Husker Max

Husker Max

huskermax.com
Everything you ever wanted to know about the Huskers www.huskermax.com
Husker Max Asked by Husker Max
1/22/2015

What is the more important component of the coaching staff's job?

27%
Recruiting

2

73%
Player development WINNER

10

27%
Recruiting

2 Comments
Norman Cummins
0
Norman Cummins

Start at a higher level of talent.

Reply
Kyle King
0
Kyle King

While there are exceptions to this rule (TCU, Boise State, etc.) the most proven way to have sustained success in college football is to recruit at a high level. While player development is certainly important, and it would be foolish to say you can have success purely with recruiting, it's no accident that the four teams in the College Football Playoff this year are considered four of the top recruiting schools in the nation. For an interesting read on this: http://www.si.com/football/2013/02/04/recruiting-rankings-predictive-accuracy

Reply

73%
Player development

10 Comments
Terry Rasmussen
2
Terry Rasmussen

Really needs to be equal

Reply
Gene Baker
1
Gene Baker

No one comes complete with all his ability fully developed. So every player no matter how good, still must be developed in order to have a championship level team.

Reply
Rick Keane
1
Rick Keane

player development brings recruits.

Reply
James Traut
1
James Traut

At NU, Osborne realized he couldn't compete head-to-head with Switzer at OU-- hence focus on development.

Reply
Joel A. De Ford
0
Joel A. De Ford

Lesser talent can be made great with good coaching, but great talent will go nowhere without good coaching.

Reply
Arlie Rauch
0
Arlie Rauch

Without player development, even very talented guys will fail to contribute well to the team.

Reply
Keith Petrie
0
Keith Petrie

You can recruit and win with players who are good... Can work hard learn and execute... And play as a team! Play with heart! GBR

Reply
Jay Johnsen
0
Jay Johnsen

While recruiting talent is obviously vital to a seems success, stars next to a players name on scout and rivals don't necessarily mean they're the best players available. Personally, I'll take a kids desire to be the best, work ethic, and humbleness (i.e. Ameer Abdullah), over a kid with 5 stars, dripping with talent, but has no desire to get better. Just take a peak at an NFL roster, most are made up of 3 star prospects. While you could argue that it is a numbers game (the ratio between 5 and 3 stars), I'd still presume its because of the "development" of talent. Furthermore, I think of it this way. A players rating is based on 1-99 (99 being the best, J.J. Watt, Calvin Johnson etc.), say a 5 star kid out of high school is roughly 75, and a 3 star is around 50. Have you seen some of these 18 year old kids that have a 5 star rating? They look around 30 with full beards. These are basically men playing amongst kids, so of course they're going to make a bigger impact on the field. However, I don't want to categorize all 5 stars in this manner for it is not true. While 3 stars on the other hand, may only be 50 right now, but their potential is much higher than 5 stars. Maybe they don't have much muscle, but a huge frame that has the potential. Maybe they can run a 40 in 4.5 seconds, but has not developed lateral movements. My point is that while 5 stars may have more of an immediate impact, 3 stars may have more of a ceiling, and may become better football players if "developed."

Reply
Bart Burroughs
0
Bart Burroughs

Osborne and his staff were masters of development. both are important but you won't always get the 4 and 5 star studs.

Reply
Ron Ames
0
Ron Ames

All players need growth -- without development, even 5*'s not attain full potential.

Reply
Husker Max Asked by Husker Max
7 months left

Do you think online sports betting will be allowed in Nebraska in November?

Yes

0

No

0

Yes

0 Comment
No one has commented yet

No

0 Comment
No one has commented yet
Do you support a direct compensation model for college athletes?

Do you support a direct compensation model for college athletes?

Yes

3

No

6

Yes

3 Comments
Loren Zimmerman
0
Loren Zimmerman

It has to fair across the board, from Fordham to Alabama. one monthly stipend for everyone, not just scholarship players. There has to be a limit on how many players all schools should abide by. Determine the national budget and every school must contribute.

Reply
Jacob Moseman
0
Jacob Moseman

Compensation has always been tied to market value. These athletes are worth far more than they're being compensated, and that's been the case for over a century. Hence, they've been ripped off. I support salary, salary cap, and education on how to invest it in 401k style accounts.

Reply
Visitor
0
Visitor

Much more controllable, and much more equitable.

Reply

No

6 Comments
Doug Einsel
0
Doug Einsel

Everyone who already commented believes in the same thing I do.

Reply
Chuck Siegel
0
Chuck Siegel

Compensation changes the entire dynamic of college athletics, and not in a positive way.

Reply
Robert Lloyd
0
Robert Lloyd

They should be students and NOT professional athletes. If they want to get paid they can go pro. Personally, I believe they should cancel all sports in public schools and colleges though I love our Huskers.

Reply
Don Scott
0
Don Scott

Put myself through school in the 70's. They are getting for exchange of their athletic prowess what I had to work and save for. The two summers after high school I drove alfalfa trucks 12 hours a day 7 days a week. EARN IT!

Reply
Scott Ferguson
0
Scott Ferguson

They already live better than most students. Free room and board, tutors, clothing, and actual education cost.

Reply
Dan List
0
Dan List

They are compensated with room and board plus an education. The perks they get as athletes now are unbelievable!!!

Reply

We use cookies to ensure you get the best possible experience on our website. Learn more OK, GOT IT