Callahan

eliot1171

eliot1171

New member
Myth: Bill Callahan strayed from the "Nebraska Way" and did away with the walk-on program.
Here's the cold-hard truth using nothing more than roster information readily available on-line.

(I'd like to thank BigRedWon for these roster numbers)

--1999: 194 [’99 media guide] *109

--2000: 155 [’00 media guide] *70

--2001: 149 [’01 media guide] *64

--2002: 138 [huskers.com roster] *53

--2003: 154 [huskers.com roster] *69

--2004: 121 [huskers.com roster] *36

--2005: 124 [huskers.com roster] *39

--2006: 125 [huskers.com roster] *40

--2007: 130 [huskers.com roster] *45

*assuming 85 scholarship players were on the roster, this number represents walk-on players.

Hmm. What happened to those 39 players who suddenly disappeared after Frank's second season?

How about the steady decline from 2000 to 2002?

And what's that? This year's squad only has 8 less players than the 2002 team?

The fact is, both Dr. Tom and Frank Solich said with the NCAA rules reducing the amount of graduate assistants allowed on a staff, the walk-on program HAD to be scaled back.

Yet Bill Callahan is the sole culprit for said changes.

If numbers say anything, Coach Callahn has been pretty consistent with the size of the squad.

In the meantime, lost in all this was the fact that walk-ons were seen more on the field because the previous staff put NU on self-imposed NCAA scholarship limitations.

Over the course of 6 seasons, the previous staff never offered a full class and in fact averaged only 20 scholarship players per class with 18 being the smallest and 22 being the highest. When the NCAA usually slaps a school with probation, they usually take away 3 scholarships.

NU averaged 2 less than a team who was actually on probation.

Saving the scholarships for walk-ons or having to use them out of necessity because of overly small classes and the inability to fill a full recruiting class?

In coach Callahan's 4 years, only his first class (put together in a month) resembled the "norm" of the previous staff. 18 scholaship players were offered in his first class.

Did he save those 7 scholarships to give to walk-ons? Nope. He offered 31 scholarships to make up for the small number of his intial class.

For his last two classes, NU offered 24 in 2005 and 28 in 2006 respectively.

Basically, what this all boils down to is what Steve Pederson alluded to when he talked about Frank being unable to recruit depth.

Frank recruited some decent players but handed out scholarships to walk-ons because he HAD no choice. Thus no depth.

Coach Callahan is giving walk-ons scholarships because they deserve it. In the meantime, you're seeing less walk-ons in the two and three deep because scholarship players occupy those spots. So it appears the walk-on player has been forgotten.

There's a big difference between having walk-ons because you need them and having walk-ons as a luxury.

Either way, the reduction in the number of walk-ons didn't start with the current staff but its easy to see why it looks that way.

Myth: Busted.
Click to expand...
 
papersun87 said:
Dan Erickson comes to mind . . .
Click to expand...
so does Todd Peterson, Rigoni, Eisenhart, Tiedtke, Ickes, Kadavy, etc.

As much as others would like to think, the "attrition" of the walk-on program is non-existent. After reading NUMEROUS articles with interviews from former and current walk-ons and the book by Kolowski, Callahan has done a good thing and is managing the walk-on program very well.

 
DJR313 said:
papersun87 said:
Dan Erickson comes to mind . . .
Click to expand...
so does Todd Peterson, Rigoni, Eisenhart, Tiedtke, Ickes, Kadavy, etc.

As much as others would like to think, the "attrition" of the walk-on program is non-existent. After reading NUMEROUS articles with interviews from former and current walk-ons and the book by Kolowski, Callahan has done a good thing and is managing the walk-on program very well.
Click to expand...
I think the walk-on program is actually stronger than it was. We actually have guys that will play and can play. Instead of 109 guys who eat for free at the training table.
 
DaveH said:
DJR313 said:
papersun87 said:
Dan Erickson comes to mind . . .
Click to expand...
so does Todd Peterson, Rigoni, Eisenhart, Tiedtke, Ickes, Kadavy, etc.

As much as others would like to think, the "attrition" of the walk-on program is non-existent. After reading NUMEROUS articles with interviews from former and current walk-ons and the book by Kolowski, Callahan has done a good thing and is managing the walk-on program very well.
Click to expand...
I think the walk-on program is actually stronger than it was. We actually have guys that will play and can play. Instead of 109 guys who eat for free at the training table.
Click to expand...
Zing! LOL! :rollin Funny, but true...

 
DaveH said:
DJR313 said:
papersun87 said:
Dan Erickson comes to mind . . .
Click to expand...
so does Todd Peterson, Rigoni, Eisenhart, Tiedtke, Ickes, Kadavy, etc.

As much as others would like to think, the "attrition" of the walk-on program is non-existent. After reading NUMEROUS articles with interviews from former and current walk-ons and the book by Kolowski, Callahan has done a good thing and is managing the walk-on program very well.
Click to expand...
I think the walk-on program is actually stronger than it was. We actually have guys that will play and can play. Instead of 109 guys who eat for free at the training table.
Click to expand...

:yeah

Absolutely true.

 
DaveH said:
I think the walk-on program is actually stronger than it was. We actually have guys that will play and can play. Instead of 109 guys who eat for free at the training table.
Click to expand...
Still..It would've been fun just to be a tackling dummy against these guys and be able to hit somebody.

Just wearing your practice cleats to bars would get you laid.

 
Back
Top