Brett Kitrell to Minnesota
- Thread starter SevoHusker
- Start date
Good luck to him. We have better OL committed and in on better DL prospects right now. Firmly behind the staff's evaluation with this one.
Given that Clouse said there is 1, maybe 2 slots left, and those are definitely OT slots, its not hard to see why we passed on Kittrell. If a couple of big fish pan out, great, but it might be 1 big fish and Arnold.
I don't think there's any reasonable scenario where Kittrell fits.
I don't think there's any reasonable scenario where Kittrell fits.
Just hate losing out (not offering) on Local kids! Always afraid we could be missing out on the next Ott, Bazata etc. gotta trust the coaches though!
My thought is that Nebraska football is based on that hard working Nebraska kid who will make the others around work harder. I just think we need to keep Nebraska kids. When they go to play at other schools they seem to come back and haunt Nebraska or they end up playing major roles in those colleges programs. Nebraska kids can play big time football.
Last edited:
Actually, I can't think of many Nebraska kids who have gone elsewhere that have really come back to haunt us in any way. The only way I think you can say that is if they end up playing us and play well. Other than Drew Ott, can you think of any recently? I can't. For that matter, the game against us where he had the biggest impact-the 2014 game where he recovered that botched punt snap and ran it back for a TD was a game that we ended up winning. Most of the Nebraska kids that have gone to other schools either don't play us or don't really do much. In fact, there are so few that have played against us that have had prominent roles at least in recent years, that I have trouble even coming up with many names.
I remember Allan Evridge who started at QB for KSU against us in 2005, who had a very up and down game-rushed for 138 yards, but was only 5 of 27 for 77 yards passing. They lost the game too, so I think it's hard to say he haunted us in any way. There was Nathan Enderle from North Platte who started at QB against us for Idaho in 2010. He had a nightmarish game going 16 of 31 for 141 yards and 1 TD and 5 INTs(and of course, they lost).
I suppose you could say not having Danny Woodhead haunted us because he could have made a big impact for us, but that's hard to quantify and of course he never played against us nor had a chance to since he didn't even play at the D-I level.
Who knows, we could regret not having Brett Kitrell in the future, but frankly I just don't think there's much evidence to back up the assertion that in-state players like him that go elsewhere usually end up hurting us in some way.
Did you have to diss him? And wtf do you know mr. expert? Your obsession with pre-emptively defending riley is creepy.
Happy for this great player! A scholly to a B1G school is a big deal!
What Archie said is true, per the expert recruiting analysts in college football. Just look at the ratings of Kittrell compared to the players we are in on. I didn't see what Archie typed as a diss, but I do see how it could be taken that way by others.
Last edited:
Not only hasn't he been offered by Nebraska but he also hasn't been offered by Iowa, Iowa State, Wyoming and Kansas State, all schools that recruit Nebraska. Minnesota sees something in him many other schools don't, best of luck to the kid.
I'm not dissing him at all. He earned the offer, accepted, and I said good luck to him. I'm simply of the opinion that we are making the right decision with our prospect evaluation. I think that can be supported with a number of observables.
But like I said...best of luck to him.
you could have said, good luck to him and left it at that. You didn't need to get into the defense of the staff evaluation and offering better players theme.
Well I did. This is a Nebraska message board. People offer their opinions.
Stating facts is now considered defense of the staff? Ouch man, that's a rough opinion to have.
Check yourself. He's not stating facts, just opinion. He says good luck, and then goes straight into 'we have better prospects' and then says 'he is behind the staff's evaluation'. This is defending the staff for not offering the kid, and nobody was even saying that. It was as if he was preparing for that comment in advance, or just wanted to be a jerk to the kid (as another poster took it). Why would you feel the need to say those things if you weren't defending the staff. Plus, we all know Archie's posting history, so it's not hard to come to that realization. It was a dumb thing to say, he didn't have to go there, he got called out on it.
No need to check myself. Every scouting service supports the fact NU is in on better prospects. Your opinion is noted, and flushed.
I don't know his posting history, and couldn't care less about it.
Nikki, this is where it becomes a pissing match with you. When you look at the ratings of Kittrell and compare them to the ratings of those who we are in on, what Archie stated is dead on.
Admittedly, ratings are subjective, but if you value the collective opinion of the experts, then it is highly likely that Archie is right. And again, I didn't see it as a diss like huskerfan1414 and you did... but then again, I don't read Archie's posts with a critical eye. I appreciate where he is coming from because it is a similar position that I hold.
Personally, I believe you read certain posters with a filter on already. It's pretty clear in this post. If Archie types something (or if I do, or some others who think we are turning things around) you are looking at it from a perspective of he only types things in support of the coaching staff. And you are already prepared to be critical before you read it.
I admit that I do it too; we all do. But it is pretty clear to me that until Huskerfan1414 said something about how he read the post, no one seemed to have a problem with it.
Edit: please understand, I am not just leveling this at you, Nikki. Again, we all are guilty of this.
Last edited:
Can we all stop being pissy for at least today? Think about it.
smh... those are opinions.. all scouting services, pick any or all, they can only offer opinions on how they rate guys. Just because Scout rates some guy a 4 star does not make it a fact. If Rivals rates some unknown a 2 star, that does not make it a fact either. It is just some person's opinion. So saying player X is better than player Y is nothing more than opinion. It cannot be a fact because it is subjective.
Correct, to an extent, inaccurate to an extent. When all services have many higher than the other, well, I shouldn't have to explain it. Based on the reply from @timnsun, and other posts of yours I've read, it's quite possibly you're looking for something. I'm not interested in that so good luck in this thread.
I argued that those statements were opinions vs facts and you agree it is subjective.. the rest of this stuff you are talking about is not central to the argument.
Honest effort on my part... Sorry you can't be open to the possibility that we all have filters that color our arguments. I had no problem with what Archie said. You did. Who's right? Guess it can't be any agenda on your part. It's only on Archie.
Tells me all I need to know.
Tim, you are just changing the scope of the discussion, and things have veered off course enough as it is. If you want to have a sidebar about it, I'd love to.
sidebar is fine... we are on the same side and certainly not enemies... Wouldn't mind visiting about things one on one.
