Does NU have a chance in the B1G West?

BaytownHusker said:
I hate to say it and sound like I'm drinking the Kool aide BUT. The way this defense is playing the only B1G team that really scares me is Michigan. 

Iowa Offense is terrible. We can stop Wisconsin run game and force them to pass.  I can see a 1st,2nd or 3rd finish for the west for our Huskers.
Click to expand...
Our defense (and more specifically, our rush defense) has passed every test they have been given so far this year.  Yes, Colorado scored quite a few points, but our offense was pathetic with turnovers putting them in bad situations.

This game is the test to see really how good they are.  Hopefully, this isn't a game where HH and the offense becomes a turnover machine again and they can at least sustain a some drives.

I'm excited to see what our defense can do in this game.  I'm not going to be shocked or upset if Michigan puts up a bunch of points because that's what everyone expects.  But....maybe they are as good as their stats show.  If so....that will be fun to watch and be a good indication as to how the rest of the year could go.

 
PasstheDamnBallGuy said:
I just had to go check on that final score after reading your post. I turned that game off assuming it over way early. How did Minnesota lose that game? 
Click to expand...
Simple answer?  They suck.

The talent gap between the worst team in the west and the "best" team in the west is so thin that it ultimately doesn't matter.

Right now, NU is still starting two (former) walk-on LBers.  In a P5 conference at a school with all the support and resources in the world. 

Minny had to get a transfer from a MAC school to play RB for them and over the last 5 years have recruited 1 QB.

Wisky took a 5 star QB and turned him into a lame QB and then took a QB from SMU that passed for like 4000 yards last year but will be lucky to pass fr 2500 yards this year because they have no idea what they want to do on offense now.

 
teachercd said:
Right now, NU is still starting two (former) walk-on LBers.  In a P5 conference at a school with all the support and resources in the world. 
Click to expand...
Reimer and Bullock are great personal stories for working hard and persevering and developing into “starting LB’s” at NU. But, you are right, NU needs better talent identification and development from recruiting.  Losing Haussmann hurts, because he was a super athlete who also could make plays on the field. Of course, he’s seeing the field for a top 5 team in the country. You know Michigan coaches were in his ear after the game last November. 

 
ColoradoHusk said:
Reimer and Bullock are great personal stories for working hard and persevering and developing into “starting LB’s” at NU. But, you are right, NU needs better talent identification and development from recruiting.  Losing Haussmann hurts, because he was a super athlete who also could make plays on the field. Of course, he’s seeing the field for a top 5 team in the country. You know Michigan coaches were in his ear after the game last November. 
Click to expand...
"Hey...hey...you...a guy from our school is going to be sliding into your DM's in about 3 weeks, shhhhhhh, don't tell anyone"

 
ColoradoHusk said:
Reimer and Bullock are great personal stories for working hard and persevering and developing into “starting LB’s” at NU. But, you are right, NU needs better talent identification and development from recruiting.  Losing Haussmann hurts, because he was a super athlete who also could make plays on the field. Of course, he’s seeing the field for a top 5 team in the country. You know Michigan coaches were in his ear after the game last November. 
Click to expand...
Good post. That's the one thing that I think at times has gotten lost in translation or even romanticized about the walk-on program around here.

It's great to see a walk-on persevere in a strong system surrounded by talent and emerge as a key contributor. But, I think it's another thing entirely when walk-ons earn starting roles out of necessity due to a lack of talent acquisition and development.

 
Enhance said:
Good post. That's the one thing that I think at times has gotten lost in translation or even romanticized about the walk-on program around here.

It's great to see a walk-on persevere in a strong system surrounded by talent and emerge as a key contributor. But, I think it's another thing entirely when walk-ons earn starting roles out of necessity due to a lack of talent acquisition and development.
Click to expand...


There are even a few walk-ons who just blow past what we thought their ceiling was, like Spencer Long. And I think Reimer (when healthy) is closer to that than just a decent role player who can be successful surrounded by talent. But I have not seen a whole lot from Bullock, that does feel like a scenario where he would be fine as a rotational piece but is overmatched as a starting Big Ten LB. And more walk-ons fit in that bucket than the one where they truly turned into above average players. 

 
Enhance said:
Good post. That's the one thing that I think at times has gotten lost in translation or even romanticized about the walk-on program around here.

It's great to see a walk-on persevere in a strong system surrounded by talent and emerge as a key contributor. But, I think it's another thing entirely when walk-ons earn starting roles out of necessity due to a lack of talent acquisition and development.
Click to expand...
There is such a big range of situations here that I fail to see how someone can generalize.  We have had walkons that have started because the scholarship players at that position didn't work out and they have been OK to average.  We have also had walkons that have started where people THINK they are in the previous group and they turn out to be great players and actually go off and have good NFL careers.

Obviously, we would love to have 4-5 star players at every position meeting all the expectations there are with those types of recruits.  Fact is, that's not where we are at.  I just cringe though when I see people make comments like...."well, we have a walkon starting so that obviously sucks".  Not all walkons are great and not all walkons suck.

 
BigRedBuster said:
Obviously, we would love to have 4-5 star players at every position meeting all the expectations there are with those types of recruits.  Fact is, that's not where we are at.  I just cringe though when I see people make comments like...."well, we have a walkon starting so that obviously sucks".  Not all walkons are great and not all walkons suck.
Click to expand...
I don't follow recruiting that closely, but based on final rankings, NU has had to have plenty of 4-star recruits and a few 5-stars.  The problem is they have either been overrated out of HS, or haven't been developed by previous staffs. 

There seems to be a lot of 4/5-star players that dominate in HS because they are superior athletes, but don't put in the work to improve when they get to college and everyone is athletically equal (or better).  Even Lebron James and Usain Bolt had to work their a$$es off when they got to the world stage.  I know neither of them went to college, but it's the same principle.  It's not always about talent, there has to be a drive to improve too.  Lamar Jackson when he was at Louisville had a huge arm and great running ability as a freshman, but didn't complete 55% of his passes and only had a 12/8 TD/Int rate.  He worked his tail off in the offseason and won the Heisman as a sophomore.  His completion percentage didn't increase by a huge amount (56.2%), but his TD/Int rate went to 30/9. 

I'm not saying NU has a Lebron/Usain/Lamar kind of player on their roster, but the players they do have need to have the internal drive to improve.  It can't always be on the coaches and they can't only rely on their natural talent.

 
ECisGod said:
I don't follow recruiting that closely, but based on final rankings, NU has had to have plenty of 4-star recruits and a few 5-stars.  The problem is they have either been overrated out of HS, or haven't been developed by previous staffs. 

There seems to be a lot of 4/5-star players that dominate in HS because they are superior athletes, but don't put in the work to improve when they get to college and everyone is athletically equal (or better).  Even Lebron James and Usain Bolt had to work their a$$es off when they got to the world stage.  I know neither of them went to college, but it's the same principle.  It's not always about talent, there has to be a drive to improve too.  Lamar Jackson when he was at Louisville had a huge arm and great running ability as a freshman, but didn't complete 55% of his passes and only had a 12/8 TD/Int rate.  He worked his tail off in the offseason and won the Heisman as a sophomore.  His completion percentage didn't increase by a huge amount (56.2%), but his TD/Int rate went to 30/9. 

I'm not saying NU has a Lebron/Usain/Lamar kind of player on their roster, but the players they do have need to have the internal drive to improve.  It can't always be on the coaches and they can't only rely on their natural talent.
Click to expand...
That is where the culture in the program becomes important.  We have recruited enough 4 star players to be better than we have been. But...it takes a program to still develop them, the right attitude from the player to be coachable and a team that holds everyone accountable.

I know of a player that was on the team (lineman) when Solich was fired.  When BC came in, he recruited some top stud player.  He shows up in the summer to lift and the team started holding him accountable because he wasn't putting in max effort and skipping workouts.  The coaching staff got all over the other players trying to hold him accountable and told them to lay off.

That was the first time this particular player that I know knew the program was going in the tank.  

We have got to get back to every player at every position working their asses off for coaches that know how to develop players and holding each other accountable.

 
After Week 4 (still some preseason priors built into the models that will get phased out over the next couple weeks)

Nebraska #59 in SP+ / #65 in FPI

Minnesota #54 / #50
Colorado #79 / #68
N. Illinois #121 / #111
Louisiana Tech #111 / #114
Michigan #1 / #12
Illinois #52 / #54
North­western #93 / #72
Purdue #77 / #67
Michigan St #63  / #59
Maryland #33 / #30
Wisconsin #27 / #27
Iowa #39 / #38

I wouldn't be surprised if we are sitting at 4-2 in conference (with a bowl bid wrapped up) and controlling our own destiny in the West going into the Maryland game. 

Conversely, I also wouldn't be surprised if we are 2-4 in conference going into the Maryland game.

 
Red Five said:
According to ESPN FPI (not sure how good it is after just 3 weeks, I mean it has Alabama at ranked #3), here are the chances to win the West: 

Iowa 37.5% 

Wisconsin 32.1%

Minnesota 12.1%

Illinois 9.0%

Purdue 5.1%

Nebraska 2.6%

Northwestern 1.7%
Click to expand...


FPI Chance to win the West after week 4:

Wisconsin 59.7%

Iowa 23.2%

Illinois 7.6%

Minnesota 4.8%

Northwestern 2.0%

Nebraska 2.0%

Purdue 0.7%

 
Red Five said:
FPI Chance to win the West after week 4:

Wisconsin 59.7%

Iowa 23.2%

Illinois 7.6%

Minnesota 4.8%

Northwestern 2.0%

Nebraska 2.0%

Purdue 0.7%
Click to expand...


Obviously there's time for teams to adapt and come together, but right now I think Iowa would beat Wisconsin straight up. Mordecai tries to be a gunslinger, and if he doesn't reign it in he'll throw several picks and Iowa would probably take at least one to the house. But Iowa (like every team here) is just very beatable. Nothing would shock me here, I just think Wisconsin's offense is way behind where they expected to be and Iowa is fully capable of exploiting that.

 
Dr. Strangelove said:
The strategy of all the West teams is to "develop" a bunch of 3* receivers and QBs, which then go get dominated by teams that recruit actual talent. Being a "development" program is really difficult. 
Click to expand...


Maybe you meant it this way, but it's a bit of a generalization. There are Rashod Bateman's out there that were 4 star players that really helped their team rise above their expected performance.

But also, why'd you put "develop" in quotations?    :)    Genuinely asking. That's a good thing right? Again looking at Minnesota, you have a guy like Mo Ibrahim who was a 3* player that turned into something pretty special.

Damn. I kind of regret giving Minnesota props two times in one post.

 
Undone said:
Maybe you meant it this way, but it's a bit of a generalization. There are Rashod Bateman's out there that were 4 star players that really helped their team rise above their expected performance.

But also, why'd you put "develop" in quotations?    :)    Genuinely asking. That's a good thing right? Again looking at Minnesota, you have a guy like Mo Ibrahim who was a 3* player that turned into something pretty special.

Damn. I kind of regret giving Minnesota props two times in one post.
Click to expand...
I put "develop" in quotations because it's an over used phrase that literally 50 teams across the country try and do. They all recruit low rated 3* players and coaches at 50 P5 schools believe they will develop them into being solid players, but it happens very few times and it's extremely difficult to pull off and sustain. The ability to develop 3* players into All-Conference caliber players is extremely difficult and the ability of Strength and Conditioning to make up the talent gap is greatly overstated by fans.

It's also hard to tell how good programs are at development and if they do anything special to help their players. Mo Ibrahim was a really good player and was not properly rated - but was it because PJ Fleck "developed" him or was Ibrahim already a good player and just didn't go to camps in high school/went to a small high school/or grew into his body a little later than other highly ranked players? Similarly, Matt Campbell got lucky and found Brock Purdy; is Matt Campbell good at developing him or did he just get lucky and find a really good player?

At the end of the day, good coaches are going to recognize what players they have and try to put them in the best spots to succeed. Scott Frost was bad at this, while PJ Fleck, Kirk Ferents, etc. are good at this. But those coaches still don't have any talent to work with and it's important to understand that no amount of weight lifting, nutrition, recovery programs, etc. are going to make Iowa/Wisconsin/etc. receivers as good as what Ohio State plucks out of high school. It's why they go get the doors blown off them when they play each other most of the time.

 
Back
Top