Online Now 441

The Bone Yard

The place for inside information on the Nebraska Cornhuskers

On this Board 325
Record: 1943 (5/25/2013)

Online now 553
Record: 4815 (3/13/2012)

Reply

Grade the class!

  • klein12 said...

    Who would that be? I think I see a few who might be seen as reaches (Kevin Maurice, Drake Martinez, Boaz Joseph) but there's enough people who I trust that like all three that it's hard for me to classify them as reaches. Maybe projects.

    Gladney, Maurice, Miller, Boaz.

    You can call them projects, I call them reaches.

    This post was edited by Landohusker on 2/7/2013 at 12:31 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    Landohusker

  • Landohusker said...

    Gladney, Maurice, Miller, Boaz.

    Miller? The long snapper is a reach -- that is a reach to say that. He will start for 4 years as a long snapper. You know what other program signed a long snapper as a specialty player -- Alabama.

    cmurchison

  • cmurchison said...

    Miller? The long snapper is a reach -- that is a reach to say that. He will start for 4 years as a long snapper. You know what other program signed a long snapper as a specialty player -- Alabama.

    Bama has talent on top of talent, do we?

    signature image signature image signature image

    Landohusker

  • klein12 said...

    the only thing I disagree with here is OT/OG, I think we did dang well in this area.

    They did well no doubt but I would trade Hannon & Johnson for any combination of

    Ethan Pocic (LSU - IL), Kyle Bosch (UM - IL), David Dawson (UM-MI), Patrick Kugler (UM - PA), Dorian Johnson (PItt - PA), Steven Elmer (ND - MI), Evan Lisle (OSU - OH), Chris Fox (UM - CO), Logan Tulley-Tillman (UM - IL)

    and not bat an eye. There was a great opportunity to pull in immediate help with Finnin & Chongo, then pull high school OL in Knevel, two kids above (hell id keep Hannon if it ment G. Miller wasnt taking up space but thats another discussion) and add them to Thurston, Reeves, Sterup and then hit the midland region in 2014 for another three high level OL. We simply put have got to stop losing so much OL talent in Big Ten country, Michigan for pete sake took five of the best OL in the entire region and they also happened to be five high level OL prospects.

    signature image

    Bamboo, or else...

    Panda_Bear

  • Landohusker said...

    Gladney, Maurice, Miller, Boaz.

    You can call them projects, I call them reaches.

    Gladney isn't a reach. I'll stake my claim to that one.

    The other three I don't dispute much:

    Maurice is a senior film guy. Thought it was telling that a few teams showed up late. I like Collins a lot more.

    Boaz is liked a lot by our national analysts but I'm not sold either.

    Miller is a long snapper. I've got no issue giving him a scholarship. He'll have more than earned it by the end of his sophomore year.

    Twitter: @mikejschaefer Email: mschaefer@247sports.com

    Mike Schaefer ●

  • Mike Schaefer said...

    Gladney isn't a reach. I'll stake my claim to that one.

    The other three I don't dispute much:

    Maurice is a senior film guy. Thought it was telling that a few teams showed up late. I like Collins a lot more.

    Boaz is liked a lot by our national analysts but I'm not sold either.

    Miller is a long snapper. I've got no issue giving him a scholarship. He'll have more than earned it by the end of his sophomore year.

    Saved me some typing! Perfect.

    Big Red Phoenix

  • Panda_Bear said...

    They did well no doubt but I would trade Hannon & Johnson for any combination of

    Ethan Pocic (LSU - IL), Kyle Bosch (UM - IL), David Dawson (UM-MI), Patrick Kugler (UM - PA), Dorian Johnson (PItt - PA), Steven Elmer (ND - MI), Evan Lisle (OSU - OH), Chris Fox (UM - CO), Logan Tulley-Tillman (UM - IL)

    and not bat an eye. There was a great opportunity to pull in immediate help with Finnin & Chongo, then pull high school OL in Knevel, two kids above (hell id keep Hannon if it ment G. Miller wasnt taking up space but thats another discussion) and add them to Thurston, Reeves, Sterup and then hit the midland region in 2014 for another three high level OL. We simply put have got to stop losing so much OL talent in Big Ten country, Michigan for pete sake took five of the best OL in the entire region and they also happened to be five high level OL prospects.

    I agree with your thoughts, but still think the class is worthy of a B. Misses at DT, CB and WR make it hard to justify anything higher, imo.

    Big Red Phoenix

  • Landohusker said...

    Gladney, Maurice, Miller, Boaz.

    You can call them projects, I call them reaches.

    I'll disagree on Miller, myself. If Miller can comes in, as expected, and replace Mangieri from day one -- It will have been a major success. It was a need, the coaches thought it was a large enough need to use a scholarship on, and Miller is expected to do well. I won't act like I know a damn thing about sizing up a long snapper and his potential, but those better-informed than me seem to think highly of him. Hard for me to call a player a reach when he's looked at as top-ten in his position.

    signature image signature image signature image

    BornToBeRed ●

  • BornToBeRed said...

    I'll disagree on Miller, myself. If Miller can comes in, as expected, and replace Mangieri from day one -- It will have been a major success. It was a need, the coaches thought it was a large enough need to use a scholarship on, and Miller is expected to do well. I won't act like I know a damn thing about sizing up a long snapper and his potential, but those better-informed than me seem to think highly of him. Hard for me to call a player a reach when he's looked at as top-ten in his position.

    top 3

    klein12 ●

  • klein12 said...

    top 3

    247 says #3, Scout says #2 in the class, #4 on Chris Sailer Kicking, Rivals doesn't rank LS.

    I was just being generous in my refute. biggrin

    signature image signature image signature image

    BornToBeRed ●

  • Hell I'll give it an A for us Bone Hard Lemonade drinkers. A+ if we could have snagged Willis or Hooks. Love every single player in this class.

    bobrosshairclub

  • Scooby said...

    If I graded the class on a scale of what I think we should usually do then my grade would be different. By this I mean what should be the average class we bring in, what would be below or above that average. Also I used the word should not have. What do we think nebraska is capable of bringing in as an average?

    With that type of thinking I would give this class a c+. By that I mean a little above average. I think we should be able to on average bring in classes similar to this. We were ranked about 23 according to 247. A good class would be more like 15-17 and a great class would be 12 or better. So thinkin of it that way I would say c+.

    The rankings of the class range from 11-23 so we are between a great class and a C+ class?

    cmurchison

  • BornToBeRed said...

    I'll disagree on Miller, myself. If Miller can comes in, as expected, and replace Mangieri from day one -- It will have been a major success. It was a need, the coaches thought it was a large enough need to use a scholarship on, and Miller is expected to do well. I won't act like I know a damn thing about sizing up a long snapper and his potential, but those better-informed than me seem to think highly of him. Hard for me to call a player a reach when he's looked at as top-ten in his position.

    It is a reach to me because we need players, in other positions than to save a schollie for a LS.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Landohusker

  • cmurchison said...

    The rankings of the class range from 11-23 so we are between a great class and a C+ class?

    Scout and ESPN suck, so we are between a 17-20 class(18-20). IYAM. Even though we should be 18th on rivals than 17th.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Landohusker

  • Landohusker said...

    Gladney, Maurice, Miller, Boaz.

    You can call them projects, I call them reaches.

    Gladney is NOT a reach. Guaranteed. You put Gladney on a team with a Qb that isnt god awful he would be a high 4* or perhaps better. Saying Gladney is a reach leads me to believe all you do is stargaze.

    signature image signature image signature image

    iBleedRed6801 ●

  • Mike Schaefer said...

    Gladney isn't a reach. I'll stake my claim to that one.

    The other three I don't dispute much:

    Maurice is a senior film guy. Thought it was telling that a few teams showed up late. I like Collins a lot more.

    Boaz is liked a lot by our national analysts but I'm not sold either.

    Miller is a long snapper. I've got no issue giving him a scholarship. He'll have more than earned it by the end of his sophomore year.

    Should have read this before posting my last comment. clap

    signature image signature image signature image

    iBleedRed6801 ●

  • cdcins

  • Landohusker said...

    Gladney, Maurice, Miller, Boaz.

    You can call them projects, I call them reaches.

    If you are going to troll at least do a better job at it. How dare we have good special team snaps....lol.

    mfldhuskers ●

  • iBleedRed6801 said...

    Gladney is NOT a reach. Guaranteed. You put Gladney on a team with a Qb that isnt god awful he would be a high 4* or perhaps better. Saying Gladney is a reach leads me to believe all you do is stargaze.

    Whoa bump the brakes here.

    You're correct Gladney isn't a 'reach' but he in no way shape or form is a high four-star or higher, WR prospect with a QB.

    Gladney is a nice possession WR who runs in the mid 4.76-4.78 range. He's a guy who doesn't require attention and will never be the type of prospect who is going to take the top off a Defense or make something out of nothing. He's a solid WR addition who can go over the middle & make catches in traffic due to his size & great hands.

    signature image

    Bamboo, or else...

    Panda_Bear

  • Panda_Bear said...

    Whoa bump the brakes here.

    You're correct Gladney isn't a 'reach' but he in no way shape or form is a high four-star or higher, WR prospect with a QB.

    Gladney is a nice possession WR who runs in the mid 4.76-4.78 range. He's a guy who doesn't require attention and will never be the type of prospect who is going to take the top off a Defense or make something out of nothing. He's a solid WR addition who can go over the middle & make catches in traffic due to his size & great hands.

    ...mid 4.76-4.78 range?

    I'll mark this as a new high in precise speaking.

    signature image signature image

    k9_r

  • Panda_Bear said...

    Whoa bump the brakes here.

    You're correct Gladney isn't a 'reach' but he in no way shape or form is a high four-star or higher, WR prospect with a QB.

    Gladney is a nice possession WR who runs in the mid 4.76-4.78 range. He's a guy who doesn't require attention and will never be the type of prospect who is going to take the top off a Defense or make something out of nothing. He's a solid WR addition who can go over the middle & make catches in traffic due to his size & great hands.

    I may have over stepped a tad. But I think very very highly of Gladney. And he is in no way a reach. +1

    This post was edited by iBleedRed6801 on 2/7/2013 at 7:09 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    iBleedRed6801 ●

  • Landohusker said...

    Scout and ESPN suck, so we are between a 17-20 class(18-20). IYAM. Even though we should be 18th on rivals than 17th.

    not sure what you mean at the end of this post... Rivals doesn't consider Singleton a commitment so if anything we should be ranked higher than where they have us. Maybe that's what you were saying but I was genuinely confused.

    klein12 ●

  • klein12 said...

    not sure what you mean at the end of this post... Rivals doesn't consider Singleton a commitment so if anything we should be ranked higher than where they have us. Maybe that's what you were saying but I was genuinely confused.

    Washington has 2 less commits than us, but a better star average, so they should be ahead of us, in the rankings but aren't because of the number of commits. So we should be 18 and uw should be 17th.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Landohusker

  • Landohusker said...

    Washington has 2 less commits than us, but a better star average, so they should be ahead of us, in the rankings but aren't because of the number of commits. So we should be 18 and uw should be 17th.

    I bet you weren't making that argument in our favor the last 2 years when our star rating was high

    This post was edited by nustudent on 2/7/2013 at 8:34 PM

    nustudent

  • nustudent said...

    I bet you weren't making that argument in our favor 2 years ago when our star rating was high

    Yes I would, since rankings are mostly off star rating. But rivals counts # of commits more than 247.

    Also on paper that was a great class, but like I said 2 years ago and last year, not enough numbers. 19 commits and 6 are already gone. That leaves us with 13 from that class.

    This post was edited by Landohusker on 2/7/2013 at 8:39 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    Landohusker

Nebraska
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports