Football team ....5 players over 1800I propose that John Cook becomes the new recruiting coordinator.
Volleyball team 5 players over 1800
Boyd Eppely article in husker Extra
- Thread starter bleed husker red
- Start date
Volleyball team 5 players over 1800
25 on team vs. 105 on team.
??? Scholarships vs. 85 Scholarships
It's clear from this article that we do have some talented players. We have a lot of good players. But Boyd was also very clear that we are far behind what we need to be. This article doesn't say we are void of talent. But to me, it clearly states we don't have enough.
We can read this in different ways to support our agendas how we see fit, but it is clear that we have to restock. Having a lot of guys above 1500 is great, but we don't have enough in the right places. Surely this was clear from this article, wasn't it?
We can read this in different ways to support our agendas how we see fit, but it is clear that we have to restock. Having a lot of guys above 1500 is great, but we don't have enough in the right places. Surely this was clear from this article, wasn't it?
And Boyd's conclusion should come as no surprise to anyone who pays attention to college football beyond NU. We've fallen behind.
To everyone saying that the reason we were so successful was the roids. News Flash everyone used them. Teams are still using them and you're naive to think that every team in major college football doesn't use them. It was well documented that Randy Gregory used all sorts of substances in his time at NU and guess how many games he missed due to this? 0. So to say that the only reason NU was successful was the roids is asinine when you consider that every other team they played used them too. So when you consider the rampant use of PEDs in college athletics the past 35 years that have continued to today, Boyd is comparing apples to apples with his index. Our talent level is pathetic for a blue-blood program. 3 NFL quality players? We used to pump out 3 to 5 NFL draft picks a year. Now we have 3 NFL players on our entire roster? Pathetic.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
To my eyes it appeared we were as talented as any team we faced this year with maybe the exception of Miami and I believe UCLA will be more talented
One team MSU we beat and will be in the final four - One team we doubled their yardage and lost due to turnovers Iowa - was almost in - I do not feel either of these teams had more talent than we did
Kind of depends how you look at talent. They were both more talented on the lines, especially MSU on the DL and Iowa on the OL. They both also had QB's that were accurate and took care of the ball, which is much more important at that position than index score.
So roid use is business as usual, just as it was in the 80s and 90s? I think you are misinformed if you believe that. I do agree that use wasn't limited to NU but hopefully Boyd's performance comparisons will be looked at with skepticism if the message is players in the 80s and 90s scored higher. By the way, I knew a Husker QB in the mid 80s and he was pretty disturbed by the rampant use of roids by some of his teammates. I would be very surprised if some current players weren't using PEDs, but it is surely nowhere as wide open as 20-30 years ago.
Hardly. You can't possibly think it's wise to communicate publicly that the talent level of a team is low and expect the team to buy-in and play like they can compete at high levels. That is communications 101.
The steroid discussion doesn't matter at all to the impact of the article. The article compares our current testing versus our previous testing levels. The results are sub par. We don't even know how Boyd evaluates and collects the data sets, ensuring that we can't conclude a causal link between steroids and previous testing results. Hypothetically, even assuming the flawed argument that steroid use = higher test results, it would not discount the fact that our athletes are not conditioned to a championship level. At best one would have to conclude that steroid use = championships if this was the case. This is the very pinnacle of unnecessary cynicism.
You mean to be honest? It's not a secret to anyone who knows their ass from a hole in the wall when it comes to football.
It was eye-opening for me, I didn't realize it was THAT bad. To see it compared to the volleyball team like that is a harsh dose of reality. A team less than 1/4 the size has more physical talent. That's ROUGH.
And read that other stat correctly, that's 20 players BELOW 900. Which is considered the THRESHOLD for walk-on status.
I say again, that's 20 guys on the roster who don't test out at a level that was once the minimum to be considered to pay your own way.
That is bleak. That is damning all the way around for what's been going on in terms of recruiting, program design, and development.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
You're the expert. Epley and his numbers say different, excuse me for tending to believe him. If your eyes were telling you we were as talented as anyone on our schedule (when 20÷ would not be on a normal power 5 team) then Riley did a hell of a job coaching them up to look that way, right? Spin spin spin spin spin
Not literally, as in tell us something that isn't obvious. That is common sense 101.
You guys read an article and it then becomes affirmation for your agenda that Riley is a great coach and talent/players are the problem.
All this article said is that our talent level overall is down, and that is down from what it used to be when Boyd was last here which was 2006 - I agree we have less talent than in 2006. However we also no longer are playing OU and TX in the Big12 anymore and this year we did not play OSU or MI or PSU.
So yes I do not think talent based on the competition we played this year was the reason for the losing season but yes I do agree talent level is down.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Fair enough and I agree for the most part. But we can't try to build a program with the idea of beating Illinois and Purdue, (which would be an improvement). We have to have the goal of competing with the elite of CFB physically which will also take care of the Purdue's of the world.
Isn't there some middle ground? Maybe we have really subpar talent AND the coaching wasn't what it needed to be. Why do "you guys" have to try and prove the only issue with the season was coaching?
Here is information on Strength Index. It calculates based on body weight with cleans, bench, and squat.
http://www.epicstrengthindex.com/library/Strength_Index_Test_Procedures.pdf
For the Performance Index, it's calculated based on body weight with vertical, 10-yard, and pro agility.
Because in my mind it was the issue - If this years team won five games and we did not have the coaching issues I would then say Talent is the issue - If this years team won 8 games and there were not glaring coaching issues, then I agree with you.
It should not have taken elite talent to have a winning season this year
If the coaching issues are not cleaned up all the talent in the world will not matter ( see Bill Callahan experiment)
I agree our goals should be higher - however if we need more talent than other teams at all times to win we are in trouble. NU is not going to out talent the elite of CFB - we need more talent to be sure and then we need to out coach them - But when this staff is being out coached by Purdue its a bit disheartening
It's fair to say that it's both talent and coaching this year. Given our current program leadership, neither is going to be fixed overnight.
The coaching staff is here to stay for the immediate term.
Talent can be vastly improved with a strong recruiting class including JUCOs.
Talent can also be improved by strong work ethic in the offseason and more dedication to restoring Husker power.
The coaching staff is here to stay for the immediate term.
Talent can be vastly improved with a strong recruiting class including JUCOs.
Talent can also be improved by strong work ethic in the offseason and more dedication to restoring Husker power.
I think the only thing that surprised me is that Boyd said we have running backs who scored really well on the tests. The production on the field certainly did not reflect a ton of athletic ability, but it could be a case of running backs who test really well, but consistently miss the hole on running plays. Or maybe the lack of production was more of a reflection of the lack of talent on the OL than I initially believed.
Its not the only problem, but it is a problem.
Boyd has said this is going to take time, specifically a year and a half *from now*. That's year 3 entering year 4 in football seasons. I notice that people who want Riley gone now, no ifs and or butts, are not pointing that out.
As always, time is a major factor that those who profess that they are only motivated by "love for the program" are not willing to consider.
I think its fairly clear if we are at year 3 or 4, we are losing tons of games and a quarter of the roster is still not testing at the walk-on level, that a move is necessary.
You're running out of axe to grind.
Your running out of excuses. Why are the coaches off limits but players seem to be fair game - do we need more talent absolutely.
Is having a roster filled with all big 10 players going to prevent Langdorf from calling a bubble screen on 1st down from the four - dont think so
Riley will get four years unless next year is as bad as this year then he is on the seat in year three
So a question for you as part of the "real fan base" If Riley has a losing season next year and the same mistakes are evident ie penalties, clock management, no running game commitment are you still going to say everything is rosey as long as recruiting is Ok - how about year three if its still the same - at what point are results - His results
Maybe not, but having a roster filled with all B1G players will make that play work better...
This is a good question... I can try to be objective about it but as an optimist I always tend to give the benefit of the doubt. I still supported Pelini up until last year's Wisconsin game. That was when the bubble finally burst for me.
I know the question wasn't directed to me specifically, but more generically to those who support Riley... If next year is rocky I don't know where I'll be in terms of support... Especially if the coaching mistakes this year aren't addressed at all, specifically penalties, turnovers and to an extent, clock management.
I'm not as hung up on the running game... This offense is designed for a short passing game as well to mimic some of the run game I guess, so as long as we are moving the chains, I'll be happy with that.
I've been critical of Mike Riley and the coaching staff this year. In no universe do I think Nebraska should lose to a team like Purdue and I'll be honest I lost a lot of faith in the staff after that game. However, this evidence by Boyd is about as damning as you can get.
Football team ....5 players over 1800
Volleyball team 5 players over 1800
Nebraska used to be a place where we maximized our talent. At the peak in our 90's, we'd have at least 2 first rounders on a yearly basis and 5-7 players that would get drafted. There is no way in hell you can compete for championships much less wins with those numbers especially when your problems are in the trenches. It's simply not happening. We can blame Riley all we want for some of the questionable coaching decisions that occurred this season however we must also realize that we wouldn't have been in those precarious positions to begin with if it wasn't for our horrid recruiting the last 9 years.
Unfortunately, our recruiting this year hasn't been all that great. It'll be interesting to see how the staff closes out the year. Next year will be the benchmark for the staff when it comes to recruiting. Let's hope they can get this thing turned around! GBR!
Football team ....5 players over 1800
Volleyball team 5 players over 1800
Nebraska used to be a place where we maximized our talent. At the peak in our 90's, we'd have at least 2 first rounders on a yearly basis and 5-7 players that would get drafted. There is no way in hell you can compete for championships much less wins with those numbers especially when your problems are in the trenches. It's simply not happening. We can blame Riley all we want for some of the questionable coaching decisions that occurred this season however we must also realize that we wouldn't have been in those precarious positions to begin with if it wasn't for our horrid recruiting the last 9 years.
Unfortunately, our recruiting this year hasn't been all that great. It'll be interesting to see how the staff closes out the year. Next year will be the benchmark for the staff when it comes to recruiting. Let's hope they can get this thing turned around! GBR!
Would a higher talent level prevented us from running a run/pass option in the Illinois game - and yes it was an option as the back was running a pass pattern. Would having better talent have made the players know how to correctly defend in a Hail mary situation - or how about passing 45 times against the worst rush defense in the league
They're off limits right now because this is Nebraska and we don't can coaches, good or bad, before they've had a chance to prove their mettle. Yes, there were many questionable coaching decisions this year - too many to list - but constantly, incessantly complaining about it does no good. It just makes me wonder why you rail against these coaches before they've even had a chance to get settled in.
I think the bottom line is, there are so many things that could be fixed, you could really pick any one of them. You've made clear you aren't a fan of Riley, and so you naturally gravitate towards fixes that he personally or his staff have screwed up.
In reality, there's many ways to get where we want to go. TA could play smarter 3-4 plays a game to fix the TO issue. The OL could play more consistent. Newby could see the field better. DL can continue to neuter instruction to the point where "take this ball and run it over there" is the play call. Riley can use TO's wisely. Whatever, there are a ton of paths to where we can get better.
It falls not all on staff, nor on players, but both.
Its been pointed out on several occasions that despite all of the ills of a passing offense and all the allegations of square peg and round hole, we're not that far away (a handful of plays in a game) from finishing these things out and winning at a clip we're used to. People want to act like the universe is falling apart around us because the football goes through the air, but its really not.
I am expressing my opinion based on years of following Riley and Crew - Trust me I have gone through all these same thoughts following OSU. The same tired old arguments supporting him, the same problems on the field.
This is not new it just moved to NU
I think you're missing my point... If we have better talent, those plays often are more successful.
I'm not saying the coaches are off limits at all... They could have recognized the strengths of the team better and called the plays accordingly. No arguments there. But if the talent is better the called plays work more often than what we saw this year.
Last edited:
