The service academies will never land top 20 recruiting classes, ever. Because of their self imposed restrictions they shouldn't even be compared to anyone else.
What did we learn-Wyoming edition
- Thread starter JJ Husker
- Start date
Totally agree with this.BlitzFirst said:
The service academies can't recruit 300 lb fat linemen because of height/weight restrictions imposed by the military. You can get a waiver if your BMI shows a low fat content (weight lifters that pack on muscle for instance) but there is no such waiver for someone with a beer gut. They have other restrictions and disadvantages as well. How many kids want to go play for a service academy and then have to serve in the military for an extended period. (How long depends on your career path.)
I think you're exactly right. And it makes people really uncomfortable to admit that NU is holding similar stacked cards relative to the top 20 programs in the country. That ego protectionism is why there's so much resistance to being a "gimmick" or "high school" offense, which is unfortunately how some still view even TO's system.
Last edited by a moderator:
Landlord
Banned
1. There's no evidence that he would or wouldn't have ever had a 7-6 season here. He built a program from scratch with no facilities, history, or talent, and the results would have obviously been different at a different school. If he did have that season, in the manner that MSU did with 5 single digit losses to good teams, after back to back eleven win seasons, though, there's no way he'd be fired.
2. Bo's approach might have been similar, but his results weren't. One easy example - he's never given up a 50+ point game, ever.
3. Makes Bo look like a saint? In what capacity? Sure, he's abrasive, but the worst he gets is being terse, short, and cold, instead of explosive, raging and screaming. I guess Bo suffers from leaked audio tapes of explicit rants that Dantonio doesn't, but hey, I mean, maybe he still calls his AD a c*** behind closed doors too.
Last edited by a moderator:
Red Five
New member
Not true at all
LT 6'5" 290 / 6'4" 281
LG 6'7" 300 / 6'3" 297
C 6'1" 295 / 6'2" 271
RG 6'4" 295 / 6'3" 294
RT 6'9" 315 / 6'4" 300
Avg 6'5" 299 / 6'3" 289
http://www.huskers.com/SportSelect.dbml?SPSID=4&SPID=22
http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/navy/sports/m-footbl/auto_pdf/2016-17/depth_chart_event/depth_chart.pdf
Last edited by a moderator:
I forget that I have to be hyper precise with every statement. Let's look at this way. In terms of weight, here's how the 10 players rank:
NU
NU - Navy (equal)
Navy
NU
NU
Navy
NU
Navy
Navy
The minor difference noted above in weight and height hardly "destroys" the argument that Navy has more than one option when it comes to running an offense.
People act as though Navy has dwarfs on their OL. That's simply not the case.
NU
NU - Navy (equal)
Navy
NU
NU
Navy
NU
Navy
Navy
The minor difference noted above in weight and height hardly "destroys" the argument that Navy has more than one option when it comes to running an offense.
People act as though Navy has dwarfs on their OL. That's simply not the case.
The Dude
New member
Count 'Bility
Banned
Looking at navys records that last decade and seeing a lot of 9-x and 8-x and seeing CM's constant obsession with Bo Pelini, I have finally made the connection here.
None of my argument is false - you are just hyper attentive to minor throwaway statements.
If I'd simply said, "Navy's OL is approximately the same size as Nebraska's," what would you argue?