RB Kewan Lacy [Missouri - Signed LOI]

[Cornfed]

2 minutes ago, Huskerfollower4life said:

As a overall program yes we have had more success but in this generation we aren't a better program then Iowa State.  That's the problem Nebraska has to win to get the respectablility back.  In this generation most of the kids never got to see Nebraska win so by what they go off of is are we a winning program rn? No we are not but we can when we eventually start winning but you can't hold yourself to say we belong to be mentioned with the Michigan's and Ohio State and lose to the Northwestern's of the world.

Every blue blood has down years. Granted Nebraska’s has felt like forever. We still have the pedigree. The same can’t be said about the aforementioned.

[Huskerfollower4life]

7 minutes ago, Cornfed said:

Every blue blood has down years. Granted Nebraska’s has felt like forever. We still have the pedigree. The same can’t be said about the aforementioned.

When you mentioned years your meaning a couple we have had 7 years of losing that's half in a generation.  Yes blue bloods have had off years but they tend to get back on track.  We haven't yet.

[Cornfed]

7 minutes ago, Huskerfollower4life said:

When you mentioned years your meaning a couple we have had 7 years of losing that's half in a generation.  Yes blue bloods have had off years but they tend to get back on track.  We haven't yet.

I acknowledged the drought. You’re not saying anything that effectively discounts what I’m iterating. 

[Huskerfollower4life]

12 minutes ago, Cornfed said:

I acknowledged the drought. You’re not saying anything that effectively discounts what I’m iterating. 

Yes I did we aren't better then Iowa State rn bc of the losing.

[Cornfed]

3 minutes ago, Huskerfollower4life said:

Yes I did we aren't better than Iowa State rn bc of the losing.

K buddy. You’re proving my point with the “rn.” You’re only focusing on a piece of the picture. I also acknowledged that we need to start winning, obviously. Still, Iowa state can’t be Nebraska because they don’t have nor can offer everything that Nebraska has.  If the stature of a program was solely based on current record the college football landscape would look drastically different. Legacy, facilities, resources, support…MATTER. 

[SouthLincoln Husker]

1 hour ago, Cornfed said:

K buddy. You’re proving my point with the “rn.” You’re only focusing on a piece of the picture. I also acknowledged that we need to start winning, obviously. Still, Iowa state can’t be Nebraska because they don’t have nor can offer everything that Nebraska has.  If the stature of a program was solely based on current record the college football landscape would look drastically different. Legacy, facilities, resources, support…MATTER. 

Your talking to a wall! 

[Cornfed]

5 minutes ago, SouthLincoln Husker said:

Your talking to a wall! 

haha yeah. Brick wall is missing some bricks. 

[Wistrom Disciple]

2 hours ago, Cornfed said:

Every blue blood has down years. Granted Nebraska’s has felt like forever. We still have the pedigree. The same can’t be said about the aforementioned.

We have the pedigree to our own fan base and college football fans older than 25-30 years old. Yes, we have the facilities, investment, and the history to match up with almost anyone in the country. However, we haven't been to a bowl game since the current recruits were entering middle school and haven't been a true Top 10-20 program since they were in first or second grade at best. 

 

Therefore, @Huskerfollower4life makes a valid point that in the eyes of recruits, our program's current standing is no better than the likes of Iowa State, Arkansas, etc. Only when you factor in the off-the-field stuff (facilities, NIL, etc.) do we have more appeal than those programs. 

[Cornfed]

2 hours ago, Wistrom Disciple said:

We have the pedigree to our own fan base and college football fans older than 25-30 years old. Yes, we have the facilities, investment, and the history to match up with almost anyone in the country. However, we haven't been to a bowl game since the current recruits were entering middle school and haven't been a true Top 10-20 program since they were in first or second grade at best. 

 

Therefore, @Huskerfollower4life makes a valid point that in the eyes of recruits, our program's current standing is no better than the likes of Iowa State, Arkansas, etc. Only when you factor in the off-the-field stuff (facilities, NIL, etc.) do we have more appeal than those programs. 

Thank you for reiterating, I guess. Point being, you can’t say we’re in the same class as BYU/TCU/Iowa st because of our recent record. There’s a lot more to the college football machine than just your record. 

[Huskerfollower4life]

15 hours ago, Cornfed said:

Thank you for reiterating, I guess. Point being, you can’t say we’re in the same class as BYU/TCU/Iowa st because of our recent record. There’s a lot more to the college football machine than just your record. 

I wasn't saying bc of our current record I was talking about losing for 7 years straight.  After this weekend I hope we move past losing to teams we should beat on paper and can actually get to a bowl game next year.

[Wistrom Disciple]

15 hours ago, Cornfed said:

Thank you for reiterating, I guess. Point being, you can’t say we’re in the same class as BYU/TCU/Iowa st because of our recent record. There’s a lot more to the college football machine than just your record. 

You're welcome.

 

We have not been in the same class as any of those three at this time. Off the field we're competitive with most Top 10-15 teams of the college football world, but on the field (where it counts) we have been more on par with Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, and UConn. You are correct that programs are often perceived as successful by more than just their win-loss record (ie- NFL draft picks, rankings, etc.). However, the one metric that will always be most important in the perception of a successful program is whether Team A is consistently winning on the field. 

[Mavric]

9 minutes ago, Wistrom Disciple said:

You're welcome.

 

We have not been in the same class as any of those three at this time. Off the field we're competitive with most Top 10-15 teams of the college football world, but on the field (where it counts) we have been more on par with Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, and UConn. You are correct that programs are often perceived as successful by more than just their win-loss record (ie- NFL draft picks, rankings, etc.). However, the one metric that will always be most important in the perception of a successful program is whether Team A is consistently winning on the field. 

 

And yet we have the #2 player in this class visiting as we type....

[Huskerfollower4life]

8 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

And yet we have the #2 player in this class visiting as we type....

That's true but that a totally different scenario bc of family ties to this place. Nebraska wouldn't even be able to draw him here without that.  The only way Nebraska could have drawn him in is if he was actually from here and wanted to stay home and play for his home state otherwise there wouldn't be any interest for him to look our way.

[Mavric]

4 minutes ago, Huskerfollower4life said:

That's true but that a totally different scenario bc of family connections.  Nebraska wouldn't even be able to draw him here without that.

 

Which is exactly the point.  There are a ton of factors that go into it.  So to try to put it in an arbitrary box is not in line with reality.

[Wistrom Disciple]

36 minutes ago, Mavric said:

And yet we have the #2 player in this class visiting as we type....

Yes, and that's a great sign that Rhule has the program heading in the right direction. As you know however, winning games is far more important than winning the PR battle.