Jump to content
StPaulHusker

Recruiting Tangent Thread

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

I don't disagree, it's good to get some nearby projects and I think they're more likely overall to contribute. Aren't 3 of those guys committed as walk ons? They're willing to join the the team and work for a scholarship, a kid from SC isn't going to come halfway across the country without one. This way we get both.

 

There's also a difference between a project that could turn into a great tackle and a project who can only play Guard. Fritzche is athletic enough to be a great Tackle - obviously that's not guaranteed, but it's a possibility. Nothing against the walk-on commits, but who was the last walk-on Tackle who contributed in a big way? We've churned out some really good Centers and Guards, not any Tackles that I can recall.

Who was the last TE turned Tackle that contributed in a big way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

Who was the last TE turned Tackle that contributed in a big way?

 

Well, we're going to have (basically) two of them next year - three if we get this guy - so we'll see how it works out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Well, we're going to have (basically) two of them next year - three if we get this guy - so we'll see how it works out.

That didn't answer the question.  But thanks 

Share this post


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

Who was the last TE turned Tackle that contributed in a big way?

 

Also...

 

Quote

When Robert Gallery was chosen 2nd overall in the 2004 NFL Draft, he was a rarity at that time, a high school tight end being drafted to play offensive tackle. Gallery may not have been the first ever, but he did seem to kick off a modern era where colleges look more for frame and athleticism than sheer weight and size when it comes to offensive line recruits. 

 

Joe Staley "cried his eyes out" over being moved from tight end to offensive tackle as a freshman at Central Michigan. He is now a Pro Bowl tackle for the San Francisco 49ers and due to make over 8 million dollars this year. The move is still met with some resistance from young men, but stories like those and the plentiful examples in the Big Ten should be enough to convince prospective tackles that the move is promotion, not a demotion.

 

COLE CHEWINS - Michigan State (6-8, 264 - Clarkston, Mich.)
BEAU BENZSCHAWEL - Wisconsin (6-6, 308 - Grafton, Wis.)
BLAKE HANCE - Northwestern (6-5, 300 - Jacksonville, Ill.)
COY CRONK - Indiana (6-5, 305 - Lafayette, Ind.)
IKE BOETTGER - Iowa (6-6, 300 - Cedar Falls, Iowa)
BOONE MYERS - Iowa (6-5, 300 - Webster City, Iowa)
CHRISTIAN DiLAURO - Illinois (6-5, 300 - Uniontown, Ohio)

 

THE NEXT GENERATION (2018 Class)
Ryan Hayes, Traverse City (Mich.) West - committed to Michigan
Jack Plumb, Bay Port (Wis.) - committed to Iowa
Julian Pearl, Danville (Ill.) - committed to Illinois

 

247

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Also...

 

 

247

 

Did you read any of the conversation or did you just jump in so you could try to show how you can prove someone wrong?

 

We were discussing NEBRASKA.  Husker in WI asked who was the last walk on to contribute as a tackle in a big way.  And that's when I asked my question.  

 

 

  • Eyeroll 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

 

Did you read any of the conversation or did you just jump in so you could try to show how you can prove someone wrong?

 

We were discussing NEBRASKA.  Husker in WI asked who was the last walk on to contribute as a tackle in a big way.  And that's when I asked my question.  

 

 

I don't understand. He posted an article that answered your question:

31 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

Who was the last TE turned Tackle that contributed in a big way?

Or are you trying to say that TE turned OT trends are only relevant for Nebraska under different coaches than we have today? That seems ridiculous.

  • Plus1 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

Did you read any of the conversation or did you just jump in so you could try to show how you can prove someone wrong?

 

We were discussing NEBRASKA.  Husker in WI asked who was the last walk on to contribute as a tackle in a big way.  And that's when I asked my question.  

 

So if it's never happened at Nebraska it can't happen?  We can't try anything that's proved to work other places?

Share this post


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

I don't understand. He posted an article that answered your question:

Or are you trying to say that TE turned OT trends are only relevant for Nebraska under different coaches than we have today? That seems ridiculous.

 

I wasn't saying anything.  Husker in WI asked when was the last walk on to contribute significantly at Tackle at Nebraska.  I asked when the last TE converted to Tackle that contributed significantly at Nebraska.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

So if it's never happened at Nebraska it can't happen?  We can't try anything that's proved to work other places?

Why aren't you posting names of players that were once walk on tackles at other places that did great things later to prove Husker in WI wrong?

 

Or is it you just pick and choose who you argue with?

 

And we ARE trying it here.  Remember?  We are taking one of the most athletic HS football players in recent history in the state of Nebraska and making him a Center.

Share this post


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

Why aren't you posting names of players that were once walk on tackles at other places that did great things later to prove Husker in WI wrong?

 

Or is it you just pick and choose who you argue with?

 

You're the one who was arguing with him about that.  If you're going to argue, why don't you come up with your own evidence to show him that he's wrong?

 

It took me five seconds on Google to show that your little retort was just trying to be argumentative.  Then instead of admitting that it happens fairly often, now you've resorted to attacking the poster.  Good work.

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

You're the one who was arguing with him about that.  If you're going to argue, why don't you come up with your own evidence to show him that he's wrong?

 

It took me five seconds on Google to show that your little retort was just trying to be argumentative.  Then instead of admitting that it happens fairly often, now you've resorted to attacking the poster.  Good work.

HE asked ME when who was the last NEBRAKSA walkon tackle to contribute significantly.  Why would I think about any other college in my question back to him?

 

You just don't like it when people have an opinion that you don't like and choose to attack that person.  You didn't bother to read the discussion. You just like to try to own people. It's pretty sad that a mod behaves this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

HE asked ME when who was the last NEBRAKSA walkon tackle to contribute significantly.  Why would I think about any other college in my question back to him?

 

You just don't like it when people have an opinion that you don't like and choose to attack that person.  You didn't bother to read the discussion. You just like to try to own people. It's pretty sad that a mod behaves this way.

 

Yes, he asked you.  Rather than answer his question, you just shot back one of your own.  You didn't want to have to actually defend your position, just argue with someone who was asking you a question.

 

I did not attack anyone.  I responded with facts to a question being asked.  The fact that you view that kind of a response as an attack on you says a lot about what you are trying to accomplish.

  • Plus1 1
  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


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

HE asked ME when who was the last NEBRAKSA walkon tackle to contribute significantly.  Why would I think about any other college in my question back to him?

 

You just don't like it when people have an opinion that you don't like and choose to attack that person.  You didn't bother to read the discussion. You just like to try to own people. It's pretty sad that a mod behaves this way.

banhammer_forecast.gif

Share this post


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

 

Yes, he asked you.  Rather than answer his question, you just shot back one of your own.

 

I did not attack anyone.  I responded with facts to a question being asked.  The fact that you view that kind of a response as an attack on you says a lot about what you are trying to accomplish.

You offered zero facts about Nebraska.  Which was the discussion.  

 

And since you're a mod, you get to decide when you are attacking or trolling people and there's nothing that can be done.  

 

 

  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

HE asked ME when who was the last NEBRAKSA walkon tackle to contribute significantly.  Why would I think about any other college in my question back to him?

 

You just don't like it when people have an opinion that you don't like and choose to attack that person.  You didn't bother to read the discussion. You just like to try to own people. It's pretty sad that a mod behaves this way.

 

 

It’s not relevant whether at Nebraska a TE ever converted to OT, because Scott Frost wasn’t the head coach before. What Mavric posted was about as relevant to the conversation as you can get. If it never happened at Nebraska before it might be because no one tried, and it might be no one tried because they didn’t play this style of offense before.

 

FWIW, and I’ve argued plenty with Mavric before, I didn’t find it to be an attack or troll at all.

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cole Conrad and Sam Hahn were both walk-ons that ended up starting at tackle for us recently. The most recent TE/DE to tackle that we had was Mike Smith in 2010 and Chris Patrick in 2006.

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, seaofred92 said:

don't be my first victim SPH

If you decide to suspend or ban me, so be it.  It's not like I can do anything about it. 

1 minute ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

It’s not relevant whether at Nebraska a TE ever converted to OT, because Scott Frost wasn’t the head coach before. What Mavric posted was about as relevant to the conversation as you can get. If it never happened at Nebraska before it might be because no one tried, and it might be no one tried because they didn’t play this style of offense before.

 

FWIW, and I’ve argued plenty with Mavric before, I didn’t find it to be an attack or troll at all.

Then why was it relevant to ask about walk on tackles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be willing to open up my argument to teams other than Nebraska, I'm just not really familiar with other teams walk-ons. So far I've really only found 2 great walk-on Tackles, both in the late 90s - Brian Burlsworth at Arkansas and Levi Jones at Arizona State. It is a fair point that Nebraska has had very few TE turned Tackles or walk-on Tackles. Kind of an interesting subject if this gets split off into it's own thread but since we're potentially taking both this class, I'm not really concerned. I'd rather use scholarships for the higher ceiling, although obviously you have to balance that against how likely it is.

 

So it is possible, but I think it still boils down to Fritzche having athletic potential that the nearby lineman prospects do not. Add in the fact that they will walk-on and he most likely wouldn't, and I'm ok with the offer.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

And since you're a mod, you get to decide when you are attacking or trolling people and there's nothing that can be done.  

 

Where did I attack you?

Share this post


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

 Then why was it relevant to ask about walk on tackles?

 

 

A TE can be converted to an OT anywhere and used as an example that it can be done if the person was a good OT on a good OL.

 

Nebraska walk ons are Nebraska walk ons, and our walk on program isn’t like most other walk on programs. We have a huge walk on population to pull from. If it hasn’t happend here (I have no idea) then chances are decent it hasn’t happened other places. But even then if you’re looking at other places it’s important to know how good their line was in general just like with the TE to OT move. 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


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

Why aren't you posting names of players that were once walk on tackles at other places that did great things later to prove Husker in WI wrong?

 

Or is it you just pick and choose who you argue with?

 

And we ARE trying it here.  Remember?  We are taking one of the most athletic HS football players in recent history in the state of Nebraska and making him a Center.

 

Yes, I know we're trying.  I mentioned that above.  But when I did all you responded with was the snarky

 

44 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

That didn't answer the question.  But thanks 

 

Easy to get lost when you're not really trying to have a discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cole Conrad and Sam Hahn were both walk-ons that ended up starting at tackle for us recently. The most recent TE/DE to tackles that we had were Mike Smith in 2010 and Chris Patrick in 2006.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


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

Cole Conrad and Sam Hahn were both walk-ons that ended up starting at tackle for us recently. The most recent TE/DE to tackles that we had were Mike Smith in 2010 and Chris Patrick in 2006.

Bad examples:  Both Conrad & Hahn were well below standards for a good D1 line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just now, SouthLincoln Husker said:

Bad examples:  Both Conrad & Hahn were well below standards for a good D1 line.

 

In that case...the last walk-on to All-Conference tackle I can think of is Adam Treu.

Share this post


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

 

 

In that case...the last walk-on to All-Conference tackle I can think of is Adam Treu.

I'm sure there were some walkons during the Osbourn era, but they earned scholarships if they were on the 2 deep.  Don't know if they still do that as we have less schollies available.

Share this post


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

HE asked ME when who was the last NEBRAKSA walkon tackle to contribute significantly.  Why would I think about any other college in my question back to him?

 

You just don't like it when people have an opinion that you don't like and choose to attack that person.  You didn't bother to read the discussion. You just like to try to own people. It's pretty sad that a mod behaves this way.

 

Have to say that this is a top 5 post by StPaulHusker

  • Sad 1
  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Huskers93-97 said:

Curious if anyone knows how many kids say dream school- then go somewhere else? Wondering if our odds are really good or if this gets thrown around by kids

Yes someone please look through every single recruit in the history of recruiting who has mentioned "dream school" and then cross reference it to where they actually went. We expect a full report on Monday.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


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

I just call out stupid posts. You happen to post a lot of them so it coincides. 

Someone get this man a confused face to get every response

Share this post


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

I just call out stupid posts. You happen to post a lot of them so it coincides. 

Well actually if we are going off pure facts and not just 1 person's angry viewpoint. The below would contradict your opinion and would actually state more people enjoy my posts than yours. :D

 

I have 1912 +1 to my 2853 posts for an average of 67% of my posts get a +1. While you on the other hand have 1255 +1 to your 2129 posts for an average of 58.9% of your posts get a +1. 

  • Eyeroll 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said:

Well actually if we are going off pure facts and not just 1 person's angry viewpoint. The below would contradict your opinion and would actually state more people enjoy my posts than yours. :D

 

I have 1912 +1 to my 2853 posts for an average of 67% of my posts get a +1. While you on the other hand have 1255 +1 to your 2129 posts for an average of 58.9% of your posts get a +1. 

I think I was on your side prior to this. Now I'm not so sure.

 

I am sure I want mr dream school to join our football team

  • Plus1 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said:

Well actually if we are going off pure facts and not just 1 person's angry viewpoint. The below would contradict your opinion and would actually state more people enjoy my posts than yours. :D

 

I have 1912 +1 to my 2853 posts for an average of 67% of my posts get a +1. While you on the other hand have 1255 +1 to your 2129 posts for an average of 58.9% of your posts get a +1. 

I wonder how many posters have a higher percentage than you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 4skers89 said:

I wonder how many posters have a higher percentage than you.

 

Probably plenty and I dont really care about that. It was a counter argument to someone attacking all my "stupid posts" 

  • Eyeroll 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said:

Probably plenty and I dont really care about that. It was a counter argument to someone attacking all my "stupid posts" 

It’s probably only a handful of posters. I seem to remember @Toe mentioning his percentage in a status update and it was also remarkable. I believe @knapplc replied and his was pretty good. I’m curious if someone has the data on  this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@4skers89 Heh. Among those on the most rep points leaderboard, it looks like @Ulty is currently #1 for Likes:Posts ratio, with 1.07 likes per post, while I'm at #2 with 1.03, and @Fru is currently right exactly on a 1:1 ratio. Again, that's among those who show up on the leaderboard, which is like the top 75 for total rep.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ArkanSkers It's the Leaderboard link at the top of the page. You're about a thousand points below the bottom rank of the rep points leaderboard, lol. I don't think there's a way to view a full list of members.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


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

@4skers89 Heh. Among those on the most rep points leaderboard, it looks like @Ulty is currently #1 for Likes:Posts ratio, with 1.07 likes per post, while I'm at #2 with 1.03, and @Fru is currently right exactly on a 1:1 ratio. Again, that's among those who show up on the leaderboard, which is like the top 75 for total rep.

You're not helping.:D  Alright, so to satisfy my curiousity about something I assumed nobody would have data on or care about, does @Huskers93-97 show up on the leaderboard?

 

P.S.  Ever since your status update, I noticed you limit your posts to humorous things that you know will get +1.  I think you're a total rep:post ho!:P

Share this post


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

@4skers89 I mean, you could just click the link and check, it's right there in the post you just quoted. :P

Too much work.  I guess I'm not that curious after all :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I doing this right if I went through the thread and +1'ed everything Toe said to keep the streak alive? 

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

@4skers89 Heh. Among those on the most rep points leaderboard, it looks like @Ulty is currently #1 for Likes:Posts ratio, with 1.07 likes per post, while I'm at #2 with 1.03, and @Fru is currently right exactly on a 1:1 ratio. Again, that's among those who show up on the leaderboard, which is like the top 75 for total rep. 

 

I think I'm the de facto HuskerBoard custodian of Rep, since I have data going back to 2010, the first year we started the Rep thing when IP Board added it to their base package. My reliable historical data dates from about 2012 when people started asking questions about Rep and I, in response, started keeping a bit of track of it. 

 

What you're saying here is not exactly accurate, as it doesn't account for years when we only had 10 Rep to give per day, or 50, or 100, as decided by the Admins, and announced by @AR Husker Fan, who I don't think most of the people you're citing even know. Back in the day people would just respond to something they agreed with with "+1" or something like, and hitting the rep button wasn't really a thing.

 

So there are stages of Rep based on a few different factors, including a person's longevity, their post count, the amount of Rep we could give per day, etc. It's all fluctuated wildly over the past nine-ish years.

 

I don't have my data in front of me as I reply to this, but off the top of my head, @Guy Chamberlin has a really good post-to-Rep ratio, as does @Ulty, as does @Ads.

 

Weird that the reference links stop after five in a post.

 

Again, off the top of my head, @BigWillie has a really good post-to-Rep ratio, and I don't think he's even in the top 75. @Nexus used to be up there, too. Not sure where he is now, since he's barely posted in five years.

 

The reason we have data on the top 75 or whatever it is is because when we changed to this version of the board about three or four years ago, I asked @Mavric to increase the reporting for Rep to more than the default 10 or 25 or whatever it was, because on a bi-monthly basis I've been keeping track of this stuff for a bunch of years.

 

Year by year, BigRedBuster, Moiraine, me, Landlord, zoogs, and a few others have pretty good post-to-Rep ratios. Those stats will be skewed in favor of people who joined in the last, say, five years when Rep increased to 100 per day.

 

All that's to say that there are basically tiers of people with good rep ratios based on their join dates in relation to Rep-per-day amounts. But it's important to note that someone like Mavric, who does a TON of basic info-posting and other mundane tasks that increase his post count, but don't necessarily always result in +1s, won't ever be up there on a post-to-Rep ratio, but who are very important to the board, won't be counted. A lot of the Mods fit that category, but Mav is the most obvious of them.

 

So Rep ratios are nice, but they need historic context.

  • Plus1 4

Share this post


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

 

I think I'm the de facto HuskerBoard custodian of Rep, since I have data going back to 2010, the first year we started the Rep thing when IP Board added it to their base package. My reliable historical data dates from about 2012 when people started asking questions about Rep and I, in response, started keeping a bit of track of it. 

 

What you're saying here is not exactly accurate, as it doesn't account for years when we only had 10 Rep to give per day, or 50, or 100, as decided by the Admins, and announced by @AR Husker Fan, who I don't think most of the people you're citing even know. Back in the day people would just respond to something they agreed with with "+1" or something like, and hitting the rep button wasn't really a thing.

 

So there are stages of Rep based on a few different factors, including a person's longevity, their post count, the amount of Rep we could give per day, etc. It's all fluctuated wildly over the past nine-ish years.

 

I don't have my data in front of me as I reply to this, but off the top of my head, @Guy Chamberlin has a really good post-to-Rep ratio, as does @Ulty, as does @Ads.

 

Weird that the reference links stop after five in a post.

 

Again, off the top of my head, @BigWillie has a really good post-to-Rep ratio, and I don't think he's even in the top 75. @Nexus used to be up there, too. Not sure where he is now, since he's barely posted in five years.

 

The reason we have data on the top 75 or whatever it is is because when we changed to this version of the board about three or four years ago, I asked @Mavric to increase the reporting for Rep to more than the default 10 or 25 or whatever it was, because on a bi-monthly basis I've been keeping track of this stuff for a bunch of years.

 

Year by year, BigRedBuster, Moiraine, me, Landlord, zoogs, and a few others have pretty good post-to-Rep ratios. Those stats will be skewed in favor of people who joined in the last, say, five years when Rep increased to 100 per day.

 

All that's to say that there are basically tiers of people with good rep ratios based on their join dates in relation to Rep-per-day amounts. But it's important to note that someone like Mavric, who does a TON of basic info-posting and other mundane tasks that increase his post count, but don't necessarily always result in +1s, won't ever be up there on a post-to-Rep ratio, but who are very important to the board, won't be counted. A lot of the Mods fit that category, but Mav is the most obvious of them.

 

So Rep ratios are nice, but they need historic context.

Excellent overview Knapp, appreciate the rundown.

 

+1 for your contributions.

 

Also, thanks to all the posters who are here to share and discuss the Huskers and eyerolls to the trolls.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@knapplc Yeah, I pretty much assumed all of that. Didn't mean for my numbers to be taken too seriously, as I said I was only going by what the leaderboard showed. I figured that lots of posts predated the rep system, although I didn't know that there was a daily limit on reps. Even breaking things into tiers by join date might skew my numbers, since I registered here back in 2007 but didn't make this my regular board until a couple years ago.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

@knapplc I pretty much assumed all of that. Didn't mean for my numbers to be taken too seriously, as I said I was only going by what the leaderboard showed. I figured that lots of posts predated the rep system, although I didn't know that there was a daily limit on reps. Even breaking things into tiers by join date might skew my numbers, since I registered here back in 2007 but didn't make this my regular board until a couple years ago.

 

I agree. None of it is to be taken too seriously. The Rep stuff is a fun oddity to look at. A person with zero Rep can make a better point than a person with 5,000 Rep.

 

The whole thing is just fodder for spreadsheets and idle time.

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.

×