OWH: Nebraska's In-State Recruiting Collapse was Worse than you Think

[Undone]

The increasing inflation rate of tuition is probably the biggest issue to the walk-on program. The sheer roster size of Osborne's teams was probably the biggest advantage in terms of being able to create large pools of different units in practice to go up against each other. That was nice, but ultimately only the more talented guys see the field anyway. So while many will probably disagree with this, I think the decreased roster limit angle is blown a bit out of proportion in terms of negative impact.

 

The other issue  that Dirk mentions that's key is that it's harder to pull a kid in if the program sucks. Frost can and probably will change this. Wisconsin had a starting defensive lineman from Lincoln Southeast this season. Get your head around that.

[BIG ERN]

6 minutes ago, Undone said:

The increasing inflation rate of tuition is probably the biggest issue to the walk-on program. The sheer roster size of Osborne's teams was probably the biggest advantage in terms of being able to create large pools of different units in practice to go up against each other. That was nice, but ultimately only the more talented guys see the field anyway. So while many will probably disagree with this, I think the decreased roster limit angle is blown a bit out of proportion in terms of negative impact.

 

The other issue  that Dirk mentions that's key is that it's harder to pull a kid in if the program sucks. Frost can and probably will change this. Wisconsin had a starting defensive lineman from Lincoln Southeast this season. Get your head around that.

I think having larger roster sizes because of walk ons isn't more about practicing, it's just a numbers game. No different than why most larger schools can beat smaller schools - numbers. One school has 50 kids to choose from and the other has 300. I know there is more that goes into that, but we just need to have a few breakthrough every year since we are getting so many quality ones. It's coming...

[Undone]

9 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

I think having larger roster sizes because of walk ons isn't more about practicing, it's just a numbers game. No different than why most larger schools can beat smaller schools - numbers. One school has 50 kids to choose from and the other has 300. I know there is more that goes into that, but we just need to have a few breakthrough every year since we are getting so many quality ones. It's coming...

 

But I mentioned this in my post: Only the good ones actually see the field. Therefore, I really believe that the big roster size we had in the 80s & 90s mainly was about fueling competition. Which is obviously helpful - but probably overblown a bit as it pertains to lamenting why we suck so bad now compared to our glory years.

 

Frost and his staff have to learn how to develop players the same way that Iowa & Wisconsin develop players. And I think with the two firings we've seen this offseason it's clear that this hit him. 

 

Everyone now has the same roster size. So it's a level playing field for everybody. The smaller programs may not hit their max roster size each season, but the teams we're going to be competing against most likely do. The questions is whether you can draw in your in-state talent (which our program hasn't been doing a good job of) and then also whether or not you have the coaching to develop the guys you keep in-state.

[Mavric]

On 2/3/2020 at 12:38 PM, NUance said:

Here are a couple facts that stood out to me:  

 

despite  

 

Okay, I realize they're playing against lessor competition.  But does that mean ALL of the eight-man players are lessor?    24.7 percent! 

 

To be fair, those numbers really don't tell the correct story.

 

I'm sure there are kids walking the halls (not out for football) at Omaha South (largest school in the state, any Class A school really) who would be starters for almost any eight-man team in the state.  But they are far enough down the list at their school that they don't even go out - or are limited by roster sizes (possibly). 

 

The more appropriate number would be that eight-man comprises 4,021 boys by enrollment compared to 40,856 for the entire state - slightly under 10%.  Which is still below the percentage overall (I assume more than 20 in-state kids have lettered) but significantly lower than the number used in the article.

[NUance]

3 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

To be fair, those numbers really don't tell the correct story.

 

I'm sure there are kids walking the halls (not out for football) at Omaha South (largest school in the state, any Class A school really) who would be starters for almost any eight-man team in the state.  But they are far enough down the list at their school that they don't even go out - or are limited by roster sizes (possibly). 

 

The more appropriate number would be that eight-man comprises 4,021 boys by enrollment compared to 40,856 for the entire state - slightly under 10%.  Which is still below the percentage overall (I assume more than 20 in-state kids have lettered) but significantly lower than the number used in the article.

 

Good point.  Comparing enrollment would be a better analysis.  Still, nowhere close to 10% of the in-state scholarships go to 8-man players.  That'd be about one scholarship every three to five years.  

[Mavric]

22 hours ago, NUance said:

Good point.  Comparing enrollment would be a better analysis.  Still, nowhere close to 10% of the in-state scholarships go to 8-man players.  That'd be about one scholarship every three to five years.  

 

They were talking about lettermen, which would be different from scholarship.  But I agree it's probably a smaller percentage.

 

If you're wanting to talk scholarships, that seems to be harder to pin down what the number "should" be.  I've been tracking the top five rated in-state recruits for the past 12 years to see which ones went to Nebraska, other Power 5 schools or to some smaller school.  Over that 12 years, Drew Ott is the only 8-man player who's been ranked in the Top 5 in the state for that year.  That's 1 out of 60 (1.6%).  So there barely been any eight-man players who would seem to be worthy of a scholarship over that time.  For whatever reason that's obviously well below what a random distribution of talent would say there should be. 

 

Perhaps there'd be a similar discrepancy on letterman.  But I agree with the above that the cost of college is probably the largest factor in the lack of in-state lettermen/scholarships.

[Danimal]

On ‎2‎/‎2‎/‎2020 at 9:26 PM, Mavric said:

Thanks to @HUSKER 37 (and @NUance) for pointing this out.

 

 

OWH

 

With costs skyrocketing it's damn impressive Frost has been able get so many guys to pass on schollies to lover-level programs. If I was a prospect back in my day(late 80's) I would have walked-on, if I was a kid now I'd probably take that sure thing at SDSU or wherever.