I agree with Drunk Off Punch here. In theory you are correct Making Chimichangas, but recruiting success is relative to situation. For example, UCF had a great recruiting class this year, they finished 58th I believe. If we recruited 58th we would be like 8th in the BIG or worse. UCF had the best recruiting class in their conference. That is an A for them. Would you consider 58 an A for us?
If Nebraska had the 58th rated class, that would be a C+ class.
I'll ask again: If we take the notion that any recruiting class below 40 is an F...
Then does that mean that since 2011 Wisconsin has been kicking our collective arses up and down the field, every single year, with consistently "F" rated classes?
I would love for someone to address this question without moving the goalposts.
And remember that Northwestern, Purdue, Illinois, and Iowa (whom we've supposedly out-recruited by a wide margin every single year) consistently play us tough and down to the wire every year.
Or, could all you guys just admit that the level of separation from a class rated 20th to a class rated 11th is a matter of perception? Naw, you wouldn't do that...cause seeing all those stars nest to recruits names are pretty.
I am not saying we shouldn't recruit the best talent out there, but you guys take opinion (recruiting rankings) and state them as absolute fact.
Doesn't ring any "alarm bells" when recruiting analysts say you could, in a given year, swap the #10 team for the #1 team? I mean seriously, these rankings are nothing close to absolute.