Evaluating where Iowa is

Nebraska has many of the same obstacles faced by Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Utah, Boise State, Virginia Tech, and other schools that have built winning programs recently. Other teams that have all the advantages we want, including UCLA, Texas, and Florida State have strung together some pretty crappy seasons across multiple coaches. We have to be a little more clever, but it's not like there's no way back for teams not in Ohio or Alabama.

I actually think the recent development of downtown Lincoln helps our case with recruits, coaching staffs and their wives. Gotta stop thinking small and humble. 

 
swmohusker said:
Iowa has had some talent.  You can almost make the argument that they underachieve for the talent they have on the roster.  
Click to expand...




Nah. The talent they have they hand crafted in a way that maximizes the least. They overachieve because the talent they have on the roster wasn't there at the start. 

 
BigPeterJ said:
Iowa has been decent for a long time now and sometimes very good.  And its very hard to beat them in a rivalry game, in Iowa City.  That was one hell of a win by Bo.  I dont even think Eichorst believed what he was saying.  They do have much better talent than their recruiting rankings.  They are getting some skill guys too. That freshman RB they got already looks very good.  
Click to expand...
 How do you quantify that they have much better talent than their recruiting rankings? I'm curious what you base that statement on.

I'll buy that they have done a better job developing players and that they know what they are and what they want to do but "much better talent"....based on what?

 
JJ Husker said:
 How do you quantify that they have much better talent than their recruiting rankings? I'm curious what you base that statement on.

I'll buy that they have done a better job developing players and that they know what they are and what they want to do but "much better talent"....based on what?
Click to expand...
They just look like better athletes than we have.  We called a bad game, and AM played bad, but we played harder than any other game of the year.   Iowa has some talent, and their freshman RB looked really good.  Something we havent been able to say ourselves.  Nebraska hasn't had a good RB in a while.

 
BigPeterJ said:
They just look like better athletes than we have.  We called a bad game, and AM played bad, but we played harder than any other game of the year.   Iowa has some talent, and their freshman RB looked really good.  Something we havent been able to say ourselves.  Nebraska hasn't had a good RB in a while.
Click to expand...
I won't dispute any of that. We can say they've played better, been more productive, have developed better, have beaten us, outcoached us and all kinds of other things. But you can't say they have much better talent than us. That simply isn't true. Their talent is what their rankings say it is. They've just done more with what they have.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Landlord said:
Their recruiting rankings? Or their end of season top 25 rankings or what?
Click to expand...
The statement he made was that they have much better talent than their recruiting rankings. My point was that their talent is what it is, they simply have developed and done more with what they have. Unless somebody has developed a newfangled measure of talent? Or maybe he’s going off “the eye test”  :dunno

 
Undone said:
According to the recruiting site rankings, I'm pretty sure we've "out-recruited" Iowa in terms of average class rank the last five seasons. So why have they produced more NFL talent than we have? I'd say there are three possible explanations, all of which could be true to some degree:

1. The recruiting site rankings aren't exactly what we think they are.

2. Iowa is better at developing talent.

3. Iowa is better at identifying talent in high school film, regardless of where that player ranks on the recruiting rankings sites.

I think it's a combination of #2 and #3. But probably mainly #2.
Click to expand...
Look at the recruiting rankings AFTER attrition, they're about 40 spots better 

 
Can we just be sick of them beating us every year and call it a rivalry yet?  I want to beat Iowa so bad I feel like I’m 10 yrs old and cried when OU got the best of us with Bosworth and his ugly a$$ color striped haircut lines. I only measure Wisc a rival because we MUST beat them to be in B1G champ games; they’re way out of our league. 
 

look, Iowa gets it done. Every single player knows exactly what they need done, and they do it. On that note, I don’t ‘feel’ like Nebraska has every player dialed in to just DO THEIR DAMN JOB. Or the long term developed talent. 

you think Nebraska got WR  talent in the 90s here because Osborne promised them 80 catches over a career?? Hell no. They came to catch 3 passes a game for big yards and WIN the damn game, and play for Bowls and championships, by blocking their asses off and making most of their opportunities when the ball did come  their way. 
 

we need players here who can be developed, work their asses off while biding their time, and buy into a whole program philosophy.  Then you get the 2-3 players a year who can transform a 9-10 win team into a 12-14 win team. That takes a SYSTEM. And that’s what Iowa has, a tried and true system and program that players know exactly what they’re signing on for and have the patience to wait for “their turn”. 
 

That’s the difference: a long game, long term approach, marathon, system, program...

I believe Frost gets this too and is doing it the right way, even tho results (wins) haven’t materialized yet. But it’s on the way. 

 
huskerfan333157 said:
Look at the recruiting rankings AFTER attrition, they're about 40 spots better 
Click to expand...
I admit i haven't looked at the rankings post attrition. But i have looked at OUR roster in great depth.  And we have very little talent in our upcoming Junior and Senior classes.  Less than Iowa, hell..less than Purdue.  When people look at our recruiting rankings they are ignoring attrition..i agree with you on that.  

I am sure Iowa had more talent than us last year on the field.  I imagine POST-attrution rankings would show that , but simply the eye test made it clear.  Iowa has some ballers.  It is humbling to say, but Iowa had more talent than us last year, including some young guys.  We dont have a running back I have seen, as good as Iowa's freshman.  Hopefully Sevion or Scott can be that for us.  But lets be honest, we are all excited about RB rated in the 50ish range.  We used to have some of the best RBs in the country, now we get giddy over a 40-50th best back in the country.  Hopefully a bit of diamonds in the rough.

 
BigPeterJ said:
But lets be honest, we are all excited about RB rated in the 50ish range.  We used to have some of the best RBs in the country, now we get giddy over a 40-50th best back in the country.
Click to expand...


Average rank of the top RB recruit in our last three classes is 22, although the highest-ranked of those was Washington. Losing him hurts, but what can you do in a case like that?  <_< More than anything, it probably hurts us in terms of depth, and RB is one of the most important important spots for depth due to high injury potential.

 
Back
Top