New Nebraska Recruiting Record

Husker in WI said:
They don't rely on the scouting services, but they do a lot of the same work. I suspect Rivals/247 were already working on Mauga-Clements (and many other players), then expedited his review when he committed to a P5 program. It's not like the coaches are just skimming rivals looking for who else to offer, but the recruiting sites do their own work as well.

Offers do play a big factor for sure though, they're striving for accuracy so if you know Bama wants this kid badly you're probably going to give him a bump. I've noticed the state of Wisconsin has a lot more 4* lineman nowadays, and I'm pretty sure that has more to do with knowing they'll be developed well than better small school scouting from recruiting sites.
Click to expand...
So it’s all a bit self-fulfilling in that the NFL is loaded with 4&5 star guys because the “best” players are the ones who attend the guru service camps and the colleges’ camps and attend the big high schools in the big towns and the ones the elite schools offer become rated higher.  A big circular arrangement and many go unnoticed.   I think of my all time favorite Huskers were the walkons who played lowly 8 man ball and became legends.  Probably weren’t rated at all let alone earnestly scouted.   They didn’t raise our class ranking but made the team great nonetheless.  

 
People are missing this part....Nebraska has not been getting 5* players and probably rarely ever will. Clemson got 6 of them this year which is more than we have since 2000 (we have 2 in the last 20 years - 247 composite). There have been 5 major powers for quite sometime and ironically enough they finished 1-5 this year. Clemson did gain traction once they started winning so hopefully we can get to that point which is possible. Iowa for ex got 5* Epenesa who will be a 1st round pick. It matters. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
84HuskerLaw said:
So it’s all a bit self-fulfilling in that the NFL is loaded with 4&5 star guys because the “best” players are the ones who attend the guru service camps and the colleges’ camps and attend the big high schools in the big towns and the ones the elite schools offer become rated higher.  A big circular arrangement and many go unnoticed.   I think of my all time favorite Huskers were the walkons who played lowly 8 man ball and became legends.  Probably weren’t rated at all let alone earnestly scouted.   They didn’t raise our class ranking but made the team great nonetheless.  
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call it self-fulfilling, what you've described is various ways the best players get noticed. There will always be exceptions, and those are some of my favorite guys too. But for the most part, recruiting services do a decent job of assessing talent. On the field performance matters the most, but good recruiting affects the on field performance directly. I'll trust the coaches to find diamonds in the rough with walk-ons and lower-rated guys, but overall the more high end talent we can get the better. Provided they are the right type of guys, and I think this staff stresses that as much as any in the country.

 
BIG ERN said:
People are missing this part....Nebraska has not been getting 5* players and probably rarely ever will. Clemson got 6 of them this year which is more than we have since 2000 (we have 2 in the last 20 years - 247 composite). 
Click to expand...




Clemson's an interesting example to use... did you check what they were doing before Swinney? Pretty sure they got fewer than 6 5 stars from 2000-2009. Then they got a coach that started winning.

I don't think Nebraska will ever recruit on the level of teams in recruiting hot beds, but if Frost starts winning, we'll have some good classes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
2009: No. 36 nationally, (13 enrollees)

2010: No. 27 nationally, (20 enrollees)

2011: No. 10 nationally, (28 enrollees)

2012: No. 20 nationally, (15 enrollees)

2013: No. 15 nationally, (22 enrollees)

2014: No. 16 nationally, (19 enrollees)

2015: No. 9 nationally, (24 enrollees)

2016: No. 11 nationally (21 enrollees)

2017: No. 16 nationally (14 enrollees)

2018: No. 7 nationally (17 enrollees)

2019: No. 1 nationally (23 enrollees)

Does this type of recruiting seem possible for Nebraska? It does to me and it has produced 3 NC appearances and 2 championships for Clemson.

If Frost and co start showing it on the field I think we can recruit at this level and it puts you in the NC conversation. We may never have the number 1 class, but then again you win a couple NCs and kids pay attention.

 
Cy the Cyclone said:
Stars...bah!  

The only "stars" that used to matter were how many you could make the other guy see when you smacked him in the head with a forearm.

we didn't even have star ratings.  Oh, sure...every team had their designated "star" player...the big stud who was going to run all over you...but that was more of a target than an honor.  22 guys piling on and cheap shotting you for two hours was your usual reward for being a "star".

i think that was how Nebraska used to get the great players in the recruiting battles.  Instead of looking for season opening, over-hyped players, they grabbed up the under-hyped survivors at the end of the year and developed them.  

Oh...and my dad said the Nebraska recruiting class this year was disappointing...and he's watched football for 70 years so he's an expert. 
Click to expand...
Wut....not sure if serious.  While there weren’t recruiting “rankings” they did have a system of evaluating talent.  I would guess relationships and pipeline schools gave some early access to certain programs.  Now because of these rankings it does level the playing field a bit.  However, the idea that Nebraska’s glory days was 18-20 walkons from IA and NE with 2-3 guys that could run from FL or CA is laughable.  Some of best classes, had rankings been around, were the classes for our run through the 90’s.

 
BIG ERN said:
People are missing this part....Nebraska has not been getting 5* players and probably rarely ever will. Clemson got 6 of them this year which is more than we have since 2000 (we have 2 in the last 20 years - 247 composite). There have been 5 major powers for quite sometime and ironically enough they finished 1-5 this year. Clemson did gain traction once they started winning so hopefully we can get to that point which is possible. Iowa for ex got 5* Epenesa who will be a 1st round pick. It matters. 
Click to expand...
It does but to compete for championships we need to continually recruit top 15-20 classes.  A robust walkon program that provides depth, competition, culture, and maybe 2-4, 3rd-5th year contributors or starters each yr.  with success you start to sneak in the top ten here and there.  The walkon program, if executed at a high level, could be a key advantage, for just a little boost.  We can compete over time with top 10-15 classes, walkon pgm, and occasionally sneak in top ten.  5* recruits are tough....only 28 this year, so it’s not like they are choosing not to come here by the 100’s.  I mentioned earlier it’s not like we are far off either....Corcoran was rated 38 overall this yr.

 
Husker in WI said:
I wouldn't call it self-fulfilling, what you've described is various ways the best players get noticed. There will always be exceptions, and those are some of my favorite guys too. But for the most part, recruiting services do a decent job of assessing talent. On the field performance matters the most, but good recruiting affects the on field performance directly. I'll trust the coaches to find diamonds in the rough with walk-ons and lower-rated guys, but overall the more high end talent we can get the better. Provided they are the right type of guys, and I think this staff stresses that as much as any in the country.
Click to expand...
Agree completely.   I just think there are many dam good players that are not rated and or get misjudge substantially every year.  The ratings are broad brush strokes.  Wiscy gets better classes than the ratings suggest.  
nebraska had many great players who helped great teams do great things that were not highly rated nor played pro ball.  The 4 teams in the playoff this year will have a bunch of top players that won’t be pros.  Recruiting is vital no question but Rivals opinion is not the be all - end all.  I think too much weight is placed there.   I am not disagreeing - just trying to put more perspective on the whole topic.   

 
84HuskerLaw said:
Agree completely.   I just think there are many dam good players that are not rated and or get misjudge substantially every year.  The ratings are broad brush strokes.  Wiscy gets better classes than the ratings suggest.  
nebraska had many great players who helped great teams do great things that were not highly rated nor played pro ball.  The 4 teams in the playoff this year will have a bunch of top players that won’t be pros.  Recruiting is vital no question but Rivals opinion is not the be all - end all.  I think too much weight is placed there.   I am not disagreeing - just trying to put more perspective on the whole topic.   
Click to expand...
Yeah, I hear you. What's funny is this whole argument is kind of presented as 2 sides, recruiting rankings don't matter at all vs. top tier recruiting is way more important than coaching/development. And no one is actually arguing for either of those points of view. But everyone leans a little bit one way or the other compared to other fans, and tends to argue against the extreme opposite view whether that's what the other person is arguing or not. And I'm totally guilty of it as well.

 
N is for nowledge said:
It does but to compete for championships we need to continually recruit top 15-20 classes.  A robust walkon program that provides depth, competition, culture, and maybe 2-4, 3rd-5th year contributors or starters each yr.  with success you start to sneak in the top ten here and there.  The walkon program, if executed at a high level, could be a key advantage, for just a little boost.  We can compete over time with top 10-15 classes, walkon pgm, and occasionally sneak in top ten.  5* recruits are tough....only 28 this year, so it’s not like they are choosing not to come here by the 100’s.  I mentioned earlier it’s not like we are far off either....Corcoran was rated 38 overall this yr.
Click to expand...
We are on the same page. I was just making the point that 5* players matter 

 
BIG ERN said:
People are missing this part....Nebraska has not been getting 5* players and probably rarely ever will. Clemson got 6 of them this year which is more than we have since 2000 (we have 2 in the last 20 years - 247 composite). There have been 5 major powers for quite sometime and ironically enough they finished 1-5 this year. Clemson did gain traction once they started winning so hopefully we can get to that point which is possible. Iowa for ex got 5* Epenesa who will be a 1st round pick. It matters. 
Click to expand...
Epenesa was a 5 star guy?  The Iowa game makes a lot more sense now.

 


Thanks for that.  I'm going to have to really dig into this star rating thing.  Reading what I have, thanks for the link, and googling it I still haven't gotten a feel for the process.  I envision the concerned entities needing a scale by which to guide them somewhat in investing in talent, but again, I don't yet see the on-the-ground performance of these players as it translates to competitive ratings.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top