Undone

So, basically like watching pretty much any Husker football game in the past seven years.

I was definitely referring to pressure & expectations delivered by Husker Nation. Let's assume this board represents a decent cross-section of the fan base. During this period, the overwhelming majority of people are going to say they don't have high expectations. I agree with that, that's what people will say. And our schedule for the first six games of the year is arguable the easiest it's been in memory, recent or otherwise. But I'm still talking about how things go if the first half of the season is "bad." And for the record I made a strong emphasis in that post on the word "if."

Throwing the kitchen sink at them definitely seems like the wisest strategy. The hardest part for these two QB's will probably be huge amount of pressure that could come if things don't go well during the first 4-5 games of the season, mainly from the fan base and the weight of expectations. What I've seen with our program in the post-Bo era is not being able to get a handle on that aspect of playing here. But for me, if these guys can play better than Ricky Haarberg this season it's a major accomplishment and can & will be a building block for greatness (as long as no key players transfer).

Mike Minter, telling me what I want to hear!

PasstheDamnBallGuy...you love their offense, don't you, sir?! Haha.

Please stop being so reasonable.

Thompson was kind of an injury-prone guy. Hard to say how many games he would have even lasted in 2023. But Sims was fumbling snaps and turned the wrong way multiple times on running back hand off plays. His play was atrocious even just outside of stats when he suited up for the Huskers. I can't say that about Thompson's time as a 'sker. But, the entire conversation is definitely water under the bridge at this rate anyway.

Wasn't it just thumb surgery? And I don't recall that having a recovery time being estimated at over six months. You're right that he wasn't able to participate in spring ball, though.

But you're only doing it for 2023 numbers, right? If I look at Thompson vs Sims in their entire collegiate careers prior to the 2023 season and I adjust for the competition Thompson faced, I'm taking Thompson as the better QB. I'd take him as the guy I'd want heading into game one for 2023 Nebraska. And if I factor 2023 into the whole career, I'm still taking Thompson, personally.

Agree with that second paragraph, for sure. To the first part, I'm still trying to figure out why the staff went so hard with trying to set up a power run QB scheme leading into year one. A lot of keyboard warriors think they have all the answers there, but I'm not so sure. But, like you said in the second part - Rhule is getting things fixed. I think our program has a bigger head of steam right now than I reasonably thought we'd have at this point if I go back to just after the Georgia Southern loss in 2022 and Frost's firing. The 2023 season was really disappointing on offense because of how good the defense wound up being, but good things are ahead.

Even if Satterfield isn't actually a bad coach, there's been enough smoke around the topic even outside of the our bubble of the program to where it can send a message to recruits that this isn't the place to be. Obviously it wasn't a problem for landing Raiola, and just bringing him in would have done/will do wonders for offensive recruiting, even if Thomas didn't come to Lincoln. But Thomas' hiring makes it pretty obvious that Rhule didn't exactly love what he saw last season on offense (outside of the biggest obvious problem of turnovers).

Ha, was this an ad you got on Huskerboard?

If Washington played our schedule this season they're 11-1. I'm 100% sure the spread offense works in any conference as long as you protect the QB. Penix was a bit off tonight, unfortunately for him and all of us. But you're right that Michigan did well in the trenches, no arguments there.

Ok - really good clarification there.

But it really didn't, as they ranked 87th in rushing yards per game. Hence floridacorn's point.

I see quite a few teams on the right side of the vertical dashed line who run spread offenses, which I'm not surprised to see. And the guy explains that scheme is a part of the metric.

Yes but you could say that about so many football games, right? In the Michigan vs. TCU game, the turnover margin was 0 (both teams had 3 turnovers). Michigan's defense just didn't really show up to play, IMO. Giving up 488 yards on defense puts you in a position to lose just about any game you're playing in that position.

That stat is pretty crazy. Penix was a world beater this year, though. I had thought that Jalen Milroe wasn't maybe up to snuff with some more recent Alabama QB's but then I looked up his passing stats for the year...he had a 65.8% completion percentage this year, along with 23 TD's and 6 INT's. Kind of reinforces how you pretty much don't make it to the top these days without an elite QB. Good thing we have one coming in.

Yeah. I don't like the playoff extending past 8 teams, even if that does give us any kind of shot at making it someday. I think 12 will make the bowl games feel fairly irrelevant when you combine all of the transfer shenanigans (until player contracts arrive).

Michigan had become very physical in the last four years, but this past offseason they really went to a whole new level. They couldn't be manhandled by anyone this year except maybe for Georgia, but we never got to see that game. They did pretty much all of the manhandling. So it was kind of Michigan standing alone outside of Georgia & Alabama in that department outside of the SEC in terms of physicality. Ohio State has fallen off the map in that department. Texas & Washington matched up well against each other because they both tend to score points. The championship game is the most interesting one in such a long time - but I really despise Harbaugh & Michigan after the sign stealing thing.

Just a bump of this thread to remind everyone that Dylan Raiola is going to play for this team soon. Merry Christmas!

I think there's a pitfall though in thinking that having a fullback means you'll keep a defense guessing but if you don't have a fullback you won't be able to. You didn't say that verbatim of course, but as a fan of the niners you might just have that as your "scheme bias" or whatever we might call it. There are two main concerns I have in general: Are we putting a fullback or two tight ends out there because it actually sets us up to get numbers on our opponents in the best way, or are we doing it just because it's the staff's/fans' wet dream? If Raiola turns out to be a generational talent among Husker QB's, we need to maximize what his strengths bring to the table. And I'm thinking that's pushing the ball downfield in the passing game. So to the first point, let's say we've got three traditional type receivers by the time Raiola is up to speed that are really exceptional at getting open and catching the ball. If you put a fullback in just because you want a fullback out there but he can't really act as a weapon on the level of any of those three receivers, that's probably bad because having him out there means you can't have all three WR's on the field at the same time. But my bookend to all of this is that any scheme can win any game if the players execute it well. I don't get too stuck on all of this but it's something to talk about in the offseason.