[Husker] interesting OWH article

[Dennison Gross]

Just remember all.. Barfneck is a tool!  His "views" are a lot of the =
time
intentionally slanted to get a rise out of Husker Nation, much the same =
way
you see outrageous front stories in the checkout lanes on the National
Enquirer.  Personally, I read his articles with the same frame of mind =
as
when I read the comics. =20

I don=92t condone the "all Nebraska stories through red glasses" theory, =
but
Barfnecks are gutless... just IMHO.


-----Original Message-----
From: husker-bounces at tssi.com [mailto:husker-bounces at tssi.com] On Behalf =
Of
Steve Reichenbach
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 5:30 PM
To: 3aoo-cvfd at dea.spamcon.org; husker at tssi.com
Subject: Re: [Husker] interesting OWH article


There is much more to recruiting than "facilities and culture"
--- academics is obviously an important consideration.  Even
if facilities and culture were sufficient to ensure superior
recruiting (which they are not), recruiting remains an inexact
practice --- some student athletes don't pan out (e.g., get
in academic trouble, have alcohol problems, get homesick, etc.).
Even if the recruiting were done as well as possible (which
it can't be), unforseen events, such as injuries, can negate
recruiting.  Even if all of the recruits are on the field
(which they won't be), each game is complex interaction of
many events such that the same two teams could play to many
different possible outcomes with different probabilities.
Sometimes, inferior teams beat better teams on a given day.
So, there are a few other issues besides facilities and
culture.

It is extremely naive to suggest that because of "facilities
and culture , we should never lose to Kansas, Kansas State,
Missouri, Iowa State or Colorado."

> j j wrote:
> >
> > I would say that we probably have better facilities=20
> > then most of the Big XII teams except OU, TU, and aTm=20
> > and we probably are equal to those three.  We have=20
> > better culture then most college teams.  So are you=20
> > saying that we should only lose to about 10 or 15=20
> > different teams and beat everyone else?=20
>=20
> I'm saying that because of our superior facilities and
> superior culture, we should out-recruit the other North
> teams.  Add that talent to our facilities and culture,
> and we should consistently beat every big North team.
> Every year.  Like a hot knife through butter.
>=20
> We all recruit to the same environment.  All of us are
> a thousand miles from the nearest beach.  All of us have
> long cold winters.  You can forgive a recruit for choosing
> the beaches of Miami to the snow-storms of Nebraska, but
> why would a recruit choose Kansas?  Or Iowa State?
>=20
> Nebraska should totally dominate Big 12 North recruiting.
> Once those recruits mature (within our superior culture
> and superior facilities), they will dominate the B12 North. =20
> And that will make Nebraska even more attractive to new=20
> recruits.
>=20
> Outside of the B12 North, things are different.  Some=20
> schools have facilities to match Nebraska and some have=20
> more attractive climates and/or environs.  Therefore
> Nebraska is unlikely to outrecruit them.  So, yes, we
> will face some tough competition outside the B12 North
> and, yes, we will lose some games to those teams.
>=20
> Whether the number of tough teams is 10-15 or 20-25,=20
> I don't know.  It will vary from year to year.  What=20
> I do know is that there is no excuse for losing to a=20
> B12 North team.  If our coaches are doing their jobs,
> we should never lose to Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri,
> Iowa State or Colorado.  Ever.
>=20
> GBR
>=20
>=20
>  =20
>=20
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
>=20

_______________________________________________
husker site list
husker at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker

--=20
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.14.1/527 - Release Date: =
11/9/2006
6:00 PM
=20