that recruit in the 30's or worse very rarely win conference championships.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're debating wining conference championships when the team typically finishes 3rd to 5th in the West division of the conference.  How about we worry about beating Purdue and Minnesota, keeping Iowa under 50 and making OSU punt once this decade.  Recruiting service class ranking is the absolute least of our problems at this point. 

 

Frost needs to turn around a short recruiting season and is behind the 8 ball finding kids in weeks instead of months.  But more importantly whoever he manages to bring on board, he needs to field a team that knows how to play fundamental football and has serviceable depth.  In a year or two and we'll know if these coaches are good recruiters.  If they manage to fill the roster this year with any stars, it's a good indication that they are.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Nebfanatic said:

Ok you got me my one statement was hyperbole. Goodness gracious if i knew i would be scrutinized this much about it i wouldn't have said it. I'll revise and say this. If we want to be an elite team year in and out we need to hit on at least 2 top 20 (closer to 15) or so every 4 years. I didn't think what I was saying was that ridiculous. Just because those 2 teams have accomplished what they did doesn't necessarily mean that we can. And until we do i would be much more confident in pursuing higher recruiting rankings rather than go the Wisconsin model. We really need something in between and that can take us to national title contenders. 

 

9 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

 

I think that most people in here realize that that statement was not necessarily intended to be considered completely factual and demonstrably true, and was more of a general expression of a relative truth that generally speaking, teams that recruit in the 30's or worse very rarely win conference championships.

If you look back, my first response was just a single sentence. I didn't think there'd be any push back against what I assumed was an obvious conclusion, and that @Nebfanatic would respond with a clarification as he did.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, LaunchCode said:

Last years class 8 line and 3 LB commits, compared to 3 receivers and 1 DB.  The receivers and DB were all four start, maybe that's what you're getting at and not numbers of players?

 

The 16' class featured 4 star O linemen; Farniok and Raridon, 3 star OL Brokop and Wilson.

 

I don't see the evidence the O or D line was ignored.  I think we have a lot of young talent on both lines and need to keep adding to it with each class. 

 

I don't think "ignored" is at all accurate.  But I think you can make an argument that they weren't very good at recruiting offensive linemen.  

 

Last year's class had four OL (Jaimes, Sichterman, Bando and Walker) and three DL (Thomas, Daniels and Watts but Watts didn't get to campus).  Jaimes and Thomas were the highest-rated of that crew and they were upper-mid three-stars.  

 

In the 16 class, Farniok had already had some good ground-work laid by the previous staff, while Raridon and Brokop were already committed before Riley was hired.  So they get credit for locking Farniok up but they didn't really do a whole lot to show that they could recruit upper-level linemen on their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

I don't think "ignored" is at all accurate.  But I think you can make an argument that they weren't very good at recruiting offensive linemen.  

 

Last year's class had four OL (Jaimes, Sichterman, Bando and Walker) and three DL (Thomas, Daniels and Watts but Watts didn't get to campus).  Jaimes and Thomas were the highest-rated of that crew and they were upper-mid three-stars.  

 

In the 16 class, Farniok had already had some good ground-work laid by the previous staff, while Raridon and Brokop were already committed before Riley was hired.  So they get credit for locking Farniok up but they didn't really do a whole lot to show that they could recruit upper-level linemen on their own.

The biggest problem with the o-line play under Cavanaugh/Riley was the lack of development and poor S&C.  From the McBride podcast last week, Cav only cared about getting 5 players ready to play, and nobody knew his reasoning on those 5 players.  I don't know how much attention Cav paid to the backups, but it doesn't sound like there was much. The lack of accountability in the S&C department also contributed to the poor development.

 

Recruiting wise, it seems like Riley and Cav ended up linemen who are best suited to play the interior positions (guard and center) and they struggled to identify and develop OT's.  It looks like Frost may go after some JUCO's OT's who can provide competition and step in and play right away.

Edited by ColoradoHusk
  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I  think the analogy of Wisconsin is what we were in the 80's and very early 90's holds some real truth.  Wisconsin wins basically 10 games a year but can't win the big one (B1G Championship).  That is no different than what we were against Oklahoma and the Florida schools.  What were in the mid 90's is historically rare and we are talking modern day Alabama, now Clemson and possibly Ohio State.  

 

We plan and simple just need to get back to the 80's/early 90's Huskers first.  Basically we need to replace Wisconsin as the top dogs of the West.  From that point we can only dream about resembling mid 90's or a current day Alabama.  Are those dreams even realistic though in this day and age of college football?  We know we can strive to reach where Wisconsin is currently.  

 

I have never been one about having to have top 15 classes to win, you need good coaching.  Wisconsin has very good coaching.  

Edited by BartonHusker
  • Plus1 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×