Junior College Strategy Shift

2 comments so far February 7, 2007 by Darren K. Carlson

In both the percentage of the class and in the players’ profile and position, there is a subtle but tangible shift in the way NU is using the recruitment of junior college players to bolster their roster. In his first two classes, Callahan and his staff were using JC players to address the total talent makeup of their team. Now, JC talent appears to be brought in to address specific needs. It's an important distinction. And for those chirping about the academic prowess of such players, let's not forget NU's solid track record with Proposition 48 players under Tom Osborne.

By the Numbers
Bill Callahan's first "half" class - 2004, split with Frank Solich - featured seven players from junior colleges in a class of 23 (30%). Callahan's first full in 2005 class included 12 JC players out of 30 in the class (40%). The 2006 class had seven JC players in 22 (31%). Now, in 2007 NU has a class that includes six JC players in a class of 28 (21%). It's not too dramatic, but those percentage changes are significant, and should reassure fans about the talent developing on NU's roster.

From "Warm Bodies" to Playmakers
The high percentage of JC players in the 2004 and 2005 classes (especially 2005, Callahan's first full year), illustrates how much the new staff felt they needed to overhaul the total talent makeup of the team. They needed contributors...right away. For that, the JC route is the way to go. Yes, there were some major busts in that group (Marque McCray, Justin Tomerlin), but it also provided the core players like Zach Taylor, Zackary Bowman, Barry Cryer and Ola Dagunduro, that keyed this staff's ability to jump start their way of running the program.

Most analysts and fans agree that recruiting high school players is the more solid way to build long term. And, I agree. There is less attrition with high school players and they have more eligibility. Now that NU has the talent tide where they want it, they can use JC players more to address pressing needs at specific positions. And, they can target the very top-drawer players in the JC ranks to fill those roles.

Witness the JC crop for 2007. NU's most pressing roster needs (in my opinion) were defensive tackle, defensive back, and another quarterback to compete. And, NU recruited three JC defensive tackles, two JC defensive backs, and a JC quarterback. Further, all six of those players are ranked among the top 50 JC players in the country. That is filling need with talent.

Like Proposition 48 Plus Two Years
Unfortunately there is still the occasional naysayer who complains that JC players are inferior students and that the current coaches betray NU's long legacy of great student athletes by recruiting them. Sorry, that's just wrong. First, NU's classes are full of some excellent students. Please remember that. And, don't think for one second that kids from JC don't somehow deserve the opportunity for a 4-year degree or that they won't try to earn one. That would be selling them very short.

Next, JC players are basically the same type of players NU recruited so well in the days of Proposition 48 under Osborne. And, NU now can only have two academic partial qualifiers since the formation of the Big 12. As the standards changed, those kids moved in to the JC ranks. Other programs (Kansas State...) fully embraced this route to talent. NU did not, taking only five JC players - total - in 2002 and 2003.

I'm by no means advocating filling classes with one-third or more JC players. But in this age, it may be the best route to great talent to address team needs. I'm pleased so see the shift between 2005 and 2007 that illustrates the current coaching staff is going exactly this route.

» Enjoy this article?
Send it to your friend or get Husker news by email!

NextPrevious