QB Dylan Raiola

To which school will Raiola commit?

  • Total voters
    87
Not necessarily talking about Dylan, but it’s a long way to December. While it probably won’t be Dylan, there will be decommitments. Thus some we don’t expect to come may still end up here. On the other hand there will probably be around three who decommits from N. One way or the other it’s far from over. But I do believe Dylan will be at Georgia for at least on year if not more. 

 
My husband is a Georgia alum and he likes to gloat about things in general, but Nebraska is so far gone he has not even said anything to me.

 
Moiraine said:
My husband is a Georgia alum and he likes to gloat about things in general, but Nebraska is so far gone he has not even said anything to me.
Click to expand...
That's the sad part. I have an N decorative rock out in front of my house, and it just garners pity from my neighbors these days (I live in Colorado, near Boulder). We are not even worth making fun of anymore. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Huskerfollower4life said:
https://twitter.com/UnnecRoughness/status/1660765650992726016?s=20 Good clip on why Raiola made more sense at Nebraska and other thoughts on the whole thing.
Click to expand...


I think we all feel this way, but it all comes down to personal choice. You have 2 options 1) Build your own legacy - if you're successful, you are the guy, you get the statue, your jersey retired, a weight room named after you (Suh), your name becomes immortal; doing so allows you to fully shine and exhibit your strengths and your faults. If you're successful the world knows its mostly on you. The flip side is if you don't get it done, there is nothing to mask your deficiencies, no legacy that provides your the benefit of the doubt, and failure (even being mediocre is failure in this sense) leaves you another name in a string of forgettable disappointments. 2) Be part of someone else's legacy. Continue the greatness. If you're successful you enter the conversation of the best of the best, you won't get a statue, and you'll be the guy during your tenure then someone else will be they guy. Your name, even if successful, is added to the collection of greats- think of our glory years - Turner Gill, Tommy Frazier, Scott Frost, Brook Berringer, Eric Crouch our collection of greats. You have to rise to that level to get mentioned. A Steve Taylor, Gerry Godwolski, Mike Grant, Jammal Lord, Joe Dailey, and Zac Taylor, while experiencing degrees of success in their own right, are often lost within the list of greats. When joining a legacy, people will wonder if its your talent or the talent of those around you that led to success, slightly dimming your strengths, but a strong cast and culture around you will also help to mask weaknesses. Your value on the transfer market, should you get beat out will remain high due to perceived strength of the room, and should you win the job but not rise to the level of the greats you'll be given the benefit of the doubt come draft time. 

So there are definitely positives and negatives to both, there is more pressure on the individual who chooses to build their own legacy. There is greater risk if you fail, but also far greater reward if you succeed. Some people aren't cut out for that much pressure. 

 
Born N Bled Red said:
I think we all feel this way, but it all comes down to personal choice. You have 2 options 1) Build your own legacy - if you're successful, you are the guy, you get the statue, your jersey retired, a weight room named after you (Suh), your name becomes immortal; doing so allows you to fully shine and exhibit your strengths and your faults. If you're successful the world knows its mostly on you. The flip side is if you don't get it done, there is nothing to mask your deficiencies, no legacy that provides your the benefit of the doubt, and failure (even being mediocre is failure in this sense) leaves you another name in a string of forgettable disappointments. 2) Be part of someone else's legacy. Continue the greatness. If you're successful you enter the conversation of the best of the best, you won't get a statue, and you'll be the guy during your tenure then someone else will be they guy. Your name, even if successful, is added to the collection of greats- think of our glory years - Turner Gill, Tommy Frazier, Scott Frost, Brook Berringer, Eric Crouch our collection of greats. You have to rise to that level to get mentioned. A Steve Taylor, Gerry Godwolski, Mike Grant, Jammal Lord, Joe Dailey, and Zac Taylor, while experiencing degrees of success in their own right, are often lost within the list of greats. When joining a legacy, people will wonder if its your talent or the talent of those around you that led to success, slightly dimming your strengths, but a strong cast and culture around you will also help to mask weaknesses. Your value on the transfer market, should you get beat out will remain high due to perceived strength of the room, and should you win the job but not rise to the level of the greats you'll be given the benefit of the doubt come draft time. 

So there are definitely positives and negatives to both, there is more pressure on the individual who chooses to build their own legacy. There is greater risk if you fail, but also far greater reward if you succeed. Some people aren't cut out for that much pressure. 
Click to expand...
And if he fails at Georgia(I'm not saying he will by any means) then I think he is on a much bigger scale to be scrutinized.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top