Is a top 5 recruiting class in the works?

[red rover 70]

Riley and the staff are coming on strong and it looks like they have caused a major tremor in the recruiting world. We are sitting just outside the top ten right now and the ceiling looks to be going up. This is exactly what we need to add quality depth throughout the roster. What say you?

 

[jteten]

Off to a very nice start.

 

[JohnRossEwing]

I think top 10 for sure.

 

[CC_Lemming]

No idea. Would be awesome!!!

 

[AdaminLincoln]

Top 20 is probably a lot more realistic. Off to a great start though.

 

[Cornicator]

Will need to land a guy like Lindsey or Holmes, or both, to draw a top 5 slot from a math standpoint. But I think top 15 is attainable right now.

The bigger question depends on where they go with some positions of need.

 

[red rover 70]

I think top 10 for sure.

I would guess somewhere between 6 and 10 is likely.

 

[red rover 70]

Will need to land a guy like Lindsey or Holmes, or both, to draw a top 5 slot from a math standpoint. But I think top 15 is attainable right now.

The bigger question depends on where they go with some positions of need.

What about Tyler Shelvin? Is he still gonna make a visit?

 

[nebcountry]

Looking at scholarship distribution and roster departures puts us at 20 seniors, 20 future open spots. I don't know how many we will take for 2017. If it's 20, then all 20 will count for Rivals team ranking calculation.

If we're sitting at 793 points currently with 8 players, ratioing up to 20 players would put us at 1983 points. So neither optimistic nor pessimistic, just plain trajectory. Depending on the year, 1983 points would put us somewhere between 16th and 21st in the team rankings.

Maybe we'll get one or some of the 5* receivers, or highly rated players at other positions. Just have to wait and see.

 

[inWV]

I would guess somewhere between 6 and 10 is likely.

I'd say more like a probability of maybe 30%, with a probability of 11-20 more like 60%, and a ranking of greater than 20 10%. It really depends on trajectory. The momentum is good and that bodes well for landing the higher ranked guys. We are now ranked 10th for average stars (3.57) of teams that have 6 or more commits. The two teams that were close to that average star ranking in 2016 (LSU-3.54&Ole MS-3.58) both signed 24 kids. I don't know how many we plan to sign, but of the slots that count toward the rank, we basically need to average plus 3.6 to get a top ten ranking.

 

[AndyHanline]

Will need to land a guy like Lindsey or Holmes, or both, to draw a top 5 slot from a math standpoint. But I think top 15 is attainable right now.

The bigger question depends on where they go with some positions of need.

Agree. We'll need to land some top 100 prospects to propel us into the top 5. I think anywhere from 10-15 is where we likely end up.

 

[red rover 70]

Looking at scholarship distribution and roster departures puts us at 20 seniors, 20 future open spots. I don't know how many we will take for 2017. If it's 20, then all 20 will count for Rivals team ranking calculation.

If we're sitting at 793 points currently with 8 players, ratioing up to 20 players would put us at 1983 points. So neither optimistic nor pessimistic, just plain trajectory. Depending on the year, 1983 points would put us somewhere between 16th and 21st in the team rankings.

Maybe we'll get one or some of the 5* receivers, or highly rated players at other positions. Just have to wait and see.

Maybe Corn would know better but I thought I heard we were going to grab a few more then 20?

 

[hddude55]

I think we will finish a little ahead of Iowa.

 

[sparky62]

I'm thinking top 15. but anything is possible.

 

[CC_Lemming]

Will need to land a guy like Lindsey or Holmes, or both, to draw a top 5 slot from a math standpoint. But I think top 15 is attainable right now.

The bigger question depends on where they go with some positions of need.

How do you feel about our positions of need? I'm really excited about the talent this class is bringing in and has the potential to bring in, but so far it seems to be disproportionately distributed, which is why I ask.

 

[NikkiSixx]

We need Defensive Linemen. Saw something that we might want to take 5-6 this class. Numbers are likely more important than stars with that particular position of need.

 

[Archie Graham]

Highly doubt it.

 

[red rover 70]

Highly doubt it.

I feel ya Archie. I'm asking the question because of how the last four games changed the whole dynamic. After the Purdue game no one...NOT EVEN I SAW THIS RECRUITING TREMOR IN THE CARDS! Yet here we are. We've got four star recruits having fun Twitter conversations about us with other four star recruits. And other highly ranked players are taking notice. What if this year plays out in spades for us? How would that affect our ranking? Wow!

 

[litespeedhuskerfan]

I am not sure the rest of the CFB recruiting world considers what's happening in Lincoln a "tremor". Oh I get the excitement, but this will be MR's 3rd recruiting class. I think the first was unranked, second was #25, and what are we right now? 15? In May? Hardly the kind of thing you need to put plywood over the windows for but I get the excitement, but the rest of the world doesn't share it, sorry. Plus, none of these kids have even signed, I'd bet any amount of money you're comfortable with, out of all our current commits, they don't all sign on the dotted line. There will be $EC money in many of their futures, offers closer to home, moms and or dads who change their mind, a new girl a recruit hasn't even met yet who will be going to Washington and they want to follow. Again, I get the excitement, but a top 5? No.

 

[ellobo]

I'd say more like a probability of maybe 30%, with a probability of 11-20 more like 60%, and a ranking of greater than 20 10%. It really depends on trajectory. The momentum is good and that bodes well for landing the higher ranked guys. We are now ranked 10th for average stars (3.57) of teams that have 6 or more commits. The two teams that were close to that average star ranking in 2016 (LSU-3.54&Ole MS-3.58) both signed 24 kids. I don't know how many we plan to sign, but of the slots that count toward the rank, we basically need to average plus 3.6 to get a top ten ranking.

The star rating is not the indicator you need to look at in the current rivals formula. It technically doesn't even factor into the equation and really is just something for fan consumption to make it easier to digest. What is important is the RR ("Rivals Rating") which is on a scale of 6.1-5.2.

Rivals doesn't view all players with the same number of stars as the same. For example, Gebbia has a rating of 5.9 and gets bonus points for where he is ranked in the top 100/250. His current value is 155 points. McQuitty, as a 5.8 and outside of the R250, has a value of 105 points. 50 points might not seem like all that much but it adds up. For example: If a team had 10 Gebbias another team would need 15 McQuittys just to match them despite having the same exact star ranking.

Why they do that actually makes sense. Think in terms of the NFL: Does a 2nd round pick have the same value as a 7th rounder? In terms of Rivals numbers a 2nd round pick is a 4* (6.0 RR) and a 7th round pick would still be a 4* (among the top 253 players in the nation but with a 5.8 RR). Thus, how many of the 5.9+ players a school gets is really where programs start to separate themselves (in the rankings) from having a top 5 or 10 or 15 class. You used LSU as an example. Last year they landed 10 players with a 5.9 RR or greater. Right now NU has one. Nebcountry calculated what this current class would translate to with 20 players: 1983 points. LSU (at #5) had 2545. Thus it is going to take a good number (more than can be counted on one hand) of Gebbias (5.9+ players) to get into the top 5 discussion. Not saying it can't or won't happen...just trying to help make sense of how the system works.

 

[red rover 70]

The star rating is not the indicator you need to look at in the current rivals formula. It technically doesn't even factor into the equation and really is just something for fan consumption to make it easier to digest. What is important is the RR ("Rivals Rankings") which is on a scale of 6.1-5.2.

Rivals doesn't view all players with the same number of stars as the same. For example, Gebbia has a rating of 5.9 and gets bonus points for where he is ranked in the top 100/250. His current value is 155 points. McQuitty, as a 5.8 and outside of the R250, has a value 105 points. 50 points might not seem like all that much but it adds up. For example: If a team had 10 Gebbias another team would need 15 McQuittys just to match them despite having the same exact star ranking.

Why they do that actually makes sense. Think in terms of the NFL: Does a 2nd round pick have the same value as a 7th rounder? In terms of Rivals numbers a 2nd round pick is a 4* (6.0 RR) and a 7th round pick would still be a 4* (among the top 253 players in the nation). Thus, how many of the 5.9+ players a school picks is really where programs start to separate themselves (in the rankings) from having a top 5 or 10 or 15 class. You used LSU as an example. Last year they landed 10 players with a 5.9 RR or greater. Right now NU has one. Nebcountry calculated what this current class would translate to with 20 players: 1983 points. LSU (at #5) had 2545. Thus it is going to take a good number (more than can be counted on one hand) of Gebbias (5.9+ players) to get into the top 5 discussion. Not saying it can't or won't happen...just trying to help make sense of how the system works.

Thanks... and great post!

 

[TheBeav815]

The star rating is not the indicator you need to look at in the current rivals formula. It technically doesn't even factor into the equation and really is just something for fan consumption to make it easier to digest. What is important is the RR ("Rivals Rankings") which is on a scale of 6.1-5.2.

Rivals doesn't view all players with the same number of stars as the same. For example, Gebbia has a rating of 5.9 and gets bonus points for where he is ranked in the top 100/250. His current value is 155 points. McQuitty, as a 5.8 and outside of the R250, has a value 105 points. 50 points might not seem like all that much but it adds up. For example: If a team had 10 Gebbias another team would need 15 McQuittys just to match them despite having the same exact star ranking.

Why they do that actually makes sense. Think in terms of the NFL: Does a 2nd round pick have the same value as a 7th rounder? In terms of Rivals numbers a 2nd round pick is a 4* (6.0 RR) and a 7th round pick would still be a 4* (among the top 253 players in the nation). Thus, how many of the 5.9+ players a school picks is really where programs start to separate themselves (in the rankings) from having a top 5 or 10 or 15 class. You used LSU as an example. Last year they landed 10 players with a 5.9 RR or greater. Right now NU has one. Nebcountry calculated what this current class would translate to with 20 players: 1983 points. LSU (at #5) had 2545. Thus it is going to take a good number (more than can be counted on one hand) of Gebbias (5.9+ players) to get into the top 5 discussion. Not saying it can't or won't happen...just trying to help make sense of how the system works.

Whoa now, that's a lot of sense you're making...

 

[Archie Graham]

I feel ya Archie. I'm asking the question because of how the last four games changed the whole dynamic. After the Purdue game no one...NOT EVEN I SAW THIS RECRUITING TREMOR IN THE CARDS! Yet here we are. We've got four star recruits having fun Twitter conversations about us with other four star recruits. And other highly ranked players are taking notice. What if this year plays out in spades for us? How would that affect our ranking? Wow!

Our recruiting class is going to kick serious ass. No doubt about that. I just don't think it will be top five statistically with the way classes are calculated.

I'm as excited as anyone with the model/results in place right now. Our staff is kicking ass.

 

[Husker Sledge]

Maybe 10-15. 0% chance we're top 5.

There's never a 0 chance! Lol We somehow reel in a couple 5* things change real fast! With our WR, DL and LB coaches, anything is possible.

 

[huskerfan1414]

Top 15 for sure.
If we make top five it means we had a great season, which is what is most important.
Riley can bring them in, winning will get them signed. (Five star players I mean).

 

[jbt25]

I'm thinking top 15. but anything is possible.

I would agree at this point but also with this kind of a great start I would hope top 15 is worst we will do. I think we need to make it top 10 or better hopefully

 

[mwulf]

Is Riley best friends with the head of a recruiting service? If not then top 15 is probably more realistic

 

[rcnut223]

This is certainly a lot more fun to read and talk about than last years discussion on recruiting!

 

[nebcountry]

Maybe Corn would know better but I thought I heard we were going to grab a few more then 20?

20 is an educated guess, and it's only "good" for right now. February is quite a ways off and the number could be somewhat of a moving target based on players falling off the roster and scholarships awarded to walk-ons. Also, I'm not all that certain where the B1G stands on oversigning (meaning oversigning with or without due cause). So, ya, Corn or one of the others closer to the program would have a better number.

Could we finish with a top 5 or top 10 class, it's possible. We'd need to light it up, and I mean LIGHT IT UP as far as landing top recruits. I'll be happy with a top 20 class. My opinion, top 20 is a number we should be able to hit year-in and year-out. Anything better than 20th is icing on the cake to me. QB is the most important position by my reckoning, and Langsdorf has done a good job in getting players with potential. We need to see these qb's pan out, as well as the other recruits.

 

[jteten]

I just hope we keep pace with the rest of the perennial top 15 recruiting schools. 10-12 4 stars with an occasional sprinkle of a 5 star here or there is basically mandatory to keep up with the heavy hitters of recruiting. We havent had over 10 4 stars since 2011. We had a smaller class, or that one would have been a top 10 group. Its an incredibly tall task, but our staff is clearly going to give it a go.

 

[Nate004]

I just hope we keep pace with the rest of the perennial top 15 recruiting schools. 10-12 4 stars with an occasional sprinkle of a 5 star here or there is basically mandatory to keep up with the heavy hitters of recruiting. We havent had over 10 4 stars since 2011. We had a smaller class, or that one would have been a top 10 group. Its an incredibly tall task, but our staff is clearly going to give it a go.

If Nebraska ever wants to sniff championships on a regular level again, this has to be the goal.

 

[timnsun]

If Nebraska ever wants to sniff championships on a regular level again, this has to be the goal.

I gotta believe that it is a goal... It would be nice to see it as a reality as well.

 

[otismotis08]

Realistically, I'm thinking we'll finish somewhere around 15-20.
That is still a nice upward trend.

 

[baseball31ne]

Going to say 10-15 range. Will get two to three more top level talents and additionally several higkly starred players. Going to guess 1-5*, 10-4* and the rest highly ranked three star guys.

Just a feeling.

 

[TFrazier]

Realistically 10-15...anything higher than that would be unreal.

 

[jimbosc]

Top 15 would be great. Top 3 in B1G is the key measure.

 

[litespeedhuskerfan]

You're setting yourself up for disappointment to think we could hit a top 5 final ranking, but that doesn't mean we aren't kicking ass, because we are. Just not top 5 kicking ass, but realistically, how could anyone be disappointed with the staff's effort and results so far?

 

[nuiscool]

Nope.

 

[DudznSudz]

Here are my thoughts, and I'd appreciate feedback:

1.) I went back and did some research on Osborne and Solich's estimated class rankings, and they were consistently between 25-15. Lots of 3 stars, a smattering of 4 and 5 star players. Every now and then they'd land something even better, but that was very rare. This tells me that if we can consistently land the same, or better, we're going to do just fine.

2.) There was a really funny, well-written article about "The Last Team To Consistently Beat The SEC And What We Can Learn From Them: Nebraska" published by SB Nation a few years ago, and it did a great job of running through how Nebraska used to be so dominant:

- Unique, Consistent Identity: Run a very particular and very physical offense that few teams spent much time learning how to defend. Pair it with a bone-crushing defense. Also, over the course of like 30 years Nebraska had two, TWO coaches.
- Cannon Fodder: Have a huge pool of decent walk-ons from in-state and around the area that don't mind playing on the Scout teams and getting beat up by the starters just to make the program better, overall.
- Boyd Epley: Figured out that strength and conditioning, and getting specific players to do very specific tasks perfectly, was a key to success when you couldn't always recruit freak athletes to your program. He's kind of like the Moneyball guy that way.

3.) Now that the S&C advantages aren't what they used to be due to program parity (though having some of the best facilities in all of college football, still, helps a ton), and now that we're going to be running a balanced, pro-style attack, I think the emphasis needs to be on finding the absolute best players we can (duh), or players with tremendous upsides that we can coach up, and having them WANT to be here. I think the coaches understand this very well, which is why they are turning to social media, California players, and emphasizing the new, sunny identity of the program and its...let's just say "enthusiastic" fan base.

4.) I don't think we should be trying to out-recruit Ohio State or even Michigan. Ohio State has some of, if not the, best 500-mile radius recruiting range in the entire country. Michigan, under Harbaugh, is going to kind of be its own nut-ball show. I view us much more as being like Michigan State, a program that was developed and built patiently into having a strong identity and being able to field teams that can beat almost anyone due to player development, good coaching, and having a strong, mean identity. I actually view us as being able to do Michigan State better than Michigan State does in this respect. No disrespect to the Spartans, I just think we may be able to recruit better right now and thus field slightly better teams, on average, especially on offense (Sparty's D is probably going to always be freaking brutal).

 

[red rover 70]

You're setting yourself up for disappointment to think we could hit a top 5 final ranking, but that doesn't mean we aren't kicking ass, because we are. Just not top 5 kicking ass, but realistically, how could anyone be disappointed with the staff's effort and results so far?

In my eyes a top 10 ranking is equivalent to a 5 spot. And I say that because will probably grab two to three guys that are high two's to low 3's that this staff really likes. And of course they'll be under the national radar and we'll take a hit.