2024 Fall Camp Notes - Receivers & Tight Ends

[Undone]

That's the comparison I've made before, and I agree that the types of things we saw Bonner do in the spring would be also the kinds of things Nelson would potentially do.

I hesitate to call it a 'position' though. With Bonner, he can already to a bunch of stuff, but in Nelson's case it'll depend on how fast his skills and knowledge develop. That's what's great about the receiver position, it kinda grows with you. If you can only do 'this' then that's all you go in for.

If we talk about that play we've talked about all spring/summer with Bonner in a big slot role and two receivers to the outside, a guy like Nelson can impact games there just with his athleticism. Maybe he just runs seam routes and can get open that way if they try to bracket the outside or he occupies a Safety so one of the outside speedsters gets one on one. I think we'll have a package for him whether that's him catching screens or running 4 verts or whatever and then we'll see how he develops and how injuries play out. 

I am maybe beating a dead horse on this but in all seriousness, I enjoy the discussion.

I do think floridacorn is probably accurate in describing it as them having "created a position" for this. That's fine if they did, but it'll boil down to whether or not we're actually putting up either more rushing yards (with the hybrid guy being there to block better than a skinnier/smaller guy) or putting up more passing yards (by the hybrid guy actually being a good receiving threat).

I will wait patiently to see how it plays out. But I do have my doubts about the strategy.

 

[BaytownHusker]

Yep.  And when you look at his size, quickness and skill sets, who else is in his way?   Fidone runs with braces on both legs, and Boerkircher is a Boerkircher.  

It shouldn't take that long to be in the rotation.  I mean, it's not like we are Alabama or Texas or Ohio State for goodness sake.  Best man up.

I'm with you on this one. Mainly cause Fidone just hasn't really impressed me all that much.  Granted he had injuries and we can argue lack of Qb.  

So in my opinion 1st couple games this season will be a mark for him.

 

[floridacorn]

I hesitate to call it a 'position' though. With Bonner, he can already to a bunch of stuff, but in Nelson's case it'll depend on how fast his skills and knowledge develop. That's what's great about the receiver position, it kinda grows with you. If you can only do 'this' then that's all you go in for.

If we talk about that play we've talked about all spring/summer with Bonner in a big slot role and two receivers to the outside, a guy like Nelson can impact games there just with his athleticism. 

You clearly have an advanced understanding of X’s & O’s, but for others a new position could be as simple as a label/personnel grouping.  For example, the early iteration of our offense had a big Y (TE) and little y (slot wr), same with H, and we had a Bandit back that could replace the RB.  This could be as simple as replacing the little y or h with C, which may line up differently than the previous position.
 

As I implied earlier, I’m more of a players over plays advocate, but that’s just my philosophy.  Whether or not Bonner is one NU’s guys remains to be seen, but it’s probably a wise decision to assume Nelson will be, and accommodate his present skill set.  

 

[brophog]

I do think floridacorn is probably accurate in describing it as them having "created a position" for this

We're getting into semantics at this point and football has enough of that naming nonsense as it is. I don't consider it a position because it's temporary. I'm not arguing with floridacorn here, in fact i think we're on the same page, in terms of actual usage. It's just if we call this a position then we're probably redefining what that position is every week.

All this is with Nelson is just a way to get him on the field quickly. As he develops, physically and mentally, we'll move him around.

As I implied earlier, I’m more of a players over plays advocate, but that’s just my philosophy.

Explain, please.

 

[floridacorn]

Explain, please.

Staying with the discussion, I don't care what advantage on paper a big slot gives us vs an overhang defender if he's not one of our "guys".  I'm going to work to our strengths with our "guys" on the field.  This isn't a right or wrong position, but a personal philosophy.  

We've had a P5 TE who never came off the field.  When we went 4/5 wide, he was in a slot.  He played Y & y.  When we didn't have a TE who was one of our guys, we played w/o a Y all together.  Same with H-back.  

Going back to the original question Undone presented, do we really want Bonner taking snaps at the expense of others.  My answer was essentially only if he's one of our guys.  You presented the other side of that position and I freely acknowledge many teams are very successful utilizing that approach.  There is more than one way to skin the proverbial cat, but my preference is to start with the sharpest knife at my disposal.  If Bonner, Nelson, or Fidone fall into that category, I'd get to work exploring the best ways to utilize them.  

 

[soup]

Satterfield all but said yesterday in the PC that they created this position for Carter to get him on the field.

 

[Decked]

Satterfield all but said yesterday in the PC that they created this position for Carter to get him on the field.

Not too many guys with that rare combo of size and speed. He will need to put on a little more weight/strength to block but can use that combo to get open as a WR/TE hybrid. 

 

[Undone]

We're getting into semantics at this point and football has enough of that naming nonsense as it is. I don't consider it a position because it's temporary. I'm not arguing with floridacorn here, in fact i think we're on the same page, in terms of actual usage. It's just if we call this a position then we're probably redefining what that position is every week.

All this is with Nelson is just a way to get him on the field quickly. As he develops, physically and mentally, we'll move him around.

I agree with this.

Staying with the discussion, I don't care what advantage on paper a big slot gives us vs an overhang defender if he's not one of our "guys".  I'm going to work to our strengths with our "guys" on the field.  This isn't a right or wrong position, but a personal philosophy.  

We've had a P5 TE who never came off the field.  When we went 4/5 wide, he was in a slot.  He played Y & y.  When we didn't have a TE who was one of our guys, we played w/o a Y all together.  Same with H-back.  

Yep, this.

We've had Rhule saying verbatim "we're not going to be a spread offense" and also "we tried a spread offense at Nebraska, and it didn't work." Verbatim quotes.

I know that somebody might be able to comb through hours of tape to find a couple examples to show me wrong on this, but from memory, when we'd go 4 wide last season where the back would sometimes even curl out into the flat as a fifth receiver, it was very situationally obvious.

Not sure why it has to be "run a bunch of two tight end sets and then go spread on 3rd & long in desperation." I think we should be running way, way more typical 11 man personnel where Fidone is the TE and then <fill in three relatively obvious guys here> are playing as traditional wideouts.

We can still "spread the field" doing this. But I get it, these coaches just don't seem to want to do that as much as I do.        I will wait and see what happens.

 

[brophog]

I'm going to work to our strengths with our "guys" on the field.  This isn't a right or wrong position, but a personal philosophy.  

I get what you're saying. A lot of NFL teams are set up this way because of roster size restrictions and salary cap. Some college teams do this, too, because it can simplify things.

That approach works, certainly, but I'm not sure it's the right approach for this squad or how Rhule tends to operate, which segways nicely.....

We've had Rhule saying verbatim "we're not going to be a spread offense" and also "we tried a spread offense at Nebraska, and it didn't work." Verbatim quotes.

There's a reason you'll rarely find me describing an offense as 'the' spread, and if i do I probably didn't proofread well enough.

Rhule swung a little more one way at Temple and a little more the other way at Baylor, but his general philosophy has a strong tendency to match personnel to situation. He'll play a lot of different personnel.

This matches his recruiting philosphy. He's going to go out there and recruit athletes and then turn them into whatever seems the best fit. In looking at this year's team, there probably isn't an All American receiver out there. Could be wrong, but let's go with that premise. I think there are a lot of guys, at all of the position groups, that can do something well. The challenge for Satterfield, as I see it, is to find those combinations that best complement one another.

I think we should be running way, way more typical 11 man personnel where Fidone is the TE and then <fill in three relatively obvious guys here> are playing as traditional wideouts.

I think, in general, the better you can consistently recruit the more you can go that way. If your Fidone role is played by Travis Kelce and he can play all over the field, then you're going to be very versatile despite fixed personnel. But then what happens the next year when he leaves and you have a good inline TE and a good flex TE and you suddenly have a lot of questions on how you make that work. That's a common scenario in college football.

I'm not big on any particular style. There are lots of ways that work and when one way becomes dominant the other side of the ball adjusts and it cycles to something else. What I do think is important is matching your recruiting philosophy and ability to recruit with your schemes.

 

[Mavric]

[No message]

 

[Mavric]

Banks, Neyor and Bonner were the first three receivers out tonight.

Coleman and Bullock were on the second team.

 

[Decked]

Banks, Neyor and Bonner were the first three receivers out tonight.

Coleman and Bullock were on the second team.

Worth noting that Lloyd was out. 

 

[Mavric]

[No message]

 

[Mavric]

Thomas Fidone II, TE, Nebraska

Snaps: 478

Fidone looks like a late-blooming player after some tough breaks with injuries marring the start of his career. Fidone has an excellent catch radius (and 25 career catches). He plays in a tight end-friendly offense. A new quarterback, freshman Dylan Raiola, will be looking for a security blanket. Does it come together? I say yes and expect a big season. 

Breakout potential this year: Very high chance

 

[brophog]

If you want two breakout guys on offense (each in their own way), Barney and Fidone are great candidates. Barney obviously has a tougher path to consistent playing time, but he's the kind of guy that'll be hard to get off the field once he breaks through.

Fidone has a real chance for national considerations. He can play all of the tight end spots, we have some creative ways to get it to him, and Raiola throws an accurate, catchable ball that can lead to yards after catch.