Interesting fact.

[Ratt Mhule]

So if we beat UCLA, losing to Minnesota would have been okay?

that would have been better than losing to them both, no?

As far as record goes, yes. But either way, people are still calling for Pelini's head

 

[sd'sker]

As far as record goes, yes. But either way, people are still calling for Pelini's head

just to be clear, i am not calling for his head. all i said is that if we beat top teams, i would be less upset if we occasionally lost to an inferior opponent.

now, technically the inferior losses would hurt more, perhaps, because more would be at stake and we would have more to lose. but still, it is getting old not competing in big games and losing games we should dominate. i just want to see a good product on the field and accept that sometimes even good teams have bad games.

 

[TheSker]

Or they might not. Academics. Location. Location. Location.

I agree with you there. Stanford is in a much better spot than Nebraska. The NCAA Division 1 bylaws say that an incoming student athlete (SA) has to meet "the regular published entrance requirements of that institution." Bylaw 14.1.6.1. That means that, beyond NCAA requirements applicable across the board, a prospective SA only has to meet the school's general admission standards, however high or low the school sets them. Like a lot of top schools, Stanford doesn't really have a minimum high school GPA and SAT/ACT since it can rely on its academic reputation to get lots of quality applicants. The odd thing is that for a top high school football prospect with less than stellar academic marks, it's easier to get into Stanford than NU (which does have minimum requirements and an admissions department that sometimes does a bad job of working with recruits). At any rate, a high-ranking school administrator can make exceptions to admissions requirements if it publishes a policy stating the grounds for exceptions. Bylaw 14.1.6.1.1.

So, Stanford has a great location and gets to sell its academic reputation to recruits without actually being burdened too much by admission requirements.

But we can find can find schools in our own conference that have done more with less than Pelini has (e.g., Wisconsin).

I'm not convinced Wisconsin has done "more with less".......they've sent quite a few to the league in recent years. Russell Wilson and JJ Watt certainly do not indicate a need to do "more with less" to me.

 

[suigeneris]

Or they might not. Academics. Location. Location. Location.

I agree with you there. Stanford is in a much better spot than Nebraska. The NCAA Division 1 bylaws say that an incoming student athlete (SA) has to meet "the regular published entrance requirements of that institution." Bylaw 14.1.6.1. That means that, beyond NCAA requirements applicable across the board, a prospective SA only has to meet the school's general admission standards, however high or low the school sets them. Like a lot of top schools, Stanford doesn't really have a minimum high school GPA and SAT/ACT since it can rely on its academic reputation to get lots of quality applicants. The odd thing is that for a top high school football prospect with less than stellar academic marks, it's easier to get into Stanford than NU (which does have minimum requirements and an admissions department that sometimes does a bad job of working with recruits). At any rate, a high-ranking school administrator can make exceptions to admissions requirements if it publishes a policy stating the grounds for exceptions. Bylaw 14.1.6.1.1.

So, Stanford has a great location and gets to sell its academic reputation to recruits without actually being burdened too much by admission requirements.

But we can find can find schools in our own conference that have done more with less than Pelini has (e.g., Wisconsin).

I'm not convinced Wisconsin has done "more with less".......they've sent quite a few to the league in recent years. Russell Wilson and JJ Watt certainly do not indicate a need to do "more with less" to me.

Yup, and those NFL draftees just fall out of the sky in Wisconsin and have nothing to do with the staff in place.

 

[JJ Husker]

As far as record goes, yes. But either way, people are still calling for Pelini's head

just to be clear, i am not calling for his head. all i said is that if we beat top teams, i would be less upset if we occasionally lost to an inferior opponent.

now, technically the inferior losses would hurt more, perhaps, because more would be at stake and we would have more to lose. but still, it is getting old not competing in big games and losing games we should dominate. i just want to see a good product on the field and accept that sometimes even good teams have bad games.

This^ +1.

 

[TheSker]

Or they might not. Academics. Location. Location. Location.

I agree with you there. Stanford is in a much better spot than Nebraska. The NCAA Division 1 bylaws say that an incoming student athlete (SA) has to meet "the regular published entrance requirements of that institution." Bylaw 14.1.6.1. That means that, beyond NCAA requirements applicable across the board, a prospective SA only has to meet the school's general admission standards, however high or low the school sets them. Like a lot of top schools, Stanford doesn't really have a minimum high school GPA and SAT/ACT since it can rely on its academic reputation to get lots of quality applicants. The odd thing is that for a top high school football prospect with less than stellar academic marks, it's easier to get into Stanford than NU (which does have minimum requirements and an admissions department that sometimes does a bad job of working with recruits). At any rate, a high-ranking school administrator can make exceptions to admissions requirements if it publishes a policy stating the grounds for exceptions. Bylaw 14.1.6.1.1.

So, Stanford has a great location and gets to sell its academic reputation to recruits without actually being burdened too much by admission requirements.

But we can find can find schools in our own conference that have done more with less than Pelini has (e.g., Wisconsin).

I'm not convinced Wisconsin has done "more with less".......they've sent quite a few to the league in recent years. Russell Wilson and JJ Watt certainly do not indicate a need to do "more with less" to me.

Yup, and those NFL draftees just fall out of the sky in Wisconsin and have nothing to do with the staff in place.

I don't think it's any secret we need to recruit better and have done so the past two seasons.

 

[NUpolo8]

Or they might not. Academics. Location. Location. Location.

I agree with you there. Stanford is in a much better spot than Nebraska. The NCAA Division 1 bylaws say that an incoming student athlete (SA) has to meet "the regular published entrance requirements of that institution." Bylaw 14.1.6.1. That means that, beyond NCAA requirements applicable across the board, a prospective SA only has to meet the school's general admission standards, however high or low the school sets them. Like a lot of top schools, Stanford doesn't really have a minimum high school GPA and SAT/ACT since it can rely on its academic reputation to get lots of quality applicants. The odd thing is that for a top high school football prospect with less than stellar academic marks, it's easier to get into Stanford than NU (which does have minimum requirements and an admissions department that sometimes does a bad job of working with recruits). At any rate, a high-ranking school administrator can make exceptions to admissions requirements if it publishes a policy stating the grounds for exceptions. Bylaw 14.1.6.1.1.

So, Stanford has a great location and gets to sell its academic reputation to recruits without actually being burdened too much by admission requirements.

But we can find can find schools in our own conference that have done more with less than Pelini has (e.g., Wisconsin).

I'm not convinced Wisconsin has done "more with less".......they've sent quite a few to the league in recent years. Russell Wilson and JJ Watt certainly do not indicate a need to do "more with less" to me.

Yup, and those NFL draftees just fall out of the sky in Wisconsin and have nothing to do with the staff in place.

I don't think it's any secret we need to recruit better and have done so the past two seasons.

Nebraska is regressing. I'll believe the better talent chestnut when I actually see a better product.

 

[QMany]

Nebraska is regressing. I'll believe the better talent chestnut when I actually see a better product.

Please, elaborate.

 

[TheSker]

Stanford's a pretty rare case. Just an exceptional university in pretty much all areas.

Is Oklahoma a better example then? Or Wisconsin?

Let's recap the past several weeks at Oklahoma. Lost to Texas. Blown out by Baylor. Stoops got a contract extension. Anything else I missed?

 

[NUpolo8]

Nebraska is regressing. I'll believe the better talent chestnut when I actually see a better product.

Please, elaborate.

In 2009 they were a disputed second away from a BCS bowl and had an all world defense.

Their defense now gets completely dominated in the trenches and threatens to set futility records every game against a team with a pulse.

I really wouldn't have to say more than that. But if these recruits are so amazing right now, why can't they get onnthenfield over the previous misses?

 

[NUpolo8]

Stanford's a pretty rare case. Just an exceptional university in pretty much all areas.

Is Oklahoma a better example then? Or Wisconsin?

Let's recap the past several weeks at Oklahoma. Lost to Texas. Blown out by Baylor. Stoops got a contract extension. Anything else I missed?

A few BCS bowls and conference championships. And rankings. So no, not much

 

[suigeneris]

I don't think it's any secret we need to recruit better and have done so the past two seasons.

I think our great recruiting the past two years would come as a surprise to people outside of Nebraska. The last two classes have been, maybe, marginally better in terms of the rating services and offer lists. They have been wildly better in the eyes of self-styled amateur recruitniks who think they can evaluate talent by reading message boards and watching a 5-minute highlight video.

So far, the results are inconclusive. I think our younger guys look more athletic to some fans because those fans desperately want them to be more athletic. If you listen to Husker fans, the freshman are always faster and more athletic than the upperclassmen who have been in the program a few years.

 

[EZ-E]

No way anyone can possibly say one of the most respected academic schools in the nation that is in the state of California has as many built in disadvantages as NU.

athletes could not care less about academics. c'mon man.

Hoping there was sarcasm here.

 

[sd'sker]

No way anyone can possibly say one of the most respected academic schools in the nation that is in the state of California has as many built in disadvantages as NU.

athletes could not care less about academics. c'mon man.

Hoping there was sarcasm here.

not at all.

 

[NUpolo8]

No way anyone can possibly say one of the most respected academic schools in the nation that is in the state of California has as many built in disadvantages as NU.

athletes could not care less about academics. c'mon man.

Hoping there was sarcasm here.

You don't get to have both sides of the argument about places like the sec and then use the academics argument.