Noah Fant

huskerfan830

Sophomore
Oct 28, 2006
2,207
169
0
We cared. Previous staff was all about him playing DE and overall blowing it. Riley was a lot more flexible, but too late. They made up a lot of ground that Bo chopped up, but the gap was too big.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PistolPacking

maplesyrup95

All-Conference
Nov 26, 2014
1,675
1,064
0
And here comes everybody out of the woodwork. Welcome back to football season. Former staff pretty much alienated him and Fant's dad. Ferentz was already way ahead with him when Riley arrived.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PistolPacking

huskerfan830

Sophomore
Oct 28, 2006
2,207
169
0
6'8 Austin Allen and 6'7 Kurt Rafdal say hello. Or if he stays at TE 6'4 Cam Jurgens says whats up.
Good specimens, but not the same speed as Fant. Our TE appear to be more possession type, Fant could be a legit deep threat.
 
May 2, 2005
94,699
70,101
0
Pelini's staff completely screwed up Fant' s recruitment and Rileys staff tried to salvage it, but Hank Hughes botched that. Riley tried to step in and make an 11th hour push for him, but the damage had already been done. Couple that with the fact that Fant liked Iowa's TE history and it was a long shot.
 
A

anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi

Guest
Drop #2. His hands need to keep improving if anyone thinks he will just walk in and take a spot on a Sunday roster away from guys that NEVER drop balls. He has every other attribute to play on Sundays
 
  • Like
Reactions: timnsun

timnsun

All-American
Jan 25, 2008
13,815
7,519
3
A Nebraska kid so I wish him the best but will root against him when he plays Nebraska. Why can't we just wish kids the best until they play the Huskers?
Who on here is wishing him the worst? Should each poster in this thread also wish him the best?
 
A

anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi

Guest
Nobody. Its people trying to make a case against the current staff for not getting an Omaha kid to Lincoln. More on the old staff but whatever fits their agenda I guess.
Bingo. Bombers crap is so transparent.
 

nebcountry

Senior
Oct 29, 2013
1,878
801
0
What I remember is that WE wanted him on D, HE wanted to play TE. Riley hired 12/14, Fant committed to Iowa 01/16. That's over a year the current staff had to "make up ground" on a kid from Omaha, Nebraska. Blame it on Pelini if makes you feel better.
 
A

anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi

Guest
What I remember is that WE wanted him on D, HE wanted to play TE. Riley hired 12/14, Fant committed to Iowa 01/16. That's over a year the current staff had to "make up ground" on a kid from Omaha, Nebraska. Blame it on Pelini if makes you feel better.
There it is. All Rileys fault, so says the guy still under blos desk
 

mwulf

All-Conference
Dec 15, 2013
8,787
1,641
0
This is mainly on Hank Hughes...he is gone so we addressed that weak spot by hiring Parella..
 
A

anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi

Guest
You bring nothing to a discussion but insults. The quality of your character is on full display with every post you make.
Some would say insults, some would say truth. Your posting history reveals yourself. Sorry I hurt your feelings.
 

huskerfan830

Sophomore
Oct 28, 2006
2,207
169
0
What I remember is that WE wanted him on D, HE wanted to play TE. Riley hired 12/14, Fant committed to Iowa 01/16. That's over a year the current staff had to "make up ground" on a kid from Omaha, Nebraska. Blame it on Pelini if makes you feel better.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Fant committed to Iowa like in August of the previous year, opened things up, played a little game with Minnesota, flirted with NU and ended up back with Iowa. The frayed relationship does date back to Bo, and Hughes played a factor as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: timnsun
A

anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi

Guest
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Fant committed to Iowa like in August of the previous year, opened things up, played a little game with Minnesota, flirted with NU and ended up back with Iowa. The frayed relationship does date back to Bo, and Hughes played a factor as well.
I was wondering who would bring actual facts, not bloner spin.
 

Blackshirt316

Junior
Jan 17, 2007
4,370
361
0
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Fant committed to Iowa like in August of the previous year, opened things up, played a little game with Minnesota, flirted with NU and ended up back with Iowa. The frayed relationship does date back to Bo, and Hughes played a factor as well.

It also didn't help that when Fant spoke with Riley about playing offense Riley told Fant he would have to work on his blocking and Fant replied something to the effect of "I'm not a lineman I'm a reciever."

That was pretty much the end of the the recruitment on both sides.
 

huskerfan830

Sophomore
Oct 28, 2006
2,207
169
0
It also didn't help that when Fant spoke with Riley about playing offense Riley told Fant he would have to work on his blocking and Fant replied something to the effect of "I'm not a lineman I'm a reciever."

That was pretty much the end of the the recruitment on both sides.
Sounds like a conversation really being taken out of context, but I could be wrong. WR/TE both require blocking skill, TE more so. Wouldn't be surprised if Iowa mentioned the same thing as he was making the transition in high school from being primary a big WR to possible TE. All moot though.
 

SWIowahawks_rivals44758

All-Conference
Sep 2, 2006
2,374
1,118
0
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Fant committed to Iowa like in August of the previous year, opened things up, played a little game with Minnesota, flirted with NU and ended up back with Iowa. The frayed relationship does date back to Bo, and Hughes played a factor as well.
I don't think he ever "decommitted". Atleast not publicly. He went on a visit to Minnesota and it caused a stir.

For some reason I was thinking Nebraska was really late in offering him and it hurt their chances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: huskerfan830