Undone

I'm going to put the mark of "we'll know much more by 'X' date" at roughly the mid point of this coming season.

I do think Sims has potential, yes.

I can only express so much gratitude through this keyboard. But really though, what I'm saying is that I'm more interested in what all of this means for the kind of plays will be our bread & butter in this offense. Will be interesting to see if the QB run game is something Rhule is planning on as a staple, or just as more of "here and there." Sims' addition kind of suggests the former.

All you need to know is that the college football you knew is gone (which I think is good) and now the players essentially get paid salaries (which I also think is good).

I think this was a solid observation, and I agree. If the offensive line was good and if your running back is capable, you're probably in a lot of 3rh & shorts instead of 3rd & longs. But still the conversation for me is more about trying to figure out what Rhule is going to try to do in 2023 on offense scheme-wise, and also speculating on who'll start. Thompson is still on the roster. He and Sims are pretty different QB's. Not polar opposite necessarily, but pretty different. If Rhule really wants to plug Sims in right away, it's pretty telling about what he's going to try to do scheme-wise.

Fairly disappointing to go this kind of a route for me. He doesn’t have the skills to be the guy you want in the pocket when it’s 3rd & long. Which is where we’ve struggled off & on for quite a while. I understand that in a rebuild in year zero you just get the best talent you can and hope something shakes out. But it’s just weird because literally one of the first things out of Rhule’s mouth as head coach when asked about what kind of offense he’ll run was “we’re not going to be a spread offense.”

The nightly open bar in Rhule's office he's planning surely aren't going to help...

I thought Hixson did better than I expected him to. Maybe that just means that my own expectations were too low. But the point is, he at least got coached to play a new position somewhat competently in basically one offseason. And Corcoran really came along. So there were at least some positives from what Raiola was doing. But he didn't help our right tackle's game at all, and that leaves some pretty big question marks for me personally.

Whenever you run a Nickel scheme it's at least somewhat similar to those concepts Bo had. But the thing with Bo is that he recruited real defensive ends...something we haven't done successfully since he left.

If I recall correctly, guy did make an NFL practice roster. His arm really wasn't as bad as a lot of people remember. I think he just wasn't the QB that fans wanted him to be in that era he was the starter, mainly.

I walked right into this one.

I wonder if the biggest concern was current offensive linemen jumping ship into the portal if Raiola left? If he is the guy on staff and he doesn't perform well next year he absolutely has to get fired next season. Personally I think we've already given him enough of a tryout and I don't like what I've seen.

That's more or less what we did quite a bit under Chinander and then by extension some with Busch, also. The question of whether there are 3 or 4 guys on the line kind of ebbs & flows. In the later Chinander years he'd usually have either Tannor or Nelson on the line for a four man front. But anyway, we played a lot of Nickel (5 guys in the backfield).