For all the doubters

[irafreak]

This hate on hedley is excessive. I must have missed some really horrible comments by him or something because all he did in this thread was make a very valid point. These coaches get paid big bucks and get major praise when they succeed. Hard work and criticism come with the job. Do we appreciate the coaching staff? This team has 10 wins. Of course we appreciate their work. Had we won the CCG we'd be singing their praises all excited about the focus now being on the rose bowl and recruiting.

 

[BIGREDIOWAN]

Gotta get them to signing day though, they can verbal all they want, but until they sign I ain't buying it. I've seen kids jump WAY too many times on signing day to say I'm comfortable with anything. Remember about 4 or 5 years ago when Oregon took a lot of kids from us?

 

[HuskerFowler]

I'm looking at this.

http://rivals.yahoo....R.EWWnn4XtGPZB4

#43 national rank.

and

http://rivals.yahoo..../2013/BIG10/all

#9 B1G

ESPN has us #33

And the 247 site is jacked up. No Nebraska listed, though several other teams are listed multiple times, and they have Cal and Clemson in the B1G

247 has new composite ratings that takes the ratings from all the sites and averages them, essentially taking all the biased excuses out of the equation. We are 19th when you average the recruiting rankings from all 4 sites. If you want to look at the way rivals does it thats fine, but rivals is falling behind here, the points sysytem is stupid ( i would say this if we were #1) 247 is on the cutting edge of anaylizing and rating kids, and rivals is quickly falling behind.

It really doesnt matter who you want to look at, if you take an average of all 4 sites that will get you a pretty accurate assessment of where we are at, and 19th is sounds about right for class size and our current commits, and i expect us to finish somewhere around here.

 

[Count 'Bility]

This hate on hedley is excessive. I must have missed some really horrible comments by him or something because all he did in this thread was make a very valid point. These coaches get paid big bucks and get major praise when they succeed. Hard work and criticism come with the job. Do we appreciate the coaching staff? This team has 10 wins. Of course we appreciate their work. Had we won the CCG we'd be singing their praises all excited about the focus now being on the rose bowl and recruiting.

Yes, you missed a lot. IMO, he's coming around. He started off sh**ty though. It wasnt what he said, it's how he said it and when.

 

[HuskerShark]

Average star ranking is fine and all but that will only matter if it stays that way with 25-27 commits. We just have to wait and see what happens. Can't judge a class yet.

That's my point. The players we have so far are very good it's just that other teams have more commits. Gotta wait to pass judgment till the process is over.

All of these schools that are practically done recruiting are ranked what in the polls etc though? I mean if the top 10-15 schools have almost all scholarships accounted for we must be doing something wrong.

NU will never fill up as fast as the Texas's, the USC's, and the Georgia's of the world. I don't mind it either. We would have missed out on a player like Ameer if we did.

If we were competing for National Championships we would.

No.

Winning a championship would boost recruiting quite a bit, but Texas, USC, Bama, etc. would all still have a great advantage over us in recruiting.

 

[kchusker_chris]

I'm looking at this.

http://rivals.yahoo....R.EWWnn4XtGPZB4

#43 national rank.

and

http://rivals.yahoo..../2013/BIG10/all

#9 B1G

ESPN has us #33

And the 247 site is jacked up. No Nebraska listed, though several other teams are listed multiple times, and they have Cal and Clemson in the B1G

247 has new composite ratings that takes the ratings from all the sites and averages them, essentially taking all the biased excuses out of the equation. We are 19th when you average the recruiting rankings from all 4 sites. If you want to look at the way rivals does it thats fine, but rivals is falling behind here, the points sysytem is stupid ( i would say this if we were #1) 247 is on the cutting edge of anaylizing and rating kids, and rivals is quickly falling behind.

It really doesnt matter who you want to look at, if you take an average of all 4 sites that will get you a pretty accurate assessment of where we are at, and 19th is sounds about right for class size and our current commits, and i expect us to finish somewhere around here.

I'm not sure I entirely agree w/ 247's composite. It means that Rivals - who puts a tremendous amount of resources into recruiting, carries the same weight as ESPN/Scout - which both seem to be EXTREMELY far off in many cases. I still like Rivals. But with anything it's all so subjective that you can't really put much weight into any of it. Our issues aren't ranking, it's retaining/using the talent we sign 3 years after the class.

2009: Out of 20, only Burkhead, Ankra, Green, T-Mart, Martin, Pensick, Sirles, Qvale, Randle are contributors (and this is one of the better percentages) w/ 7 busts/transfers.

2010: Out of 22, only Rome, Enunwa, Bell, Evans & SJB are regular contributors w/ 5 busts/transfers

2011: Out of 20, only Turner, Santos (barely), Stafford, Abdulla are contributors w/ 5-6 busts/transfers. This was our best class yet, but the bulk of what made that class (Moore, Green, Klachko) is no longer here.

That should be the core of our 2 deep. But that's only 17 out of 40+. Granted we redshirted almost the entire 2008 class (which is a decision we're still paying for and will continue to even moreso in the future). But still - just seems like we're watching at least as much talent leave the team as we are signing each year.

Note: When I say busts - I'm not including guys like Moudy/Ash that just haven't lived up to their potential - but still have time to.

 

[BigRedBuster]

I believe Scout puts just as much time and effort into the evaluations and rankings as Rivals. They have us at 19th nationally and 3rd in the Big Ten.

Each site has a little different formula on how they calculate the rankings.

 

[BigRedBuster]

There is also a difference in the number of commits each site has for us. Rivals has the fewest at 14. 247 and Scout have us at 16.

 

[Hedley Lamarr]

Rivals total point system is a little flawed. However in the end everyone usually ends up with 25ish and it evens out. I am more concerned about each individual recruit. That recruits film and offers far outweighs everything else. If Bama, tOSU etc want a current commit we have we can assume they feel he would contribute for them. This in turn should lead us to believe we potentially have a future contributor if all falls into place.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I'm looking at this.

http://rivals.yahoo....R.EWWnn4XtGPZB4

#43 national rank.

and

http://rivals.yahoo..../2013/BIG10/all

#9 B1G

ESPN has us #33

And the 247 site is jacked up. No Nebraska listed, though several other teams are listed multiple times, and they have Cal and Clemson in the B1G

247 has new composite ratings that takes the ratings from all the sites and averages them, essentially taking all the biased excuses out of the equation. We are 19th when you average the recruiting rankings from all 4 sites. If you want to look at the way rivals does it thats fine, but rivals is falling behind here, the points sysytem is stupid ( i would say this if we were #1) 247 is on the cutting edge of anaylizing and rating kids, and rivals is quickly falling behind.

It really doesnt matter who you want to look at, if you take an average of all 4 sites that will get you a pretty accurate assessment of where we are at, and 19th is sounds about right for class size and our current commits, and i expect us to finish somewhere around here.

I'm not sure I entirely agree w/ 247's composite. It means that Rivals - who puts a tremendous amount of resources into recruiting, carries the same weight as ESPN/Scout - which both seem to be EXTREMELY far off in many cases. I still like Rivals. But with anything it's all so subjective that you can't really put much weight into any of it. Our issues aren't ranking, it's retaining/using the talent we sign 3 years after the class.

2009: Out of 20, only Burkhead, Ankra, Green, T-Mart, Martin, Pensick, Sirles, Qvale, Randle are contributors (and this is one of the better percentages) w/ 7 busts/transfers.

2010: Out of 22, only Rome, Enunwa, Bell, Evans & SJB are regular contributors w/ 5 busts/transfers

2011: Out of 20, only Turner, Santos (barely), Stafford, Abdulla are contributors w/ 5-6 busts/transfers. This was our best class yet, but the bulk of what made that class (Moore, Green, Klachko) is no longer here.

That should be the core of our 2 deep. But that's only 17 out of 40+. Granted we redshirted almost the entire 2008 class (which is a decision we're still paying for and will continue to even moreso in the future). But still - just seems like we're watching at least as much talent leave the team as we are signing each year.

Note: When I say busts - I'm not including guys like Moudy/Ash that just haven't lived up to their potential - but still have time to.

So in other words it is still safe to say the recruiting is getting better with each year. It's what we're doing with the guys when they get here that obviously has to improve greatly.

Doesnt seem that getting them here is as much of a problem. Also an issue may be the evaluation of the athletes during the recruiting process. There was an article last winter of Bo hiring some agency to assist in the evaluation of talent and psychology of players he was considering recruiting to help cut down on misses/busts.

 

[kchusker_chris]

So in other words it is still safe to say the recruiting is getting better with each year. It's what we're doing with the guys when they get here that obviously has to improve greatly.

Doesnt seem that getting them here is as much of a problem. Also an issue may be the evaluation of the athletes during the recruiting process. There was an article last winter of Bo hiring some agency to assist in the evaluation of talent and psychology of players he was considering recruiting to help cut down on misses/busts.

I don't think we're that far off from a ranking perspective. I do think Bo has done a piss poor job of managing the roster though. That's certainly one of those HC things that you can't really learn as a coordinator. He's gotten better though. The 2008 fiasco of redshirting 25ish guys is going to hurt us as the last couple of classes have been forced to be small because of that decision. And it is something we are just now going to start feeling. Don't see him going that route again. Missing on a couple late last year and going into the season short on schollies sucks too. Stuff like that. He needs to improve there. For as big of a "family" as this team seems to be, for some reason he is out of touch w/ the numbers - and who's staying/going, etc. He probably tries too hard to talk a kid into staying. He convinces them even though they don't want to because it's in their best interest. Then they walk anyway. It's better to cut them loose in January, versus watching them walk during spring ball when you can't do anything about the roster.

I do believe that the evaluation part needs to hinge more on whether a kid from inner-city Miami can hack it in small-town Lincoln. Even something so simple as a kid with a long distance relationship puts this team at risk. There's a lot more than football that goes into Nebraska recruiting. Those are some of the issues he needs to learn to overcome.

Add a "difference-maker" type of player to each of these classes, someone like Peat last year, Hooks, or maybe Newby this year (though I think almost any RB can be successful at Nebraska) plus a Sandland - and I believe Bo has us where we need to be in recruiting from a ranking/potential standpoint. But he's got to hit the numbers better, and he's got to retain the talent.

 

[HuskerNationNick]

2010: Out of 22, only Rome, Enunwa, Bell, Evans & SJB are regular contributors w/ 5 busts/transfers

2011: Out of 20, only Turner, Santos (barely), Stafford, Abdulla are contributors w/ 5-6 busts/transfers. This was our best class yet, but the bulk of what made that class (Moore, Green, Klachko) is no longer here.

What about Allen? Allen would have been much more of a success and was a contributor until his injury.

Charles Jackson, Reeves, Williams, Peat Jr, Bondi, Pirman, Price and Sutton can't be counted out just yet. Two of them are injured, and the rest just haven't gotten enough experience to start. I do believe almost all of these guys will be key contributors next year. Bondi will get the K/P starting position. Pirman will most likely get a LB position alongside Anderson, Brown and Santos.

I think its a little premature to say any of these kids are busts, especially when they are RS Freshman or true sophomores.

 

[kchusker_chris]

2010: Out of 22, only Rome, Enunwa, Bell, Evans & SJB are regular contributors w/ 5 busts/transfers

2011: Out of 20, only Turner, Santos (barely), Stafford, Abdulla are contributors w/ 5-6 busts/transfers. This was our best class yet, but the bulk of what made that class (Moore, Green, Klachko) is no longer here.

What about Allen? Allen would have been much more of a success and was a contributor until his injury.

Charles Jackson, Reeves, Williams, Peat Jr, Bondi, Pirman, Price and Sutton can't be counted out just yet. Two of them are injured, and the rest just haven't gotten enough experience to start. I do believe almost all of these guys will be key contributors next year. Bondi will get the K/P starting position. Pirman will most likely get a LB position alongside Anderson, Brown and Santos.

I think its a little premature to say any of these kids are busts, especially when they are RS Freshman or true sophomores.

i didn't say any of them were busts, they weren't counted in my numbers (hense the reason busts + contributers != commits) But I think it's safe to say Bondi has not been a contributor, or price, or sutton, or Allen, or Reeves, etc. That was the point.

 

[irafreak]

This hate on hedley is excessive. I must have missed some really horrible comments by him or something because all he did in this thread was make a very valid point. These coaches get paid big bucks and get major praise when they succeed. Hard work and criticism come with the job. Do we appreciate the coaching staff? This team has 10 wins. Of course we appreciate their work. Had we won the CCG we'd be singing their praises all excited about the focus now being on the rose bowl and recruiting.

Yes, you missed a lot. IMO, he's coming around. He started off sh**ty though. It wasnt what he said, it's how he said it and when.

Kinda hard to judge that on the internet. People are always misinterpreting me. Anyway not trying to be jerk just saying the posts I've read are very opinionated but seem well thought out. Didn't see any "Bo sucks Taylor sucks f you all I rule" posts...

 

[kchusker_chris]

This hate on hedley is excessive. I must have missed some really horrible comments by him or something because all he did in this thread was make a very valid point. These coaches get paid big bucks and get major praise when they succeed. Hard work and criticism come with the job. Do we appreciate the coaching staff? This team has 10 wins. Of course we appreciate their work. Had we won the CCG we'd be singing their praises all excited about the focus now being on the rose bowl and recruiting.

Yes, you missed a lot. IMO, he's coming around. He started off sh**ty though. It wasnt what he said, it's how he said it and when.

Kinda hard to judge that on the internet. People are always misinterpreting me. Anyway not trying to be jerk just saying the posts I've read are very opinionated but seem well thought out. Didn't see any "Bo sucks Taylor sucks f you all I rule" posts...

Hedly's issue is that he joined during one of the lowest period's of Husker football (post Wisconsin smack down) in the last 4-5 years. He joined in a period where the board was swarmed with derp. Most of his early posts were immediately after the embarrassment that was the B1G championship. He had a low post count, and everyone railed on him any time something negative was said (which was frequent) - then they went overboard because he had the balls to argue back (not always eloquently - but with some of the responses even that was understandable). Frankly I'm surprised he's still posting...a number of people really had it out for him - and obviously still do. I would have packed up my opinions and found a new board.