New Commit Tyson Terry is N (1 Viewer)

[Goskers07]

You think he’s only competing against other sophomores? He was manhandling seniors as a freshman.

Texas high schools have been doing this for decades… the ole 2 years of 8th grade trick. This is a good get.

Yes he was. Because he was their age. And agreed on the Texas part. It's actually pretty common in Nebraska too, particularly in wrestling families for some reason. Again, I'm not unhappy to have him, as our roster doesn't leave us with much wiggle room for DL as it is. But I feel he's a high floor, low ceiling kid.

 

[HerbRedman]

I'm in the same boat. I worry that he's dominating simply due to having developed before other kids his age. I'm glad to have him, but have always thought of him as a high floor low ceiling guy.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but @Ducksker (aka Kitty) is actually correct. The age difference makes less of a difference by the time you're 17-18 yrs old.

In youth sports, age difference is a massive deal at age 5...age 10...12,13, yes... but by the time you get to 17-18, it's much less of a big deal. I'm not worried about the age thing at all. If you're average, you're not gonna dominate a 17 yr old just because you're 18.

Now, if you're 23 and you've had 3 yrs in the Wisconsin weight room vs a 22 yr old who had 2 years in a JUCO weight room, then yes, the 23 yr old wins in that situation. But we're talking HS kid vs HS kid in this situation (same lack of resources), not a big deal IMHO.

 

[Carm]

Again, I'm not unhappy to have him, as our roster doesn't leave us with much wiggle room for DL as it is.

Actually this is a concern. He wants to be a DL. Nebraska and Cockeye believe he is an IOL and told him so. Nebraska agreed to let him come as a DL, Cockeye wouldn’t. I assume other schools also likely see him as an P5 IOL and not a DL.

 

[Red Finger]

I’m impressed with how fast you always get these posted

@Dell Husker deserves a raise I’m thinkin Gare

 

[Goskers07]

I can't believe I'm saying this, but @Ducksker (aka Kitty) is actually correct. The age difference makes less of a difference by the time you're 17-18 yrs old.

In youth sports, age difference is a massive deal at age 5...age 10...12,13, yes... but by the time you get to 17-18, it's much less of a big deal. I'm not worried about the age thing at all. If you're average, you're not gonna dominate a 17 yr old just because you're 18.

Now, if you're 23 and you've had 3 yrs in the Wisconsin weight room vs a 22 yr old who had 2 years in a JUCO weight room, then yes, the 23 yr old wins in that situation. But we're talking HS kid vs HS kid in this situation (same lack of resources), not a big deal IMHO.

Its less his age and more the development, although there's generally a correlation. We see it all the time with linemen. They get really big and strong fast in high school but fail to continue developing in college and plateau.

He came in full sized as a freshman and thats when the hype around him was biggest. Notice how it's seemed to have tailed off, whereas you'd expect a recruit that got offers that early to build on those offers.

Again, I hope I'm wrong, I just don't see him being much.

 

[vailhusker]

 

[vailhusker]

 

[vailhusker]

 

[vailhusker]

 

[Gman1228]

Actually this is a concern. He wants to be a DL. Nebraska and Cockeye believe he is an IOL and told him so. Nebraska agreed to let him come as a DL, Cockeye wouldn’t. I assume other schools also likely see him as an P5 IOL and not a DL.

Sounds like Nebraska. Those situations normally work out well for us!

 

[DuckSker]

There’s a difference between having concern that a kid will be playing high school ball at 20 and either plateauing/not reaching their potential as a result vs a kid of normal age who other than a mission trip is on a normal timeline.

So if he was just finishing up his junior year of high school you’d feel better about him as a recruit compared to the fact he’s just finishing his sophomore year? He won’t improve when he gets on a college campus because he spent 1 year too long in HS? Trying to wrap my brain around that.

Imo this is just a free redshirt year for us. Send him a strength program and get him started now. Let him get older. Most all guys peak physically 25-28 anway. If your players are plateuing at 20 its probably a coaching/ development issue. Or they’re just a bust to begin with.

He reminds me of Logan Jones from Lewis Central a few years back who is Cockeye’s center now. I think he’d contribute early if he goes the IOL route

 

[Scarlet ObsessioN]

I can't believe I'm saying this, but @Ducksker (aka Kitty) is actually correct. The age difference makes less of a difference by the time you're 17-18 yrs old.

In youth sports, age difference is a massive deal at age 5...age 10...12,13, yes... but by the time you get to 17-18, it's much less of a big deal. I'm not worried about the age thing at all. If you're average, you're not gonna dominate a 17 yr old just because you're 18.

Now, if you're 23 and you've had 3 yrs in the Wisconsin weight room vs a 22 yr old who had 2 years in a JUCO weight room, then yes, the 23 yr old wins in that situation. But we're talking HS kid vs HS kid in this situation (same lack of resources), not a big deal IMHO.

Agree with you and *checks notes.. Ducksker (aka Kitty) .


I don't understand how another year of age without sacrificing eligibility is a bad thing. He's going to be a near grown ass man when het gets on campus and may be able to play sooner physically.

 

[2010sarenevercoming]

Is he for sure coming in with the '25 class, or would he potentially reclassify to 2024? Seems like he'd be about as good a candidate as any to do that.

 

[1HuskerDad]

 

[Tsakoi]

1: I'm happy about this commit. We need the mood in Omaha to change about Nebraska football and it looks like it is starting to do just that.

2: Have we figured out how old he is and in what grade he is actually in?

3: Has someone asked him what position he wants to play in college because he is listed as DL but some people project him as OL? I think he plays both at North.

4: I honestly don't care about his wrestling stuff. Good for him, but Hutmacher and Benhart were good wrestlers too and we have yet to see them play good football.

 

[ShortSideOption]

 

[Napkins]

Is he for sure coming in with the '25 class, or would he potentially reclassify to 2024? Seems like he'd be about as good a candidate as any to do that.

I wondered the same thing but his desire to be an undefeated 4x wrestling state champ seems pretty strong and would keep him through ‘25.

 

[BIG TONE SOPRANO]

Now the brainiacs on here have stooped to arguing about a player’s age. Don’t you people have homes?

 

[HerbRedman]

Agree with you and *checks notes.. Ducksker (aka Kitty) .


I don't understand how another year of age without sacrificing eligibility is a bad thing. He's going to be a near grown ass man when het gets on campus and may be able to play sooner physically.

Yeah the argument appears to be:

(a) Terry only looks good on film because he's dominating younger players​

(b) Terry would be a worse player if his video showed him against equally-aged players​

(c) Rhule and his staff aren't smart enough to understand this and thus they are being hoodwinked into signing a poor player bc they're being fooled by his video​

This sounds like a very, very dumb argument to make. You're basically saying that Rhule doesn't know how to evaluate HS film and that you, message board poster, could do it better. I assure you, Rhule and his staff are better at evaluating HS film than every single poster on this or any message board. In 25 yrs in coaching, the dude has probably watched over 1m+ hours of HS film. This includes players in every situation: weak competition, good competition, bad conditions, good conditions, good coaching, bad coaching, ref errors and on and on.

The idea that Rhule, w/ his 25 yrs of coaching experience, doesn't know how to evaluate Terry's film (but the message boarders can do it better) is so fuckin stupid, I'm actually surprised anyone on here is taking this tack.

 

[Napkins]

Yeah the argument appears to be:

(a) Terry only looks good on film because he's dominating younger players​

(b) Terry would be a worse player if his video showed him against equally-aged players​

(c) Rhule and his staff aren't smart enough to understand this and thus they are being hoodwinked into signing a poor player bc they're being fooled by his video​

This sounds like a very, very dumb argument to make. You're basically saying that Rhule doesn't know how to evaluate HS film and that you, message board poster, could do it better. I assure you, Rhule and his staff are better at evaluating HS film than every single poster on this or any message board. In 25 yrs in coaching, the dude has probably watched over 1m+ hours of HS film. This includes players in every situation: weak competition, good competition, bad conditions, good conditions, good coaching, bad coaching, ref errors and on and on.

The idea that Rhule, w/ his 25 yrs of coaching experience, doesn't know how to evaluate Terry's film (but the message boarders can do it better) is so fuckin stupid, I'm actually surprised anyone on here is taking this tack.

Yeah if it’s going to be a problem for him it will happen if he is 25 or 26 trying to make it to the league as a rookie. As far as we are concerned, if he is good, he is good. Doesn’t matter if he is 25 and beating up on other teams or 22. Obviously he would develop more in our program than at Omaha North, but as was pointed out, he isn’t giving up eligibility to stick around and wrestle.