2019 Blue Chip Ratio - National Title contenders

[yort2000]

I hope it's ok to post this link here.

http://www.coogfans.com/t/how-to-make-the-cfp/19801

"Entering 2019, 16 teams meet the Blue-Chip Ratio mark.

• Ohio State 81%
• Alabama 80%
• Georgia 79%
• LSU 64%
• Florida State 61%
• Clemson 60%
• USC 60%
• Penn State 60%
• Michigan 60%
• Texas 60%
• Oklahoma 60%
• Auburn 58%
• Washington 54%
• Notre Dame 54%
• Florida 53%
• Miami 51%"

Will Nebraska ever have a chance at another national championship?

2019 7/27
2018 6/22
2017 5/18
2016 5/21
Total 23/88 = 26%

 

[8675309husker]

I would like our number to be in the 40 percentile. I feel like with our system that is all we will need to win a national championship.

 

[scarletred]

We’ve been down for so long I just want to start winning the B1G West and playing in the conference CCG..

Whether or not Nebraska ever has a chance winning the National title can’t be done unless the above happens first..

 

[Dean Pope]

Will Nebraska ever have a chance at another national championship?

Have a chance? Yes. What we're talking about is going undefeated in the preseason and winning the Big 10. That should be enough to get into the playoff. If you get in the playoff, you have a chance.

The NU recipe to success is getting a great QB behind an offensive line stacked with future NFL talent. Play makers at the skill positions, physical front seven and great team speed on defense.

I believe the need to recruit top 15-20 every year. Bring in great walk-ons. They are going to have to hit big on some 3 stars and even a few walk-ons. But anyone who follows the NFL knows that there are quite a few 2 star/3 stars, small school kids, former walk-ons in the league. And a lot of that is talent development too.

 

[yort2000]

Just to expand on our "blue chippers". Going into last season (2014-2018 recruiting)

Blue Chipper

2014
Tanner Farmer - Starter
Nick Gates - Not on roster in 2018, but 3 year starter
Jerald Foster - Starter

2015
Eric Lee - Moderate contributor
Jalin Barnett - Bust
Jordan Stevenson - Bust
Avery Anderson - Minor contributor

2016
Lamar Jackson - Starter
John Raridon - Currently not a contributor
Patrick O'Brien - A CSU Ram
Marquel Dismuke - 1 start, probable starter in 2019
Matt Farniok - Starter

2017
Tyjon Lindsey - An OSU Beaver
Avery Roberts - An OSU Beaver
Tristan Gebbia - An OSU Beaver
Jaevon McQuitty - Still on path back from major injury
Keyshawn Johnson - BUST

2018
Adrian Martinez - Starter
Cam Jurgens - Injured - Redshirted - Moved to Center in 2019
Maurice Washington - Contributor - Issues - Future??????
Cam'ron Jones - Now an SMU Mustang
Tate Wildeman - Injury - Redshirted
Caleb Tannor - Contributor


OOF. Not good. Not only does Nebraska need to recruit more 4 stars they need to increase their success rate with the 4 stars they recruit. 2018 is looking like a good start as 3 are already contributors with the other 2 remaining recruits projected to be major contributors in the future.

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

Just as the success rate in recruiting is contrary to actual wins, it can also work in your favor.
Miami,fsu and usc are examples of this, ucf is an example for it in favor of being contrary.

We have out recruited the west for years, how many times have we won the division?
It still comes down to scheme culture and coaching, plus the jimmys and joes.

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

Just to expand on our "blue chippers". Going into last season (2014-2018 recruiting)

Blue Chipper

2014
Tanner Farmer - Starter
Nick Gates - Not on roster in 2018, but 3 year starter
Jerald Foster - Starter

2015
Eric Lee - Moderate contributor
Jalin Barnett - Bust
Jordan Stevenson - Bust
Avery Anderson - Minor contributor

2016
Lamar Jackson - Starter
John Raridon - Currently not a contributor
Patrick O'Brien - A CSU Ram
Marquel Dismuke - 1 start, probable starter in 2019
Matt Farniok - Starter

2017
Tyjon Lindsey - An OSU Beaver
Avery Roberts - An OSU Beaver
Tristan Gebbia - An OSU Beaver
Jaevon McQuitty - Still on path back from major injury
Keyshawn Johnson - BUST

2018
Adrian Martinez - Starter
Cam Jurgens - Injured - Redshirted - Moved to Center in 2019
Maurice Washington - Contributor - Issues - Future??????
Cam'ron Jones - Now an SMU Mustang
Tate Wildeman - Injury - Redshirted
Caleb Tannor - Contributor


OOF. Not good. Not only does Nebraska need to recruit more 4 stars they need to increase their success rate with the 4 stars they recruit. 2018 is looking like a good start as 3 are already contributors with the other 2 remaining recruits are projected to be major contributors in the future.

These are outliers.
New coach, you lose players,always.
Much of the failures were due to bad fits,and bad culture.

Example, keyshawn, you get a fat wr so you can get more recruits,very bad for culture, a wasted recruit/scholly.
Bad fits include both qbs,a few lbs.
Bad recruiting,much like keyshawn, was ,well look no further than osu, less team ,more I in those recruits.
Much like going after baseball players that also played football, bad fit, high hopes, no go.

Also, first year was very huried by the new staff, they had little time developing the needed relationships and even some vetting as to certain character.

You need six players a class to start, you want three of those to be top quality.
You do that on average or more,you're in the ballpark.

 

[z28craz]

IMO, if you win, they will come. Start winning and I think we start recruiting at a higher level. I think by virtue of the fact that we are a blue blood, we’ll always recruit well. A high caliber coach and wins will make it even better.

 

[jlb321]

Just as the success rate in recruiting is contrary to actual wins, it can also work in your favor.
Miami,fsu and usc are examples of this, ucf is an example for it in favor of being contrary.

We have out recruited the west for years, how many times have we won the division?
It still comes down to scheme culture and coaching, plus the jimmys and joes.

The blue chip ratio data do not say you are guaranteed to have success if your ratio is > 50% - only that no team since recruiting rankings have been available for a total of 4 years has won a national title with a ratio < 50% (2005).

Since 2005 no team has won a national title unless their BCR was > 50%

3 of the 20 teams that have made the playoffs have had a ratio of < 50%. Oregon in 2014 had a ratio of > 40% - beat FSU in semis and lost by more than 3 TDs to OSU. Michigan State and Washington made the playoffs and didn’t belong in the field with the teams they played in the semis

 

[Cornicator]

That formula did not define his threshold for defining a "blue chip" player.

It also doesn't mention transfers, coming in or leaving the program. Florida State has been a merry go round stop for players the last 5 seasons. And a team like the Huskers will start two transfers who were once considered "blue chip." Derrion Daniels was a 5.9 Four Star, top 100 player before signing with Okie State. Deontai Williams was a National recruit, 4-star, back in 2015 before not qualifying.

If you want to compete for championships, you need to recruit elite players at the following positions:

1. QB
2. OLB/DE - edge rushers in 3-4 or 4-3
3. Offensive Tackles
4. DT
5. Secondary

Everyone wants an Amari Cooper or a Leonard Fournette at WR or RB, but you just need those guys to win the whole thing. And some might suggest Bama has won titles without elite QBs. While true on the surface, those guys still had incredible seasons abs numbers.


The Huskers are currently recruiting the list above pretty well with the exception of pass rusher. It needs to get better there.

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

The blue chip ratio data do not say you are guaranteed to have success if your ratio is > 50% - only that no team since recruiting rankings have been available for a total of 4 years has won a national title with a ratio < 50% (2005).

Since 2005 no team has won a national title unless their BCR was > 50%

3 of the 20 teams that have made the playoffs have had a ratio of < 50%. Oregon in 2014 had a ratio of > 40% - beat FSU in semis and lost by more than 3 TDs to OSU. Michigan State and Washington made the playoffs and didn’t belong in the field with the teams they played in the semis

Question for you.
If a high three star gets recruited by bama, does his score go up?
My question is pointed towards where this ends up.
How many on a bama,usc etc, are truly high threes, yet are counted blue chip?
So, this blurs the numbers somewhat, besides the obvious misses.

 

[jlb321]

Question for you.
If a high three star gets recruited by bama, does his score go up?

Alabama’s ratio is > than 80%. They aren’t limping across that 50% threshold.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

Just as the success rate in recruiting is contrary to actual wins, it can also work in your favor.
Miami,fsu and usc are examples of this, ucf is an example for it in favor of being contrary.

We have out recruited the west for years, how many times have we won the division?
It still comes down to scheme culture and coaching, plus the jimmys and joes.

I will just say that it is tougher to win with out players, the Jimmy‘s and the Joe‘s. You can have a great coach a great scheme and a fabulous culture and not win the championship. But as auburn proved a few years ago if you have the talent, even with a mediocre head coach you can win a title

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

Alabama’s ratio is > than 80%. They aren’t limping across that 50% threshold.

So, only bamas recruits gets bumps?
We have seen this with this staff as well.
Not so much with previous staffs.

I know we need to recruit better, but definitions and clarity should be welcome.

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

I look at notre dames barely there 54%.
How many got bumps because notre dame?
Say 1 in 20 players?
That puts them under 50% if so,and thats less than one kid per class,meaning after four years, five total getting those artificial bumps.
While this is mostly true, there are enough variables to have true outliers,needing that 50%.

But again, we need the guys.

 

[jlb321]

So, only bamas recruits gets bumps?
We have seen this with this staff as well.
Not so much with previous staffs.

I know we need to recruit better, but definitions and clarity should be welcome.

I don’t have that data. Not sure anyone does. If you question the data then go back to every recruiting class since Alabama became great and do the research.

At some point I suspect a team under 50% will win it. I suspect they will be close to 50% and have a heisman caliber QB.

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

I don’t have that data. Not sure anyone does. If you question the data then go back to every recruiting class since Alabama became great and do the research.

At some point I suspect a team under 50% will win it. I suspect they will be close to 50% and have a heisman caliber QB.

Exactly, the system isnt perfect, and no study needs be done to see/know that.
But someone will do it, but,they still will be close, unless the next super genious comes from somewhere creating an unstoppable scheme.

 

[huskersreign]

If we win a national title it won't be by using the same recipe everyone else is using or has used in the past 20 years. Even when we were a successful program nationally.. we were an exception to the rule then. Yes we had talent, but we didn't win it all by copying what others were doing (we recruited well, but we weren't winning recruiting titles by any means) and if we hope to win another we are going to have to become a pioneer again.

Look at the National Champions since 1970. Every champion resided in recruiting hot beds with the exception of Nebraska (x5), Washington (x1), Colorado (x1) & BYU (x1), with Nebraska being the only one that was nationally relevant pretty much every year (up till 2001). So what is really skewing the current idea that you have to recruit at a very high level (possibly higher than Nebraska is capable of) is quite literally the absence of Nebraska, which can be argued had to do more with coaching and not sustaining the culture we had developed (not necessarily a lack of talent).

We have to recruit well (Top 20) but...

Nebraska is different. We have to be.

 

[jflores]

Frost has more or less admitted we're a development program. He'll get some good players sure, but he and his staff are not going to do "shady things" and "cheat" to get into that Top 10 consistently. Maybe the winning will take care of that eventually, but to prime the pump, he's poised to try and win something of note without the BCR.

 

[jflores]

We have to remember that Pelini was pretty competitive against a stacked Georgia team with an NU team that was not all the good. He even beat Texas with essentially a defense before we had the refs step in.

Assuming Frost takes us back to our normal level of good play, and can fill in the holes Pelini never did and evens out the performance level, we'll be pretty formidable team that has a puncher's chance at a national title.

 

[TheBeav815]

If we win a national title it won't be by using the same recipe everyone else is using or has used in the past 20 years. Even when we were a successful program nationally.. we were an exception to the rule then. Yes we had talent, but we didn't win it all by copying what others were doing (we recruited well, but we weren't winning recruiting titles by any means) and if we hope to win another we are going to have to become a pioneer again.

Look at the National Champions since 1970. Every champion resided in recruiting hot beds with the exception of Nebraska (x5), Washington (x1), Colorado (x1) & BYU (x1), with Nebraska being the only one that was nationally relevant pretty much every year (up till 2001). So what is really skewing the current idea that you have to recruit at a very high level (possibly higher than Nebraska is capable of) is quite literally the absence of Nebraska, which can be argued had to do more with coaching and not sustaining the culture we had developed (not necessarily a lack of talent).

We have to recruit well (Top 20) but...

Nebraska is different. We have to be.

Yes it will or we won't win it. I don't get what's hard about this.

If you want that ring you need elite players. NU absolutely can recruit elite players, it just hasn't built momentum doing that over several years because the guys who could coach a bit couldn't recruit (Solich, Pelini) and the guys who could recruit couldn't coach (Callahan, Riley) and they all got fired.

We have a staff that looks like they can do both. What they did in recruiting with a 4-win season was pretty damn good. Let's see what they can do if they can actually put 8-10 wins on the sheets.

 

[yort2000]

Frost has more or less admitted we're a development program. He'll get some good players sure, but he and his staff are not going to do "shady things" and "cheat" to get into that Top 10 consistently. Maybe the winning will take care of that eventually, but to prime the pump, he's poised to try and win something of note without the BCR.

The BCR is national title only. The creator of the metric states that developmental programs can win division and conference championships, but so far the metrics point to them not winning the national title. It makes sense as this year Nebraska only has 1 team on their regular schedule that is above 50% on BCR (tOSU), they could lose to them in regular season and then possibly meet 1 of the 3 50%+ BCRs in the B1G (PSU, UM, or OSU) in the B1G championship game. Thus, they would only have to beat 1 50%+ BCR school to be conference champ. However, to win the national title, you would have to beat the B1G 50%+ BCR school and probably 2 others in the playoffs. Being a Cinderella once is doable, but 3 times in a row and the probabilities are extremely against you.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

The variable that changed college football is the college football playoff. Up until 2014 you had to be good enough to win your division win your conference title game and win one bowl game against a top 4 team. Teams that depend on development of underrated players or a scheme that just keeps the ball away from the opponent, can get you the conference title and maybe a shot at the national championship. Now that you have to do all of those things plus win the first game against a top 4 team, then beat another top 4 team a week later, the chances of a team that depends on development doing all of that is slim. Did y’all go yy more difficult than it was back in the day.

 

[jlb321]

The variable that changed college football is the college football playoff. Up until 2014 you had to be good enough to win your division when your conference title game and win one bowl game against a top 4 team. Teams that depend on development of underrated players or a scheme that just keeps the ball away from the opponent, can get you the conference title and maybe a shot at the national championship. Now that you have to do all of those things plus win the first game against a top 4 team, then beat another top 4 team a week later, the chances of a team that depends on development doing all of that is slim. Definitely more difficult than it was back in the day.

You are right - even more difficult with the playoffs. Only 3 teams with a ratio less 50% have even made the playoffs. 3 of 20 teams (15%) and all 3 got their asses handed to them - average loss was by 27 points.

Even before the playoffs (2005-2014) no team under 50% has won a nat title.

 

[TheBeav815]

You are right - even more difficult with the playoffs. Only 3 teams with a ratio less 50% have even made the playoffs. 3 of 20 teams (15%) and all 3 got their asses handed to them - average loss was by 27 points.

Even before the playoffs (2005-2014) no team under 50% has won a nat title.

Yeah it's kinda wild that it was virtually impossible to do even before the playoff with a shorter road. There is still that bias against the cinderella teams like Boise State from the 2000s, Frost's team of two years ago that they don't get a title shot.

So that makes it a guarantee that only blue chip teams can win it if the "little guy" is never selected for the game in the first place, but the facts are still the facts.

 

[Solana Beach Husker]

I hope it's ok to post this link here.

http://www.coogfans.com/t/how-to-make-the-cfp/19801

"Entering 2019, 16 teams meet the Blue-Chip Ratio mark.

• Ohio State 81%
• Alabama 80%
• Georgia 79%
• LSU 64%
• Florida State 61%
• Clemson 60%
• USC 60%
• Penn State 60%
• Michigan 60%
• Texas 60%
• Oklahoma 60%
• Auburn 58%
• Washington 54%
• Notre Dame 54%
• Florida 53%
• Miami 51%"

Will Nebraska ever have a chance at another national championship?

2019 7/27
2018 6/22
2017 5/18
2016 5/21
Total 23/88 = 26%

There is hope. Bluebloods who went through long stretches without titles also went through period of poorer recruiting. Statistically, even with our poor play, we have consistently been in the top half or even quarter of the conference in recruiting over the last 20 years. That is similar to OU, Alabama, Clemson, FSU as they went through their stretches of mediocrity. In all cases a new coach was hired who had to win with less than ideal talent, often in year 2 or 3. OU came out of nowhere in 2000 and won a title with recruiting classes that were below their historical standard. Saban led an Alabama team to a title 3 years after they were awful under Shula. And once a team hits the national stage the elite recruiting catches up. Our 94 team was not made of nationally touted talent, in fact the feeder classes were some of the most poor in Osbornes tenure. The 90s teams were full of Nebraska kids who started and contributed. And the top classes came in 96-2000...sadly Tom left just as the thing was rolling and didn't hand it off to a competent coach. The one equalizer in order to win above your talent level is a dominant, mobile qb. We've seen that at Auburn, Texas, FSU, Clemson. We have such a beast right now...AM is a player who can win a game even when we are dominated physically by the other team. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a huge explosion of success while he is here if he is healthy.

 

[huskersreign]

Yes it will or we won't win it. I don't get what's hard about this.

If you want that ring you need elite players. NU absolutely can recruit elite players, it just hasn't built momentum doing that over several years because the guys who could coach a bit couldn't recruit (Solich, Pelini) and the guys who could recruit couldn't coach (Callahan, Riley) and they all got fired.

We have a staff that looks like they can do both. What they did in recruiting with a 4-win season was pretty damn good. Let's see what they can do if they can actually put 8-10 wins on the sheets.

Not saying we can win it without elite players (that's a given), but we are never going to get the volume of them as Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, USC etc. Not sure what is so hard to understand, we do not have a recruiting advantage compared to those schools, we didn't in the past and we will not in the future. We have to have a developmental edge (more so than schools in recruiting hot beds), along with good talent (much more so than Wisconsin) and a little luck.

Nebraska is never going to out Alabama, Alabama (period) Nor Clemson (period) If you want the ring (as of today), it goes through those two teams. I think it is fairly irrational to think that Nebraska can go recruit for recruit with either (can win a few key battles though) year over year, and definitely not supersede them. Nebraska has to be more than recruiting.. it also has to develop players at a higher level than any program in the nation. Which is where the pioneering piece comes in, and is the biggest part of the puzzle missing that no one seems to give much credence to. The 90's & 3 titles do not happen for Nebraska without being a pioneer within player development.

I think the physical side of development has largely been tapped and we won't gain an advantage here (maybe slight but not enough to matter), but the mental/emotional side, there is near endless room for a competitive advantage.

I believe we will recruit well now and in the future, however, that is not my concern. We simply can't be good in player development, nor great, we have to be the best , the leader (and by a fair amount) as we were then, if we ever hope to win a National Title again.

 

[jlb321]

Not saying we can win it without elite players (that's a given), but we are never going to get the volume of them as Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, USC etc. Not sure what is so hard to understand, we do not have a recruiting advantage compared to those schools, we didn't in the past and we will not in the future. We have to have a developmental edge (more so than schools in recruiting hot beds), along with good talent (much more so than Wisconsin) and a little luck.

Nebraska is never going to out Alabama, Alabama (period) Nor Clemson (period) If you want the ring (as of today), it goes through those two teams. I think it is fairly irrational to think that Nebraska can go recruit for recruit with either (can win a few key battles though) year over year, and definitely not supersede them. Nebraska has to be more than recruiting.. it also has to develop players at a higher level than any program in the nation. Which is where the pioneering piece comes in, and is the biggest part of the puzzle missing that no one seems to give much credence to. The 90's & 3 titles do not happen for Nebraska without being a pioneer within player development.

I think the physical side of development has largely been tapped and we won't gain an advantage here (maybe slight but not enough to matter), but the mental/emotional side, there is near endless room for a competitive advantage.

I believe we will recruit well now and in the future, however, that is not my concern. We simply can't be good in player development, nor great, we have to be the best , the leader (and by a fair amount) as we were then, if we ever hope to win a National Title again.

So our formula is basically the same as Iowa - iowa state - Illinois - kansas - oregon state etc etc

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

So our formula is basically the same as Iowa - iowa state - Illinois - kansas - oregon state etc etc

But the results will be different for us.

 

[Chuck003]

When the "overlooked" or "diamond in the rough" talk concerning our recruits drops to about 10 percent from the 50 percent that it currently is, we will be on our way.

 

[B1G RED RULES]

Just to expand on our "blue chippers". Going into last season (2014-2018 recruiting)

Blue Chipper

2014
Tanner Farmer - Starter
Nick Gates - Not on roster in 2018, but 3 year starter
Jerald Foster - Starter

2015
Eric Lee - Moderate contributor
Jalin Barnett - Bust
Jordan Stevenson - Bust
Avery Anderson - Minor contributor

2016
Lamar Jackson - Starter
John Raridon - Currently not a contributor
Patrick O'Brien - A CSU Ram
Marquel Dismuke - 1 start, probable starter in 2019
Matt Farniok - Starter

2017
Tyjon Lindsey - An OSU Beaver
Avery Roberts - An OSU Beaver
Tristan Gebbia - An OSU Beaver
Jaevon McQuitty - Still on path back from major injury
Keyshawn Johnson - BUST

2018
Adrian Martinez - Starter
Cam Jurgens - Injured - Redshirted - Moved to Center in 2019
Maurice Washington - Contributor - Issues - Future??????
Cam'ron Jones - Now an SMU Mustang
Tate Wildeman - Injury - Redshirted
Caleb Tannor - Contributor


OOF. Not good. Not only does Nebraska need to recruit more 4 stars they need to increase their success rate with the 4 stars they recruit. 2018 is looking like a good start as 3 are already contributors with the other 2 remaining recruits projected to be major contributors in the future.

You have to keep in mind we had one of college football’s biggest losers running his circus for most of those years. Wait and see the improvement from now on.

 

[SC_'sker]

Incredible that there are still people out there that think stars don't matter. Probably still think Bo is the man, too.

 

[RedArmageddon]

Incredible that there are still people out there that think stars don't matter. Probably still think Bo is the man, too.

Bo is the man ho daddy!

 

[oldjar07]

Oh this stupid thread again.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

Oh this stupid thread again.

I know, it is weird how every year we have this thread. Must be because it is still true. Strange how that works.

So $100, I'll take the teams provided on the list, you take the field?

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

Funny thing, you only play maybe 28 or so guys.
Depth? Injury? Injury and winning a natty is luck.
If you stay healthy, and your top 28 guys are knock out players, who cares if the other team has 38?

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

Funny thing, you only play maybe 28 or so guys.
Depth? Injury? Injury and winning a natty is luck.
If you stay healthy, and your top 28 guys are knock out players, who cares if the other team has 38?

Since you asked....How about the old iron sharpens iron. Top players practicing against top players, makes your team better.

While we are on the subject, weren't you one of those arguing about needing 150 players on the roster because you never know which one of the 65 walk ons will be discovered. If you only need 28.......who cares if you have 122 more?

 

[NorthwoodHusker]

Since you asked....How about the old iron sharpens iron. Top players practicing against top players, makes your team better.

While we are on the subject, weren't you one of those arguing about needing 150 players on the roster because you never know which one of the 65 walk ons will be discovered. If you only need 28.......who cares if you have 122 more?

Are you serious?

 

[yort2000]

Nebraska is never going to out Alabama, Alabama (period) Nor Clemson (period) If you want the ring (as of today), it goes through those two teams.

According to this metric, Nebraska doesn't need to out Alabama Alabama, nor Clemson, but they do need to recruit more "better" players to develop. 50% is the threshold. Any number above that is not a ranking of being better. There have been years where the national title winner was above 50%, but was not the highest BCR rating, maybe not even the top 5.

 

[yort2000]

I would like our number to be in the 40 percentile. I feel like with our system that is all we will need to win a national championship.

I will say this though, and definitely agree with this poster that Nebraska probably doesn't need 50% as we are recruiting areas like Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Colorado, South Dakota, North Dakota, etc. where you are more likely to hit on "diamonds in the rough" (including walk-ons) because kids from these areas are going to be under rated/recruited, just based on location. However, instead of five or six 4 stars a year, Nebraska needs to be getting 9 or 10.