Since it usually takes all cycle before major events like the new facilities, great season to impact recruiting in full do we expect a recruiting bump next year? Not sure what else we would need to take the next step in recruiting.
2020 recruiting
- Thread starter torque-cat
- Start date
A season the would be viewed as equal to this year in any respect would be enough to keep the positive narrative going. This has been a very slow process and I don't expect we will suddenly be recognized as a top ten program. A nine win season would be OK. The thing that would make that different is beating OSU or even UM, Stanford would be nice but a nine win that includes beating a couple of big boys would be progress even if we don't win the B1G or even the West. More important than being a flash in the pan is continuing to maintain a forward progression.
Any nine-win season is GREAT in my book. It’s hard to do year in and year out!
That’s the next step in the field. But should facilities, multiple 9-10 win seasons and a big ten west title pay dividends next year in a recruiting bump—ie from top 50 type classes to top 30-40? Granted we will always go after good fit guys over star ratings there are no doubt guys we lose to Stanford, NE, UM, Wisc etc.... With facilities, winning seasons, big ten west title, more cats in NFL be enough to land more of the next tier guys.
Yes, I think now we're going to start seeing the sustained recruiting bump with the facility open and another good season with the division title in the books; the extra bowl wins and constantly being in the national discussion as a ranked team matters as well.
The 2020 class is really the first one where you'd expect all of those factors to come together.
The biggest thing to keep in mind is that most of our recruiting targets won't change.
What will change is that we'll connect with more of our early/higher priority targets and not have to go as deep down our list of targets to fill the class.
It's going to be tough to gauge numerically. The recruiting sites rankings are weighted towards quantity, which will always disfavor us in terms of their composite numbers.
If we're getting even more of our first choice guys, that's what matters.
I look more at comparable offers these days because that's really where you can differentiate between our recent recruiting results and prior years. These days we're seeing most of our guys get multiple Power 5 offers. I expect to see those numbers improve even above where they are and expect to see us taking more guys away from the top programs.
That may not show up on in the rankings that the recruiting sites show, but it's one way to tell we're making progress.
I wouldn't sweat too much about top 30 classes. If we get between 30-40 then it's essentially a top 10 class when you consider that we keep our payers on averge of 3.7 years while I'm guessing OSU, Alabama, etc maybe keep players on average of 2.0<.
As far as recruiting, the bar will have to be set greater than 9 win seasons as we are already getting players who want to play for winning teams. As a fan, I'm spoiled now and I'm probably taking for granted that we are moving ahead of the entire division. Anything less than a big ten championship will be a letdown now.
And I think we absolutely smoke OSU next year. This was maybe the toughest schedule we have had in a decade, yet we smoked most of the good teams and also had the playoff caliber teams in cuffs until the late fourth quarters. With a greater potential for QB production next year with Hunter, I may even go to Vegas and place a bet at the sportsbook that we will go to the playoffs.
Isn't that what we are all stoked to find out?
Cameron Martinez is as good an example of a test case for how far we've come as any. I would also add the better 2020 Illinois prospects like Mills, Skoronski and Jennings to that list. Martinez is a great NU fit and a coveted play maker. But the Michigan prep also now has offers from not only Michigan, but MSU and PSU as well. We have hopefully improved our appeal to the point where more great NU fits from the BIG footprint choose NU over home state U. knowing they can hold there head high both academically and athletically among those around them who for their own reasons would have liked them to pledge State U.
One thing for sure. We are already getting a higher percentage of the better prospects. Keep that going and add a handful of the best prospects and I believe we'll be consistently competitive with Wisconsin and Nebraska and others for West Division titles and more.
It's a great time to be a Wildcat football fan.
GOUNUII
Bad guess. The NFL rule is a player must be 3 years from high school graduation to be eligible for the draft. So at a minimum the top programs have guys at least 3 seasons. I will grant you that they don't stay as long as at NU though. NU must be around 4 years, taking into account guys who are lost to injury and also those who don't red shirt.
There are many that make it to 4. Saying they average <2 is just stupid.
Yes, it certainly is far greater than 2 years. I think the point is they will have larger classes which further exacerbates the ranking differential. OSU is a horrible example in that they would spank us silly is ranking even if we had the same number of recruits. Better example would be mid tier Big Ten teams.
As a reference point OSU has signed 97 through their last 4 completed recruiting classes. NU has signed 77.
That’s one reason I didn’t say top 30 classes but moving into top 30-40 seems like a solid improvement if sustained over time. We lose A-list guys to Stanford, ND, UM, Wisc and some others. We occasionally beat those teams for guys who are mutual A-list but a solid sign to me would be 2-3 more is those types signing each class meaning 10-12 more guys like that on our roster.
Yeah, if you really want to use numbers, probably just use 247's composite rating (I know it's laughable to think about estimates to multiple decimal places about recruits, but it's the only estimate worth any kind of value to that degree).
If our average class rating reaches above 87 in the 247 composite, we're probably going to have classes in the top 30 by average rating.
If our average class rating reaches above 86 in the 247 composite, we're probably going to have classes in the top 40 by average rating.
We're already pretty close to the latter the past couple of years.
I agree that Nine win seasons are great but if we are talking about advancing the program and becoming consistently a top 20 program with real hope of B1G Championship and even National Championship, Nine wins is the new bottom. Not too many programs are ranked in the top 20 with only 9 wins.
IMO, The ratings are influenced by which school signs the prospect and often be which school has allegedly offered the recruit ( even if it is not commitable). Wisconsin secured two 2020 commits in the last couple of weeks. Neither had a rating when they committed. Cole Dakovich suddenly got a 87. His only reported offer is Wisconsin, Chimere Dike suddenly got a 86. His only other offer is Iowa State who would offer me if I had a recruiting profile. Compare that to NU verbal Jaheem Joseph. Another unranked player at verbal. Joseph eventually got a rating but it was a 83. Had P5 offers from Michigan, Louisville, and Syracuse. Subsequently, he has received offers from Nebraska and Vanderbilt. Since he verballed, he has dropped about 100 players in the rankings. Offers are not a perfect measure, especially for early verbals, but I bet the ratings would be reversed if the schools were flipped.
Last edited:
Yeah that's the main reason why I've switched to mostly focusing on comparable offers.
Numerically there's a bias towards giving higher numbers to recruits that go towards bigger programs. Especially with early commits.
What are the chances one of their analysts sat down and watched extensive film on Dakovich and compared him to similar players at his position? How many do they have reviewing film? What are their qualifications? We know publishers (such as Lou V.) aren't doing any film analysis.
I think we have generally seen that there is not really much difference between top 40 and top 50 and I would guess that the difference is not huge between 30-40. But getting to inside the top 30 would be pretty big. Bigger is getting more A list recruits because even if they are rated the same...They were A list for a reason.
There is really not much difference between 40 and 50. A little more between 30 and 40 but still not major. But getting into the top 30 would be pretty major as every team in top 30 had at least 4 4 star guys. Just as big if not bigger is getting more of our A list guys.. They were A list for a reason.
For example our recruiting class was ranked 47 while IA was 40. They have 20 recruits with 1 4 star 19 3 stars. We are at 19 with 18 three stars. Pretty similar. At 32 is Missouri with 22 recruits. 20 3 star, 1 4 star and one below 3. So between 32 and 47 not really much difference. 1 four star and a couple extra recruits. But get into the top 30/31 (MSU is at 31 with 19 recruits but 4 are 4 star )and suddenly you are looking at 4 4 stars per year. Think that might make a difference?
Reminded of an adage in coin collecting. Buy the coin and not the holder. Get the guy you want and not the rating which as we have seen can be pretty deceptive
Likely we are talking our average guy is in the program 4+ years and their recruits average time in the program is 3+
Shouldn't "game day" home atmosphere be the next thing that needs to come together
to close loop vs. "competitors" re:"top" recruits? Anything wrong with making "Attending
Home Football Games 101" a 1 credit class?
to close loop vs. "competitors" re:"top" recruits? Anything wrong with making "Attending
Home Football Games 101" a 1 credit class?
They'll be announcing a stadium renovation sometime in the next 18 months I'd guess.
After the stadium renovation, we can see what needs to be worked on for gameday atmosphere.
The next thing that needs to come together is that NU has an OC and all offensive position coaches that are as good as our DC and his coaching staff. Recruiting “top recruit” offensive players, particularly explosive play makers, will follow.
I really am at a loss to understand the dissatisfaction with Coach McCall among a small group of fans. I think he has done a great job in devising game plans to utilize our players' skills and minimize their weaknesses. In addition, he has been largely able to overcome the problems posed by poor OL play. Scoring enough points to win is no easy task; please do not minimize it. I look forward to seeing our offense with Anderson coaching the OL.
We have arguably the best DC in the country. Not sure you can expect to have that at every position. That would be like having a first round draft pick at every position. Nice aspiration but won’t actually happen.
This year especially isn't the year to criticize McCall given he did a good job in navigating the significant changes across the offense across the year (starting with CT on a restricted play count, handling the loss of Larkin, handling the addition of Bowser, proper adjustments in 2nd halves against Ohio State/Utah). Our offense may not have been efficient or high flying, but it got the job done when we needed it.
This season was McCall's best as OC; rare to navigate that many changes to the offense after we had a stable offense for 3 years.
Although I disagree that there is only a small groups of fans that are disappointed with the offense, I do agree that, after the QB, the OL is the starting point in a good offense and so I’m very curious/excited to see how the offense responds this year and whether a more effective OL, a more mobile QB, and —hopefully—the arrival/emergence of good receivers will allow better, more creative, harder to defend play calling. My point was that the offense has been substandard for some time and while the HC ultimately holds the whip on replacing position coaches, the OC is ultimately accountable for the offense’s results. So, while I’m not cynical about the potential of the offense, I’m definitely in wait-and-see mode. ( Also agree that getting an OC as good as our DC was an overstatement on my part. Should have said “somewhat comparable” or something like that )
I'll be interested in seeing what happens with a QB coming in who is generally considered to be top-flight and some incoming recruits who seem to have possibilities. As always, adequate OL play will be a key. I thought OL play in the B1G was substandard as a whole last year. Lines such as Wisconsin, Iowa and Michigan had their moments, but didn't live up to all the hype. I think NU's run D was good last season, but a Wisconsin line that can only get 46 yards for a back like Taylor against us is not a great line.
But I believe they got him more than 100 yds against everyone else. And one of the things that got him off the field against us was his fumbles
End the idiot BBQ sauce races. Focus on football, not advertising.
Are you talking about 9 wins including or excluding bowl games? Because 10 teams in the final CFP Top 20 had 9 wins or less.
The dissatisfaction stems from the fact that our offense is consistently ranked in the lower half of Division I along almost all key metrics. It didn't used to be that way under Dunbar, Wilson, and Brandon. Those guys made it look easier gaining yardage and scoring points. With aguably less talented players or at least depth according to the narrative on these boards. That's why.
Maybe it was because Cushing's failure to develop the OL was the reason and McCall had no say over who coached the OL or isn't responsible for that part of the offense, which I have doubts about, but I guess we will see what happens now that Anderson is here.
Yes, but it would be nice to have a decent OC AND a decent DC. It seems that since Walker, we've either had great offense or a great defense, but complemented by a horrendous defense or medicore at best offense. No wonder we haven't won a B1G in almost 2 decades.
Keep in mind that Fitz may well prefer a ball-control, mistake-free strategy for offense and win the close games with defense and timely offense. That has been the formula. The RBs have barely lost any fumbles over the years but our worst loss was when Thorson threw a bunch of TOs. Alabama became a dynasty with that formula, despite insane talent. Also, we will see what happens with Hunter at QB. We thought our run-blocking was horrible early this year and blamed the OL but clearly we had a frosh RB who found holes on virtually every run so it wasn't all on the OL.
Alabama clearly doesn't play that way anymore. And it would be nice to accept that you CAN have a great offense and a great defense. I'd rather do the Clemson strategy or whatever Ohio State was doing up until this year than whatever we're doing now.
