Interesting take from a former Husker

[Huskerwisdom]

What I found interesting is developing our guards through the walk on system. I mean, playing guard is easier than tackle? I played receiver in high school so I’m not very well versed on the O-line play. If we can get home grown guys to play the guard and center spots, that would be amazing.

I think the reasoning here is that most teams are recruiting for taller, pro-style linemen. We are OK with shorter, but more athletic linemen who don't necessarily fit the mold for more pro style offenses.

We have a history of finding guys like that through the walk on program, so it would seem to be a great way for us to get a recruiting advantage through the walk-on program.

 

[HuskerLLM]

pretty clear we need a lot more depth on the DL. They did alright (not great, but serviceable) in the 1h, but were mostly blown off the ball in the 2h. Our safeties leave a lot to be desired. Lamar....doesn't really want to play. Lee and Bootle try but aren't great players. Would like to see more of what Cam Taylor can do - he looks the part.

Not just depth on DL, but guys that specifically fit a 3-4, we really have 4-3 personal up front right now. Carlos and Stille have added too much weight for example and become less productive because of it. Carlos and Khalil are 3-Technique DTs in a 4-3 and Stille a 4-3 DE. It is what it is, but D Daniels is the best thing going for us in the 3-4 and you can notice the difference when he is at nose vs Carlos

 

[bshirt73]

This is an interesting take, because we don't use a fullback in this offense. And I don't think we want to fill the guards spots with walk-ons like Conrad. We need better talent across the board.

Martinez, Washington, and Spielman are great, but other than them we are severely lacking young talent at the skill positions. You need multiple backs and 5 good receivers for this offense to really thrive. Our 3rd best receiver right now is a walk-on. We need more talent at the receiver position.

Well, without a good OLine even the best wrs in the nation aren't going help that much. Imo, a good OLine should be priority #1 by a country mile.

 

[t7w0c1_rivals]

He should be. He seems to wait for the action to come to him instead of filling a hole, but even if he did fill a hole he'd get trucked. I think he's the weakest link on a dismal defense.

I think you are right but Alex Davis and Freedom are not far behind.

 

[knightwxc5000]

Hard to argue with that. Although a couple more offensive linemen would be a good idea too.

It's actually easy to argue with that. Out-of-whack scholly distributions lead to glaring holes down the road. What they need is to purge the non-contributors and recruit better on the defensive side. If they need JUCOs as a stop-gap, then they need JUCOs. Lopsided scholly distributions is not the answer.

 

[WoodRiverJennings]

I think you are right but Alex Davis and Freedom are not far behind.

I can't remember what play it was, but I saw Freedom get completely blocked out of a play by a skinny WR. He ain't good.

 

[phoenix4nu]

It's actually easy to argue with that. Out-of-whack scholly distributions lead to glaring holes down the road. What they need is to purge the non-contributors and recruit better on the defensive side. If they need JUCOs as a stop-gap, then they need JUCOs. Lopsided scholly distributions is not the answer.

My mistake. I forgot that there will always be someone on here who will argue about anything. Even if they really agree with what was said.

 

[HCHTown]

TO used to put the best athletes on offense (per him). Then he changed his philosophy and emphasized athleticism on defense and moved gifted DL to OL as needed. Of course he needed linemen that could run in his offense. In any case DL upgrade has to be our #1A priority. OL (tackles) #1B.

Cam should start every game in the secondary.

 

[Okiesue]

This is great. But it was 5 games too late. And I know nothing about Weinmaster. But I do know I would be a much happier human if I never had to watch Young play football again.

Quote from article few years ago:

“Older guys used to bring him up before many even knew he existed on Nebraska's roster.

‘Weinmaster,’ Josh Banderas used to say. 'Watch out for Weinmaster.'

Wait, who?”

This is great. But it was 5 games too late. And I know nothing about Weinmaster. But I do know I would be a much happier human if I never had to watch Young play football again.

 

[1 nu rugby_rivals]

Fullback, or extra OL, anything to help block for the QB if we are running NFL level pass attempts......sorry but I don't even recognize this stuff they call football anymore, likely reason all these "records" are falling/ being set......just sayin!

 

[HuskerHusaria]

He said linebackers that want to destroy, not murder limo drivers!

Ray Lewis isn't a murderer.

Give up, already. This is just sad now.

 

[WoodRiverJennings]

Ray Lewis isn't a murderer.

Give up, already. This is just sad now.

lol

 

[WoodRiverJennings]

Ray Lewis isn't a murderer.

Give up, already. This is just sad now.

 

[t7w0c1_rivals]

http://<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="lt" dir="ltr">#91 paralysis by analysis?? <a href="https://t.co/PD1SpzTBxi">pic.twitter.com/PD1SpzTBxi</a></p>&mdash; jd (@JDB1G) <a href="https://twitter.com/JDB1G/status/1049191525270413312?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 8, 2018</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[danielwash]

Translation: He is playing the guys who give it 100%. We have enough talent this year to win a few games against teams like Minn, Ill, Bethune. To Beat team like Wisc, Mich, Ohio St and play for championships, we don't have enough raw talent to do it.

O

 

[gobigred670]

Have to use alot on our offensive line and a couple running backs, otherwise yes. The defense is garbage. I'm not sure it's the players faults tho.

It is the DC but unfortunately he is CSFs BFF so we are stuck with him and a scheme not well suited for the B10. Very, Very disappointing......

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

I think the reasoning here is that most teams are recruiting for taller, pro-style linemen. We are OK with shorter, but more athletic linemen who don't necessarily fit the mold for more pro style offenses.

We have a history of finding guys like that through the walk on program, so it would seem to be a great way for us to get a recruiting advantage through the walk-on program.

It is flawed thinking, and looking at the heights of the 3 lineman Frost has as commitments, he doesn't think we are OK with shorter OL.
6-6
6-6
6-4

Of the 80 or so OL that were offered about 7 or 8 are shorter than 6-4 and only about 15 are 6-4.

So that leaves about 55-60 offers for guys 6'5 or taller.

 

[huskerbaseball13]

It is the DC but unfortunately he is CSFs BFF so we are stuck with him and a scheme not well suited for the B10. Very, Very disappointing......

Why do you continue to say we? You have to do a better troll job if you want people to believe you aren’t an obsessed UCF “fan.”

 

[Huskerwisdom]

It is flawed thinking, and looking at the heights of the 3 lineman Frost has as commitments, he doesn't think we are OK with shorter OL.
6-6
6-6
6-4

Of the 80 or so OL that were offered about 7 or 8 are shorter than 6-4 and only about 15 are 6-4.

So that leaves about 55-60 offers for guys 6'5 or taller.

Not at all flawed on my part. Think of it this way. To get a taller lineman you have to offer a scholarship. To get a shorter lineman who has no other offers, you offer a walk on deal.

The way we are offering linemen just shows that we are paying a market price (even though we can fill part of the roster with shorter, "cheaper" investments through the walk-on program)

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

Not at all flawed on my part. Think of it this way. To get a taller lineman you have to offer a scholarship. To get a shorter lineman who has no other offers, you offer a walk on deal.

The way we are offering linemen just shows that we are paying a market price (even though we can fill part of the roster with shorter, "cheaper" investments through the walk-on program)

If your plan is to get rich making cheap investments it's a flawed plan.

 

[Huskerwisdom]

If your plan is to get rich making cheap investments it's a flawed plan.

Unfortunately for us, it is the ONLY plan that will work. the number of teams that have won ANYTHING in a situation like ours (not in a high talent HS state, not next to a high talent HS state, in the middle of nowhere) is pretty much us and nobody else.

And when we did win those titles, we figured out ways to stretch our talent further than anyone else. If we don't figure out how to use Walk-on players for real value, get used to being Minnesota

 

[Redscarlet]

I can't remember what play it was, but I saw Freedom get completely blocked out of a play by a skinny WR. He ain't good.

I’ve been complaining about him and D.Young for two seasons now.Both are liabilities on defense and don’t contribute worth a hoot..

 

[dollerroller]

It's just me, but I don't think using walk-ons on the OL and fullbacks is gonna to be a good long term strategy to help you win the Big 10 and compete for national titles.

 

[8th Street]

Throw Lightbourn in as a blocking fullback . . .

 

[dollerroller]

Legit question...

Why are Nebraska fans obsessed with walk-ons? What other program is having success utilizing walk-ons?

 

[Ewooc]

Legit question...

Why are Nebraska fans obsessed with walk-ons? What other program is having success utilizing walk-ons?

In the 90s we had had a ton. I am not sure but think we had many starters in those championship teams that started as walk ons. I believe even into the 70s and 80s. We have a lot too. Theory is walk on aren't use to be given everything in life. They will work harder to get what they want. When Billy C came in he he demolished it and that is when the down turn kinda started. So the thought process is if we can get that going again, success will follow like it did in the past. It is a tradition. So many of the old school traditions have been wiped out by coaches who had no clue. Not saying it will help, but it is a start int he right direction.

 

[tro80]

Legit question...

Why are Nebraska fans obsessed with walk-ons? What other program is having success utilizing walk-ons?

We want 125 to 140 or so guys on the squad. Gives you more guys for practice, getting down scouting report and presenting opponents' looks to the top units. With a limit of 88 players you can't do that without significant walkon numbers. Also, sets up more competition and as stated before most are there because they love football and they love the university. They often work harder than scholarship players and therefor can often set the tone in practice and offseason workouts, provided staff values them and treats them as an important part of the program. Most have at least sufficient athletic ability and projected ability to develope size to eventually compete. And invariably several in each class will have an impact on the field. Nebraska has had order walkons become all conference and even NFL players over the years.

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

Unfortunately for us, it is the ONLY plan that will work. the number of teams that have won ANYTHING in a situation like ours (not in a high talent HS state, not next to a high talent HS state, in the middle of nowhere) is pretty much us and nobody else.

And when we did win those titles, we figured out ways to stretch our talent further than anyone else. If we don't figure out how to use Walk-on players for real value, get used to being Minnesota

I don't buy into the "no one will come here", "in the middle of nowhere" stuff.

If you have a product people want to buy they will come. Right now, we don't have a product that people want to buy.

I am fortunate to work in a school district that has produced a ton of division 1 football and basketball players. I talk to these kids everyday, players that are going to places like Oklahoma, A&M, Ole Miss, LSU. In an overwhelming amount of the time, they chose the school based on the success of the team, the opportunity for early playing time, and schemes that fit what they think they do best. Location was way down the list.

The teams in the south, play athletes, play them early, and run schemes that fit the skill sets of the athletes.

If you are a top OL who is told by Alabama, LSU or OU that you will be given a chance to play early, and those schools have a track record of playing kids early, that carries weight. Why do you think Iowa and Wisconsin don't get tons of 4 and 5 star OL? They put as many OL in the league as anyone else, but they also don't have a history of playing young players. Top players want to play, not spend 3 years "developing" for the opportunity to play 2 years.

Yes, Nebraska may be able to compete for division titles with a similar approach to Wisconsin and Iowa, but that isn't the only way to get there.

 

[phoenix4nu]

I don't buy into the "no one will come here", "in the middle of nowhere" stuff.

If you have a product people want to buy they will come. Right now, we don't have a product that people want to buy.

I am fortunate to work in a school district that has produced a ton of division 1 football and basketball players. I talk to these kids everyday, players that are going to places like Oklahoma, A&M, Ole Miss, LSU. In an overwhelming amount of the time, they chose the school based on the success of the team, the opportunity for early playing time, and schemes that fit what they think they do best. Location was way down the list.

The teams in the south, play athletes, play them early, and run schemes that fit the skill sets of the athletes.

If you are a top OL who is told by Alabama, LSU or OU that you will be given a chance to play early, and those schools have a track record of playing kids early, that carries weight. Why do you think Iowa and Wisconsin don't get tons of 4 and 5 star OL? They put as many OL in the league as anyone else, but they also don't have a history of playing young players. Top players want to play, not spend 3 years "developing" for the opportunity to play 2 years.

Yes, Nebraska may be able to compete for division titles with a similar approach to Wisconsin and Iowa, but that isn't the only way to get there.

Pelini couldn't get defensive players to come here even though we had a top rated defense in 2009. I think it takes a combination of a good opportunity and good recruiters. Pelini had one but not the other.

 

[Huskerwisdom]

I don't buy into the "no one will come here", "in the middle of nowhere" stuff.

If you have a product people want to buy they will come. Right now, we don't have a product that people want to buy.

I am fortunate to work in a school district that has produced a ton of division 1 football and basketball players. I talk to these kids everyday, players that are going to places like Oklahoma, A&M, Ole Miss, LSU. In an overwhelming amount of the time, they chose the school based on the success of the team, the opportunity for early playing time, and schemes that fit what they think they do best. Location was way down the list.

The teams in the south, play athletes, play them early, and run schemes that fit the skill sets of the athletes.

If you are a top OL who is told by Alabama, LSU or OU that you will be given a chance to play early, and those schools have a track record of playing kids early, that carries weight. Why do you think Iowa and Wisconsin don't get tons of 4 and 5 star OL? They put as many OL in the league as anyone else, but they also don't have a history of playing young players. Top players want to play, not spend 3 years "developing" for the opportunity to play 2 years.

Yes, Nebraska may be able to compete for division titles with a similar approach to Wisconsin and Iowa, but that isn't the only way to get there.

so they choose it based on the success... OK, so name a school that isn't in Texas, Cali, Florida, Ohio or the SEC country or who is in the next state from them who has won national titles......

I'll wait

 

[Ewooc]

I don't buy into the "no one will come here", "in the middle of nowhere" stuff.

If you have a product people want to buy they will come. Right now, we don't have a product that people want to buy.

Yep, Just look at our volleyball program. We consistently have top 5 top 10 recruiting classes. Getting top players in the country year in and year out. Yes I know it isn't football. If the theory that nobody want to come to crappy Nebraska was true it would hold true for every sport.
In short most of these kids don't care where in the country they play. They don't care if it FL or California or Alabama or Nebraska. They want to go somewhere #1 where they can play asap, #2 have a chance to win games. Anyone that thinks location is the deciding factor is plain wrong. If Nebraska starts to get in the top 10 consistently and competing for Championships we will start seeing top 10 classes.

 

[Ewooc]

so they choose it based on the success... OK, so name a school that isn't in Texas, Cali, Florida, Ohio or the SEC country or who is in the next state from them who has won national titles......

I'll wait

Considering those locations take up about 75% of the population area of the US as well as having approx half the nccaa football programs in the country. Odds are that a school in one of those areas will win a NC way more frequently than others.

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

so they choose it based on the success... OK, so name a school that isn't in Texas, Cali, Florida, Ohio or the SEC country or who is in the next state from them who has won national titles......

I'll wait

1 of the 3 things I listed was success of the team. Try again

 

[Huskerwisdom]

1 of the 3 things I listed was success of the team. Try again

Yes, I saw all 3, but the OVERWHELMING evidence is against that. Kids will travel, but not in large enough numbers to support programs who aren't within or next to large talent pools.

If the things you mentioned were so important, then Minnesota would have a title since they last got one in 1960

If we look at our team using something like Porter's 5-forces we see quickly that if we try to use the model that other teams use we'll almost always lose to the teams that are in the big talent areas. We need to be innovative in a way that allows us to compete and to win national titles.

Osborne was innovative and used the walk-on program as a key factor that allowed him to use more scholarships to entice speed players and skill players. He also had a cutting offensive edge system, a cutting edge S&C program, and a program that could build depth enough to withstand the various ups and downs of recruiting cycles and injuries . We need to do something similar if we want to compete at the highest levels

 

[inWV]

I don't buy into the "no one will come here", "in the middle of nowhere" stuff.

If you have a product people want to buy they will come. Right now, we don't have a product that people want to buy.

I am fortunate to work in a school district that has produced a ton of division 1 football and basketball players. I talk to these kids everyday, players that are going to places like Oklahoma, A&M, Ole Miss, LSU. In an overwhelming amount of the time, they chose the school based on the success of the team, the opportunity for early playing time, and schemes that fit what they think they do best. Location was way down the list.

The teams in the south, play athletes, play them early, and run schemes that fit the skill sets of the athletes.

If you are a top OL who is told by Alabama, LSU or OU that you will be given a chance to play early, and those schools have a track record of playing kids early, that carries weight. Why do you think Iowa and Wisconsin don't get tons of 4 and 5 star OL? They put as many OL in the league as anyone else, but they also don't have a history of playing young players. Top players want to play, not spend 3 years "developing" for the opportunity to play 2 years.

Yes, Nebraska may be able to compete for division titles with a similar approach to Wisconsin and Iowa, but that isn't the only way to get there.

I think you offer the potential to play early and even with the ****** first year record, Frost has proof of concept there, with 7/11 starters on offense freshman and sophomores. However, there is absolutely no reason not to have a robust walk on program. NU has a great tradition of giving these kind of kids a chance. Get them in the program and the ones who really develop add depth and some will obviously out compete scholarship players.

 

[Huskerwisdom]

Considering those locations take up about 75% of the population area of the US as well as having approx half the nccaa football programs in the country. Odds are that a school in one of those areas will win a NC way more frequently than others.

since 1960 the odds are very poor - that's a span of almost 60 years so random chance has tossed up a few, depending on how you view the titles - Washington was cheating, but won; Colorado had a split title, BYU's title.. well, we can all see that for what it is. We are the only ones who did it multiple times, and I claim it is due to us adapting the program to use the few strengths we had instead of trying to copy programs that we will never beat from a pure talent acquisition standpoint

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

Yes, I saw all 3, but the OVERWHELMING evidence is against that. Kids will travel, but not in large enough numbers to support programs who aren't within or next to large talent pools.

If the things you mentioned were so important, then Minnesota would have a title since they last got one in 1960

If we look at our team using something like Porter's 5-forces we see quickly that if we try to use the model that other teams use we'll almost always lose to the teams that are in the big talent areas. We need to be innovative in a way that allows us to compete and to win national titles.

Osborne was innovative and used the walk-on program as a key factor that allowed him to use more scholarships to entice speed players and skill players. He also had a cutting offensive edge system, a cutting edge S&C program, and a program that could build depth enough to withstand the various ups and downs of recruiting cycles and injuries . We need to do something similar if we want to compete at the highest levels

Minnesota doesn't have a product to sell

 

[Huskerwisdom]

Minnesota doesn't have a product to sell

they were once a powerhouse also.. just like us, or rather more so as they have 7 titles they can claim versus our 5

name one f'ing school that has a national title and has even inconsistently competed for national titles that is in a location/situation like ours

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

I think you offer the potential to play early and even with the ****** first year record, Frost has proof of concept there, with 7/11 starters on offense freshman and sophomores. However, there is absolutely no reason not to have a robust walk on program. NU has a great tradition of giving these kind of kids a chance. Get them in the program and the ones who really develop add depth and some will obviously out compete scholarship players.

Having walk ons and building the program is not the same as exclusively recruiting walk ons in the middle of the OL, as was suggested by Shanle, and apparently trumpeted by others in this thread.

I agree there is nothing wrong with building a walk on program, but you have to recruit good players as well. Since a financial analogy was used earlier I will offer this, it's ok to play the lottery and scratch offs (getting walk on players that eventually start), but only if you are making contributions to the 401k (bunch of good to great recruits).

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

they were once a powerhouse also.. just like us, or rather more so as they have 7 titles they can claim versus our 5

name one f'ing school that has a national title and has even inconsistently competed for national titles that is in a location/situation like ours

Who cares about Minnesota, they stopped being competitive and people stopped going there.

Name one program, outside of Nebraska 20 years ago, that even inconsistently competes for national titles.