I recently lost some data that I had been compiling over the last few years (and I'm still pissed off about it 
). Anyway, what I was doing was taking the top 20 ranked players each year (according to their Rivals rankings) from the 22 Husker starters and calculating what their team total would be under the Rivals scoring system. Then I would determine how that team ranking of those starters compared to the final team rankings from the previous 5 cycles since that is the window from which the players signed. At the same time, I would determine the average team ranking for NU based on where they actually finished in the Rivals team ranking over that same five year period.
What I was tracking (and seeing) under the prior regime is that the team NU fielded each season (the named starters) generally was ranked well below where you'd expect based on the average final Rivals ranking of the classes actually signed. There were two very clear reasons for this oddity, imo. First, NU either didn't get to campus, didn't retain or failed to develop waaay too many of their highest rated recruits. Second, NU seemed to have a very large number of low to not-ranked players find a home in their starting roster.
So what I was seeing is that while NU may have had an average final class ranking of 22.4 over the 5 year period spanning the 2009-2012 cycles, the actual starters taking the field only compiled enough Rivals points to make them what would have been the 27th ranked class on average over that same 5 year period. So fielding a team that was approximately 5 spots worse that what their average team rankings told us they could've/should've been.
It was always a pet peeve of mine how "under-talented" the 22 starters were (according to Rivals) compared to the classes supposedly being signed. Frustrating, to say the least.
Moving on..., I've just recently started putting the initial numbers together for the projected starting Husker team this fall and what has most recently been a negative trend under the prior regime seems to be correcting itself (pretty quickly). It certainly isn't the final data, which can't be determined until we see which guys actually take the field, but for my early look, these are the projected starters I've included in the top 20:
Kalu, C.Jones, Gerry, A. Williams, Bando, Rose-Ivey, M. Newby, Freedom, Maurice, K. Davis, Knevel, Farmer, J. Foster, Gates, Carter, Westy, Morgan, Moore, T. Newby and Tommy. The two guys left out of the top 20 were Dzuris and Utter.
Clearly, Reilly could start over Moore but there is also a chance that Dzuris or Utter get beat out so the end result would likely be a wash. Again, the final tally won't be know until the team takes the field. There is a good chance that NU's total may still end-up including a NR player but by the same token, there is also a chance that Lee, Anderson, Neal, Decker, Dismuke or Lamar Jackson, etc become starters this season which would positively impact the projected team number.
With that said, these 20 projected starters and their Rivals rankings would combine to accumulate 1,913 team points which would've had them average out as the #19 class in the team rankings over the prior five cycles (2012-2016). Over that same span, NU actually averaged out as the #26 class in the final team rankings so the projected starters in 2016 will likely be playing approximately 6-7 spots ahead of their average team ranking as many more of the higher ranked recruits seem to be finding their way into the starting line-up.
As a fan, if you're looking for a reason to start believing that their is light at the end of the tunnel, I think that this is something that you can start looking towards. Should the trend for NU actually become that the higher ranked players go on to become starters, especially given the early returns on this staffs recruiting chops, then the Huskers will definitely be putting a better overall, and more competitive, product on the field.
Food for thought.
). Anyway, what I was doing was taking the top 20 ranked players each year (according to their Rivals rankings) from the 22 Husker starters and calculating what their team total would be under the Rivals scoring system. Then I would determine how that team ranking of those starters compared to the final team rankings from the previous 5 cycles since that is the window from which the players signed. At the same time, I would determine the average team ranking for NU based on where they actually finished in the Rivals team ranking over that same five year period.What I was tracking (and seeing) under the prior regime is that the team NU fielded each season (the named starters) generally was ranked well below where you'd expect based on the average final Rivals ranking of the classes actually signed. There were two very clear reasons for this oddity, imo. First, NU either didn't get to campus, didn't retain or failed to develop waaay too many of their highest rated recruits. Second, NU seemed to have a very large number of low to not-ranked players find a home in their starting roster.
So what I was seeing is that while NU may have had an average final class ranking of 22.4 over the 5 year period spanning the 2009-2012 cycles, the actual starters taking the field only compiled enough Rivals points to make them what would have been the 27th ranked class on average over that same 5 year period. So fielding a team that was approximately 5 spots worse that what their average team rankings told us they could've/should've been.
It was always a pet peeve of mine how "under-talented" the 22 starters were (according to Rivals) compared to the classes supposedly being signed. Frustrating, to say the least.
Moving on..., I've just recently started putting the initial numbers together for the projected starting Husker team this fall and what has most recently been a negative trend under the prior regime seems to be correcting itself (pretty quickly). It certainly isn't the final data, which can't be determined until we see which guys actually take the field, but for my early look, these are the projected starters I've included in the top 20:
Kalu, C.Jones, Gerry, A. Williams, Bando, Rose-Ivey, M. Newby, Freedom, Maurice, K. Davis, Knevel, Farmer, J. Foster, Gates, Carter, Westy, Morgan, Moore, T. Newby and Tommy. The two guys left out of the top 20 were Dzuris and Utter.
Clearly, Reilly could start over Moore but there is also a chance that Dzuris or Utter get beat out so the end result would likely be a wash. Again, the final tally won't be know until the team takes the field. There is a good chance that NU's total may still end-up including a NR player but by the same token, there is also a chance that Lee, Anderson, Neal, Decker, Dismuke or Lamar Jackson, etc become starters this season which would positively impact the projected team number.
With that said, these 20 projected starters and their Rivals rankings would combine to accumulate 1,913 team points which would've had them average out as the #19 class in the team rankings over the prior five cycles (2012-2016). Over that same span, NU actually averaged out as the #26 class in the final team rankings so the projected starters in 2016 will likely be playing approximately 6-7 spots ahead of their average team ranking as many more of the higher ranked recruits seem to be finding their way into the starting line-up.
As a fan, if you're looking for a reason to start believing that their is light at the end of the tunnel, I think that this is something that you can start looking towards. Should the trend for NU actually become that the higher ranked players go on to become starters, especially given the early returns on this staffs recruiting chops, then the Huskers will definitely be putting a better overall, and more competitive, product on the field.
Food for thought.
