I knew Dennis Claridge quite well ... as he was my orthodontist -- and I had TWO sets of braces under Dr. Claridge! I heard more than a few Cornhusker tales with the countless hours over multiple years, while Dr. Claridge probed my mouth.
-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
HuskerMax readers can save 50% on Omaha Steaks .
Devaney and Frost
- Thread starter we're back
- Start date
I knew Dennis Claridge quite well ... as he was my orthodontist -- and I had TWO sets of braces under Dr. Claridge! I heard more than a few Cornhusker tales with the countless hours over multiple years, while Dr. Claridge probed my mouth.
I'll stand by my statement. Yes, Alabama is the outlier, but the rest of the field has normalized.
20 years ago, you had a CHASM of difference between schools like Nebraska, Florida State or Miami versus teams like Kansas or Indiana. Today, there's much more parity in the middle of the pack. Sure, the ultra-rich got a little richer, but a lot of teams in the middle have gotten vastly more competitive.
That's really cool..........I knew Dennis Claridge quite well ... as he was my orthodontist -- and I had TWO sets of braces under Dr. Claridge! I heard more than a few Cornhusker tales with the countless hours over multiple years, while Dr. Claridge probed my mouth.
There has always (since I've followed CFB since 1962) been about 10 teams with a shot at the title, and a second group of 10-20 that were competitive with each other and, on occassion could upset the big boys. The top group seems smaller than ever right now...maybe 6-8 teams that could win it all. The second group might be a bit bigger, but not much. The rest all stink as they always have. I see very little difference in CFB from the 60's through current...the big difference being that we haven't been in the top group for many years, and we aren't even in the second group anymore.
Your trolling act is growing old. Maybe you should try NOT to be back.
Teams had 105 scholarships and could lock potential star players up in a scholarship. With 85 your potential for finding star players dropped about 25%. There are only so many truly elite athletes and social media funnels them into fewer programs than ever before. But IMHO the coaching depth speaks volumes for Alabama. Not too many teams have so many years of experience as head coaches in one staff. Urban took a similar path putting his crew together.
I recall Barry Switzer once saying that he'd offer scholarships to the Top 10 running backs and just plan to bench 8 of them so they didn't wind up on the rosters of Texas or Nebraska.
I don't buy the parity excuse.
This isn't the same situation it was in 1962.
This isn't the same situation it was in 1962.
Parity is an excuse for not getting it done. Great coaching and systems are what allowed Nebraska to rise above parity for almost forty years
Yep. There are articles from Sports Illustrated from the 80s and 90s talking about parity.
Devaney is on record that he was pleasantly surprised at how much talent was on that first team in ‘62.
I came across on article with longtime assistant John Melton. Here’s what he had to say:
https://journalstar.com/sports/colu...cle_f26edbf5-1c0a-5582-bd7e-8ee9d00f0cbf.html
The talent and depth probably isn’t currently where it was when Devaney arrived, but the crisis of confidence rings familiar. Frost and staff are still searching for the right levers.
I’d attribute it mostly to experience. Devaney had 5 years at Wyoming before moving on to NU.
I came across on article with longtime assistant John Melton. Here’s what he had to say:
https://journalstar.com/sports/colu...cle_f26edbf5-1c0a-5582-bd7e-8ee9d00f0cbf.html
The talent and depth probably isn’t currently where it was when Devaney arrived, but the crisis of confidence rings familiar. Frost and staff are still searching for the right levers.
I’d attribute it mostly to experience. Devaney had 5 years at Wyoming before moving on to NU.
Last edited:
There's lots more to the Devaney story than just some talent on hand and "giving" them confidence. If it's that easy, then Frost should've gotten that part done by now. One thing Devaney did, was to drastically reduce the length of practices, which were very long under Jennings. He bonded with the players through sheer personality, and even his earliest teams would do anything they could not to disappoint him. For example, they knew how important it was to Devaney to beat Michigan (Bob's home state) at the "Big House" in just his second game with the program, and they got it done. This cast of losers turned into winners, not on their own, but they were crafted by Devaney and his staff...fast.
Last edited:
MartyHuskerFan
Tired and True
Its a tough moment in history to try to debate the differences between Frost and Devaney. That makes it too easy label Frost as a failure and make a list of reasons to hate on him. I think that conversation is about 5 years premature. Give him some time. We are hoping that they are actually real close to breaking through and that they will turn it around for next season. Then the comparison may look a lot different. I am not sure how many on this board are old enough to fairly discuss what occurred in the early years of Devaney. I am 57 and I think I am about 10 years too young. So, I yield the Devaney topic to those who are 70+. I am sure their are a few of you on here, have at it.
As for Parity. I think that thought is spot on! Parity! It may not be as simple as all of that, but I know some sort of parity is a fair factor to consider. I know for many years the huskers had only the Sooners and a bowl game to be concerned about, and their average margin of victory seemed to be 50 points. I definitely would not call that parity. The scholarship limits, the shared information and technology via the internet etc..., the conference realignments, the massive TV coverage for all teams, the money money money. Nebraska is on a level playing field now. They need to rely on the three things that make them unique. Traditions, culture and the walk-on program.
If you are right about there being no parity and that Nebraska is just outside of the top two tiers, the question still remains about what are they missing now that they were able to have before. I think all the same factors mentioned above are still in play whether you call it parity or you just call it Nebraska's fall from grace.
The unique walk-on program will be what delivers the huskers again. There are many who dont understand this and we could devote a whole thread to this debate. Its about culture and putting the guys who have heart into the core of the program. Sure some walk-ons do rise to the top, and we should celebrate them. But, more importantly, all the others are pushed and taught by the walk-ons. The others aren't allowed to play on their past laurels. The 4-star guys are forced to realize their true potential, instead of stay at the 4-star high school level where they started. Walk-ons will come regardless of the cost to them. That is another amazing thing that some do not understand. GBR
As for Parity. I think that thought is spot on! Parity! It may not be as simple as all of that, but I know some sort of parity is a fair factor to consider. I know for many years the huskers had only the Sooners and a bowl game to be concerned about, and their average margin of victory seemed to be 50 points. I definitely would not call that parity. The scholarship limits, the shared information and technology via the internet etc..., the conference realignments, the massive TV coverage for all teams, the money money money. Nebraska is on a level playing field now. They need to rely on the three things that make them unique. Traditions, culture and the walk-on program.
If you are right about there being no parity and that Nebraska is just outside of the top two tiers, the question still remains about what are they missing now that they were able to have before. I think all the same factors mentioned above are still in play whether you call it parity or you just call it Nebraska's fall from grace.
The unique walk-on program will be what delivers the huskers again. There are many who dont understand this and we could devote a whole thread to this debate. Its about culture and putting the guys who have heart into the core of the program. Sure some walk-ons do rise to the top, and we should celebrate them. But, more importantly, all the others are pushed and taught by the walk-ons. The others aren't allowed to play on their past laurels. The 4-star guys are forced to realize their true potential, instead of stay at the 4-star high school level where they started. Walk-ons will come regardless of the cost to them. That is another amazing thing that some do not understand. GBR
MartyHuskerFan
Tired and True
Parity is not an excuse for not getting it done. Its an explanation for why 'getting it done' may look different than it did back when 80% of the games were won by 50 points. (exaggeration alert) Frost may get it done and only have an average winning margin of 14 points. He may get it done but still lose 4-5 games in the down years. Parity will explain those things.
I'm reading this book about Bob Devaney by Bob Devaney right now. There's lots of fascinating and funny stories/history about Nebraska football. When I'm finished if any members would like to read it then pass it on let me know. I'll donate it to further enlighten some Bob Devaney fans... BTW It's copyright 1981....
BTW It's copyright 1981....