• 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 .

Nebraska over 300 offers for the 2021 class

ShortSideOption said:
Working?
Click to expand...

The class ranks seem pretty solid, the recruiting gurus have said some pretty flattering things about our classes and how we've filled some very specific needs, so I'm thinking that qualifies as working. The developing part is a little thin at the moment, but that too should be changing.

I'd also think it would be interesting to see how those needs and the offers from year to year reflected the focus on filling those specific positions we struggled with depth. If I know I'm thin at the OL, and coming in short or grabbing last minute questionable talent is going to sting me for a couple of years, I'm going to create as 'target rich environment' as possible. I'd be curious to see how Oregon recruited when Frost was around. They were not seen as one of the elites in the PAC when that program started to transition from Joke to Juggernaut. I don't know if there is data on how many actual offers they made, but this strategy almost has a 'Chip Kelly-I do things my way' feel to it.

I enjoy this discussion from a philosophical standpoint, and as a deeper look at how we are doing things a bit differently than some of our competitors, but in some ways it's coming across as a criticism, and I'm not seeing it as some glaring flaw.
 

Mack The Shark said:
How'd this recruiting class finish?
Click to expand...
Ah, was just curious your metric. I don’t think our recruiting class rankings has ever been the issue with why we struggle at Nebraska. We haven’t had a worse ranking comparative to anyone in our division since joining the B1G. But four stars flaming out (which gave us our high ranking) and transferring due to lack of fit is a major factor why we are massively depleted in certain areas. Thus making sure you are recruiting the right kids.
 
LarstheRed said:
I thought there was speculation that the commitment was only in the eyes of RJ, that the staff hadn't 'accepted' that commitment. I know you said that all offers are commitable, but I don't think that's the case, and I don't think that we aren't tiering those offers in some manner. I may have 7 guys on my board, but they sure as heck aren't all equal.

This notion that going with the 'target method', only offering a few to bring greater meaning to an offer sounds strangely like something Bo and Frank were known for, then left scrambling to pull in some last second 'reach', or a kid they hadn't really vetted well who liked smashing bottles on people's heads. I don't see how this tactic gains us much at this point. When we get left at the alter, as happens to all teams from time to time, do we really think players feel all special to be the Hail Mary late in the process? It's one thing to be told you are on our list to be a member of a pretty exclusive club, it's another to be told I got dump at the alter, but I still want to get married to someone...wanna be my someone?
Click to expand...
Curious why they let him still come up and visit after committing if it was only in RJs eyes. Also would be curious why they liked/retweeted his commitment And offer tweets, were they mocking him? “Look at this kid acting like he can commit here, let’s retweet it and throw on a like.”

All current offers are committable when they are made, thus why RJ jumped on his. Not a difficult concept. There’s a reason guys like Gifford are offered later in the process... tiers.
 
Last edited:
Hville said:
I agree on the open and honest part. That is the problem. Wisconsin can say we believe in you and what's his name. You are OUR targets and who we want and we can make the best for you. Nebraska has to say........well we are only taking the two best that we can get out of the 7. Now some will say that adds incentive for them to commit early. Some other recruits won't feel it the say way the feel it hearing from Wisconsin. I'd like to know which system leads to more recruits flipping. Right now we seem to be out recruiting the like's of Wisconsin and such but what good is it doing us?
Click to expand...
Gotta start developing the ones we get or that will become the biggest thing to hold against us in recruiting...just like the LB recruit Reed who signed with Wisconsin.
 



ShortSideOption said:
Ah, was just curious your metric. I don’t think our recruiting class rankings has ever been the issue with why we struggle at Nebraska. We haven’t had a worse ranking comparative to anyone in our division since joining the B1G. But four stars flaming out (which gave us our high ranking) and transferring due to lack of fit is a major factor why we are massively depleted in certain areas. Thus making sure you are recruiting the right kids.
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying here, but development has been a big problem across multiple staffs and maybe that falls on evaluation, but imo, I think it has more to do with a lack of consistency in scheme, staffing, and message.
 
ShortSideOption said:
Ah, was just curious your metric. I don’t think our recruiting class rankings has ever been the issue with why we struggle at Nebraska. We haven’t had a worse ranking comparative to anyone in our division since joining the B1G. But four stars flaming out (which gave us our high ranking) and transferring due to lack of fit is a major factor why we are massively depleted in certain areas. Thus making sure you are recruiting the right kids.
Click to expand...
I think the first year was an anomaly, caused by the late start and limited understanding of the needs of that team. And you are spot on we brought in too many who simply weren’t a good fit, but desperate time caused desperate measures. Last year was a good first step in addressing some of the needs on both sides of the ball. This year was fine tuning that even more. I’m frankly pleased with the growth of the recruiting process, and assume we will see it continue to mature in it’s processes.
 
Last edited:
ShortSideOption said:
Curious why they let him still come up and visit after committing if it was only in RJs eyes. Also would be curious why they liked/retweeted his commitment And offer tweets, were they mocking him? “Look at this kid acting like he can commit here, let’s retweet it and throw on a like.”

All current offers are committable when they are made, thus why RJ jumped on his. Not a difficult concept. There’s a reason guys like Gifford are offered later in the process... tiers.
Click to expand...

Actually it is a hard concept, and not one I'd be assuming is completely accurate unless confirmed by members of the staff. I'd love to see someone ask how the process works at the next presser, if anyone feels like tossing this in a reporters suggestion box. And if the staff did explain it in the manner you suggest, I'd like to know how we communicate our intentions to a kid like RJ. If we offer the guy at the top of our board, and he doesn't jump on it, you're suggesting we move on and offer the guy in the next tier. This all but guarantees we rarely if ever get our 1A top rated candidates, since those top guys seem to take a little longer to pull the trigger if you're not Alabama, OSU or Clemson. Even the guys who might be our 1B or 2A group might want some time to decide, so do we in short order move to the 2B or 3A tier? This just seems like an unlikely process. I guess it could be the normal procedure, but it would seem extremely ineffective, and put us in a position of pulling a healthy percentage of our offers last minute if the top guys held off for a public announcement.
 
Last edited:
What a great thread/discussion. Thanks, ***.

At this stage of the game, you do what you have/need to do to get what you want.

Answering objections should be in the wheelhouse of our recruiters.
Answering negative recruiting objections from others should be a slam dunk for our recruiters. Let them dig their own holes with negative recruiting.
In reality, 'committables' work both ways.....

NU has just about everything she needs to start closing the very top tier athletes....and keeping them closed. We will see.

They're doing a good job.... Like others, I'm more concerned about development......and, play calling, QB mental health, and a few other matters... lol

I'm still predicting this staff's landing their first 5 star this year.
 




bucktril said:
Sounds like the approach I used to take at the bars back in undergrad! Carpet bomb the place with offers and see which gal was beer-goggled enough (or desperate enough) to take home.
Click to expand...
The question is, how many 10s took you up on your offer?
 
Mack The Shark said:
I see what you're saying here, but development has been a big problem across multiple staffs and maybe that falls on evaluation, but imo, I think it has more to do with a lack of consistency in scheme, staffing, and message.
Click to expand...
I mean, the easy answer is it's a mix of everything. It's pretty simple to look at the transition class and see 5 of the 9 highest rated players already gone and chalk that up to evaluation. And it's better to find out before a kids senior year starts like we did with RJ Sorenson. I just wonder if there's a little validity to the "too many offers" talk if we parted ways with our first commit.

Scheme consistency, offseason training, and message to the players is the biggest hurdle we have had. We are year 3 now for all of those, there will be a noticeable difference in our play for 2020.
 



ShortSideOption said:
I mean, the easy answer is it's a mix of everything. It's pretty simple to look at the transition class and see 5 of the 9 highest rated players already gone and chalk that up to evaluation. And it's better to find out before a kids senior year starts like we did with RJ Sorenson. I just wonder if there's a little validity to the "too many offers" talk if we parted ways with our first commit.

Scheme consistency, offseason training, and message to the players is the biggest hurdle we have had. We are year 3 now for all of those, there will be a noticeable difference in our play for 2020.
Click to expand...

Let's just hope that's "noticeably better" and not "noticeably worse."
 
Last edited:
perhaps the RJ situation is as simple as higher rated DE's want in or hopes of landing said DE's look more promising? maybe wishful thinking.

One thing is certain, these relationships, evaluations & situations aren't static, they're dynamic (+ new position coaches)... all of this is somewhat of a gamble - not for the faint hearted.
 
Last edited:

Would like to see the coaches and staff get more into the business of development.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top