In response to Mo. Barry's tweet about wanting to win a national championship at Nebraska.
I'll stand by my guess that this kid is our next commit.
His offer sheet reads as a "whose who" of CFB.
Tweet from Mykelle McDaniel
- Thread starter Husk10
- Start date
In response to Mo. Barry's tweet about wanting to win a national championship at Nebraska.
I'll stand by my guess that this kid is our next commit.
His offer sheet reads as a "whose who" of CFB.
Good grief. I just looked at his profile. It is probably easier to ask who hasn't offered him than to ask who has offered him. Pretty impressive.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Not the type of talent we need to take us to the next level @Blackshirtgang21 @suhnami
"Well, friend, let us go win that national title and then enjoy the spoiles of said victory"
Last edited:
He is only a 5.6...maybe he'll get a bump up and become acceptable.
That would help us get to the minimum threshold of 5.7's or, dare I hope, 4 stars necessary per class.
Read where Mo Berry is recruiting him really hard which is nice to say and one way to develop ties in a region.
Hell yeah, come on down kid. Been a nice little trend of ranking upgrades for NU commits. This guy seems like the next to get one.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Any chance you grace us with that "recruiting board" of yours any time soon?
Well let's go win that, explicative deleted.
I suppose it could be
We will, let's go win than, explicative deleted.
In either case, I agree with the OP concerning an implied message.
I suppose it could be
We will, let's go win than, explicative deleted.
In either case, I agree with the OP concerning an implied message.
Last edited:
Maybe you could get some of those other coaches to stop winning so much with their 4 and 5 star talent to help out your position?
Fact remains, the teams that do well have those numbers. Do NOT let facts stop you from posting like an imbecile.
It was a joke homie. But it does demonstrate why the minimum number of 5.7 or betters could break down on closer examinations.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
I will take him all day any day, but he is an exception to the rule, most guys with his offer sheet AND from the vaunted southeastern region have at least 4*s by their name. Maybe they know he is going to commit to Nebraska so they keeping the man down! If he commits to in-state UGA I bet he gets that 4*. Amirite?
He currently ranks #26 in total offers & #1 for DE's. Kind of a misguided fact because a ton of kids never list all of their offers but none the less, Mykelle is a beast.
http://www.rankbyoffers.com/2016fbplayers/
I'd love to land this kid and a few sites seem to think he's ours to lose but I don't see him committing any time soon. Look for LSU to make a push with Orgeron. My prediction is he takes his all 5 visits - Florida, UGA, South Carolina, LSU, & NU.
Dawg, don't be one of those people on the internet that takes a general statement, finds an exception and then is all like "ohh look what about this here? yep what you said was wrong, in your face."
Obviously if some people are calling him the #1 DE recruit in the country he's got some skill.
Do you think he's going to stay 5.6?
So you go from referring to me as an "imbecile", to junior high sexual humor. Let me guess, if the insults keep regressing, you'll call me a Big Poopy Head next time, right?
Note...I never stated any position, so any reference to my "position" being flawed is just you trying to create a straw-man to tear down.
The purpose of my post was to point out that stating an arbitrary number of recruits per class must have an arbitrary minimum recruit ranking for the team to be successful in the future is overly simplistic. That's all.
It was going to be a "your mom" joke.
Even though I was correct about your position on the recruits, I should not have assumed I was, even if you were sarcastically referring to to that. I should have let you make some claim referring to the number of recruits and their ranking as "arbitrary" and then ripped that to shreds. Lesson learned.
It is simple, but there is a correlation to the success on the field and number of recruits with a certain ranking. I didn't pick some "arbitrary" number, perhaps you're referring to someone else who did.
I didn't say that was all there was to it, but can most all of us agree that without a certain talent level it is going to be very difficult to compete for championships? Out of all the things to try and fix that one seems pretty simple and it is an area Nebraska has been not measuring up to compared to other schools that are having more success.
If you don't think that is a fact,present your data to support something different.
I jumped too far ahead on the regression, my mistake.
Of course we all agree to the bolded. Or, at least I'd hope so. Ideally, we'd fill up on all 5-stars, picking who we want and declining the 5-stars we don't want. I think we all know a team built this way would have a step up on the rest. We all know that the national champions generally have top 5-10 classes making up their team the year that they win it.
But I guess I missed the fact(s) that supports your 15+ 5.7+'s in a class . Unless this is just your way of wording the team rankings (that to get to rank X we need at least this number of this rated or higher recruits) correlation that I'm more familiar with. If that's the case, I've never seen it stated that way, and I apologize for my misunderstanding.
It's not the year that they win it. It's the 5 years before that matter right? The teams that are winning aren't pulling in a bunch of low ranked recruits.
Do you call it a coincidence that the teams that recruit like that year in and year out are competitive on a national scale? I don't.
It's a fact that the teams like Alabama, Oregon, Florida St., Ohio St, etc are recruiting better. Unless you're saying that you want to go the Baylor or TCU route? But if we do that we'll get killed in the Big 10.
Would you say it is a fact that teams with higher rated recruits do better than teams with lower rated recruits?