Notice how the bolds started to become less and less until they disappeared? The decline in bolded teams on the list started about the time teams that used to have up to 130 or so kids on scholarship were forced to have no more than 85! Teams with less desirable locations weren't and aren't able to give enough kids money to go to school farther from home!
Ok so... what do Starkville and Oxford have that Lincoln doesn't?
- Thread starter The Nebraskan Assassin
- Start date
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
Bingo.....along with more than just 85 scholarships.
Also, I wouldn't say Oklahoma should be bolded because they are in the south and very close to a recruiting hotbed.
So, over the last 25 years, we only have 5 bolded teams (without Oklahoma because they shouldn't be).
Last edited by a moderator:
StPaulHusker
Banned
Very true, academic requirements have made it impossible to get some of the kids we won titles with that weren't eligible at least at first and would never make the roster with today requirements.
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
I have asked this multiple times in various forums and never have received an answer. What changes in NCAA rules or in college football in general in the last 30 years has benefited Nebraska?
I can name a number of them that have benefited southern schools or schools close to population hotbeds. I can also name some that have hurt Nebraska.
But, what has happened that has HELPED Nebraska?
I can name a number of them that have benefited southern schools or schools close to population hotbeds. I can also name some that have hurt Nebraska.
But, what has happened that has HELPED Nebraska?
Last edited by a moderator:
kchusker_chris
All-American
Does anyone really care about the rules that help us? We hear every detail about one that doesn't help that's for sure. I know full cost of attendance will help us. An early signing may help us (or could hurt) - but I expect that to come down eventually.
Certainly joining the B1G didn't help us with their recruiting rules, but can't blame that on the NCAA.
Undersigning by 6-7 doesn't help us, but that's our own doing - can't blame that on the NCAA either.
Not forking out the $$ to staff the recruiting department and keep up with the Jones' - again, can't blame that on the NCAA.
I'd say most of the disadvantages we have (minus location) are self inflicted or of our own choosing. You could recruit to Nebraska, maybe not top 5 classes but consistent top 15 classes. I'm fairly confident of that. But when you don't sign to 85, you don't put the $$ or time into it, then you aren't going to get out of it what you want. Simple as that.
Last edited by a moderator:
StPaulHusker
Banned
Last edited by a moderator:
Just asking...Do they not sign to 85 to allow some to be left over to award to players that walked on and work their way into scholarship roles? Because I can definitely see some players recruited on scholarship that don't pan out and never evolve so I'm not real sure that filling up on scholarships is a huge deal considering it doesn't guarantee those players will pan out. Now if we 130 to play with? Take more chances and have higher percentage that pan out along with some that don't but with many more scholarships to award it wouldn't hurt as much? Not discounting your post, just discussing.
StPaulHusker
Banned
While the winters may be a bit warmer. The playing months are comparable to Nebraska
Mississippi is about 8% more obese than Nebraska so I suppose their women can keep you warmer at night.
Starkville and Oxford are quite literally in the middle of the state. Not a lot of gulf coast beach area there.
Every college parties.
High corn?
Definitely a closer recruiting footprint.
Jury is still out on "great" HC
Only a matter of time
kchusker_chris
All-American
They don't sign to 85 because of piss-poor roster management and poor evaluation in the past. They sign to 82-83. Should hit 85 every February, no exceptions. It's not to save for walk-ons - we've awarded almost every senior walk-on the last few years...some of them weren't even remotely deserving in the sense that most think of when we hear about walk-ons "earning" scholarships. If they are there, they definitely should be handed out, but the fact so many are there is the real issue. It seems to be corrected.
You look at some of Pelini's top classes, and see the 4* guys that all bolted. Peat, Moore, Rome, Starling, Klatchko, Green, Green...the list goes on. The recruits that we've hung our hats on in the past, most never even contributed to the program. So those first 3-4 classes were actually far worse than they look.
We talk about continuation in coaching as this answer to Nebraska's problems - try looking at the retention of our talent. We aren't going to keep all, but when you turn over 30% or so (i'm not going to go back and research the exact number) for a few years, you're going to see 2013 crop up. This seems to be something that's turned a corner. You look at the team this year, and you see a difference. You see a 2012 class that is almost entirely in tact. You see a young 2013 class that is contributing big time, and that's a big class that is very much still in tact. Suttles, Brown, a few of those - that happens. But if we keep 85-90% of our class on the roster for a few years, we'll see a difference. And I think they are. So while the classes aren't top shelf talent, at least they are retaining the talent we have. That's a huge step in the right direction. Now we just need to get more of it (sign to 85) and grab a couple more 4* guys. It's not far off.
But the bottom line is, the NCAA isn't keeping us from the talent. The location isn't going to keep us from top 15 classes. The recruiting has been lacking, primarily because of our own doing. It's being addressed, and we're starting to see the results of that. Next time someone calls' for El's head, they should look to our roster first - and notice the positive impact.
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
But, that doesn't answer my question.
My point is, recruiting now and college football in general is totally different than it was 25-30 years ago.
85 scholarships
No partial qualifiers
Population shift to warm weather
Growth of HS football in Texas/SEC country making it the hot bed of talent
Development of strength and conditioning along with nutrition across the board so Nebraska doesn't have that advantage
All teams are on TV now so a player can play at ISU and still be on TV most weeks
Now, before everyone comes on here and claims I'm making just a bunch of excuses for the program. I'm not. I still believe we can win championships at Nebraska. We should still be able to win conference championships and I'm just as frustrated as anyone that that hasn't happened. However, ignoring the changes that have taken place, doesn't fix the problem. To me, this is a college football issue (NCAA). The list of NCs that has been posted tells the story. Again, only 5 years out of the last 20 have been won by a northern or midwestern team. There are very good historic programs in this area and they have not won the championship in a very very long time.
College football will become less an less popular as a national sport if this isn't fixed.
Last edited by a moderator:
kchusker_chris
All-American
most of what you listed has nothing to do with the NCAA rules. 85? we don't even make it to 85 now, so who are we to b!^@h? partial qualifiers? applies to 1 kid at most every year, and Bo isn't going to be recruiting those types of guys anyway.
The rest is entirely out of the hands of the NCAA and is nothing more than a changing landscape we as a program have to adapt to. You could also say that 30 years ago most kids were on a plane a handful of times in their life - if ever, flights were expensive as heck, and leaving your home town was something that occurred rarely. Now kids are jetting all over the nation for a couple hundred bucks multiple times a year. So the shift, the distance - to me is less relevant today than it was 30 years ago.
Last edited by a moderator:
74Hunter
Banned
Oh, I just look at what recent history has shown us, it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure it out.
And, the words of former players weigh heavy with me. But, in your defense, it's easier to make ill informed opinions when you're 1500 miles from Lincoln and don't pay attention to those things. It is easier to have a conversion with a former Husker in Omaha than in Cali, so you do have a built in excuse.