McKewon on Husker Recruiting

Mavric

Mavric

Yoda
Staff member
“It’ll be not only a time to gather information about recruits, but about recruiting for the future,” Riley said Friday. “It’s still a learning process for us. We’ve tried to capitalize on two things: We know we want to be good locally, Nebraska and the 500-mile radius ... and we’ve tried to use areas where guys already have established contacts and relationships. We hope that pays off, and that part I like.


“And then we have to evaluate the rest of it, because a lot of recruiting is about where you’re going to put your man hours.”
Click to expand...
OWH

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting thoughts from Riley. But I'm confused by this snippet from McKewon:

NU needs that side of Riley — putting together the 2016 recruiting class, which currently has seven commitments — because NU has a 7-5/8-4/9-3 kind of roster right now. It has since arriving in the Big Ten, and Nebraska’s schedules in 2013 and 2014 were pretty friendly, considering they featured a total of 11 regular-season foes that finished with winning records. The Huskers went 4-7 in those games.


You can outcoach the other guy only so often. If you’re inclined to agree with Athletic Director Shawn Eichorst — and some rival coaches — about Riley’s coaching ability, then his tenure at Oregon State is proof that good coaching has its limits. The Beavers knocked off elite teams in his time there and sustained almost unprecedented success over a decade. But Riley topped out at 10 wins in Corvallis. The overall talent profile — shaped by mediocre facilities and modest funding — caught up with his teams annually.
Click to expand...
I find it odd because I would argue that we have as much - or more - talent on the roster now as we've had for at least 5 years and maybe longer. Pelini definitely had some defensive talent when he got here - not a lot on offense - but I think the overall talent has been trending up for several years. And we've won at least nine games for seven years in a row.

So is McKewon slighting the talent we have on the roster? Or did Pelini out-coach more opponents than we give him credit for?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mavric said:
Interesting thoughts from Riley. But I'm confused by this snippet from McKewon:

NU needs that side of Riley putting together the 2016 recruiting class, which currently has seven commitments because NU has a 7-5/8-4/9-3 kind of roster right now. It has since arriving in the Big Ten, and Nebraskas schedules in 2013 and 2014 were pretty friendly, considering they featured a total of 11 regular-season foes that finished with winning records. The Huskers went 4-7 in those games.

You can outcoach the other guy only so often. If youre inclined to agree with Athletic Director Shawn Eichorst and some rival coaches about Rileys coaching ability, then his tenure at Oregon State is proof that good coaching has its limits. The Beavers knocked off elite teams in his time there and sustained almost unprecedented success over a decade. But Riley topped out at 10 wins in Corvallis. The overall talent profile shaped by mediocre facilities and modest funding caught up with his teams annually.
Click to expand...
I find it odd because I would argue that we have as much - or more - talent on the roster now as we've had for at least 5 years and maybe longer. Pelini definitely had some defensive talent when he got here - not a lot on offense - but I think the overall talent has been trending up for several years. And we've won at least nine games for seven years in a row.

So is McKewon slighting the talent we have on the roster? Or did Pelini out-coach more opponents than we give him credit for?
Click to expand...
Some defensive talent when he took over?

 
The cupboard is far from bare talent wise. Both on offense and defense. McKewon is trying to make things look worse then what they really are. Why? I have no idea...

 
Yeah all I see this article as is him saying we need to temper our expectations.

 
That side of Riley is at the top of a recruiting operation now as robust and detailed as Tim Cassidy ran in the Bill Callahan era. When, for all of Callahan’s flaws, he and Cassidy — Nebraska’s lead personnel guy at the time — opened major recruiting doors previously closed to NU. That’s the same Cassidy who’s helped return Arizona State to the national picture in the past four years.
Click to expand...
Didn't know Cassidy was at ASU. The ASU offers a few days after each NU offer make sense now. Must be him trying to get back at us for firing Billy C.

 
I thought Riley et al has all those CA and otherwise west coast connections? Anyway, I don't see the mystery in recruiting strategy: FL, TX, CA, GA, OH are the top 5 states for recruits, so, like everybody else, go there. And lock up the 500 mi radius as much as possible, of course.

 
Mavric said:
Interesting thoughts from Riley. But I'm confused by this snippet from McKewon:

NU needs that side of Riley — putting together the 2016 recruiting class, which currently has seven commitments — because NU has a 7-5/8-4/9-3 kind of roster right now. It has since arriving in the Big Ten, and Nebraska’s schedules in 2013 and 2014 were pretty friendly, considering they featured a total of 11 regular-season foes that finished with winning records. The Huskers went 4-7 in those games.


You can outcoach the other guy only so often. If you’re inclined to agree with Athletic Director Shawn Eichorst — and some rival coaches — about Riley’s coaching ability, then his tenure at Oregon State is proof that good coaching has its limits. The Beavers knocked off elite teams in his time there and sustained almost unprecedented success over a decade. But Riley topped out at 10 wins in Corvallis. The overall talent profile — shaped by mediocre facilities and modest funding — caught up with his teams annually.
Click to expand...
I find it odd because I would argue that we have as much - or more - talent on the roster now as we've had for at least 5 years and maybe longer. Pelini definitely had some defensive talent when he got here - not a lot on offense - but I think the overall talent has been trending up for several years. And we've won at least nine games for seven years in a row.

So is McKewon slighting the talent we have on the roster? Or did Pelini out-coach more opponents than we give him credit for?
Click to expand...
I think Sam is off on this. I think we have some very good talent. We are a little short on depth at some defensive positions, but our starting 11 on defense is talented enough to be a top 20 defense with the right scheme. Offensively on paper we have a lot of talent, but unproven. Our O-line from a recruiting standpoint has a lot of talent on it, but has not shown to be a dominate force. How many of our RB were rated 4*? There is talent it is just unproven.

One of BP's big problem was that he didn't let young talent get on the field unless it was necessary for depth. He was to worried about them knowing what to do all the time.

 
I actually agree with Sam. Right now, given what we currently know about the team, what we can guess from the abilities returning players have shown, and that we have a new coach, they are a 7-5/8-4/9-3 type team this year. This roster is far from loaded, as I'm sure few would argue otherwise, and there are several questions (like any roster has at this time of year).

I don't mean to pick on you NUinID, but your post is exactly the reason Sam wrote what he wrote. "Short on depth" in some defensive positions, "unproven,", "not shown to be a dominant force," and "unproven" again. We also don't have a proven commodity at RB.

So, if it's unfair to say we're 8-4 based on current talent, then it's also unfair to say we're 10-2 or better based on potential, which it seems some people are suggesting without coming out and saying it. I just think Sam is being realistic and trying to not hype people up, but, I also think this is how Sam writes. He's not typically going to blow smoke up your you-know-what. He usually takes all the information he has available and tries to paint a picture of how he thinks things are right now.

And, again, I agree with him. I think we have talented guys, and with the right coaching, it's totally possible that this team could compete for a B1G title. But, it's also totally possible this team could go 8-4 based on what we have right now.

 
Enhance89 said:
I actually agree with Sam. Right now, given what we currently know about the team, what we can guess from the abilities returning players have shown, and that we have a new coach, they are a 7-5/8-4/9-3 type team this year. This roster is far from loaded, as I'm sure few would argue otherwise, and there are several questions (like any roster has at this time of year).
Click to expand...
Do you think we have more/less/same talent as the last 3-4 years?

 
Mavric said:
Enhance89 said:
I actually agree with Sam. Right now, given what we currently know about the team, what we can guess from the abilities returning players have shown, and that we have a new coach, they are a 7-5/8-4/9-3 type team this year. This roster is far from loaded, as I'm sure few would argue otherwise, and there are several questions (like any roster has at this time of year).
Click to expand...
Do you think we have more/less/same talent as the last 3-4 years?
Click to expand...
More in some areas, less in others. I think we're more talented than the 2011 team, for example. But, as of right now, if I look just at the talent level and exclude the other factors, I think we're an 8-4/9-3 team. When you add in Riley's ability to develop talent and the potential for what we have, I could see an argument for perhaps 10-2 or B1G title contender.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Enhance89 said:
Mavric said:
Enhance89 said:
I actually agree with Sam. Right now, given what we currently know about the team, what we can guess from the abilities returning players have shown, and that we have a new coach, they are a 7-5/8-4/9-3 type team this year. This roster is far from loaded, as I'm sure few would argue otherwise, and there are several questions (like any roster has at this time of year).
Click to expand...
Do you think we have more/less/same talent as the last 3-4 years?
Click to expand...
More in some areas, less in others. I think we're more talented than the 2011 team, for example. But, as of right now, if I look just at the talent level and exclude the other factors, I think we're an 8-4/9-3 team. When you add in Riley's ability to develop talent and the potential for what we have, I could see an argument for perhaps 10-2 or B1G title contender.
Click to expand...
I'd say that's fair. As someone else said, I think our starting 22 will be about as talented overall as any team we've had in the last four years. Not by a lot but noticeable. We're thin in a few spots but that's usually the case. I don't think we have any one player that we just can't afford to lose, as would have been the case with AA, Gregory or Martinez over the last few years. Gerry and DPE would probably be the closest - Collins and VV are as talented as anyone but we have options there.

And I don't think we have as tough of a schedule as 2011. We played three teams that finished in the Top 15 that year, including manhandling Michigan State. Michigan State is probably a Top 10 team now but after that there are probably only a couple fringe Top 25 teams (out of BYU, Miami, Wiscinsin and Minnesota there are probably two). So more talent against a lesser schedule should lead to a worse record. That's what I don't get. Unless Pelini was doing a better coaching job than most give him credit for.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top