Do we need top 5 classes to be successful?

[Huskers93-97]

On 12/24/2018 at 1:05 PM, Cdog923 said:

 

No. Consistent top 15 classes + the occasional top 10 class + development will get us there. 

I agree with this completely. 

 

As as far as winning the big ten. Let’s get real and acknowledge the big ten just got way easier to win. Ohio state will stay good but will not stay elite for long. 2-3 years when Meyers top 5 classes run out they won’t be superhuman anymore. 

[DefenderAO]

19 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said:

I agree with this completely. 

 

As as far as winning the big ten. Let’s get real and acknowledge the big ten just got way easier to win. Ohio state will stay good but will not stay elite for long. 2-3 years when Meyers top 5 classes run out they won’t be superhuman anymore. 

 

OU and Texas will join the fray.  It will be fun

[4skers89]

9 hours ago, Enhance said:

I think there are three tiers for determining what Nebraska can expect based on recruiting rankings (these should be viewed as rough standards rather than exact requirements):

 

Top 25+ recruiting: compete in west, occasionally win the division, lower percentage chance at winning B1G

Top 15-24 recruiting: compete in west, regularly win division, moderate-to-good chance at winning B1G

Top 5-14 recruiting: win the west, good chance to win B1G, CFP contender

 

So far, Clemson has the worst average recruiting ranking over the last five years of any national champion (11.8). All of the others are in the Top 10. I don't think Nebraska is going to sniff hopes at a national title unless they get somewhere in that range.

 

To the question at hand, 'success' definitely does not require a top 5 class here. Solid recruiting in the 15-25 range will position the team well for conference titles, major bowls and potential CFP appearances (the latter being unlikely unless they can get into the top 15 recruiting realm).

This seems the most accurate and likely outcome.  One thing that is hard to account for is the Frost effect.  One year isn't much data to go on but last year's UCF significantly outperformed their recruiting ranking which looked to be 50 or worse from 2013-2017.  Conference recruiting rankings during that time were 8th, 3rd, 3rd, 4th and 1st so it's not like their recruiting allowed them to go undefeated in conference.  Hopefully for us the Frost effect will at least be that we finally perform up to our divisional recruiting ranking.  This will require figuring out how to consistently beat the pesky Badgers and I believe they're bringing in bigger dudes on the DL to accomplish that.  Proper S&C will be key to regularly winning the division with top 15-24 recruiting.

[huskered17]

On 12/24/2018 at 12:25 PM, runningblind said:

I don't think we need top 5 classes. Right around 12-15, and occasionally higher with the old Nebraska formula will do the trick:

 

1. Sign kids who want to work/meet character standards (staff is high on this), in order to turn 3/4* rated kids into 4/5* football players.

2. Develop/maintain culture of competition, accountability and brotherhood.

3. Out lift, out scheme, and out prepare the rest of the league.

 

These are things Frost is setting out to do,  exactly like T.O. did.  #1 is the reason we may not see consistent top 10 classes ever as they have a very specific type of player they want. Might not always be the highest rated.

 

It worked before and it will again. 

 

GBR!!!

[teachercd]

I used to think rankings were a joke (and at the start they were) then they seemed to get much much more accurate.  

 

With that said I would love to see how the rankings went if Rivals/247 didn't know who had offered the kid and where that kid committed.  

[BigRedBuster]

9 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I used to think rankings were a joke (and at the start they were) then they seemed to get much much more accurate.  

 

With that said I would love to see how the rankings went if Rivals/247 didn't know who had offered the kid and where that kid committed.  

Years ago I had a conversation with a recruiting reporter from one of the main sites. He finally admitted that what school is recruiting a player played a major factor in the rating. 

 

I still think it plays a part but smaller than it used to. Now it’s weighted more on how they perform in camps. Problem is, not all kids attend a bunch of camps. 

 

The ststem isnt perfect, but it has improved. 

[Hedley Lamarr]

We need to average in the teens and have years where we push for top 10. Luckily for us we finally have a coach that is willing to turn a roster over to better our program. He is taking 30+ this year and is expected to bring in another 25 next year....This roster is going to be flipped QUICK

[billdozer15]

Short answer, yes. History proves that the programs at or near the top consistently also have classes in that range. There may be some outliers that jump up once in a while but for the most part to be at the top you have to recruit at the top or close. I would say consistently in the top 10 of recruiting is sufficient to be a contender.

[teachercd]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

Years ago I had a conversation with a recruiting reporter from one of the main sites. He finally admitted that what school is recruiting a player played a major factor in the rating. 

 

I still think it plays a part but smaller than it used to. Now it’s weighted more on how they perform in camps. Problem is, not all kids attend a bunch of camps. 

 

The ststem isnt perfect, but it has improved. 

I think it makes sense that he would say that.  And it probably is a little bit smaller now, especially in basketball.

[Hilltop]

Recruiting rankings follow success - not the other way around imo.  When teams overachieve their supposed current level of talent, they generally attract higher level recruits.  Of course we see small jumps from coaching hires, local talent influx, etc but in general I see recruiting rankings as something that happens, not necessarily something that controls or indicates the future.  While the correlation between recruiting rankings and championships exists, I believe the reasoning for the championships is coaching.  Bottom line is we don't need top 5 classes but rather we need the coaching that will attract better recruits on a consistent basis.  I believe we have that now.   

[r06ue1]

The recruiting will come around once the winning begins.  Frost was able to take UCF recruits and beat a good Auburn team that beat Alabama, he didn't need top 5 talent to do it.  

 

Once those CCG and big bowl game wins come, then those top 100 players will be looking at Nebraska as the place they want to be to launch them into the NFL, not Alabama.  

 

And I believe it will happen a lot sooner than most expect.

 

[Vince R.]

Nebraska can average between 12-18 and be fine. The walk on program is going to be a huge difference, as is player development. Our coaches work their asses off. Believe it or not, many staffs are pretty lazy and do not get the best out of the players, despite being monster recruiters. If we can sprinkle in a top ten class every 5 years, with an overall average of 12-15, we will be in conference championship contention yearly.

[Landlord]

14 hours ago, Huskers93-97 said:

Ohio state will stay good but will not stay elite for long. 2-3 years when Meyers top 5 classes run out they won’t be superhuman anymore. 

 

 

People have been saying something to this effect for years with every new coaching hire OSU has had. Trouble is they have never been down outside of the very rare single season.

 

Ohio State is like the one single program who has never had a down period in the modern era. 

[Huskers93-97]

24 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

People have been saying something to this effect for years with every new coaching hire OSU has had. Trouble is they have never been down outside of the very rare single season.

 

Ohio State is like the one single program who has never had a down period in the modern era. 

I agree the got 2 hires in a row right. But history tells us they are due for a down period. Especially people who follow a historically successful coach. Prior to the Tressel hire their last natty was the 60s 

[WyoHusker56]

If we're using history as our guide, then Oregon's run up to their National Championship appearance in 2014 has to be the best comparison. They went something like 30, 12, 12, 14, 19 in the years leading up to it. So, I'd say we need consistent top 15 classes. Also, you could say that had Oregon had consistency at coaching it may have helped result in an eventual NC.