The part in red...You admit you don't know if we'll lose Gabbert and then immediately after you're proclaiming as a fact that we WILL lose Gabbert.
wacko.gif
WTH.gif
If, and this is a HUGE if, we do lose Gabbert then I will agree that there are some rather serious issues in the way this staff recruits.
However, if this class turns out to be very good, which I think it will; then you will admit that you over-reacted and will vow to take a few happy pills prior to discussing recruiting?
Now the criteria for a "very good" class...hmmmm...that's a tad tougher to quantify. Is it overall class rank nationally? Is it the average number of stars per player? Which site do we use as the measuring stick? What's your definition of a very good class-cause it's probably a little-or maybe a lot, different from mine?
And you may never have said actually the sky is falling, but your numerous posts regarding recruiting are certainly implying it.
The part in green...I visit the recruiting section because do like to know who is all out there and I try to keep an eye on who the Huskers are targeting because it does make interesting conversation during the off-season.
I don't think I'm overreacting at all. I've never once said we're doomed, never once said the sky is falling, or anything remotely along those lines. I've said that the recruiting class may turn out just fine, but up to this point it hasn't and that's a concern someone needs to address.
How about we go by the Rivals ranking, considering they seem to be pretty accurate as far as the correlation between good recruiting classes and who ends up being in BCS bowls and Championships. I'll take their word on what a good class is considering that more often than not they have accurate ratings. Yeah we know your definition of a good class is hard work ethic and a desire to play - well guess what, that doesn't always mean good talent. If that's your criteria put me in the game. A good recruiting class is having superior athletes and good character to complement it. To have a good recruiting class you must have both. We can agree on that I hope.
I think it's unnecessary to go over the location part of our recruiting. Everyone knows we have arguably the worst situated University of any major football program in the nation. However, Suh isn't from around here. Neither was lucky. Or Rozier. Or any number of countless others that have been legends at our school or legends at other schools. People from Florida go to California schools and vice versa all the time. We have an advantage, but it's not one we can't overcome with some hard work and competent recruiting. We'll never probably have the talent that Texas does, but we can narrow the gap by quite a bit. We have a lot to offer, and we need to start making that clear.
Once again I'll ask you Jen - what's your take on recruiting? Stop arguing every point I make and state your case plain and simple. I've said mine - the class may turn out alright in the end, but I think there are some serious issues that need to be addressed right now. We've lost two 4 star commits and have only 5 verbals right now. The biggest issue is that these recruits imply that Nebraska hasn't made efforts to maintain good relationships. This is what I find most disconcerting.
And finally, take a good long look at the players who have already committed to other schools and ask yourself what is the one common factor among them all? The answer is of course location. Nebraska does not have location as an advantage. Ergo, we will probably always lag behind other schools who are closer in proximity to the hotbeds of talent. That doesn't mean we can't still get great players, it just means we have to work harder and take longer to do the recruiting.
If that's a problem for you... dunno.gif