I just don't fully understand this thinking, and maybe it's because we've always been independent.

Why does changing conferences change who they are compete with for recruits? The school didn't change, they didn't move to a new location, everything about them is the same except for their conference.

Why are they no longer competing with the Big 12 teams for recruits and only with Big 10 teams? Why weren't they competing with Big 10 teams for recruits before joining the Big 10?

Which Nebraska needed and was able to attract, sometimes the big motivator is playing against the in-state school. I think for most of them, it's either a road less travelled thing, or else they have some sort of chip on their shoulder if they think they weren't given a fair chance by the in-state school. For example, it's probably easier to get a would-be Texas recruit fired up at the opportunity to face Texas or Oklahoma than it is to get that same recruit fired up to play Ohio State or Michigan.

When Nebraska was in the Big 12 they could go to a 5 star stud in Texas and say our campus might be far away, but we're going to play in your state every single year. If there happened to be a blue-chip recruit from Iowa, Missouri, or Colorado they could guarantee a game not only in-state, but close to home (since they are much smaller than Texas) at least every other year. Now that they are in the Big 10, they have nothing to sell a recruit from Texas. Our campus is 600 miles away, we aren't a powerhouse, and we're never going to play close to you.

Despite not being in a conference, Notre Dame subscribes to this line of thinking to some extent in making schedules. One rationale for the Shamrock Series was bringing games to recruiting hotbeds. We close every season in California (and used to in south Florida every other year) so we can recruit players from talent-rich areas. We've always tried to schedule games in the NY metro area to be close to NJ's blue chip recruits. It's certainly not the only reasoning; those areas also have many alums, football history plays a part, and other factors; but access to recruits is indisputably part of the logic.

The common line of thinking is that Nebraska lost access to their major recruiting base when they switched from the Big 12 to the Big 10. The problem is the facts don't back that up. Nebraska had 164 players play on a team that won at least a share of a national championship (70, 71, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 93, 94, 95, 97, or 99) and made a pro roster (NFL, CFL, WFL, or USFL). Presumably these were the best players on the Cornhuskers' best teams. Of course Nebraska led the way with 58 of those players. The other top states were California (13), Texas (11), New Jersey and Iowa (9 each), South Dakota, Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Arizona (4 each).

The Cornhuskers obviously play just as many games in Nebraska as they did in the Big 12 or Big 8. The second biggest recruiting hotbed for them was California. In their 12 national championship years they played 3 games in California. In their 10 Big Ten years they've played 4. The third hotbed, Texas has taken a hit, as they played six games there in their championship years and none since they joined the Big Ten. They played two games in New Jersey in their 12 championship years and one in their 10 Big Ten years. They played 7 games in Iowa in 12 championship years and 5 in the their 10 Big Ten years. Obviously they never played in South Dakota. Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Arizona had 10 games in 12 championship years and 9 games in 10 Big Ten years. So the only recruiting base they've lost access to is Texas. Texas wasn't nearly as important a recruiting base as many people make it seem though. It trailed California in difference-making players and New Jersey and Iowa were just behind despite being much smaller states.

Back then, California kids were watching Nebraska-Oklahoma on national TV every year. And more often than not, there was no competing game for them to watch. Now? They'll play Wisconsin or Iowa on national TV, but there will be a handful of other options, in terms of college games, instead. Same applies to New Jersey kids.

A mistake for recruiting. Why go to a school with zero chance of winning?

in the 2021 class. Thomas Fidone from Council Bluffs IA.

ND tried to get that kid. So did Iowa-Stanford-PSU-Alabama-Michigan.

ND and all those others schools have a history of producing lots of NFL TE's.

Nebraska? Seriously, who have they ever produced at TE'?
I'm drawing a total blank.



I think that kid is going to regret his choice.