*** 2017 Recruiting ***

Well, I added Sarell and Greg Johnson (dreaming) to the list I already had in the calculator. Comparing it to the final scores from 2016, it would put us somewhere around 14-16.

 
Right on. I actually compared it to the current classes, so my comparison doesn't make much sense, since those teams will keep adding points.

I'd take anything under 20 in the rankings... Like I said though, we really just need to be in the top 20 for Avg. Star Ranking.

 
Using average star ratings doesn't make sense to me (among many things related to the pretend science around recruitnik sites).

If we have a class of 20 that is an average of 4*, but want to add 5 3*s, that would bring the average down. But that would also improve the depth of the class.

Seems like that's more important than having fewer recruits that are theoretically better prospects.

 
It isn't a factor of one being important and the other not. Different sites have the number of recruits mean more in the rankings than other sites.

For me, I would put them just about equal in importance. You can have 10-5 star players and think you have an absolute stud class. But, you have no depth. You can also have 30-3 star players and you have depth but no top end athleticism.

It has to be a combination of each.

 
What I like is the staffs ability to just look for and snag talented guys. Take Robert Porcher for example. Wasn't highly rated when we signed him and now he is a 4* recruit. Some of that may be from us signing him but I think he seems like a pretty good kid that will help our program.

Though this could be said for any recruiting class as they are often filled with hope and curiosity as to how they will perform as Huskers, I really do think we are bringing in quality recruits.

 
Mavric said:
15 commits on our way to (possibly) 24. I think we're looking for 1 RB, 2 WR, 1 OT, 1 DT, 1 DE, 1 LB, 2 CB and 1 S. We're within one commit of full at each spot except WR and CB. Would be handy to snag at least one DB and a WR pretty soon.

Priority:

DB - Our roster isn't in bad shape but we don't have any commits there yet.

RB - Roster in good shape but I'm not sure where we are on these recruits. Speculation we may not take one.

WR - Good with the two we have but we're after four and seem to be slipping with our top targets.

OT - Obviously need some talented depth here. For sure one more. May grab two.

-----------------------------------------

QB - 1 - TRISTAN GEBBIA

RB - 0-1 - Daniel Young, Alaric Williams, Nathan Tilford

FB - 1 - BEN MILES

WR - 4-5 - KEYSHAWN JOHNSON Jr., JAEVON McQUITTY, Jamire Calvin, Joseph Lewis, Isaiah Hodgins, Emmanuel Greene, Taariq Johnson, Jeremiah Holloman

TE - 2 - AUSTIN ALLEN, REESE LEITAO

OT - 3-4 - BRENDEN JAIMES, MATT SICHTERMAN, Aaron Banks, Austin Jackson, Foster Sarell, Chuck Filiaga

OG/C - 1 - BROC BANDO

DT - 3 - DEONTRE THOMAS, DEIONTAE WATTS, Damion Daniels, Noah Elliss

DE - 3 - ROBERT PORCHER, GUY THOMAS, Martin Andrus

LB - 3 - WILLIE HAMPTON, AVERY ROBERTS, Rahyme Johnson, Andrew Ward, Jaquan Henderson

CB - 2 - TraJon Cotton, Elijah Gates, Thomas Graham, Chevin Calloway, Quran Hafiz

S - 1 - Jaylen Kelly-Powell, Kamren Curl, Greg Johnson
Click to expand...
WR- Lewis, Calvin, Hodgins

OT- Sarrell

DT- Elliss

CB- Cotton and Hafiz

LB -Johnson

Safety/RB- Greg Johnson- might play him at both and could be a two for one guy due to the 85 limit- So he would play rb if need be but will primarily play safety and we have to flip him

One extra spot for 2018/ really good commit we can't pass up

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is there any consideration in evauating and comparing recruiting classes for perhaps adjusting by player position? For example, in my view, certain positions are more important to making a team better than others. Take this year's Huskers. If we had not had our three very fine DTs leave early, I believe we would have had a top 5 defense nationally as it has turned out. I think most would agree that a much stronger d line would have been a big upgrade by adding strong pass rush. We have plenty of interceptions and decent cover guys but we've given up plenty of passing yards because, in my opinion, we don't get the great pass rush. Add in the depth and push of those missing guys and we are 9-1 and don't lose to Ohio State by 59 (more like 35). Add in about 4 more 4 star plus offensive linemen and we give Ohio State a real game and likely score another 10 points a game offensively, making some of our games 'easy' or even semi-blow outs. This in turn gives the team the chance to play our starters 15 plays a game less getting very valuable experience and development to the back ups and youth. Having depth also means injuries to starters are likely reduced as they are not required to play as many snaps - the more snaps played the greater the probability of injury. IMO

I also might add that we all know that the team who wins the battle at the line of scrimmage wins 80% or more of the time. While it is great to have superstar WRs, TEs and RBs, a group of 3 star level WRs and RBs can be dam productive (good if not great) IF they have top linemen making big and lasting holes for them. You also are not so totally dependent on a QB who can literally run for his football life to avoid sacks and buy time to pass or run for something out of nothing.

Therefore, I would suggest that a great recruiting class needs great players in the 'right' places more so than just sheer numbers. One can have the top five WRs and top two RBs and top two TEs and number one CB, Safety and LB and still NOT be a truly great class if they all end up on team with poor line play. I don't know how one would calculate or tabulate this in your formulas but it seems a great class has to 'fill your needs' as much as have a great average star number.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
84HuskerLaw said:
Is there any consideration in evauating and comparing recruiting classes for perhaps adjusting by player position? For example, in my view, certain positions are more important to making a team better than others. Take this year's Huskers. If we had not had our three very fine DTs leave early, I believe we would have had a top 5 defense nationally as it has turned out. I think most would agree that a much stronger d line would have been a big upgrade by adding strong pass rush. We have plenty of interceptions and decent cover guys but we've given up plenty of passing yards because, in my opinion, we don't get the great pass rush. Add in the depth and push of those missing guys and we are 9-1 and don't lose to Ohio State by 59 (more like 35). Add in about 4 more 4 star plus offensive linemen and we give Ohio State a real game and likely score another 10 points a game offensively, making some of our games 'easy' or even semi-blow outs. This in turn gives the team the chance to play our starters 15 plays a game less getting very valuable experience and development to the back ups and youth. Having depth also means injuries to starters are likely reduced as they are not required to play as many snaps - the more snaps played the greater the probability of injury. IMO

I also might add that we all know that the team who wins the battle at the line of scrimmage wins 80% or more of the time. While it is great to have superstar WRs, TEs and RBs, a group of 3 star level WRs and RBs can be dam productive (good if not great) IF they have top linemen making big and lasting holes for them. You also are not so totally dependent on a QB who can literally run for his football life to avoid sacks and buy time to pass or run for something out of nothing.

Therefore, I would suggest that a great recruiting class needs great players in the 'right' places more so than just sheer numbers. One can have the top five WRs and top two RBs and top two TEs and number one CB, Safety and LB and still NOT be a truly great class if they all end up on team with poor line play. I don't know how one would calculate or tabulate this in your formulas but it seems a great class has to 'fill your needs' as much as have a great average star number.
Click to expand...
You'd have to adjust for every team's particular needs. No, this would be even more arbitrary than the system already is.

 
Mavric said:
15 commits on our way to (possibly) 24. I think we're looking for 1 RB, 2 WR, 1 OT, 1 DT, 1 DE, 1 LB, 2 CB and 1 S. We're within one commit of full at each spot except WR and CB. Would be handy to snag at least one DB and a WR pretty soon.

Priority:

DB - Our roster isn't in bad shape but we don't have any commits there yet.

RB - Roster in good shape but I'm not sure where we are on these recruits. Speculation we may not take one.

WR - Good with the two we have but we're after four and seem to be slipping with our top targets.

OT - Obviously need some talented depth here. For sure one more. May grab two.

-----------------------------------------

QB - 1 - TRISTAN GEBBIA

RB - 0-1 - Daniel Young, Alaric Williams, Nathan Tilford

FB - 1 - BEN MILES

WR - 4-5 - KEYSHAWN JOHNSON Jr., JAEVON McQUITTY, Jamire Calvin, Joseph Lewis, Isaiah Hodgins, Emmanuel Greene, Taariq Johnson, Jeremiah Holloman

TE - 2 - AUSTIN ALLEN, REESE LEITAO

OT - 3-4 - BRENDEN JAIMES, MATT SICHTERMAN, Aaron Banks, Austin Jackson, Foster Sarell, Chuck Filiaga

OG/C - 1 - BROC BANDO

DT - 3 - DEONTRE THOMAS, DEIONTAE WATTS, Damion Daniels, Noah Elliss

DE - 3 - ROBERT PORCHER, GUY THOMAS, Martin Andrus

LB - 3 - WILLIE HAMPTON, AVERY ROBERTS, Rahyme Johnson, Andrew Ward, Jaquan Henderson

CB - 2 - TraJon Cotton, Elijah Gates, Thomas Graham, Chevin Calloway, Quran Hafiz

S - 1 - Jaylen Kelly-Powell, Kamren Curl, Greg Johnson
Click to expand...
Any chance we look at a Juco at DE?

 
I kind of doubt it at this point. You'd really like to have a December grad and none seem to on the radar at this point. Seemed like Van Ginkel (sp?) was our one shot at that.

 
smurphy14 said:
If we get Isaiah Hodgins and Joseph Lewis,Do you think we take 5 WR's by getting Calvin or Holloman?
Click to expand...
Wowowow would that be a haul. Idk how to answer that. At the very least you'd be guaranteed to see the worst of the 5 transfer.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top