New WR?

egaRdeR

Redshirt Freshman
Oct 17, 2019
655
1,131
93
Can you explain how 160 players versus 95 players does not take reps, time, and focus away?
Maybe the GAs are giving them reps. Maybe they watch and listen and run with the scout team. Maybe the top two players get 80% and the rest is pushed down.

I am not saying it isn't a problem. But it might be much more minimal than a lot are trying to make it out.

The key is, we don't really know. At least the vast majority on here don't. I have yet to hear from anyone in here who knows for certain how they are splitting reps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OzzyLvr

Tuco Salamanca

Head Coach
Aug 18, 2016
11,558
16,320
113
Albuquerque
So if it is the 7 and 8 guys getting little to no reps and with GAs how does that impact the guys playing the game? What if those bottom 60 guys are running on the scout team and have little to no impact on the top players reps?

My point is simple, people WANT to make this a big deal when the vast majority are basing it on speculation. There are a lot of ways they can be handling reps and without knowing, I don't get how anyone can assess how much this is impacting the players in games.
So if 7 and 8 are getting little to no reps, why are they on the team?

There was a thread some time ago about this same subject. Someone did some legwork and found that most teams have between 110 and 125 players on their roster. What is the benefit you get by having 35 more players than every other team in America?
 

egaRdeR

Redshirt Freshman
Oct 17, 2019
655
1,131
93
So if 7 and 8 are getting little to no reps, why are they on the team?

There was a thread some time ago about this same subject. Someone did some legwork and found that most teams have between 110 and 125 players on their roster. What is the benefit you get by having 35 more players than every other team in America?
I don't really know or care to be honest. Maybe Frost uses them as tackling dummies.

My point is, are those 35 extra players really causing all the problems many are trying to proclaim?

I agree, there has to be a point of diminishing return on numbers of players. I don't know that point and to what extent it is causing. And really no one on here does. So people tend to over hype and justify why it is more impactful. And that is subjective. It is coming from trying to find THE reason we suck. There are many. And there are likely a number of solutions and combinations of solutions that would make improvement. Frost has to figure out some combination of those improvements to make us better.

Maybe it includes parsing down the walk on numbers. Maybe it doesn't. If we win more this year I don't really care how he does it. If we lose he needs to go. I don't care how we get there.
 

Tuco Salamanca

Head Coach
Aug 18, 2016
11,558
16,320
113
Albuquerque
I don't really know or care to be honest. Maybe Frost uses them as tackling dummies.

My point is, are those 35 extra players really causing all the problems many are trying to proclaim?

I agree, there has to be a point of diminishing return on numbers of players. I don't know that point and to what extent it is causing. And really no one on here does. So people tend to over hype and justify why it is more impactful. And that is subjective. It is coming from trying to find THE reason we suck. There are many. And there are likely a number of solutions and combinations of solutions that would make improvement. Frost has to figure out some combination of those improvements to make us better.

Maybe it includes parsing down the walk on numbers. Maybe it doesn't. If we win more this year I don't really care how he does it. If we lose he needs to go. I don't care how we get there.
But isn't that sort of the point of message boards? To discuss or "figure out" why we suck.

If I just want to read what Frost gives the media, I can do that without spending time on message board.

If the team is having issues with fundamental things after 3 plus years then there is a reason for it. I get that it isn't my job to find out why, but again, sort of the point of message boards.
 

dinglefritz

Nebraska Legend
Jan 14, 2011
28,513
24,320
113
But isn't that sort of the point of message boards? To discuss or "figure out" why we suck.

If I just want to read what Frost gives the media, I can do that without spending time on message board.

If the team is having issues with fundamental things after 3 plus years then there is a reason for it. I get that it isn't my job to find out why, but again, sort of the point of message boards.
You do remember how many guys Tom had on the roster including the walk ons right? Somehow Tom managed it and was able to get his guys to execute. I had fraternity brothers on the team when I was at NU. The roster was huge. GAs do the bulk of the work with the walk ons and those guys mainly get their shot in the spring when the roster size is pared down due to graduations.

At times both Callahan and Riley had trouble having practices because they didn't have enough healthy WRs. Frost had some similar issues early on before he increased the roster size. QB got to be an issue more recently for Frost due to QB injuries and transfers. Early spring enrollees help some with the depth in the spring but walk ons fill a lot of holes as guys have off season surgeries etc.
 

Tuco Salamanca

Head Coach
Aug 18, 2016
11,558
16,320
113
Albuquerque
You do remember how many guys Tom had on the roster including the walk ons right? Somehow Tom managed it and was able to get his guys to execute. I had fraternity brothers on the team when I was at NU. The roster was huge. GAs do the bulk of the work with the walk ons and those guys mainly get their shot in the spring when the roster size is pared down due to graduations.

At times both Callahan and Riley had trouble having practices because they didn't have enough healthy WRs. Frost had some similar issues early on before he increased the roster size. QB got to be an issue more recently for Frost due to QB injuries and transfers. Early spring enrollees help some with the depth in the spring but walk ons fill a lot of holes as guys have off season surgeries etc.
Yet every other school can do it with 125. Weird

1997 was a long time ago
 

dinglefritz

Nebraska Legend
Jan 14, 2011
28,513
24,320
113
Yet every other school can do it with 125. Weird

1997 was a long time ago
So you'll admit that it CAN be done? I do agree with you that it has to be tough to do justice to that many guys down the depth chart but man we've filled a lot of holes with guys nobody expected to move up the depth chart. Some of these kids especially from small schools you really don't know until you see them against D-1 competition. FWIW 160 does seem like a lot to me too so I'll give you that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OzzyLvr

ADV1

Walk On
Oct 26, 2018
343
484
63
Aledo, Texas
I wish I loved anything as much as Scott Frost loves adding players to the roster who have been plagued by injuries.
I get what you're saying but sometimes giving a guy a second chance pans out when they have the extra motivation that this is their last chance... Pete Carroll built the Seahawks team around this concept when he took over and it did well for him... He rolled through a ton of guys finding those gems... I can see this is why HCSF is doing what he is with guys like this as well as our walk on program...
 
  • Like
Reactions: OzzyLvr

Tuco Salamanca

Head Coach
Aug 18, 2016
11,558
16,320
113
Albuquerque
So you'll admit that it CAN be done? I do agree with you that it has to be tough to do justice to that many guys down the depth chart but man we've filled a lot of holes with guys nobody expected to move up the depth chart. Some of these kids especially from small schools you really don't know until you see them against D-1 competition. FWIW 160 does seem like a lot to me too so I'll give you that.
I would say most of the guys that came in as walk ons,that were contributed, were preferred walk on. The coaches knew who they were and those players got a better chance for more opportunity than rando walk on. You can go back 40 years and may be find 50 players that were complete surprises.
 
  • Like
Reactions: headcard

headcard

Nebraska Legend
Feb 2, 2005
35,210
30,027
113
I would say most of the guys that came in as walk ons,that were contributed, were preferred walk on. The coaches knew who they were and those players got a better chance for more opportunity than rando walk on. You can go back 40 years and may be find 50 players that were complete surprises.

I agree with this. There is an obvious value in getting walk-ons that contribute, but with the the NCAA limits on the number of coaches allowed on the practice field, having a massive 150+ roster doesn't seem practical.
 
Last edited:

dinglefritz

Nebraska Legend
Jan 14, 2011
28,513
24,320
113
I would say most of the guys that came in as walk ons,that were contributed, were preferred walk on. The coaches knew who they were and those players got a better chance for more opportunity than rando walk on. You can go back 40 years and may be find 50 players that were complete surprises.
The "preferred" term kind of makes me giggle. IF you were that preferred you would have gotten a scholarship. Obviously they knew about the kids and think they have potential if they let them walk on. I think virtually every year there's a guy that pops up that nobody was really expecting anything out of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: leodisflowers

Tuco Salamanca

Head Coach
Aug 18, 2016
11,558
16,320
113
Albuquerque
The "preferred" term kind of makes me giggle. IF you were that preferred you would have gotten a scholarship. Obviously they knew about the kids and think they have potential if they let them walk on. I think virtually every year there's a guy that pops up that nobody was really expecting anything out of.
A preferred walk on as someone who was actually recruited. They have different rules as far as when they can join the team and when they can begin practice. It separates the guys you think have a chance to actually play football at Nebraska from the guys that you don’t think will ever step foot on the field.

There is not one Rando walk on that pops up every year.
 

cubsker

Athletic Director
May 29, 2003
13,376
9,198
113
images

I'm definitely watching key and peele today. my all time favorite is:

 
  • Like
Reactions: timnsun

dinglefritz

Nebraska Legend
Jan 14, 2011
28,513
24,320
113
A preferred walk on as someone who was actually recruited. They have different rules as far as when they can join the team and when they can begin practice. It separates the guys you think have a chance to actually play football at Nebraska from the guys that you don’t think will ever step foot on the field.

There is not one Rando walk on that pops up every year.
There is not one "Rando" walk on allowed on the team. They're all recruited now to some degree. The difference is that the guys who they think have the most potential get called preferred and sometimes get added to the 105 roster for fall camp.
 

Tuco Salamanca

Head Coach
Aug 18, 2016
11,558
16,320
113
Albuquerque
There is not one "Rando" walk on allowed on the team. They're all recruited now to some degree. The difference is that the guys who they think have the most potential get called preferred and sometimes get added to the 105 roster for fall camp.
There are plenty of rando walk ons. Every year Nebraska has a class of about 25 announced walk ons. That means that basically 1 out of every 4 quits completely every year.

To me it is a quality vs quantity thing. Why not take the best 12 walk ons, average about 36 walk ons on the roster at any one time. Give them the best opportunity to compete and maximize the reps they get. Keep your roster at 120-125. There is the old adage at iron sharpens iron. I am sorry to say that player 160 isn't sharpening much iron.
 

egaRdeR

Redshirt Freshman
Oct 17, 2019
655
1,131
93
But isn't that sort of the point of message boards? To discuss or "figure out" why we suck.

If I just want to read what Frost gives the media, I can do that without spending time on message board.

If the team is having issues with fundamental things after 3 plus years then there is a reason for it. I get that it isn't my job to find out why, but again, sort of the point of message boards.
Of course we should discuss it. I am just calling out when people try to state things as facts and attribute that to why we fail. There is a lot of opinions stated. And those opinions are usually driven by emotions. People are pissed off about losing. I am too. But I try not to make up scenarios to justify my frustration.

There was already someone that is upset about our new AD. That hasn't been named. ****EDIT**** Has been named but wasn't who everyone was fretting over. But now we can all freak about it being Trev.

I am probably too literal. And like to play devil's advocate.
 
Last edited:

inWV

Defensive Coordinator
Sep 22, 2007
7,628
5,692
113
The "preferred" term kind of makes me giggle. IF you were that preferred you would have gotten a scholarship. Obviously they knew about the kids and think they have potential if they let them walk on. I think virtually every year there's a guy that pops up that nobody was really expecting anything out of.
There are kids coaches ask to walk on, and there are kids that want to walk on and some of these are allowed. The good walk ons provide depth in terms of special teams and the practice field. I wouldn't probably have a roster the size of Frost's, but I would want a kid to join the team if I thought he could help the program.
 

inWV

Defensive Coordinator
Sep 22, 2007
7,628
5,692
113
There are plenty of rando walk ons. Every year Nebraska has a class of about 25 announced walk ons. That means that basically 1 out of every 4 quits completely every year.

To me it is a quality vs quantity thing. Why not take the best 12 walk ons, average about 36 walk ons on the roster at any one time. Give them the best opportunity to compete and maximize the reps they get. Keep your roster at 120-125. There is the old adage at iron sharpens iron. I am sorry to say that player 160 isn't sharpening much iron.
So the issue is over about 30 extra roster spots. I don't see the upside to it either, but on the other hand, Frost et al. don't know for sure which kids will contribute out of the walk ons. A few of the kids are pretty decent athletes and end up on special teams. I would imagine that for about half of them, it doesn't take long to know they will never play a down of competitive football in a B1G stadium. But given that some people get their shorts in a bunch if the stories are that walk ons are getting treated poorly, the easy solution if you have the resources is to have a fatter walk on program than might be ideal.
 

dinglefritz

Nebraska Legend
Jan 14, 2011
28,513
24,320
113
There are kids coaches ask to walk on, and there are kids that want to walk on and some of these are allowed. The good walk ons provide depth in terms of special teams and the practice field. I wouldn't probably have a roster the size of Frost's, but I would want a kid to join the team if I thought he could help the program.
The kids allowed on though are evaluated. They aren't random kids who show up first day of practice and are issued a uniform. I would bet that 99% of kids who walk on at NU get some type of recruiting contact before they walk on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OzzyLvr