Self Imposed Sanctions

[bugeater17]

We also have a tendency to red-shirt a fair amount of players which will naturally keep our classes per year smaller. I'd rather keep the 2 schollies and give them to a surprise transfer, JUCO, or deserving walk-on (which can then be used in next years class).

 

[RedDenver]

No one answered my question. Max out what numbers? We will be at 85 scholarships just like every other school by the time fall camp rolls around.

As long as we're at the 85 limit, then I'm good. Then use the +3 oversign if you get a few players who want in on signing day.

Yes, but correct me if I'm wrong, aren't we currently at 82 or 83? I guess we had a last minute flip and other signing day decisions not go our way, but that's why you plan to over sign by 2-3 recruits.

I'm not sure where we are. If we're below 85 after signing day, then that's not good, but it's only really a problem if it happens multiple years.

 

[Stumpy1]

You can't count on attrition when trying to fill a class. You have no idea who will leave and who won't. If Riley signs 3 over trying to anticipate attrition and no one leaves or just 1 leaves, he is stuck kicking 2 kids off the team that didn't want to leave. People would come running with torches and pitchforks because that isn't the "Nebraska Way".

Riley stated that the target number was 22 or 23 and we signed 20. I am fine with being 2 short, especially having a really small class next year.

 

[mnhusker]

I know that we can fill the 85 limit but anyone that is with less than top drawer talent means that we have lost out on a full year that could have been used to develop a higher level athlete. So much of what is done for the program is to attract elite talent to Lincoln and each scholarship is intended to be filled by top notch athletes.

 

[Oade]

You can't count on attrition when trying to fill a class. You have no idea who will leave and who won't. If Riley signs 3 over trying to anticipate attrition and no one leaves or just 1 leaves, he is stuck kicking 2 kids off the team that didn't want to leave. People would come running with torches and pitchforks because that isn't the "Nebraska Way".

Riley stated that the target number was 22 or 23 and we signed 20. I am fine with being 2 short, especially having a really small class next year.

The problem with not signing +3 is more significant than the "Nebraska Way" - although, I agree, he would get some heat for it.

But by undersigning every year, its limiting (or sanctioning) us from filling up the 85 spots on the roster each year with P-5 caliber players..... Over the course of one "recruiting cycle" 5 years (4 years, plus a RS year) if we under sign by 3 players each class, then over the course of 5 years we're subtracting 15 scholarships from our NCAA allowed total. If we under sign by 4 or 5 (or if we undersign by 3, and then 2 players transfer out) then that total adds up to 20-25 - or one entire recruiting class essentially.

Pelini did this regularly, and still won 9 games per year. How many more games could he have won if he had those 20-25 extra P5 caliber players on his roster over his 7 years, rather than giving them to 1-star and 2-star level walk-ons?

We need to fill our classes, anyone and everyone who wins a NC these days is filling their classes, if we want to compete with them, we can't limit ourselves like this consistently.

 

[BIG ERN]

I even made a thread on grad transfers, I would still bring 1-2 of them in.

For reference Bama has brought in 102 commits the past 4 years - Nebraska has had 87. A lot of schools over sign and use blue and gray shirts that a lot of other schools never do.

 

[zoogs]

You can't count on attrition when trying to fill a class. You have no idea who will leave and who won't. If Riley signs 3 over trying to anticipate attrition and no one leaves or just 1 leaves, he is stuck kicking 2 kids off the team that didn't want to leave. People would come running with torches and pitchforks because that isn't the "Nebraska Way".

Riley stated that the target number was 22 or 23 and we signed 20. I am fine with being 2 short, especially having a really small class next year.

I agree with Oade here. I think the question is why the target wasn't 24 or 25, knowing there's a good chance we'd end up one or two spots short of that.

Plus, I do think you can count on attrition. It happens every year at every program. +3 isn't a bad limit.

I'm really happy with the class and the way they closed on some big targets late. I can't fault them at all for Jamire. On the other hand, it's clear they did target the low 20s as their number, and I think that's worth revisiting.

 

[MinnwiscowaSker]

I even made a thread on grad transfers, I would still bring 1-2 of them in.

For reference Bama has brought in 102 commits the past 4 years - Nebraska has had 87. A lot of schools over sign and use blue and gray shirts that a lot of other schools never do.

I too wish we brought in more players, but 102 means a lot of guys are not sticking around in the program. I'm guessing when you recruit at Alabama's level, kids transfer when they see someone else in the way of their playing time. We're not there yet.

 

[Oade]

I even made a thread on grad transfers, I would still bring 1-2 of them in.

For reference Bama has brought in 102 commits the past 4 years - Nebraska has had 87. A lot of schools over sign and use blue and gray shirts that a lot of other schools never do.

I too wish we brought in more players, but 102 means a lot of guys are not sticking around in the program. I'm guessing when you recruit at Alabama's level, kids transfer when they see someone else in the way of their playing time. We're not there yet.

Bama also has more kids declare-early for the NFL than we do, which plays a part in why they have to over-sign consistently.