ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Nebraska Would Owe Frost $26 Million If Fired This Year

I thought Nebraska's best case scenario was to be 5-6 going into the Iowa game. Kind of like Riley's first year. I'm sure there are some stunned fans.
I feel like your scenario was the most likely scenario. Best case, I was thinking we would be going for 8 wins going into the Iowa game. Just a difference in opinion. Turns out both of us were overly optimistic.

Best case scenario, I saw these wins:
Akron/BC, CU, Troy, NW, Purdue, Minnesota, Illinois

I don't think it was delusional to think Nebraska could find ways to beat all of these teams if they execute and the calls, bounces, etc went the Huskers way. Nebraska has been in all of these games so far and had opportunities to win. Purdue is the only game where they weren't in it at the end.

But we've screwed up and continued to invent ways to lose game. Nebraska outplayed NW most of the game and still found a way to blow it. That's who Nebraska is right now. Are they 0-6 bad? I don't think so. But at some point, you are what your record says you are until you prove otherwise. I thought, until the last 2 mins of the football game on Saturday, the Huskers had finally proven they were a better team than their record showed. Then Northwestern went 99 yards in 2 mins with zero timeouts.
 
Thanks for the Nebraska thread dumb ass. He will get 3-4 years to build his team. The cupboards were bare when he arrived. Every week Nebraska thread when they lose!

This is totally untrue. Source 24/7 recruiting rankings.

2012 32nd ranked class (Iowa was 40th)

2013 22nd ranked class (Iowa was 56th)

2014 35th ranked class (Iowa was 58th)

2015 30th ranked class (Iowa was 59th)

2016 26th ranked class (Iowa was 47th)

2017 23rd ranked class. (Iowa was 41st)
 
  • Like
Reactions: sltldowney
I feel like your scenario was the most likely scenario. Best case, I was thinking we would be going for 8 wins going into the Iowa game. Just a difference in opinion. Turns out both of us were overly optimistic.

Best case scenario, I saw these wins:
Akron/BC, CU, Troy, NW, Purdue, Minnesota, Illinois

I don't think it was delusional to think Nebraska could find ways to beat all of these teams if they execute and the calls, bounces, etc went the Huskers way. Nebraska has been in all of these games so far and had opportunities to win. Purdue is the only game where they weren't in it at the end.

But we've screwed up and continued to invent ways to lose game. Nebraska outplayed NW most of the game and still found a way to blow it. That's who Nebraska is right now. Are they 0-6 bad? I don't think so. But at some point, you are what your record says you are until you prove otherwise. I thought, until the last 2 mins of the football game on Saturday, the Huskers had finally proven they were a better team than their record showed. Then Northwestern went 99 yards in 2 mins with zero timeouts.
This was a good post. You must be one of the good husker fans :cool: Wish I worked with more of you
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThrowBones92
A LOT more than you'll admit to
Well this isn't based on emotion. There is a factual number that can't really be argued with either way about how many in those recruiting classes are still on the team. And it isn't pretty when you look at the top half of each recruiting class and how many of those players are gone.

I guess it's easier to make a lazy post like yours, though, and not actually do homework.
 
This is totally untrue. Source 24/7 recruiting rankings.

2012 32nd ranked class (Iowa was 40th)

2013 22nd ranked class (Iowa was 56th)

2014 35th ranked class (Iowa was 58th)

2015 30th ranked class (Iowa was 59th)

2016 26th ranked class (Iowa was 47th)

2017 23rd ranked class. (Iowa was 41st)

How do the recruiting ranking compare when you look at the players that are currently on the roster from each of these classes? That's the number that actually matters.

Nebraska is not void of talent, but they have holes all over the place from losing guys that were supposed to be heavy contributors.
 
Well this isn't based on emotion. There is a factual number that can't really be argued with either way about how many in those recruiting classes are still on the team. And it isn't pretty when you look at the top half of each recruiting class and how many of those players are gone.

I guess it's easier to make a lazy post like yours, though, and not actually do homework.

I'm lazy? You're the one that stated so many are gone and have produce ZERO information. I do know EIGHT have left AFTER Frost was hired. Who is that on?

Hello Kettle, you're black!
 
  • Like
Reactions: sltldowney
Somebody ran those numbers and looked up how many 4* Nebraska recruits from the last 4 years are still on the roster. The number was a shockingly high amount of highly ranked recruits are still on the roster. I want to say like something over 60%.

Now I have to find that post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sltldowney
Somebody ran those numbers and looked up how many 4* Nebraska recruits from the last 4 years are still on the roster. The number was a shockingly high amount of highly ranked recruits are still on the roster. I want to say like something over 60%.

Now I have to find that post.

If the players who left are not on the OL or anywhere on the defense, it doesn't matter.
 
I'm lazy? You're the one that stated so many are gone and have produce ZERO information. I do know EIGHT have left AFTER Frost was hired. Who is that on?

Hello Kettle, you're black!
I asked if you'd like to guess how many were still on the roster, you made some comment that clearly shared that you have no idea how many are left. That's all I need to know to know that you don't actually have an idea of what is left on the roster from those classes.

I don't care to share the fact, all I care about is that I know you're speaking about something of which you don't really know the facts. If you want to know them, go look like them, just like I did when I posted a thorough breakdown on this board last fall/winter about the holes in the Nebraska roster due to players who were in the class but no longer on the roster.
 
Well this isn't based on emotion. There is a factual number that can't really be argued with either way about how many in those recruiting classes are still on the team. And it isn't pretty when you look at the top half of each recruiting class and how many of those players are gone.

I guess it's easier to make a lazy post like yours, though, and not actually do homework.

Freedom Akinmoladun Rivals 3* Christian Gaylord Rivals 3*
Quayshon Alexander Rivals 3* Will Honas Rivals 3*
Austin Allen Rivals 3* Andre Hunt Rivals 3*
David Alston Rivals 3* Lamar Jackson Rivals 4*
Avery Anderson Rivals 4* Brenden Jaimes Rivals 3*
Broc Bando Rivals 3* Pernell Jefferson Rivals 3*
Jalin Barnett Rivals 4* Cam'ron Jones Rivals 4*
Mohamed Barry Rivals 3* Miles Jones Rivals 4*
Dicaprio Bootle Rivals 3* Eric Lee Jr. Rivals 4*
Jaylin Bradley Rivals 3* Katerian Legrone Rivals 3*
Moses Bryant Rivals 3* Adrian Martinez Rivals 4*
Tre Bryant Rivals 3* Justin McGriff Rivals 3*
Andrew Bunch Rivals 3* Jaevon McQuitty Rivals 4*
Tony Butler Rivals 3* Collin Miller Rivals 3*
Braxton Clark Rivals 3* Stanley Morgan Jr. Rivals 4*
Damion Daniels Rivals 3* DaiShon Neal Rivals 3*
Carlos Davis Rivals 3* Peyton Newell Rivals 3*
Khalil Davis Rivals 4* Devine Ozigbo Rivals 3*
Marquel Dismuke Rivals 4* John Raridon Rivals 4*
Breon Dixon Rivals 4* Casey Rogers Rivals 3*
JoJo Domann Rivals 3* CJ Smith Rivals 4*
Tanner Farmer Rivals 4* JD Spielman Rivals 3*
Matt Farniok Rivals 3* Mick Stoltenberg Rivals 3*
Will Farniok Rivals 3* Deontre Thomas Rivals 3*
Tyrin Ferguson Rivals 3* Guy Thomas Rivals 4*
Jerald Foster Rivals 3* Vaha Vainuku Rivals 3*


I went alphabetically through the roster, mainly skipped the ones actually from Nebraska so I'm sure I missed a few 3* and maybe a couple of 4*'s.

These are only 52 players on the roster that are 3* and above. Christ 16 4 stars...Tell me again about the bare cupboard Scotty Frost was left with.

Is this enough research Throwbones?
 
I'm glad we didn't sign Farniok. He would be 3rd string on Iowa's line. Did Iowa recruit Tanner Farmer and Khalil Davis? If so, the Hawks dodged two bullets.

Of course, the above mentioned players might be performing a lot better with tutelage from the Iowa coaching staff.

Take a break while Cornholer fans look up tutelage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sltldowney
Freedom Akinmoladun Rivals 3* Christian Gaylord Rivals 3*
Quayshon Alexander Rivals 3* Will Honas Rivals 3*
Austin Allen Rivals 3* Andre Hunt Rivals 3*
David Alston Rivals 3* Lamar Jackson Rivals 4*
Avery Anderson Rivals 4* Brenden Jaimes Rivals 3*
Broc Bando Rivals 3* Pernell Jefferson Rivals 3*
Jalin Barnett Rivals 4* Cam'ron Jones Rivals 4*
Mohamed Barry Rivals 3* Miles Jones Rivals 4*
Dicaprio Bootle Rivals 3* Eric Lee Jr. Rivals 4*
Jaylin Bradley Rivals 3* Katerian Legrone Rivals 3*
Moses Bryant Rivals 3* Adrian Martinez Rivals 4*
Tre Bryant Rivals 3* Justin McGriff Rivals 3*
Andrew Bunch Rivals 3* Jaevon McQuitty Rivals 4*
Tony Butler Rivals 3* Collin Miller Rivals 3*
Braxton Clark Rivals 3* Stanley Morgan Jr. Rivals 4*
Damion Daniels Rivals 3* DaiShon Neal Rivals 3*
Carlos Davis Rivals 3* Peyton Newell Rivals 3*
Khalil Davis Rivals 4* Devine Ozigbo Rivals 3*
Marquel Dismuke Rivals 4* John Raridon Rivals 4*
Breon Dixon Rivals 4* Casey Rogers Rivals 3*
JoJo Domann Rivals 3* CJ Smith Rivals 4*
Tanner Farmer Rivals 4* JD Spielman Rivals 3*
Matt Farniok Rivals 3* Mick Stoltenberg Rivals 3*
Will Farniok Rivals 3* Deontre Thomas Rivals 3*
Tyrin Ferguson Rivals 3* Guy Thomas Rivals 4*
Jerald Foster Rivals 3* Vaha Vainuku Rivals 3*


I went alphabetically through the roster, mainly skipped the ones actually from Nebraska so I'm sure I missed a few 3* and maybe a couple of 4*'s.

These are only 52 players on the roster that are 3* and above. Christ 16 4 stars...Tell me again about the bare cupboard Scotty Frost was left with.

Is this enough research Throwbones?
Well now you’re just being lazy, lol...
 
I'm glad we didn't sign Farniok. He would be 3rd string on Iowa's line. Did Iowa recruit Tanner Farmer and Khalil Davis? If so, the Hawks dodged two bullets.

Of course, the above mentioned players might be performing a lot better with tutelage from the Iowa coaching staff.

Take a break while Cornholer fans look up tutelage.

Farniok drew a boneheaded personal foul at a critical juncture in the WI game a couple of weeks ago that put them in a third and forever situation when they would have been first down in the red zone had he not drawn the penalty. I muttered the same thing at the time, glad he’s a husker and not a Hawkeye.
 
I went alphabetically through the roster, mainly skipped the ones actually from Nebraska so I'm sure I missed a few 3* and maybe a couple of 4*'s.

These are only 52 players on the roster that are 3* and above. Christ 16 4 stars...Tell me again about the bare cupboard Scotty Frost was left with.

Is this enough research Throwbones?

That's about the bare minimum work you could do right there, pretty lazy if you're trying to make your point because what we were discussing was how many players were no longer with the team from those recruiting classes. You were vaunting the recruiting classes being full of talent and that Nebraska has no lack of talent. The point I am making is that the class rank from those recruiting classes is misleading and not a good stat to point to if you're trying to argue for talent on the roster. If you were to look at what is actually left on the roster, class ranks would look a lot different.

I think it's interesting that you want to argue about stars and how much better Nebraska should be because of stars, but Iowa's a perfect example of succeeding without a bunch of stars on the roster? Also, 16 4 star players? You think that's a lot over 5 classes? That's 3.33 4 star players per year. Full of talent?

Couple of things to start:
- 4 of the 52 players you listed are no longer on the team: Barnett, Bryant, Jefferson, Alexander - three 3* and one 4*
- 17 of the remaining 48 you listed are either in their first year with the team or using their first year of eligibility

Year / class rank / # of recruits on signing day / # and list of recruits gone from the class by ranking in the class

2018 / #21 / 25 / 4 players gone from 2018 class; #5, 7, 23, 25
2017 / #20 / 20 / 9; #1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 14, 17, 18
2016 / #24 / 21 / 8; #3, 5, 7, 11, 14, 16, 18, 20
2015 / #31 / 21 / 7; #5, 6, 11, 15, 16, 17, 21
2014 / #32 / 19 / 12; #2, 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25

So of the 106 players Nebraska signed over the last 5 years, 40 are gone from the program. 66 remain. If you want to stand by the recruiting rankings as your argument that Nebraska has so much talent currently on the roster, yet 38% of the recruits are not even on the team, your argument gets pretty weak.

Talent doesn't win games. Developed talent wins games. You win games with your juniors and seniors (which also happen to be depleted but also classes that were ranked in the low 30s to begin with) with a much smaller dose of sophomores and freshmen. Maybe the point I'm trying to make is that Nebraska has nowhere near the upperclassmen talent it needs to win games. Nebraska is playing on offense with 8 FR or SO starters, and 14 total on the 2-deep. 4 walk-ons on the two-deep. 11 players new to the field at Nebraska on the 2-deep. Does that sound like a recipe for success?

On the defensive side, there are 3 FR/SP starters, 9 total on the two-deep 1 walk-on, 5 new to the field. What's most concerning here is the actual number of upperclassmen who are playing, but you watch that defense and tell me how much flat out talent you see on the field.

Nebraska has some good football players, but not nearly enough of them. 0-6 is sort of an anomaly, the talent on this team is a probably better than 0-6, but when you want to use recruiting rankings to argue the talent depth on the team, you're missing the fact that only 62% of those recruiting classes are currently on the roster.
 
That's about the bare minimum work you could do right there, pretty lazy if you're trying to make your point because what we were discussing was how many players were no longer with the team from those recruiting classes. You were vaunting the recruiting classes being full of talent and that Nebraska has no lack of talent. The point I am making is that the class rank from those recruiting classes is misleading and not a good stat to point to if you're trying to argue for talent on the roster. If you were to look at what is actually left on the roster, class ranks would look a lot different.

I think it's interesting that you want to argue about stars and how much better Nebraska should be because of stars, but Iowa's a perfect example of succeeding without a bunch of stars on the roster? Also, 16 4 star players? You think that's a lot over 5 classes? That's 3.33 4 star players per year. Full of talent?

Couple of things to start:
- 4 of the 52 players you listed are no longer on the team: Barnett, Bryant, Jefferson, Alexander - three 3* and one 4*
- 17 of the remaining 48 you listed are either in their first year with the team or using their first year of eligibility

Year / class rank / # of recruits on signing day / # and list of recruits gone from the class by ranking in the class

2018 / #21 / 25 / 4 players gone from 2018 class; #5, 7, 23, 25
2017 / #20 / 20 / 9; #1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 14, 17, 18
2016 / #24 / 21 / 8; #3, 5, 7, 11, 14, 16, 18, 20
2015 / #31 / 21 / 7; #5, 6, 11, 15, 16, 17, 21
2014 / #32 / 19 / 12; #2, 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25

So of the 106 players Nebraska signed over the last 5 years, 40 are gone from the program. 66 remain. If you want to stand by the recruiting rankings as your argument that Nebraska has so much talent currently on the roster, yet 38% of the recruits are not even on the team, your argument gets pretty weak.

Talent doesn't win games. Developed talent wins games. You win games with your juniors and seniors (which also happen to be depleted but also classes that were ranked in the low 30s to begin with) with a much smaller dose of sophomores and freshmen. Maybe the point I'm trying to make is that Nebraska has nowhere near the upperclassmen talent it needs to win games. Nebraska is playing on offense with 8 FR or SO starters, and 14 total on the 2-deep. 4 walk-ons on the two-deep. 11 players new to the field at Nebraska on the 2-deep. Does that sound like a recipe for success?

On the defensive side, there are 3 FR/SP starters, 9 total on the two-deep 1 walk-on, 5 new to the field. What's most concerning here is the actual number of upperclassmen who are playing, but you watch that defense and tell me how much flat out talent you see on the field.

Nebraska has some good football players, but not nearly enough of them. 0-6 is sort of an anomaly, the talent on this team is a probably better than 0-6, but when you want to use recruiting rankings to argue the talent depth on the team, you're missing the fact that only 62% of those recruiting classes are currently on the roster.

Yes, its called superior coaching and program development.

You husker fans are full of excuses, I truly love the extent you went to TRY and prove poor Nebraska had all the talent leave.

It's called attrition, EVERY team has it EVERY year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sltldowney
Of course it won't happen, bit it sure would be hilarious if they were paying 3(or more) former coaches and ADs simultaneously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sltldowney
26M? Shouldn't be a problem. I saw Bill Moos today at Casey's buying a chit ton of lottery tickets.
 
Yes, its called superior coaching and program development.

You husker fans are full of excuses, I truly love the extent you went to TRY and prove poor Nebraska had all the talent leave.

It's called attrition, EVERY team has it EVERY year.

I haven't made an excuse about Nebraska sucking. Feel free to look through my posts if you think I'm wrong. I've noted multiple times that players have to be developed much better than Riley was doing. Physically we are behind. And we also have razor thin depth at a number of places because those recruiting classes you like to tout as being so strong are missing just under 40% of the scholarship players that were recruited to Nebraska. The issue can be multi-faceted, and it is.

Has Iowa had 40% of signees transfer or quit over the last 5 years? Of course every program has it, my point is that Nebraska's attrition is worse than most, and that's why the "Nebraska has talent, look at their recruiting classes!" holds very little water. You can't look at a recruiting class and say there is talent when 40% of the players, on average, aren't even on the team.
 
ADVERTISEMENT