Iowa has had some talent. You can almost make the argument that they underachieve for the talent they have on the roster.
AJ Epenesa was not hand crafted. Wirfs was also a beast coming out of HS. Some guys they develop, some are pretty talented players.Nah. The talent they have they hand crafted in a way that maximizes the least. They overachieve because the talent they have on the roster wasn't there at the start.
How do you quantify that they have much better talent than their recruiting rankings? I'm curious what you base that statement on.Iowa has been decent for a long time now and sometimes very good. And its very hard to beat them in a rivalry game, in Iowa City. That was one hell of a win by Bo. I dont even think Eichorst believed what he was saying. They do have much better talent than their recruiting rankings. They are getting some skill guys too. That freshman RB they got already looks very good.
They just look like better athletes than we have. We called a bad game, and AM played bad, but we played harder than any other game of the year. Iowa has some talent, and their freshman RB looked really good. Something we havent been able to say ourselves. Nebraska hasn't had a good RB in a while.How do you quantify that they have much better talent than their recruiting rankings? I'm curious what you base that statement on.
I'll buy that they have done a better job developing players and that they know what they are and what they want to do but "much better talent"....based on what?
I won't dispute any of that. We can say they've played better, been more productive, have developed better, have beaten us, outcoached us and all kinds of other things. But you can't say they have much better talent than us. That simply isn't true. Their talent is what their rankings say it is. They've just done more with what they have.They just look like better athletes than we have. We called a bad game, and AM played bad, but we played harder than any other game of the year. Iowa has some talent, and their freshman RB looked really good. Something we havent been able to say ourselves. Nebraska hasn't had a good RB in a while.
Their talent is what their rankings say it is.
The statement he made was that they have much better talent than their recruiting rankings. My point was that their talent is what it is, they simply have developed and done more with what they have. Unless somebody has developed a newfangled measure of talent? Or maybe he’s going off “the eye test” :dunnoTheir recruiting rankings? Or their end of season top 25 rankings or what?
Look at the recruiting rankings AFTER attrition, they're about 40 spots betterAccording to the recruiting site rankings, I'm pretty sure we've "out-recruited" Iowa in terms of average class rank the last five seasons. So why have they produced more NFL talent than we have? I'd say there are three possible explanations, all of which could be true to some degree:
1. The recruiting site rankings aren't exactly what we think they are.
2. Iowa is better at developing talent.
3. Iowa is better at identifying talent in high school film, regardless of where that player ranks on the recruiting rankings sites.
I think it's a combination of #2 and #3. But probably mainly #2.
I admit i haven't looked at the rankings post attrition. But i have looked at OUR roster in great depth. And we have very little talent in our upcoming Junior and Senior classes. Less than Iowa, hell..less than Purdue. When people look at our recruiting rankings they are ignoring attrition..i agree with you on that.Look at the recruiting rankings AFTER attrition, they're about 40 spots better
But lets be honest, we are all excited about RB rated in the 50ish range. We used to have some of the best RBs in the country, now we get giddy over a 40-50th best back in the country.