Walk on program is failing?

The more Rimington speaks the more concern I have.  He seriously believes we need more walkons.  No, we don't, we have plenty.  

We need a system that is in place for more than 4 years.  Even when Bo was here he never had an offensive system in place for more than 4 years.  I could make the argument his defensive system changed also.

The reason all of the great teams are great, is because of consistency.  Nobody brings up the elephant in the room when talking about Nebraska of the 80s and 90s.  They changed their offensive identity...never, and their defensive identity....once.  Over the course of 20 years.  That is how you build championship teams.  That's when the 50 plus walkons that Rimington wants start to make a big difference because they were running the same offense and defense that Nebraska ran in High school.  They could step right in and make a difference.

 
Kiyoat Husker said:
Here's an old Sports Illustrated article about Nebraska's Walk-on program from Sept 5, 1984!  Long article, but worth the read.

https://www.si.com/vault/1984/09/05/633947/walk-ons-are-now-in-the-running

One line caught my eye specifically:

If tuition was a deterrent to walking on for some players back in 1984, how do you think it factors in today, with tuition prices skyrocketing nationally?
Click to expand...
It's totally a factor.  Higher percentage of players are going to take full rides at lower schools vs walking on.  That's why you are seeing stronger FCS competition.

 
I believe Rimington said just a day or two ago something to the effect that it is not any failure of the walk-on program when walk-ons are starting or playing but rather it is a failure of scholarship players when that happens. I think he understands all he needs to about the walk-on program.

 
knapplc said:
How long does he need to get caught up on the walk-on program? A day? Two?
Click to expand...


Its not just getting caught up on Nebraska's walk-on program, its understanding all of the gradual changes in the college football landscape.  If he had mentioned any of these things that makes the current situation different, I'd give him more credit.  Instead, he seems to brush all of that aside.

Negative bonus points for the "back in my day" line.

 
Kiyoat Husker said:
Its not just getting caught up on Nebraska's walk-on program, its understanding all of the gradual changes in the college football landscape.  If he had mentioned any of these things that makes the current situation different, I'd give him more credit.  Instead, he seems to brush all of that aside.

Negative bonus points for the "back in my day" line.
Click to expand...


Meh. We're basing all this concern off of how many words in an interview? I'm sure his thoughts on the walk-on program aren't completely summed up in 50-100 words.

 
StPaulHusker said:
It's totally a factor.  Higher percentage of players are going to take full rides at lower schools vs walking on.  That's why you are seeing stronger FCS competition.
Click to expand...


Yep. The program is difficult to sustain as tuition skyrockets.  It's not any particular coach's fault, it's simple basic economics.

 
StPaulHusker said:
Nebraska was not great because of walk ons. Our walk ons were good because we had a great program.
Click to expand...
Not according to DR. He said in the 1620 radio interview that the walk-ons helped to create the relentless culture at Nebraska that led to so much success because the walk-ons pushed the scholarship guys, challenging them for their position. This promoted open competition within the program (of course, the coaching staff had to help fuel that by allowing the competition to be truly open).

 
That just doesn't relate to the "walkon" from Nebraska anymore.  These kids weren't even alive the last time Nebraska was great.  What do they care about how successful Nebraska was 25 years ago?

 
I don't totally disagree with the idea of beefing up or reinvigorating the walk-on program.  I just think that in today's climate you have to have a totally different strategy.  It's not just about numbers, you have to get those quality kids that are earning scholarships at FCS and Group-of-Five schools.

You have to somehow convince athletes to go against their own best interests and NOT to take a scholarship.  Not an easy thing, but there might be some creative ways to incentivize walking on without breaking NCAA rules.

 
knapplc said:
Wait a second. Dave Rimington doesn't understand the current nature of the walk-on situation, but some guys on message boards do?

What planet do you guys live on that this is a reality for you?  You realize that Dave Rimington has the internet, right? And that he has access to free websites like HuskerBoard, right? And that he could learn all about the nature of the walk-on climate by reading those message boards, right?  And that on top of all that, he has access to a big-time college football program, its coaches, and all the information they have available, right?  And that he could talk to dozens of other coaches from dozens of other programs who are currently running walk-on programs of their own because he likely knows them personally through his NFL days or from his work with the Boomer Esiason Foundation, right?

Think about what you're saying. 
Click to expand...
He last played at Nebraska 34 years ago...I could tell he didn't fully grasp what the current landscape of the walk-on program was like during his initial interviews. You can disagree with me, but that is the read myself and a lot of others got. It was a major numbers game when we were atop the walk-on program. We could take countless walk-ons knowing a few would turn out for us. Not the case anymore 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A big part of TO's system was lots of reps and lots of stations.  So he could have 170 guys on the roster getting reps in practice.  Callahan and Riley don't follow that type of system at all.  Starters get reps, backups sit and watch.  

with 170 guys on the roster, that's an equal number of walkons and scholarship players.  I can't say what they actual number is, but most people say that it's about a 50% that a scholarship recruit pans out.  So let's go pretty low and say only 10% of walkons pan out.  That means we get an extra 8 or 9 guys from a TO-style walkon program.  It would take an additional 16-18 scholarship guys to get that much contribution.  So his walkon program was like having a fairly substantial number of extra scholarships.

 
BIG ERN said:
He last played at Nebraska 34 years ago...I could tell he didn't fully grasp what the current landscape of the walk-on program was like during his initial interviews. You can disagree with me, but that is the read myself and a lot of others got. 
Click to expand...


I would read Rimington's comments about the walk-on program as playing to the base, in much the same way as I read that Tom Osborne was "consulted" about the AD search.  These are things they say so Darryl & Merle from Wymore calm down about the state of the program.  It makes them think we're in good hands because the old guard is in control.

The reality is that Osborne isn't involved in the AD search really at all and Rimington won't be here long enough to do anything about the walk-on program.

All this stuff is basically Coach Speak.  People like you or me who are generally more informed than the generation(s) older than us won't fall for it, but those who do are an important part of the fan base.

 
BIG ERN said:
He last played at Nebraska 34 years ago...I could tell he didn't fully grasp what the current landscape of the walk-on program was like during his initial interviews. You can disagree with me, but that is the read myself and a lot of others got. 
Click to expand...


Riley currently has about 40 less walkons on the roster than TO did in '95.

 
Back
Top