OWH Picks Iowa as B1G West Favorite

[Count 'Bility]

Sam still trying to downplay the Huskers talent advantage despite all evidence to the contrary.

I thought I'd check to see how bad it is. I was shocked it's this bad. How the hell do we ever lose to these guys?

I dont know but someone above says we have top 20 talent and metrics back that up. According to this, thats false. Looks to me like we have sub-top 25 talent, which is right where weve been finishing. Odd.

 

[Kiyoat Husker]

Sam still trying to downplay the Huskers talent advantage despite all evidence to the contrary.

I thought I'd check to see how bad it is. I was shocked it's this bad. How the hell do we ever lose to these guys?

I dont know but someone above says we have top 20 talent and metrics back that up. According to this, thats false. Looks to me like we have sub-top 25 talent, which is right where weve been finishing. Odd.

Yeah, I caught that too. I think that i have seen enough data from multiple sources to conclude that our talent level is currently in the 25-30 range, and has been for a while.

If we had top 20 talent we would be talking more about the conference race than the divisional race, IMO. Hopefully we can get there soon. Will take a few excellent recruiting cycles in a row.

As was already mentioned, we have the talent to do far better in the West than we have so far.

 

[Count 'Bility]

Sam still trying to downplay the Huskers talent advantage despite all evidence to the contrary.

I thought I'd check to see how bad it is. I was shocked it's this bad. How the hell do we ever lose to these guys?

I dont know but someone above says we have top 20 talent and metrics back that up. According to this, thats false. Looks to me like we have sub-top 25 talent, which is right where weve been finishing. Odd.

Yeah, I caught that too. I think that i have seen enough data from multiple sources to conclude that our talent level is currently in the 25-30 range, and has been for a while.

If we had top 20 talent we would be talking more about the conference race than the divisional race, IMO. Hopefully we can get there soon. Will take a few excellent recruiting cycles in a row.

As was already mentioned, we have the talent to do far better in the West than we have so far.

Id say 30-35 for the most parts. Every not and then we have that "good" class thats like 23.

Not to mention, at this exact point, most of the better players from each of those last 4 classes are gone. How many didnt do a damn thing here. The roster managemtn issues over the past 5 years have been deeply investigated numerous times. at this current point, our overall talent level probably isnt even that good if you wanna get down and dirty with it.

Lot of ppl can watch football and watch Nebraska play, then watch teams like Bama, Clemson, Ohio St and so on, and say "wow, we're not even close to that level". Now to say we couldnt beat them on a givin day by chance isnt accurate, sure. But on a consistent basis of being a competitor, we're not that close. But the good thing is, is that's something that can change rather quickly in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Saunders]

Sam still trying to downplay the Huskers talent advantage despite all evidence to the contrary.

I thought I'd check to see how bad it is. I was shocked it's this bad. How the hell do we ever lose to these guys?

I dont know but someone above says we have top 20 talent and metrics back that up. According to this, thats false. Looks to me like we have sub-top 25 talent, which is right where weve been finishing. Odd.

http://247sports.com/Season/2016-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite

#20 on this, which counts talent on the roster (not signed recruits)

 

[Michiganball]

Iowa is able to win games mainly by other teams making mistakes, and Iowa capitalizing on them. NU should have the talent advantage over the entire Big Ten West, so NU should be winning the division the majority of the years. NU definitely shouldn't be going 1-5 against West Division opponents.

Except that there is a hell of a lot more to it then "talent". Team work, chemistry, coaching will take a team a lot further. And you are not giving Iowa credit here, dont know why, they won games for more reasons then just by capitalizing on other teams mistakes, which is something that you should be doing anyway and is something that makes you better then others when you do. it's not a negative. I agree that NU should be doing better then 1-5 vs that lot, but will see how the coaching is this year, I'm one of those not sold on coaching after the mistakes made last year. If the coaching and mental mistakes are eliminated, it might just come down to that Iowa game at the end of the season. In that case, It will be a heck of a game.

 

[Kiyoat Husker]

^^^^ I like that composite list. There is more than one way to measure talent, and this is as good as any. Pretty fair.

Here's the B1G (plus Oregon)

3 Ohio State

5 Michigan

17 Penn State

18 Michigan State

19 Oregon

20 Nebraska

38 Maryland

40 Northwestern

45 Wisconsin

47 Iowa

51 Indiana

55 Rutgers

56 Illinois

59 Minnesota

62 Purdue

Based on this, (if W/L was based only on talent level), we should be at 10.5 wins instead of Vegas's 8.5. Obviously that is not the case, but it at least points to potential.

 

[Count 'Bility]

Sam still trying to downplay the Huskers talent advantage despite all evidence to the contrary.

I thought I'd check to see how bad it is. I was shocked it's this bad. How the hell do we ever lose to these guys?

I dont know but someone above says we have top 20 talent and metrics back that up. According to this, thats false. Looks to me like we have sub-top 25 talent, which is right where weve been finishing. Odd.

http://247sports.com/Season/2016-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite

#20 on this, which counts talent on the roster (not signed recruits)

my point remains. get inside the numbers. Scroll through that list and look at the names of the higher .8 and .9 guys. How many have had an impact? how many havent hardley played a down?

Tommy Armstrong Sr

Josh Banderas Sr

Jalin Barnett fr

bryan Brokop fr

Carlos Davis fr

Marquel Dismuke fr

tanner farmer fr

Nick Gates so

Christian Gaylord Fr

Charles Jackson Sr

Lamar Jackson Fr

Eric Lee Fr

Alonzo moore Sr

Aj Natter Jr

Marcus Newby Jr

Terrll Newby Sr

Peyton Newell So

Mike Rose Sr

Adam taylor Jr

Westy Sr

Mikahle wilbon So

These are the bellcows of our top 20 talent. These are all the guys with .88 comp or above. My point is, get inside these numbers and see who they are, theyre age, have they panned out, who actually playing, etc. This is why it doesnt appear we have top 20 talent. Lot of these guys are yound. Now, according to the rankings, yes, we have talent, but it's not developed etc. Look at the guys playing, making an impact last year.

This is the interesting thing about recruiting rankings. Lot of evidence to suggest they matter, but also a lot to suggest they dont. Allows them to be used as whatever's convenient for an argument I guess.

 

[Kiyoat Husker]

Sam still trying to downplay the Huskers talent advantage despite all evidence to the contrary.

I thought I'd check to see how bad it is. I was shocked it's this bad. How the hell do we ever lose to these guys?

I dont know but someone above says we have top 20 talent and metrics back that up. According to this, thats false. Looks to me like we have sub-top 25 talent, which is right where weve been finishing. Odd.

http://247sports.com/Season/2016-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite

#20 on this, which counts talent on the roster (not signed recruits)

my point remains. get inside the numbers. Scroll through that list and look at the names of the higher .8 and .9 guys. How many have had an impact? how many havent hardley played a down?

Tommy Armstrong Sr

Josh Banderas Sr

Jalin Barnett fr

bryan Brokop fr

Carlos Davis fr

Marquel Dismuke fr

tanner farmer fr

Nick Gates so

Christian Gaylord Fr

Charles Jackson Sr

Lamar Jackson Fr

Eric Lee Fr

Alonzo moore Sr

Aj Natter Jr

Marcus Newby Jr

Terrll Newby Sr

Peyton Newell So

Mike Rose Sr

Adam taylor Jr

Westy Sr

Mikahle wilbon So

These are the bellcows of our top 20 talent. These are all the guys with .88 comp or above. My point is, get inside these numbers and see who they are, theyre age, have they panned out, who actually playing, etc. This is why it doesnt appear we have top 20 talent. Lot of these guys are yound. Now, according to the rankings, yes, we have talent, but it's not developed etc. Look at the guys playing, making an impact last year.

This is the interesting thing about recruiting rankings. Lot of evidence to suggest they matter, but also a lot to suggest they dont. Allows them to be used as whatever's convenient for an argument I guess.

You make a good point, but remember, your point can be applied to all the teams on that list. Nebraska is not the only team with talented freshmen sitting on the bench. This list at least accounts for attrition of recruiting classes. It's a pretty fair assessment, IMO.

 

[Saunders]

I think it's nearly a universal acceptance at this point that the recruiting rankings matter. The question is, how are the players developed by the staff on each team? You'll have some busts for sure, but if you see an underwhelming performance year after year based on the supposed talent on hand, it lends credence to a lack of coaching.

 

[huskered17]

Safe pick by Sam. Talent alone doesn't mean much, if you can't run the new system.

Safe pick. I "think" we can win the west this year.

Still think 2018 is Riley's big year, as coach of the Huskers.

GBR!!!

 

[Count 'Bility]

I think it's nearly a universal acceptance at this point that the recruiting rankings matter. The question is, how are the players developed by the staff on each team? You'll have some busts for sure, but if you see an underwhelming performance year after year based on the supposed talent on hand, it lends credence to a lack of coaching.

agreed. That's why it's an interesting conversation. Certainly nothing is cut and dried. I think if you look down this list and use it as perspective for last season, we'd all agree we didnt have top 20 talent. i think that's where the debate lies, is the angst over last season. One side we had the talent. Other side said we didnt. im on that said we did. This year? It's a wait and see

 

[Saunders]

I think it's nearly a universal acceptance at this point that the recruiting rankings matter. The question is, how are the players developed by the staff on each team? You'll have some busts for sure, but if you see an underwhelming performance year after year based on the supposed talent on hand, it lends credence to a lack of coaching.

agreed. That's why it's an interesting conversation. Certainly nothing is cut and dried. I think if you look down this list and use it as perspective for last season, we'd all agree we didnt have top 20 talent. i think that's where the debate lies, is the angst over last season. One side we had the talent. Other side said we didnt. im on that said we did. This year? It's a wait and see

Would I say it's top 20? Probably not. Would I say it's better than everyone on our schedule except OSU and Oregon? Absolutely.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I think it's nearly a universal acceptance at this point that the recruiting rankings matter. The question is, how are the players developed by the staff on each team? You'll have some busts for sure, but if you see an underwhelming performance year after year based on the supposed talent on hand, it lends credence to a lack of coaching.

agreed. That's why it's an interesting conversation. Certainly nothing is cut and dried. I think if you look down this list and use it as perspective for last season, we'd all agree we didnt have top 20 talent. i think that's where the debate lies, is the angst over last season. One side we had the talent. Other side said we didnt. im on that said we did. This year? It's a wait and see

Would I say it's top 20? Probably not. Would I say it's better than everyone on our schedule except OSU and Oregon? Absolutely.

There's probably not doubt about that.

Talent issues are definitely not being used as an excuse for Illinois, Purdue, *almost* Southern Miss ( i think this game is forgetton as a near disaster),

 

[Mavric]

Sam still trying to downplay the Huskers talent advantage despite all evidence to the contrary.

I thought I'd check to see how bad it is. I was shocked it's this bad. How the hell do we ever lose to these guys?

I dont know but someone above says we have top 20 talent and metrics back that up. According to this, thats false. Looks to me like we have sub-top 25 talent, which is right where weve been finishing. Odd.

http://247sports.com/Season/2016-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite

#20 on this, which counts talent on the roster (not signed recruits)

my point remains. get inside the numbers. Scroll through that list and look at the names of the higher .8 and .9 guys. How many have had an impact? how many havent hardley played a down?

Tommy Armstrong Sr

Josh Banderas Sr

Jalin Barnett fr

bryan Brokop fr

Carlos Davis fr

Marquel Dismuke fr

tanner farmer fr

Nick Gates so

Christian Gaylord Fr

Charles Jackson Sr

Lamar Jackson Fr

Eric Lee Fr

Alonzo moore Sr

Aj Natter Jr

Marcus Newby Jr

Terrll Newby Sr

Peyton Newell So

Mike Rose Sr

Adam taylor Jr

Westy Sr

Mikahle wilbon So

These are the bellcows of our top 20 talent. These are all the guys with .88 comp or above. My point is, get inside these numbers and see who they are, theyre age, have they panned out, who actually playing, etc. This is why it doesnt appear we have top 20 talent. Lot of these guys are yound. Now, according to the rankings, yes, we have talent, but it's not developed etc. Look at the guys playing, making an impact last year.

This is the interesting thing about recruiting rankings. Lot of evidence to suggest they matter, but also a lot to suggest they dont. Allows them to be used as whatever's convenient for an argument I guess.

You make a good point, but remember, your point can be applied to all the teams on that list. Nebraska is not the only team with talented freshmen sitting on the bench. This list at least accounts for attrition of recruiting classes. It's a pretty fair assessment, IMO.

Not only that but that's only looking at one side of the coin. The other side of the same coin is that guys like Brandon Reilly and Chris Weber aren't contributing anything to those rankings because they were walk-ons. They've obviously proved that they were better than their rating. And guys like Kieron Williams, Kevin Maurice, Joshua Kalu and DPE have proved to be deserving of a much higher ranking than they got.

So it works both ways. And it does for everyone.

 

[Mavric]

I think it's nearly a universal acceptance at this point that the recruiting rankings matter. The question is, how are the players developed by the staff on each team? You'll have some busts for sure, but if you see an underwhelming performance year after year based on the supposed talent on hand, it lends credence to a lack of coaching.

agreed. That's why it's an interesting conversation. Certainly nothing is cut and dried. I think if you look down this list and use it as perspective for last season, we'd all agree we didnt have top 20 talent. i think that's where the debate lies, is the angst over last season. One side we had the talent. Other side said we didnt. im on that said we did. This year? It's a wait and see

Would I say it's top 20? Probably not. Would I say it's better than everyone on our schedule except OSU and Oregon? Absolutely.

There's probably not doubt about that.

Talent issues are definitely not being used as an excuse for Illinois, Purdue, *almost* Southern Miss ( i think this game is forgetton as a near disaster),

I really think S Miss was going to score - maybe on that last play they ran - if Freedom doesn't get that sack. They had a WR streaking down the left sideline and we hadn't stopped that all day.