Look at this graph

[Huskersballz]

Pretty sobering

 

[tman87]

We definitely top (or bottom, however you want to view it) the list of losing the most with a 26ish yearly recruiting ranking.

In other words, we had decent talent, often top 25 talent, but got the LEAST out of that talent with our collective coaches over that time frame.

Sad. We used to get the most out of our players and talent. T.O. and staff knew what the hell they were doing, had a cogent plan, and stuck with it. Despite what some think, there were more tweaks each year than anyone outside of the program realized. So not only was T.O. and staff recruiting well, but developing very well, and built our team with a long-term vision and plan.

 

[2010sarenevercomingback]

 

[HerbRedman]

 

[Huskersballz]

Glad someone got the meme reference

 

[Toe]

 

[tman87]

Yet again, topping (or bottoming), the "worst of" on the whole chart. None if this is surprising... we have all seen it play out for too many years to want to remember now.

This is a sure sign of a systemic error/weakness in the University leadership. Bad decisions from the top down. Same thing happens in Pro sports - poorly managed teams, with poor ownership, rarely do well.

 

[vailhusker]

 

[bbenson67]

Consistent winners have a combination of 3 things. A vision or scheme they recruit to. Top tier coaching and recruiting. Elite level athletes. It's a 3 legged stool that requires all 3 legs to be solid.

Success builds its own momentum in terms of recruiting. You will always get at least a look from top athletes especially if they think it may improve their chances of going to the next level after college.

 

[Stan Raymond]

Consistent winners have a combination of 3 things. A vision or scheme they recruit to. Top tier coaching and recruiting. Elite level athletes. It's a 3 legged stool that requires all 3 legs to be solid.

Success builds its own momentum in terms of recruiting. You will always get at least a look from top athletes especially if they think it may improve their chances of going to the next level after college.

I'd change "A vision or scheme they recruit to." to Are always adapting scheme for players and changes in the game. Great coaches are always tweaking and adjusting schemes. Look at how different the schemes changed under TO and Saban.