Returning talent level

I think we have skill position players other than a good QB for dual threat offense.  I wouldn't be suprised if we go and get a 5th year guy this year, and maybe we get Vedral and others for the 2019 season.

We will get and see much better recruits in time.  I think this upcoming recruiting class will surprise us some as well.

D-Line and O-line play will decide our future as far as next season.  Frost coached a team that went 0-12, 6-7, and now 12-0.  I see us going at worst next season 7-5.  

 
"talent is better than most people think"

I have no idea what most people think so it's hard to know what he means.

It appeared to me we had some upper class players who weren't playing to their potential.  Coaching?  Lack of buy in?  Comfortable and just not motivated to push harder?  Hard to say, and of course there's the possibility they were playing to their potential and we overestimated what they were capable of.

There is some very good young talent on this team including those who redshirted this year.  They will help next year.  Some good young O-linemen, receivers, QB's, Db's and Lb/DE's.  

The question is, who are the difference makers? 

To win week in and week out in the Big will take 11 good players on field and depth behind them.  To challenge for a division title we need a playmaker or two on both sides of the ball.  A lightening quick DE or tackle and on the offensive side a Qb who can run for first downs when needed and/or another stud RB.  I'm not convinced yet Tre is built to make it through an entire season and hope I am way wrong.  Love the kid. 

 
olddominionhusker said:
So one thing that TO said in his interview was that the talent level here is better then most people think. 

I know some on here particularly @Mavric and @teachercd have a pretty good handle on stuff like this. 

I would be be interested in ya’ll’s assessment of that statement. 

Is the perceived lack of talent a results of poor schemes, preparation and putting the right guys in the right places under the previous regime? 

Do you all think we could could reasonably expect to see these current kids playing at a higher level just from a change in philosophy. 

Anyone who who feels like they have a good grasp of this sort of thing feel free to reply. I just addressed the two guys above specifically because I respect their opinion on these matters 
Click to expand...
Tom O is a man who says a lot while saying very little.  My thought is that he was saying the general perception around the state is that we lack talent and need a major boost in recruiting but I feel he was actually saying these players have not developed and most of it is coaching.  I understand that no player on the D side of the ball ever plays a perfect game.  Decisions have to be made in a split second and wrong angles are taken to make a tackle.  A CB can be in a bad matchup with a bigger WR and help over the top arrives late.  When a player makes the wrong choices in every game, one has to think coaches and team leaders aren't holding him accountable.  The same goes for the O line.  When 6 players are blocking 3 D linemen and all three get to our QB within 3 seconds of the snap something is seriously wrong.  Communication, trust, desire and effort have all been lacking this year.  I think we just hired a man who can motivate players who want to put in the work and are willing to learn.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
olddominionhusker said:
So one thing that TO said in his interview was that the talent level here is better then most people think. 
Click to expand...


Since a lot of people seem to be fairly down on our talent level, I think this is absolutely correct.

It's obviously tough to judge talent.  The most objective way is be recruiting rankings - they aren't perfect but over a sufficiently large sample size, they give a pretty good indication.  The last three years 247 has done a composite ranking of talent on each school's roster- the players who are actually on the roster that year accounting for attrition and transfers.  It still uses their composite ranking from high school so it doesn't take into account development but that's impossible to quantify anyway so it's a pretty good measuring stick.

The last three years have been pretty identical when comparing Nebraska's talent level to the rest of the teams on our schedule.  There is usually one team that has a clear talent advantage, one team that has very similar talent as we do and we have a significant talent advantage over 9-10 other schools on our schedule (possibly a second school with similar talent).  We have generally ranked in the mid- to upper-20s the three years they have done that composite, sliding slightly down the list each year.

So if you're basing an assumption on that, we have had a clear talent advantage over 9-10 teams we've played each of the last three years.  Since some people were trying to make the argument that Purdue had more talent than we did two years ago, I think it's fair to say that TO is correct about how much talent we actually have.

I think those people are going to be quite surprised at how quickly Frost can turn things around.

 
Mavric said:
Since a lot of people seem to be fairly down on our talent level, I think this is absolutely correct.

It's obviously tough to judge talent.  The most objective way is be recruiting rankings - they aren't perfect but over a sufficiently large sample size, they give a pretty good indication.  The last three years 247 has done a composite ranking of talent on each school's roster- the players who are actually on the roster that year accounting for attrition and transfers.  It still uses their composite ranking from high school so it doesn't take into account development but that's impossible to quantify anyway so it's a pretty good measuring stick.

The last three years have been pretty identical when comparing Nebraska's talent level to the rest of the teams on our schedule.  There is usually one team that has a clear talent advantage, one team that has very similar talent as we do and we have a significant talent advantage over 9-10 other schools on our schedule (possibly a second school with similar talent).  We have generally ranked in the mid- to upper-20s the three years they have done that composite, sliding slightly down the list each year.

So if you're basing an assumption on that, we have had a clear talent advantage over 9-10 teams we've played each of the last three years.  Since some people were trying to make the argument that Purdue had more talent than we did two years ago, I think it's fair to say that TO is correct about how much talent we actually have.

I think those people are going to be quite surprised at how quickly Frost can turn things around.
Click to expand...
For next year his chance of a quick uptick will hinge greatly upon which direction he decides to go at QB.  I've stated consistently that this team with no coaching changes was likely to show a big improvement next year with a second year starter at QB who's shown a large improvement already.  Also because all the young players on D would be more experienced, stronger, bigger, and have an entire off season grasp the defense.

I think it's setting Frost up for failure to ignore the team will be starting over in a new offense and defense with all new coaches.  I'd caution not to get caught up in expectations for next year.  I'm expecting a season similar to what Herman just went through at Texas.  If I start there and Frost produces better I'm happy.  If I start with expecting 9 wins and it's a 5-6 win year then it's a bit disappointing.  Give him time because this is it.  If we don't give Frost a long leash then where does Husker football turn for the next answer? 

 
olddominionhusker said:
So one thing that TO said in his interview was that the talent level here is better then most people think. 

I know some on here particularly @Mavric and @teachercd have a pretty good handle on stuff like this. 

I would be be interested in ya’ll’s assessment of that statement. 

Is the perceived lack of talent a results of poor schemes, preparation and putting the right guys in the right places under the previous regime? 

Do you all think we could could reasonably expect to see these current kids playing at a higher level just from a change in philosophy. 

Anyone who who feels like they have a good grasp of this sort of thing feel free to reply. I just addressed the two guys above specifically because I respect their opinion on these matters 
Click to expand...


 I've made the comment before that Nebraska has, right now, more than enough talent to win the Big 10.  

Perceived lack of talent could be what you've pointed out: poor schemes, preparation and putting the right guys in the right places. 

Also, a player not fully knowing, or understanding what he's supposed to do on a given call can lead to hesitation.  Hesitation gives the appearance of a player being "slow."  Appearing to be "slow" is often the biggest measure of perceived talent.  You've heard it here on this board many times where posters have complained that Nebraska's defense lacks speed.  That's rubbish.  They have plenty of speed, they're just not sure what they're doing, or they're freelancing, and/or trying to do someone else's job.  That gets into poor schemes, poor coaching, not putting players into the right positions, etc.  

Then there are the "star" and team "recruiting rankings."  Some hold the belief that any class ranked below 10th might as well be a failure.  Side note: I was involved in a thread awhile back where posters were saying that any recruiting class ranked below ?10th? was essentially an "F" grade.  I thought that was idiotic, still do, but the "gurus" I was conversating with thought otherwise.  To them, Nebraska's 30-40th ranked classes were Fs.

Anyway, the point is: lack of talent is solely in the eye of the grader or judger.  I have often asked, in a given year, how do you know who is the best player?  For example, at RB you have the "top 20" ranked RBs in the country.  How does anyone know if the guy ranked #1 at RB is really the best?  They don't.  It's all a guess.  Was Ndamukong Suh the 6th best DT coming out of high school in 2005?  Was he the 51st "best player" overall nationally?  I would argue based on how his career panned out, he should have been #1 nationally and #1 at his position.  But we only learn this years after the recruiting class has been signed.

https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/2005/ndamukong-suh-237

Then you have the guys who make the correlation between where a team's recruiting classes are ranked and their success on the field.  This is, I believe, where recruiting rankings are disingenuous.  For example, Wisconsin routinely had classes "ranked" in 60's nationally.under Brett Bielema (?spelling?).  However, they could play with anyone and the last 4-5 years Wisconsin has recruited the same way, but suddenly with their on-field success, their "team ranking" has risen dramatically.  Why is this?  It's because "stars" and "team rankings" are nothing more than a guess.  A team recruits, has their "team ranking" in the 50th or so.  They start winning consistently.  Recruiting sites say hey, "This coaching staff is a really good evaluator of talent so we'll start rating the players they're interested in, higher.  Said players sign with this team, they have more success, and sure enough higher recruiting rankings follow.  It's an imperfect system, rife with corruption, and too easily influenced with money to be reliable.  Now I'm not talking about the handful of kids each year who are just ballers and their talent just pops on the film.  I'm talking about the good 80% of kids coming out of high school who are talented, but nobody knows how to quantify that talent.  Then there are regional biases: a player coming out of a big time Florida high school is most of the time going to ranked higher, and more highly regarded, than a kid from Nebraska.  Ben Stille ended up being one of our best DEs and according to rivals.com, he wasn't even ranked as prospect nationally, and the kid showed he could play at a high level towards the end of the 2017 season.

I don't want to get bogged down into the minutiae of recruiting because that's not the point.  The over-arching point is talent is highly subjective and many different factors help shape a fan's team's perceived talent level.  Certainly getting your keyster handed to you seemingly every week doesn't help ease the "lack of talent" complaint. 

And I haven't even touched on how other factors like:

  • offensive and defensive systems are easy or hard to learn,
  • are the coaches asking a player to do something he can't do
  • coaching changes during a players career
  • player health and staying injury free
  • academics
  • girlfriends (and boyfriends)
  • coaching decisions in game
  • game planning and play calling
All of these things affect a team's perceived talent level above and beyond star or class rankings.

I think by merely putting forth 100% effort every snap we'll see a much higher "talent level."  I believe Nebraska has the talent to win the Big 10.  What Nebraska has lacked since TO retired is a coach who could get these kids to play to, or above, their talent.  Hopefully that changes with Coach Frost.  

 
Nebhawk said:
I think we have skill position players other than a good QB for dual threat offense. I wouldn't be suprised if we go and get a 5th year guy this year, and maybe we get Vedral and others for the 2019 season.

We will get and see much better recruits in time.  I think this upcoming recruiting class will surprise us some as well.

D-Line and O-line play will decide our future as far as next season.  Frost coached a team that went 0-12, 6-7, and now 12-0.  I see us going at worst next season 7-5.  
Click to expand...


“Hello, Mr. Burrow. This is Scott Frost. It’s time to come home.”

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Edison's Enemy said:
“Hello, Mr. Burrows. This is Scott Frost. It’s time to come home.”
Click to expand...
I like the thought of Burrow, but he isn’t scheduled to graduate until May, so he won’t be able to go through Spring practice with the team. That would be tough to win the starting job in 2018, based on the preseason training camp. He would have experience in a similar system at Ohio State, and would have 2 years of eligibility though. 

 
Enjoyed @Making Chimichangas post above.  Good read.  Personally, I think we don't have the talent to win the B1G.  I think we are as well depleted on talent, in other words, as we go to 2nd and 3rd string we often fall further behind a team like OSU.  The main area I believe we are fundamentally weak in talent and in our systems are the OL and DL.  LB need an influx of new talent.  I've believed we have recruited talent at CB and S ... I just think the techniques taught and mindset/system seems flawed.  I've been pleased with WR recruiting (or at least how they have panned out).  It seems we are now a tier below Wisky for the new good running RB.  We use to be a tier below OU and sometimes competed for that same RB ... those days are gone.

Just some of my random thoughts ... from a guy who is not an "X and O" kind of guy ... just follow recruiting from a fan perspective.

 
First off our WR’s will be fine regardless of if Williams is here or not.  We have legit talent there. 

I have never been in the camp that our talent level is as bad as it seems. I’m firmly in the camp that it’s all about development. 

How is is it that Wisconsin can throw out 6 or so damn good LB’s every year now?   It’s all about coaching and development. Some of these kids that are studs are walk on‘s or weren’t highly rated in general. But by God they play physical, they are downhill and they have very good fundamentals! 

We we use to have that under TO and to an extent under Solich.  

I know it’s tiresome on this board to keep having to bring up Wisconsin but frankly they stole our blueprint in so many ways. Barry wasn’t stupid...  he saw it as a player at Nebraska, he saw it as a coach at Iowa and he brought it to Madison.  

Sure there are positions we do need to upgrade the talent but overall I don’t think our team talent is as bad as it seems. 

Do our hard work in the weight room, come together as a team (unity), play very hard and master the fundamentals... the wins will come in droves.  Have pride in being a Husker again!!! 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BartonHusker said:
First off our WR’s will be fine regardless of if Williams is here or not.  We have legit talent there. 

I have never been in the camp that our talent level is as bad as it seems. I’m firmly in the camp that it’s all about development. 

How is is it that Wisconsin can throw out 6 or so damn good LB’s every year now?   It’s all about coaching and development. Some of these kids that are studs our walk on‘s or weren’t highly rated in general. But by God they play physical, they are downhill and they have very good fundamentals! 

We we use to have that under TO and to an extent under Solich.  

I know it’s tiresome on this board to keep having to bring up Wisconsin but frankly they stole our blueprint in so many ways. Barry wasn’t stupid...  he saw it as a player at Nebraska, he saw it as a coach at Iowa and he brought it to Madison.  

Do our hard work in the weight room, come together as a team (unity), play very hard and master the fundamentals... the wins will come in droves.  Have pride in being a Husker again!!! 
Click to expand...
I’m with you on the WR group. They will be fine if Williams is retained or not. If they choose to transfer, because their WR coach is gone, then they were at NU for the wrong reasons. If they have questions on what the offense is going to look like, they need to watch some UCF film. It’s one of the most fun offenses I have ever seen in college football. 

 
Back
Top