quote:

---

Originally posted by guest:
One of the hallmarks of success at NU through the Bob & Tom era was the ability to DEVELOP talent. One of the reasons for Notre Dames' lack of success over the past decade was the LACK of ability of the coaches to direct great talent. This is not a group of coaches(NU) that are going to sell mom & dad on their moral character. This group's ONLY hook is the connection to the NFL. Dubious at best,that is not enough!

---

actually so far in recruiting parents have loved the coaches at NU, especially John Blake and have been the reason we have got a few commitments, so try again, keep trying to bash this coaching staff when you have no idea what you're talking about

John Blake proved that he can recruit while he was at Oklahoma. But, at the same time he proved that he cannot coach the great recruits.

Of all of the members of the coaching staff, only one of them he has proven that he can coach what he brings in. And that is Coach Wagner, and that was while he was Wayne State back in the early 90's.

Untill Nebraska get coaches as well as recruiters, they will always be in the middle of the pack.

quote:

---

Originally posted by NC Fan:
John Blake proved that he can recruit while he was at Oklahoma. But, at the same time he proved that he cannot coach the great recruits.

Of all of the members of the coaching staff, only one of them he has proven that he can coach what he brings in. And that is Coach Wagner, and that was while he was Wayne State back in the early 90's.

Untill Nebraska get coaches as well as recruiters, they will always be in the middle of the pack.

---

actually Blake has a great reputation for coaching the lines, and Elmo's always had the reputation of a great position coach but needs a little work on player relations, we have the best OLine coaches in the nation, probably one of the best OCoordinators and TE coaches, we will have one of the best WR coaches very soon and Cally is a genius with the QBs and OLine

[QUOTE]Originally posted by S0404:



I will say that Elmo is no good and thats why he is a goner



SO404...you waffle more than politians...how can it be bothways??? You state earlier that Elmo is "no good and thats why he is a goner"...and now you are saying he has always had the reputation of a GREAT positions coach. WOW!!

With all of the D-1 head coaching jobs that were recently available, I can't believe none of the "best coaches in the nation" and "geniuses" were not given offers or even interviews...nobody else must realize the abundance of talent we have here.

Well here's on that is way under a 15th ranked average recruiting class that IS in the top 25... actually in the top 5!

5. UTAH/ 02 - 77th
03 - 90th
04 - 61st
Avg. - 76

so as you can see, recruiting rank does not always dictate the sucess on the field... if it did, Utah sould have been garbage this year!

quote:

---

Originally posted by S0404:
since you dont think recruiting success translates to success on the field lets take a look

1. USC/ 02-13th 03-3rd 04-1st avg. 5.66
2. Auburn/ 02-6th 03-11th 04-21st avg. 12.33
3. Oklahoma/ 02-7th 03-4th 04-8th avg. 6.33
4. Texas/ 02-1st 03-15th 04 10th avg. 8.66


now lets find some teams with under a 15th ranked average recruiting class that wernt in the top 25

Good luck with that one.... cuz i guarentee you wont find one

---

Just goes to show...liars figure and figures lie.

You can also bet that if those high recruiting numbers don't translate into 9- and 10-win seasons, Callahan and Co. won't be in Lincoln long. I hope that they do get us back to that upper echelon, but as picky as Husker fans were during the previous three coaching eras, they won't accept another 5-6 season...and you can take that to the bank.

And as far as Blake goes...correct me if I'm wrong on this, but wasn't he the same cat we hung 69 AND 73 points on a few years back when he was running the OU program??? I don't know about you...but I'm a little concerned with that little tidbit of trivia....

Here's another that is close enough for me.... since SO404 said it couldn't be done!

Texas A&M -- 02-23rd 03-10th 04-13th Avg. 15.333
(With rounding that would go up, to make it 15; and they are not in the top 25!)

What about these teams that all finished in the top 15 this year...

#8Iowa 02-51st 03-43rd 04-38th Avg.=44th
#7Louisville 02-59th 03-35th 04-64th Avg.=52nd
#5 Utah 02-77th 03-90th 04-61st Avg.=76th
#13 Boise St. 02-74th 03-101st 04-85th Avg=65th

How could teams be so successful with such lousy recruiting????? one word...COACHING

"now lets find some teams with under a 15th ranked average recruiting class that wernt in the top 25
Good luck with that one.... cuz i guarentee you wont find one"

Well, he's right in one aspect...we didn't find one -- we found FIVE.

Good coaching is made a lot easier with good talent. Under Frank Solich, we had neither. If those guys who left the team in the past month or so had been picked up by USC, Oklahoma, or K-State, that would be the sign of a problem. But where are they going? Burger King, McDonald's, and Hy-Vee. And if we had such great coaching why weren't the likes of Notre Dame and Florida jumping at the chance to sign our coaches? They ended up where? Oh yeah, OHIO University. Everyone wanted Pelini to become our next coach...he couldn't get the Pitt or Syracuse jobs.

Give it time...we have a good combination of coaching AND recruiting. The two together will produce some big results.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Guest:
Here's another that is close enough for me.... since SO404 said it couldn't be done!

Texas A&M -- 02-23rd 03-10th 04-13th Avg. 15.333
(With rounding that would go up, to make it 15; and they are not in the top 25!)

---

thats an average over 15

quote:

---

Originally posted by Guest:
What about these teams that all finished in the top 15 this year...

#8Iowa 02-51st 03-43rd 04-38th Avg.=44th
#7Louisville 02-59th 03-35th 04-64th Avg.=52nd
#5 Utah 02-77th 03-90th 04-61st Avg.=76th
#13 Boise St. 02-74th 03-101st 04-85th Avg=65th

How could teams be so successful with such lousy recruiting????? one word...COACHING

---

And you have it Bass Ackwards, those are teams with low recruiting ratings and good teams, im talking about high recruiting rankings with bad teams, nice try though

Thought there wasn't one to be found Shane. What about this one?

Care to flap your gums some more?

quote:

---

Originally posted by <Guest>:
Well here's on that is way under a 15th ranked average recruiting class that IS in the top 25... actually in the top 5!

5. UTAH/ 02 - 77th
03 - 90th
04 - 61st
Avg. - 76

so as you can see, recruiting rank does not always dictate the sucess on the field... if it did, Utah sould have been garbage this year!

quote:

---

Originally posted by S0404:
since you dont think recruiting success translates to success on the field lets take a look

1. USC/ 02-13th 03-3rd 04-1st avg. 5.66
2. Auburn/ 02-6th 03-11th 04-21st avg. 12.33
3. Oklahoma/ 02-7th 03-4th 04-8th avg. 6.33
4. Texas/ 02-1st 03-15th 04 10th avg. 8.66


now lets find some teams with under a 15th ranked average recruiting class that wernt in the top 25

Good luck with that one.... cuz i guarentee you wont find one

---

---

ok seriously, i just said this... You have it backwards, i said teams with great recruiting the past few years (Like NU is doing now) that dont have a top 25 team...

not teams with poor recruiting that are in the top 25 (like NU always used to)

Regardless, it proves that good recruiting doesn't always lead to a quality football program. Look at Notre Dame in the 90's, always recruited the best of the best, but rarely (if ever) translated it into a national championship or a high poll finish.

Something about the Osborne being able to develop talent, walk on water, etc. thing: From the mid 70s to mid 90s the Big 8 was more like The Big 2 and the Little 6. In the late 70s/early 80s the Big 2 were OU and NU, in the late 80s early 90s it was NU and the Buffs, and in the mid 90s in was NU and the Mildcats. We were guaranteed eight wins a year over weak teams (six conference and usually at least 2 non-conf. patsies). And the reason it was tough to prepare for us is because we were one of the few teams in the country that ran the option, and of those teams one of the few that ran it well. So teams had to take extra time to prepare for the option package. But the well dried up on quality high school athletes that wanted to run the option, so the talent pool of option specialists dried up. We either had to change with the times or get run over. Even if Osborne was still coaching he would've had to adapt to change. He did it with his defensive philosophy when they switched from the read-and-react 5-2 alignment to the attacking 4-3.

quote:

---

Originally posted by NWI:
Regardless, it proves that good recruiting doesn't always lead to a quality football program. Look at Notre Dame in the 90's, always recruited the best of the best, but rarely (if ever) translated it into a national championship or a high poll finish.

---

id think a writer would have more material, ur sounding like a broken record... and like i said, ND's recruiting drop off reflects there drop off in results, almost straight up....

broken record? Kind of like the pot calling the kettle black, IMO...LOL

guest, if I didn't know better, I would have thought that I wrote that post about the 70/80's in the little 8.
You hit the nail on the head.
Our competition is much tougher now.