Where Is It OK to Start Walk-Ons?

Mavric

Mavric

Yoda
Staff member
Great question from a caller on S&B just now.

Where is it "OK" to have a walk-on as a starter - according to fans?  His example: it's OK to have a walk-on starting at WR - Brandon Reilly for example - but not "OK" to have a walk-on starting at quarterback.

What does HuskerBoard think?

 
I'm pretty much ok with walk-ons being starters at your specialist spots (K/P/LS), and occasionally OL/DL/LB.  You should never have a walk on at WR/QB/RB/Secondary unless something truly crazy happens/you absolutely whiff at recruiting.

OL/DL can be tricky to predict and sometimes you get a guy that just makes huge strides and pushes his way into earning some playing time.  For whatever reason Nebraska seems to get a pretty good LB out of a walk on every few years or so.  Weber being the latest example.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think that's quite the angle he was going for.

It's more if a walk-on works his way into a starting job at OL or WR, a lot of fans will embrace that as showing the value of the walk-on tradition and rewarding the guy for his hard work.  But if a walk-on were to start at QB or RB, it would be viewed as the guys we recruited at those positions being failures and a sign that our recruiting wasn't getting the job done.

Edit: This was in reply to @Cdog923 and @BigRedBuster

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the best player should play, regardless of scholarship player or walk-on.  That goes for all positions.  However, starting "too many" walk-ons can show deficiencies in recruiting.

 
I'm gonna take it as a trick question. All of our starters should be on scholarship, even if they started a walk on :thumbs  

 
Mavric said:
I don't think that's quite the angle he was going for.

It's more if a walk-on works his way into a starting job at OL or WR, a lot of fans will embrace that as showing the value of the walk-on tradition and rewarding the guy for his hard work.  But if a walk-on were to start at QB or RB, it would be viewed as the guys we recruited at those positions being failures and a sign that our recruiting wasn't getting the job done.
Click to expand...


Ahh, I get it. 

That is absolutely how it's going to be perceived if Bunch is named starter, or if Wyatt Mazour was named starter at RB. Those are the "money" positions in recruiting that get the most attention in recruiting. It could be that way at any position that a team has recruiting highly at for a number of years, though. What if a guy like Owen Pappoe comes to Nebraska, but gets beat out by a Chris Weber. Would we be ok with the look of that? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mavric said:
I don't think that's quite the angle he was going for.

It's more if a walk-on works his way into a starting job at OL or WR, a lot of fans will embrace that as showing the value of the walk-on tradition and rewarding the guy for his hard work.  But if a walk-on were to start at QB or RB, it would be viewed as the guys we recruited at those positions being failures and a sign that our recruiting wasn't getting the job done.
Click to expand...


I tried to make a similar point.  It is concerning if recruiting targets at key skill positions like QB and RB aren't able to beat out a walk-on guy at those spots.  Too me, it shows failure in recruiting rather than a walk-on having a ton of overlooked talent.

 
Mavric said:
I don't think that's quite the angle he was going for.

It's more if a walk-on works his way into a starting job at OL or WR, a lot of fans will embrace that as showing the value of the walk-on tradition and rewarding the guy for his hard work.  But if a walk-on were to start at QB or RB, it would be viewed as the guys we recruited at those positions being failures and a sign that our recruiting wasn't getting the job done.

Edit: This was in reply to @Cdog923 and @BigRedBuster
Click to expand...


I understood what he was getting at.

My point is, I don't agree with fans with that attitude.

 
Walk-ons typically don't have scholarships for a reason, typically because their measurables aren't as good coming out of high school. At some positions, hard work and coaching can overcome those deficiencies.

A walk-on OL can get to be a starter by living in the weight room and having the right mentality.

A walk-on WR can do the same, but he's likely going to be limited in some area (height, speed, elusiveness) so he has to develop a niche. If he does, he can still help the offense because we need a variety of receivers.

A walk-on QB has the hardest battle because not only is he dealing with the same physical limitations that many walk-ons have, he is also competing for just 1 spot. If he ends up starting that usually means he overcame many of those limitations, the services missed him, or the scholarship guys were busts/hurt.

 
Joe Ganz was a scholarship player from Illinois.  However, he was very low rated at .7889 out of HS.  If he were from Nebraska, I have no doubt he would have been asked to walk-on.....and, if he was the typical Nebraska kid, he would have done so.

There were a lot of Husker fans that were claiming he would never see the field as a player.

So.....if he were actually from Nebraska, rated the same and asked to walk-on, should he have never started.....just because he was a walk-on?

 
I think it only matters when that walk-on doesn't seem to be performing and we are wondering why the scholly player is riding pine... Like when Dylan Utter kept getting worked 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
At one time or another we've started a walk-on, or former walk-on, at every position on the field.  Even QB.  (The legend of The Turmanator!)

The  most common positions for walk-on starters are probably fullback, punter and kicker.  Lately though we don't play a fullback much.  That, and we give scholies to punters and kickers.  So I'm not sure what the answer is.   

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