So JUCOs are automatically better? I missed that memo.
So Juco's are not ever better? I missed that memo.
So JUCOs are automatically better? I missed that memo.
So Juco's are not ever better? I missed that memo.
I think that's what this staff is doing. They've just been very selective and unsuccessful to this point. They are in on two juco offensive tackles right now although one of them already committed elsewhere.Did we not just lose a 4 star recruit ( Blades) due to grades to Juco - most top 25 teams take a Juco or two every year what makes us different plus we do have holes and as correctly pointed out here the previous staff did not do a good job filling classes
My point is that maybe he attempted to address it but the jucos he offered didn't accept.My point was that many here want to lament our current talent and act like their were such giant holes that it was impossible to compete for championships. If true, Riley could have addressed the issue. He didn't which leads me to believe much of that is overblown.
I think your analogy kind of proves the point. In your instances you had no holes but were trying to take the leap to next level - blowing everything up and starting over brings risk , most would say unacceptable risk.I'll try to equate a real life story that, at least, relates to this JUCO influx thing.
A few years ago I took over the sales area of a company that was moderately successful. The sales staff depended mostly on return customers. Those longtime return customers had smaller orders but they were enough to sustain the current sales levels. When I came in, I wanted to make a push on getting new sales. The problem is the staff had grown complacent, they had reliable income and didn't want to willingly step out and sort of pushed back a little. So I decided to spend a lot of time working with them to increase the number of new clients, the first year or so was slow but sales increased they were making money and the return customers didn't leave. We grew steadily after that.
I could have replaced the sales staff from the outside, and my new sales would probably have increased at a higher rate in year 1 but I would have lost some of the older clients.
By the time I moved on I am not sure either path would have resulted in better results than the other. I do know that I had no guarantee the new staff would automatically out perform what I had and I knew that I would lose long time clients if I did replace staff.
Like or don't like. I don't care but the microwave quick fix isn't always best.
My point was that many here want to lament our current talent and act like their were such giant holes that it was impossible to compete for championships. If true, Riley could have addressed the issue. He didn't which leads me to believe much of that is overblown.
So where was all the talent from the last two years drafted? What rounds? How are they doing in the NFL? This is probably more for Tulsa Tom than you, but I'm curious about all this talent that Tom thinks has been on the roster.I look at JUCOs as a higher academic risk, but you can better see their floor and ceiling as players. Unless you have freshman/redshirt freshman that will be instant contributors, the JUCO route might be better. If a freshman has to develop, he's holding a scholarship and riding the pine. But the JUCO has to come in as an instant contributor, or you've likely wasted the scholarship just like the freshman that never plays.
We've went after some JUCOs, they didn't come here for whatever reason.
The "compete for chamionships" part is kind of nebulous. An outside shot is different from being the unanimous favorites. But the "overblown" part, I'm in full agreement there.
My point was that many here want to lament our current talent and act like their were such giant holes that it was impossible to compete for championships. If true, Riley could have addressed the issue. He didn't which leads me to believe much of that is overblown.
I think your analogy kind of proves the point. In your instances you had no holes but were trying to take the leap to next level - blowing everything up and starting over brings risk , most would say unacceptable risk.
In this instance the previous coach was fired, Riley comes in and there holes in the roster. The AD stated when the previous coach was fired in part becuase he could not win the games that mattered, Riley by extension was hired to take this next step. Why not plug the holes quickly with a couple of JUCO's Riley has shown he can recruit so if he truly wanted some Spot Juco's I believe he could have signed some
If the holes were so great, why would one not go hard after JUCOs? If the classes three years down the road from when Riley was hired were going to be such a problem, why not go after JUCOs in the first couple years? It's not like the talent level of the #31, #24, and #20 classes involving all freshmen was so much better than some players at the JUCO ranks.
One answer MIGHT be that Eichorst was right in saying we already had players who could compete for championships. Even Bo out-recruited the others in our division.
My favorite contradiction on this board has to be this one.
-Riley doesn't recruit Jucos cause he doesn't have too or only goes after like 2 a year
then same type of posters post
-Riley cant compete at a high level because he doesn't have depth on his roster.
No one can argue with you with that logic because it's impossible to argue with idiots.
IF this staff believes it can do better by recruiting HS kids and develop them quick enough to build depth, I am fine with that. But don't give me sh*t about him not having time to build depth then. It a freaking contradiction. He's signed 62 scholarship players, 31 walk-ons, and 2 transfers (93 total players!!!) in 2015, 2016, & 2017 combined.If they can build depth with young guys, then they should be fine now, right? He's got the bodies. So give me a freaking break and don't use a double standard.
As far as Ginkel goes @ IWCC, Huskers got a big F-U from IWCC on that. Nebraska lacks a history of recruiting kids @ IWCC. I feel like the school and it's football staff feel a little shunned off by the Huskers and Ginkel was their "F off" moment .
Finally, almost every coach in college football recruits Jucos. Myers does. Saban does. Every SEC school has landed at least 1 Juco in the past 2 years combined (most have taken a couple). Saban usually takes @ least 1 Juco per year. Osborne recruited Jucos. Arguably the 2 best LBs in Husker football were Jucos. No one is asking for Snyder but when you obviously have depth problems, do something to fix it. Don't just pout and say " In 2021 we should be fine". Build a pair for a change and grow up.
So where was all the talent from the last two years drafted? What rounds? How are they doing in the NFL? This is probably more for Tulsa Tom than you, but I'm curious about all this talent that Tom thinks has been on the roster.
I don't think anyone has remotely said what you posted. We have a very small class upcoming. We could have achieved balance for the long haul with jucos...and next year's class would be a lot bigger. Going the JUCO route with even 3-4 of them, we would be sitting better number wise for the long haul. At that point, we could have done what the SEC does...take 1 or 2 a year to immediately fill a position of unexpected need.There's a very simple answer to this. The AD is taking more of a long view on this. How long, I can't say for sure. I know its longer than the folks calling for Riley's head after 5 games had in mind, and its probably shorter than the 7 years Bo had, but every single action taken by the staff indicates that they have internal top cover to build this thing up "the right way".
Everyone who seems to be at odds with the plainly available evidence, kinda sorta seems to be making a fair amount of assumption here. Namely, because Riley is 60 something, if he doesn't load up on talent through JUCOs, processing, what have you *right now* he'll basically keel over a failure.
From what we can observe and hear it seems like the most likely option is that the AD going to give Riley the top cover he needs to do this his way, and if it doesn't work out, Riley retires and hands over a stable roster to probably someone like Frost.
Given the type of decisionmaker SE seems to be, loading up on a bunch of JUCOs and going for broke in Year 2 or 3 and having an empty husk afterwards doesn't seem to be in the cards.
A lot of folks who are impatient with Riley and kind of hinting at the imminence of the whole situation were a lot of the same folks that thought SE was going to come in and be a hatchet man with Bo (which again SE operated on a different timeline there).
I don't think anyone has remotely said what you posted. We have a very small class upcoming. We could have achieved balance for the long haul with jucos...and next year's class would be a lot bigger. Going the JUCO route with even 3-4 of them, we would be sitting better number wise for the long haul. At that point, we could have done what the SEC does...take 1 or 2 a year to immediately fill a position of unexpected need.
Nobody has said we want the Bill Snyder plan.
![]()
Your appear to be saying that by plugging in a couple of JUCOs, they would have been automatically better than what was already on the roster.
When you look back on timing, the JUCO signing day is in December right? So December of 2014 he would have had to identify and sign some JUCOs in 2 weeks for them to be available for the 2015 season. Not possible. No relationships, staff is being replaced it was hard enough for them to keep what was already committed.
By the time you start recruiting for the 2016 class, you have a whole spring, and an unsuccessful 2015 season to evaluate your team, your staff and your talent. If they thought there were JUCOs they could get, that they wanted and would have been an improvement, I have no doubt they would have gone full force after them. But they didn't.
If you want to use hindsight, I will too. The 2016 season was a 9-3 regular season. Typical Nebraska season, record wise, as the past 15 years.
Going into 2017 he has his staff in place, his player are entering their third year in his system. I would and do expect better results.
So taking JUCOs, any JUCOs, automatically solves depth problems?My favorite contradiction on this board has to be this one.
-Riley doesn't recruit Jucos cause he doesn't have too or only goes after like 2 a year
then same type of posters post
-Riley cant compete at a high level because he doesn't have depth on his roster.
No one can argue with you with that logic because it's impossible to argue with idiots.
IF this staff believes it can do better by recruiting HS kids and develop them quick enough to build depth, I am fine with that. But don't give me sh*t about him not having time to build depth then. It a freaking contradiction. He's signed 62 scholarship players, 31 walk-ons, and 2 transfers (93 total players!!!) in 2015, 2016, & 2017 combined.If they can build depth with young guys, then they should be fine now, right? He's got the bodies. So give me a freaking break and don't use a double standard.
As far as Ginkel goes @ IWCC, Huskers got a big F-U from IWCC on that. Nebraska lacks a history of recruiting kids @ IWCC. I feel like the school and it's football staff feel a little shunned off by the Huskers and Ginkel was their "F off" moment .
Finally, almost every coach in college football recruits Jucos. Myers does. Saban does. Every SEC school has landed at least 1 Juco in the past 2 years combined (most have taken a couple). Saban usually takes @ least 1 Juco per year. Osborne recruited Jucos. Arguably the 2 best LBs in Husker football were Jucos. No one is asking for Snyder but when you obviously have depth problems, do something to fix it. Don't just pout and say " In 2021 we should be fine". Build a pair for a change and grow up.
Again you are using 20/20 hindsight with DLine recruiting. Basing what they should have done then on what you know after the fact.
The general consensus was that Collins was gone, but not Valentine. You were also counting on McMullen and Williams to be back and you had Maurice in the mix. Along with Stoltenberg and Freedom.
The 2015 class had 4 Dlinemen who were brought in to help replace those players.
During the 2015 season it was more a known fact that you had to replace the DLine coach than there was a known shortage of DLine players.
Recruiting players doesn't start in November when the JUCO signing day is Mid December.
My favorite contradiction on this board has to be this one.
I think every decision is made with the best intentions but unfortunately history (hindsight) is often the ultimate and only way to judge whether the decision was correct or not
a decision can still be reasonable even if history proves it to be wrong, but leaders jobs are to make decisions given less than certain information ... history will often judge whether the correct decision was made
should we draft Sam Bowie or Michael Jordan
should I take the raiders -4.5
do I recruit player x or y
go for it on 4th down or punt
you are trying to make the best decision based on the limited info you have
sometimes history tells you it was the right decision, sometimes it tells you it was the wrong one
a decision can be reasonable at the time but still prove to be wrong
most thought Bill Callahan was a reasonable hire, same with Bo ... hindsight tells us they weren't
bottom line is I think hindsight is a valid tool to evaluate a decision as long as we understand that the decision isn't being made with all the info that is available a few days, weeks, years later. With some decisions it doesn't matter ... when you hire a coach it doesn't matter if it seemed reasonable at the time if they don't get the job done. Riley's job is high profile enough that ultimately history will tell us whether his decisions were good ones or bad ones based on wins and losses
Tom, you gonna address my question on talent, since you are convinced we had it already and should have won championships with it? You know, the NFL talent the last two years? You are, after all, the one claiming Eichorst couldn't have lied about the talent issue. If we were talented enough, why only 3 draft picks the last 2 years?I don't think anyone has remotely said what you posted. We have a very small class upcoming. We could have achieved balance for the long haul with jucos...and next year's class would be a lot bigger. Going the JUCO route with even 3-4 of them, we would be sitting better number wise for the long haul. At that point, we could have done what the SEC does...take 1 or 2 a year to immediately fill a position of unexpected need.
Nobody has said we want the Bill Snyder plan.
![]()
You had to dig a little deeper to understand the depth of the comments. It's not black & white, at least how I read it from some people.
JUCO is good and bad. It's a short term fix, and a long term problem. It's obvious to me Riley came in and built for the future, instead of filling the plugs early on then facing the same issues in 12-18 months once they're gone.
2015 class
Mulligan as it was a transition. Dang near impossible to hit the JUCO ranks and land anyone worth a shit in 3 weeks (early signing) or 8 weeks (regular LOI day).
2016 class
First full class, are entering their redshirt freshmen (16 redshirted) year or true sophomore year (4 played). Do you really expect true freshmen to provide immediate depth? As a whole, no.
JUCO possibilities here, curious what positions did you want?
2017 class
His second full class, haven't even began fall camp. I anticipate 8 of them contributing in some fashion this season.
JUCO possibilities here, curious what positions did you want?
2018 class
His third full class, haven't even signed. Go on record now, without hindsight posting months after signing day, what positions he should go after.
Let's put JUCOs on hold for a minute. I get what Spinner is saying concerning talent. What he is pointing out is, imo, the most popular narrative on this board. Now back to JUCOs. I could see an argument for going after JUCO(s) DL after the DL collapse following the 2015 season. It seems like it's been awhile since we had a rush end that would get much attention, I suppose Randy Gregory was the last. And I suppose Freedom could come into his own this year, of course he is a converted TE, because we needed him to be a DE. If we are converting TE to DE, that seems a pretty clear signal of looking JUCO. That could be called hindsight I guess.
Hard to say what right now needs there are. Do Bradley, Bryant, Ozigbo, or Wilbon satisfy what we need at RB? Who is gonna step up at TE? The coaching staff is in the best position to answer those types of questions.
Concerning playing young players. I pointed this out not too long ago. Penn St won the conference starting a true freshman and a RS freshman OL. Yep, two youngsters on the OL starting. People cling to the thought that we have to redshirt. If there's talent coming in, the talent should see the field.
At the risk of what? Collins and Valentine weren't for sure going to the NFL so do you really think NU could've effectively recruited a JUCO DT when both of our starters were junior's at the time and signs pointed to them returning prior to the season? Remember, recruiting JUCO's happen in the spring and summer of 2015, well before the season began.
DE's, full agreement and can probably dig up a post saying as much around that time.
You say it's hard to know now, and that's the point of my response. Saying something years later is easy, if someone has a stance on something then they should be able to say what JUCO spots we should recruit right now for the 2018 class.
Full agreement on younger players.
The commitment list on this board has the commitment dates listed. It's on the right side. If you are on your phone, you may need to scroll over to see it.I want to play what if.
I can't seem to find a list of recruits for 2015, 2016 and 2017 with the dates they committed.
When I find this I'll post it. Then I want to know from the JUCO crowd, without the benefit of hindsight, which high school player you would scratch off the committed list in order to sign up a 2-3 JUCO players each year.
By that I mean, you can't pick KJJ based on the fact he isn't in the class now because there isn't one of us who thought he was not a good pickup when he committed.
I never thought callahan was a good hire. Or pederson. Knew from the start it wouldnt work.I think every decision is made with the best intentions but unfortunately history (hindsight) is often the ultimate and only way to judge whether the decision was correct or not
a decision can still be reasonable even if history proves it to be wrong, but leaders jobs are to make decisions given less than certain information ... history will often judge whether the correct decision was made
should we draft Sam Bowie or Michael Jordan
should I take the raiders -4.5
do I recruit player x or y
go for it on 4th down or punt
you are trying to make the best decision based on the limited info you have
sometimes history tells you it was the right decision, sometimes it tells you it was the wrong one
a decision can be reasonable at the time but still prove to be wrong
most thought Bill Callahan was a reasonable hire, same with Bo ... hindsight tells us they weren't
bottom line is I think hindsight is a valid tool to evaluate a decision as long as we understand that the decision isn't being made with all the info that is available a few days, weeks, years later. With some decisions it doesn't matter ... when you hire a coach it doesn't matter if it seemed reasonable at the time if they don't get the job done. Riley's job is high profile enough that ultimately history will tell us whether his decisions were good ones or bad ones based on wins and losses
Or they arent coached well.Tom, you gonna address my question on talent, since you are convinced we had it already and should have won championships with it? You know, the NFL talent the last two years? You are, after all, the one claiming Eichorst couldn't have lied about the talent issue. If we were talented enough, why only 3 draft picks the last 2 years?
Maybe it seems we weren't as talented as you think we were.
Thanks for answering for Tom. Yes, he is an idiot.Or they arent coached well.
Stop thinking that what happens in 4 years in college doesnt matter and destiny is decided by the stars next to your name when you are 18.
Im not blaming that all on Riley but if you thought the past few seasons had well coached players, both under Pelini and then under Riley and his old staff while he was getting his feet wet, youre delirious.
Dont read into that more than it is, ok? In other words, dont overreact as usual.
And stop worrying about Tom. Hes an idiot and everyone knows it.
(And sense you will probably overreact, no i dont think we had championship level talent then or now, ok?)