recruiting

[huskerbaseball13]

I'm not sure Eichorst and Perlman are to blame, per say, but it took them a couple days to support Bo after tapegate and didn't make any statements of support aside from that. It's an unequivocal fact that we lost recruits because of the lack of an appearance of job security.

Did we lose recruits last year because of it? And the year before that? Medicore recruiting isn't new to this staff...this has been going on for years now which is why the product on the field is what it is. Let's be real...the AD wouldnt have to say a word if Bo's teams were not giving up 38 unanswered points at home on national TV. The AD wouldn't have to say or word if the Coach wasn't on ESPN mutiple times making the program look bad. I'm curious as to what Perlman and Eichorst did to hault recruiting starting in September?

To answer only the question of "what did Perlman and Eichorst do to stop recruiting dead in its tracks in September ? (not a general defense or condemnation of Bo, of past recruiting years, etc. and apologizing in advance for the length of the post) :

After the UCLA game and the release of "The Tape", Perlman publically played the "The coach could get fired card". He needs to keep his mouth shut at that point (publically). Deal with the investigation privately (which in this case involved T.O. saying he knew about it and dealt with it 2 years earlier), and make the call; or have a plan and begin executing it privately. At this point (prior to concluding the review the tape investigation), Eichorst's public statements were actually more measured and appropriate (I'm not going to go back and find them, but he handled it much better than Perlman at that point). Once the "he might get fired" card is publically stated by head of the University, recruiting is dead. Players and their parents need to know who the coach is going to be, what offenses and defenses they run, who their poisition coach is likely to be, etc.

Once the decison was made to have no firing or any punishment at all, the expression of support was extremely tepid. Basically a statement of non-support. And then the weeks of silence and "I don't comment on a coach during the season ( Although I won't even define whether the end of the season is after the last conference game or the bowl game)." Assistants start wondering if they will have a job. Short term focus is exclusively on getting wins to keep jobs rather than recruiting. The competition dirty recruits our targets on possible regime change and lack of stability.

Nick Gates was actually ready to commit early in the fall and backed off due to the firing speculation. Just one example.

Bo goes to Eichorst the tuesday before the Iowa game, says I need to know where I stand, and we're getting killed in recruiting. Eichorst sticks to his guns and his beloved "process". I'll evaluate at the end of the season. There will be not public or private expression of support. Sticks to that even in the elevators with the reporters after the game, despite the flurry of media attention the entire week. Bo and the staff twist in the wind from UCLA until the day after the Iowa game. No way anyone can recruit effectively with that going on.

I realize some think Bo is the devil and should be fired. And that he deserves and earned all of the problems and lack of support from the Chancellor and AD. Made his own bed. I'm not trying to change their views or even debate it. My point is, if you are going to publically feed the coaching change speculation (Perlman) or decline to issue any expressions of support despite the obvious media frenzy and impact on recruiting (Eichorst), you have to know the consequences.

This is just a more intense version of why coaches always get their contracts extended. You basically have to extend them or fire them, and everyone knows its because of recruiting.

If they weren't going to make a change, at some point before the coach and his staff twist in the wind for over 2 months, you've got to get out of your precious "process" or "my approach is to never say a word, blah blah" and provide support. And with Bo, if you refuse to provide public support becasue of your iron-clad policy, at least give him some assurances privately. To that some say it's still on Bo that he went nuts from half-time on of the Iowa game (and I am more in that camp than you might think), a true leader and manager of people should know that it's tough to have one inflexible policy no matter who you are dealing with. I have employed dozens of people over the years, and you have to have some flexibility on how to deal with them. Same with coaches and players--they respond differently to different approaches. Eichorst poured gas on the Bo fire, and it ended about as poorly as one could expect.

Regardless of whether you are Pro-Bo, Anti-Bo, or agnostic, the whole thing was wierd. I don't think its any secret that HP and Bo have nothing but utter disdain for each other. And Shawn "The Ghost" Eichorst declined on every occasion before the Iowa game to indicate the head coach had his support. He stuck to his approach regardless of how loud the noise got and how it affected recruiting (its one thing to have recruiting on hold for a couple of weeks, it's another to have it on hold for 10 weeks during commitment season). If he was truly waiting for the regular season to end to complete his evaluation, and was truly undecided as to Bo's fate, than how in God's name could the events of that day not have caused him to decide to make a change? Let's see, blowout loss. Surly Bo on national TV at halftime. Bo goes ballistic on ref with spittle and hat swipe, earning a $10,000 fine and public reprimand. Defiant, belligerent Bo comes out at post-game press conference. And THEN Eichorst's "finish evalutation after the season and only comment then" approach has him decide to keep Bo?? Bizarre to say the least.

My take: Eichorst is not a dumb guy. He has to know that if he is going to keep the coach, he can't let the speculation and frenzy get to fever pitch and just let them twist in the wind and claim business as normal. Cause it ain't normal with that going on, especially recruiting. You're dead without the support of your AD under these circumstances. So I think SE had decided to make a change, with HP's blessing, or at a minimum explore options of possible replacements via the secret underworld in which these things are done. But the plan was squelched at the 11th hour by the certain Regents who forced the unexpected announcement Bo was staying, and its still somewhat mild expression of support, on saturday morning.

So, regardless of how one feels about Bo, I don't think there is any doubt that Perlman's actions, and Eichorst's inaction, beginning after UCLA and not ending until the shocking announcement the day after Iowa, effectively put a stop to any effective recruiting in the fall of 2013. If you're not making a change, you have to give your guy a little support, whether he deserves it in the abstract world or not. Bo has been far from perfect, but it's hard to see how this was handled well by HP and SE either; to me a classic case of how not to handle a situation.

HB you make some good points and I don't necessarily disagree. After Bo's outburst and the play on the field I thought he was all but gone. I honestly did not pay close enough attention to Perlmans actions but I did find it odd regardings Eichorst stance on not commenting on the situation. Hell, he was going to wait even longer but his hand was forced by all the speculation which I do agree hurt recruiting. You may be able to chalk up the recruiting lull from this but also the ole "we have to fix us" mentality from the staff. I get it, the team has problems that needs fixed which cut into recruiting. But guess what? How many years in a row does this need to happen? It would be great If for one year Bo put a complete team on the field. The excuses are out the window now, a recruiting staff is being hired and access to private jets should help recruiting. I think almost everyone would agree this is the do or die year for Pelini. I don't think this staff can get it done but I hope they do, I'd rather not go thru another hiring process if we can avoid it.

[huskerbaseball13]

"Mediocre recruiting isn't new to this staff..."

This is the worst recruiting year we have had under Bo and 2 of his last 3 classes were #17 and #15. I'm aware he needs to be a better recruiter (and he has changed their recruiting philosophy and habits to become one), but to act like this was a typical class under Bo is laughable. It's over 10 spots below his 5 year average.

. One of those classes is brand new, so we will see. And this class on paper looks mediocre but maybe it will turn out great? Bo's best players for the most part have either been Callahans recruits or Juco's. That's an issue. That 15th ranked class...how many of those highly rated recruits are still here? Looks great on paper but means diddly squat if you can't develop or keep kids on campus.

[TheGov21]

Evaluating football recruiting is so much tougher to do than in basketball because you can't see those players compete against each other like you do in the AAU circuts for basketball.  Because of that guys fall through the cracks, get underrated, or overrated. 

 

The recruiting services (Rivals, Scout, 24/7, and ESPN) do a good job of identifying the elite players (5 stars) but where they struggle is that area between the 4 starts and 2 stars.  In my opinion the difference between a 4 star and 3 start is very close.  Also the difference between a 3 start and 2 start is just as close.  So you could realistically say the difference between a 4 star and 2 star isn't that far off.  There are plenty of players that are considered 2 stars that go on to have great college careers and play in the NFL.  There are also plenty of 4 stars that are complete busts that never see the field in college.  Alfonzo Dennard was a 2 star but came to Nebraska and start for four years and now has started his first two years for the Patriots.

 

Star rankings can be affected by a lot of things.  The more recruiting camps you go to, the better chance you have to increase yoru star rankings.  You also have scouting services give a player a low ranking and then when certain schools start recruiting them their star rankings go up.  Nebraska got a commit from a 2 star LB a couple of years ago from Louisiana and then LSU got interested and started recruiting him he eventually became a 4 star.  The same thing goes the other way.  If a player in California isn't being offered by UCLA, USC, or Cal then their star ranking goes down.  But the reason they are offering is because he can't get accepted.  Titus Young was a player like that, went to Boise State and was a 2nd round draft pick by the Detroit Lions.

 

A lot of people want to get upset that Nebraska isn't doing better to bring in higher rated classes, but that's not the end all be all.  I'm sure a lot of Husker fans would love to trade what Nebraska has done over the past four years with schools like Wisconsin or Michigan State.  But both of those schools had recruiting classes ranked in the 20-30 range.  Yet Michigan State ended this past season at #3 in the country.  So rankings do matter, but they aren't the end all be all.

 

I don't by the fact that Pelini lost recruits because Eichorst or Perlman didn't come out with a vote of confidence.  That's the last thing an AD wants to do.  Just look at Florida.  Their AD came out in full support of Muschamp and then the next week the Gators lost to FCS Georgia State.  The questions about Muschamp's future didn't go away and the AD still had to ask if he was still supporting him.  The best thing a coach can do to quiet the rumors of him getting fired is to win.