Not to rain on your parade, but during the era you are lamenting about, Nebraska had always recruited talent. Wisconsin has never been Nebraska (Osborne years) in terms of talent on the roster.
I assume your talking about Pat Fitzgerald?
I get what you are saying with being paid like a 70% winner but I still would put my money on NW turning into Purdue—a.k.a dog you-know-what if he left. Their football stadium is terrible and should have been unplayable last year. I love Chicago but it is not a college football town. It's the 3rd most populated city in America and I might not go back to Evanston game solely because of their obsolete stadium. The most overrated coach in the Big 10 to me is still James Franklin even after last year, but thats a different topic for another thread.
And they still shell out 10+ wins and division titles with a slightly above-average coach in Chryst. I would argue that they are successful because of their location to so many young norsemen! They have tons of big boys from the state of Wisconsin on the OL year in and year out.
That isn't true...Riley was thought of as a stud because of what he was able to do at OSU...USC wanted...Bama wanted him. He was and is viewed in very high regard.
This. Everyone seems to think we were consisted entirely of kids no one else wanted. Indeed, talent development was fantastic, but we were also all around states fighting the big boys for the top talent.
Weather? I think it's historic athletic commitment that differentiates. Seriously, it's not even close (historically - as NW is on an infrastructure binge suddenly) over the past forever. There's a reason why ND has asked Fitz to be their coach every chance it's had. Including I'd guess, the next one. Seriously the weather in SB is worse than Evanston. Unless you're considering the absence of an indoor facility, it could not be less relevant.
Notre Dame and Stanford have a history in their football program. If Fitz were to go to Notre Dame I'm sure he'd have more wins and better recruits too.
You may be correct but he is overrated, especially as an in game coach.
Both those guys have been great. However, they both have stepped back some in terms of record once they entered power 5 conferences.
I do think he is legit. They have been good for quite a long time. They haven't made it to a national championship game (they were robbed a few years back), but he takes low level recruits and wins.
Not exactly true yes we recruited some talent especially at the skill positions, however most times the cores of an Osborne team was developed talent that was not highly recruited.
That's the point, that's what we are saying. Resembles, yes. But they aren't pulling the top end guys like we did. That means no LP, no Frazier, no Fryar, no Gill, no Peters, and I could keep going forever. The core was development, but the high end guys are what pushed us to greatness.
This.
kind of the chicken or egg - what comes first - Osborne built his base on development and then he went after some skilled players - it wasnt til later he pulled in great classes - So I believe the development came first which brought a level of success then the highly sought players followed even then many of players that contributed the most were Nebraska or surrounding kids coming to NU because of the reputation he had
I guess I've never seen him State this.
