Dr. Strangelove
Well-known member
I'm comparing team talent by looking at the number of Blue Chip players each team recruits out of high school. The numbers you listed include transfers, inflating Nebraska's numbers - to include a 5* player in Arik Gilbert who was with the team for 6 weeks. Getting former high ranked players in the transfer portal is great, but Kaine Williams (4*) was a backup at Alabama for a reason.First, that's not really a way to compare team talent.
Second - which is a corollary to the first - you kept changing which teams you were comparing us to (other than Minnesota).
Third, since you're the one wanting to compare star rankings, on this year's roster (per the 247 Composite):
- Nebraska has one five-star and 23 four-stars
- Wisconsin has one five-star and 18 four-stars
- Maryland has 0 five-stars and 16 four-stars
- Purdue has 0 five-stars and 15 four-stars
- Northwestern has 0 five-stars and 7 four-stars
- Minnesota has 0 five-stars and 7 four-stars
- Rutgers has 0 five-stars and 5 four-stars
- Illinois has 0 five-stars and 6 four-stars
So there isn't a huge talent difference between us and Wisconsin, but still noticable. But Wisconsin wasn't one of the teams I listed as a "should beat". I said toss-up, which looks close.
Everyone else we have at least a 50% lead on, according to your metric. A 300%-400% lead on some of them.
Now I'll hang up and listen for you moving the goal posts.
When listing teams to compare talent, I was simply listing teams often thought of as teams that Nebraska 'should' beat to illustrate that we don't significantly out recruit them. Over a 4 year period, Nebraska doesn't significantly out recruit Minnesota, Northwestern, etc. The difference between a team recruiting 2 blue chip players and a team doubling them and recruiting 4 isn't anything to write home about. They're both bad.
But go on believing that just because there's an N on the helmet and they play in front of 85,000 fans it magically makes the roster better than it is. It doesn't.