gossamorharpy

2 minutes ago, lo country said:

Yes.  Because it doesn't.  It's not the "only" way now.  It's part of it, but not as big as NIL and the portal now.  Raiola, by all accounts got several million to flip...He didn't come out of his love for all things red and NU.  had that been the case OSU and UGA would have never factored in.  And until we can develop the kids we recruit, the recruiting has yet to make a difference in the W-L record.  Or getting us bowling.  And truly hasn't improved our performance for years.  Clemson is another example.  Dabo's desire to not use the portal (possibly NIL) has now got people talking about he has "lost" it and that Clemson's grip on the ACC is over.  Despite top rated classes.

Id say high school recruiting still holds 75% importance and portal other 25%. you gotta develop both buckets. If you're abysmal recruiting high school, no money or famous head coach in the world is going to sustain success from the portal alone.

Look at both washington and UM- largely organic rosters but they both hit the jackpot in getting guys from the portal to complete the team.  

I think we're trending the right direction on player development.  We've been bad at it for sure, its also worth pointing out that we went thru a 7 year run of riley & frosty where A LOT of his recruits never even saw the field.  We recruited horrendously on the lines and many of our recruiting years were "buoyed" by 4* skill players, many of which transferred in a year or never took a snap

Paul finebaum is a moron. 
 

im disappointed to see so many doom and gloom posts on this. Washington has made the playoffs 3 times now? TCU was in the title game last year? We 10000% can return to greatness. R we gonna go 60-3 and win 3 titles in 4 years? Prolly not

but we sure as hell can get out of our own way, consistently be top 15 and in the playoff contention most years. You mix a 5 star qb with a filthy d line and we’re there…

we already have half the equation ;)

I find this whole thread and posts ironic and amusing. Never thought i'd see the day a staunch Big 8 supporter would go out of there way to tarnish and question the credibility of the program that largely ran the Big8 until its end.

New year same trolls

2 hours ago, Scofrosghost said:

I don’t know about you guys but I personally love that there are no SEC teams in the natty. 
 

Fluke or parity?

The start of much needed parity.  NIL/transfer portal makes it a lot tougher for the Bama, Georgia, tOSU of the world to consistently hoard 5 star talent across the depth chart.  Bama was the only team in the playoff who's starting QB didn't start their career elsewhere.  

I don't think there is a team this year between the top 8 teams that would be favored over everyone else.  Seeing Washington beat Texas tells me Oregon could also go toe to toe with all the playoff teams given how close they played UW twice this year.

Can't wait for the playoff next year.  We will hopefully continue to see more parity with the portal era and more teams getting access to the title.

Did anyone else have nightmares of Texas getting :01 back yesterday for another attempt?  If you look at the replay, pretty sure a ball dude literally caught the ball and had he not that clock was at :00.  Thank you football gods for not handing those texa$$hats another gift.

1 hour ago, deedsker said:

Yeah, it is looking more like B1G defenses were pretty good and the offenses being inept was only a small part. Mizzou had one of the best offenses in the SEC and didn’t get hit too hard by opt outs. tOSU held them in check all night. tOSU offense getting obliterated by the portal/Harrison JR opt out hurt their offense.

That mizzou/tOSU game was painful to watch at times.  I think its fair to say if tOSU had their roster from most of the year they prolly winning that game easily.

Solid start for bigten thus far up until the typical penn state dud against a team with a pulse.   Maryland earned some goodwill back for us.

Jan 1st gonna be a really telling day.  Despite being a bigten fan, i have little confidence michigan will show up and beat bama.  Perhaps I'm drawing from past years too much but i just dont see how michigans offense is going to consistently move the ball.  Feel like its critical they get out to a lead because i dont think theyre built to score fast on a defense like bamas.  

Iowa/Wiscy games should be fun contrast in styles

13 minutes ago, chamrocck said:

B. Purdy is a good QB, efficient, smart. Kudos to him playing how the coaches need him so SF keeps winning games. But no he is not a dynamic QB and benefits due to all the talent and weapons he has around him. He’s like a McCord. Let’s see how McCord does with Syracuse players instead of OSU.  That’s why I didn’t really understand the premise of the article as Raiola is very different than a game manager QB. I think we could have gone with a game manager but instead I think we are going to be exciting and throw deep and there will be growing pains but it sure will be fun to watch. 

I am so incredibly excited to see what we have to work with.

We gotta give Brock some credit tho.  Jimmy G had this same talent and the offense was nowhere near as explosive.  

The Mccord situation is so puzzling.  Sounds like we never offered him a spot-- im shocked syracuse was where he landed.

1 hour ago, Mavric said:

 

At the very least this is hyperbole.  At best, you're still just claiming things without any justification.

 

And, again, college and NFL are not the same.

 

 

It's a false stat, but that's seems to be what you're making your living on right now.

 

 

This seems appropriate being as how Nebraska doesn't play in the NFL.

 

 

Good deflection.

 

 

We're just talking about the stuff that you brought up.  So you tell me.

 

 

Yep, that's exactly what I said.  You can tell by the part where I never said anything like that.

Sorry, I meant Yards after catch.  And heading into this past week Deebo, Kittle and CMC were all leaders at their respective positions in this category.

The fact that you selectively say this isnt an NFL convo and nebraska doesnt play in the NFL doesnt make any sense when literally the content of the OP (WHICH YOU POSTED) was mimicing a very successful NFL team.  The posts after were discussing how SF brings in TEs and 2 back sets, so when you say "i shake my head when people drool over FBs and TEs" I assume it had some kind of connection to the original post and posters before. 

As far as deflections go- you've literally cherry picked words you either said or meant in another way after the fact.   You literally posted this a day before I did lol.  You had zero response to me calling that out, outside of moving the goal posts and then questioning credibility.  Great exchange, for an admin, you're really providing a great leading example what this board should be.

25 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

Husker fans seem to go to this blame pretty quickly. If we had put Georgia's offensive line in front of Haarberg, would the results have been that different?

 

Or to rephrase it, which would have given us more wins in 2023?

 

• Having Georgia's offensive line
• Having Michael Penix at QB in all 12 games

 

When you present it that way, I think we would have had more wins in 23 with Penix.  I mean, you can easily make the argument we're a 10-2/11-1 team with Penix with the only losses being Michigan and then an inevitable wtf stumble against someone else.  

Assuming we dont have a heisman finalist at qb, i think a top line gives you more to work with and a more consistent chance of success (assuming your other position groups aren't trash).  

2 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

 

And I do think this is exactly the kind of thing Rhule & Satterfield want to do, also.

 

I think  that we've had the issue of playing against heavy defensive fronts when we're rolling out the B Grade or even C Grade dual threat QB's that aren't actually a threat with their arm. You tend to get heavy pressure there because there's lots of game film that shows your QB can't stand strong in the pocket and dial in a good throw when the blitz is coming.

 

It's probably not smart to pour over the San Francisco comments too much, but also it's the offseason. I still say we'd need better talent at running back to implement a clone of what the niners do, but then again I doubt Rhule intends to try to do exactly what Shanahan does on offense.

 

The bottom line to me is that once Raiola is up to speed and if his arm is as good as I think it's going to be, it'll be a waste of what he can give us if we don't toss the ball around the field quite a bit more than what our fan base probably has in their mind as their ideal run/pass ratio.

 

And it's like our program has some actual allergic reaction to anything considered a "spread offense." I think that's lame.

What about when we roll out F and D+ grade dual threats like we did this past year?

Love me the offseason.  I kind of said the same thing in another post with an analogy to Fred Hoiberg.  Waiting for his press conference when he announces he  just gonna do what the 2017 warriors and 96 bulls did.  

On your last part.  Its hard to say, frosty's offense was largely predicated on spread concepts but I'd argue he was a bit too horizontal and didnt have the line to work with.  I'm hopeful Rhule will find the right balance of being a power run first team but also being able to throw the ball downfield when they do throw it to.  While we dont have the skill athletes of ohio state/bamas of the world, we certainly can get the right players to make it work and be in the running in the big10 consistently.

I really think the biggest thing we're allergic to as of late is quality line play.  This isnt a knock on raiola (ol coach)- but in general, we've disregarded the importance of the line to the point where no offense would be successful. 

2 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

I haven't changed my point at all.  You're the one who brought up stacked boxes in the NFL, not me.  I already said I don't think it's really relevant to the original conversation.  I'm just trying to see if you have any facts or you just want people to accept your assertions at face value.

Let me break this down:

You originally said: "This is why it makes me shake my head when people drool over fullbacks and tight ends.  All you do when you go to a heavy formation is bring more defenders into the box.  Which is more guys to block, more blocks to not screw up and just generally more traffic to work through."

The topic of this thread was a pie in the sky model our offense after SF idea.  You know, one of the only teams in the NFL that still uses a FULLBACK and TE regularly on the same play formation.  The niners seem to have zero issue combatting a stacked box.  Kyle Shanahan has been on record many a times saying he loves seeing a stacked box because thats exactly what he wants to trick the defnese into.... have them expect the run and gash them on a pass play out of the same exact formation they've seen a run from many times in that game.  Its one of the major reasons as to why Deebo, Kittle and CMC all lead their respective positions in RAC yardage (how's that for stats?).

You then disregard my response and try and morph the argument into an NFL vs. college conversation.  

Then when I acknowledge some differences in the game, you basically say unless i back things up with stats I'm lying, but its ok for you to drop zero stats and make a point where we have to accept your assertion at face value. 

Lastly, what about this exchange is not relevant to the original conversation?  SFs success is due to a multitude of things- one of the biggest tho is how multiple they are in play formations and plays they can out of it.  You literally responded saying it makes you shake your head when people drool over FB and TEs.  This is why I said you r stuck in 2004.  You act as if the offense has a play, see's what the defense runs and goes "aww shucks, they have 8 or 9 in the box, we're stuck with what we designed, lets hike it anyways".  

1 hour ago, Mavric said:

 

Assuming they are all healthy for next year, I think we are about as well-stacked as anyone can expect.  We have three guys who have seen extensive game action plus a redshirt freshman.  Now, productivity can be argued but I doubt there are many depth charts that have more experience than that.

I hope it plays out this way.  I thought the same thing about the rb room heading into this past year.  Was not expecting a clear decline in AG's level of play and obvi didn't forsee the injury bug ending Rhamir and Gabe's season early (and at the same time)

Having a deep RB room is great.  What's even better is if 1 of those guys can clearly separate themselves.

1 minute ago, Mavric said:

 

This is a convenient way to say "I don't really know but it's what I want to believe."

lol, at least its more relevant than completely changing your original point around?  I was simply trying to say your take on the stacked boxes thing is just a cop out.  Other progrums have no issue handling a stacked box, to say its a nebraska problem is just lazy.  

I do like your methods of responding tho- basically challenging someone to prove their point with an exhaustive research/data/stat exercise which 99% of ppl wont do, and then u claim victory.  

Perhaps after my last meeting this afternoon I'll dive in and report back, stay tuned....

4 hours ago, GlobalHusker said:

Wait…who wouldn’t want to run what Niners run. With a Trent Williams to rely the blind side, Swiss Army knives at just about every position. How man FB’s you know that can run a wheel route like Yoos? Or with Kittle’s speed, catching, AND blocking ability. Deebo can line up in the backfield or split wide. CMC can catch run and block. They can run many sets without rotating personnel that puts pressure on the defenses to stop with what they have. Seems very distant from happening anytime soon here

lol, i missed this comment the first go around...

I'm waiting for fred hoiberg to have a press conference and announce he wants to do what the 2017 warriors did.  We'll just look over the fact of having 4 HOFs on the team we're doing it babbyyyy

19 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

I would be interested for you to provide data or examples of how often NFL teams have 9 in the box.

It happens a lot more often that you think.  A defense running their base personnel and bringing in a safety or corner closer to the formation qualifies as a stacked box.  

Hell, our defense probably fell in the stacked box stat frequently last year given all the pre snap motion/looks we have our defenders present to the offense. 

I could spend time finding stats but not worth my time.  My first comment was in regards to you saying you dont like it when people want to see more TE and FB formations because it brings more guys in the box for us to block.  If thats really a challenge for us then thats just a kind way of saying our OC and QB are garbage.  My point is that a stacked box shouldn't be seen as a deterrent- it should be seen as an easy way for the offense to gain an edge and hopefully have the IQ and players able to capitalize when a defense sells out to stop the run or leaves themselves exposed in a cover 0 or cover 1 formation to get ripped with a big pass play over the top or crossing routes with nothing but open field to run with (this is the hallmark of the niners btw... deebo and kittle are so filthy at showing an initial block, and then running to open space, getting the ball and having nothing but field inbetween them and the endzone)

If you really want to change the argument to frequency of NFL teams have 9 in the box then fine.  But that my friends falls in the category

13 minutes ago, runningblind said:

The Frisco?  Oakland West?  What do you prefer out there? 

SF, The city, the 415, san francisco,  Big red of the west coast, Nebraska west, antyhing but san fran

Just now, Mavric said:

 

Most of the college offenses doing the "check with me" are operating out of four- and five-wide sets.  Not what I am talking about.

 

A "stacked box" in the NFL is significantly different than a stacked box in college.

Well, I think its simply fair to say there are more college offenses running some form of spread, RPO heavy pass, or air raid variation than old school running formations.  Hence, your first comment is true.  That being said, a lot of plays have pre-baked audibles/adjustments that the QB can make or sideline will signal in depending on what defense is showing.  This is obvi more apparent in passing plays where receivers will move all over, but there's also running based variations that might signal a different guard pulling, running to a different side, etc. 

I dont think the concept of stacked box is significantly different compared to college. One can argue the wider hash marks in the college game do make it different for certain routes to be ran vs nfl and the game hence is a bit different.  For simplicity purposes tho, typically 8-9 in the box is a pretty telling indicator of what the defense is thinking for both college and nfl

6 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Am I the only one in this thread that gets half way through reading a post thinking SF is referring to a former coach?

lol, same.  as I was typing my response i was like, i hope this doesnt confuse ppl and should use the HCSF acronym standard moving forward

2 minutes ago, runningblind said:

I was tracking with SanFran, but now I have an eye twitch when reading it, so thanks! 

Please, brother, remove San Fran out of the lexicon.  we hate it when ppl use that term.  Its like when I see nebraska referred on other boards as UN or neb or nebby.   

2 hours ago, Undone said:

Yeah. Purdy leaving hurts us quite a bit, IMO. I really expected he'd be the starter next year and Rhule would try to redshirt Raiola, probably giving Raiola his four allowable games.

 

 

Eh, we'll be fine.  Purdy looked solid because the only comparisons were some of the worst QBs in the country.  He def seemed to have a better grasp and more playmaking than the other alternatives but lets also not selectively forget the pretty basic INTs he threw that directly cost us wins to end the season. 

You get a QB like raiola you start him week 1.  If Rhule doesnt think he's ready after seeing him first hand in spring ball action then i imagine we go in the portal for someone and should have no issue finding someone close or better than what purdy brought to the table

6 hours ago, brophog said:

 

They have good skill guys, but the key to that offense is they have offensive lineman that can really move. They ask a lot of their lineman with their reach blocks. That makes the defenders overplay to beat them to those spots and then the 49ers utilize a lot of motion and misdirection to punish them when they do that.

 

All of their big guys can really move whether that's OL, TE, or FB and that immensely helps them with a wide variety of screen passes. They also love quads and with all of that motion that creates a lot of opportunities. Purdy gets a lot of easy throws at times because they can either create a numbers advantage in this way or set it up so that they can isolate a backside receiver if the defense overplays the strong side. They simply do a fabulous job stretching you laterally with their motion and mobility, and off of that lateral stretch they can create verticality by attacking those seams. It's this mobility by everyone, but in particular the offensive line, that forces the defense to overplay and that allows the running and passing game to sync off of one another.

 

As it relates to Nebraska, this falls in line with our overall recruiting and S&C philosophy. Both offensively and defensively, we want big guys that can move and guys on both sides of the ball made big strides towards that end this past season.

BINGO. you're the only poster on this thread who seems to understand what makes SF's offense work.  I'll get even more granular- its trent williams.  Dont agree? just look at the games and stats when he doesnt play.  The guy single handily protects the blindside while also making runs substantially easier whether its in the in the box, upfield, or pulling trent out to the flat for outside runs.  Guy is a top 3 LT of all time and gets minimal credit for what makes SF special

19 hours ago, chamrocck said:

I’d argue SF has all sorts of weapons that make a game manager like B. Purdy successful.  D. Samuel is a unique weapon. McCaffrey also is a stud and Kittle a top TE.  I sort of envision Raiola stretching the field with deep balls to fast guys.  We seem to be getting strong TE’s which I like. I think we need more dynamic backs and a thumper too.

This is an insult to Brock Purdy and what good qb play should look like.  

18 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

This is why it makes me shake my head when people drool over fullbacks and tight ends.  All you do when you go to a heavy formation is bring more defenders into the box.  Which is more guys to block, more blocks to not screw up and just generally more traffic to work through. 

 

I'm all about a strong running game.  But I'd much rather spread the defense out and run to daylight than have to run over people.

Your comment like the bolded one makes me shake my head all the time.  It screams 2004.  Specially in college, the majority of the snaps the offense lines up, checks the defense, checks the sidelines, makes adjustments and then goes.  SF welcomes loaded boxes because they know they can audible to a quick hitting pass play, flat or over the top to a kittle/Deebo. Fans complaining about going against stack boxes scream they dont pay attention to modern football or how its called at the college level

19 hours ago, Undone said:

San Francisco runs a relatively high amount of 21 personnel (2 backs, 1 tight end), and then a healthy dose of 22 personnel. That's lining up then with just 2 receivers. Kyle Shanahan uses some good creativity with motion and the use of two tight ends. It's kind of hard to say how that could translate to what we could do when you look at just how amazing & versatile Debo Samuel and McCaffrey are.

 

Perhaps a year or 2 ago this would be correct, but this is no longer the case.  Shanny has moved more to Kittle being the sole TE on the field and using a lot of pre snap motion between Deebo/Kittle/CMC to confuse a defense while having Aiyuk/Jennings (WRs) work routes along with Deebo (when he''s not in the backfield)

4 hours ago, Waldo said:

Dude was the most overrated “playmaker” I can think of the last 20 years. Fair caught everything and wasn’t that fast. The media guys seemed to always rave about him.
 QB play didn’t help. 

QB play sank him.  He's most filthy working in the slot and with a qb who can be quick/precise.  Something none of the qbs on our roster this year possessed. 

There's also the conference change/type of opponent that worked against him.  ACC is very different from the big ten style of quality defenses + ball control/bleed the clock offenses (for the most part).  

Imagine if he transferred a year sooner and he was working with CT and palmer on the outside.   We would've seen the kemp as advertised 

16 minutes ago, LP1 said:

#4 QB, #35 overall. What a sham of a recruiting service

 

https://www.on3.com/db/rankings/player/football/2024/

good. little added motivation is never a bad thing

It is pretty head scratching though when on3 shows the industry rankings next to theres.  24/7 & rivals has him as top qb and 2nd highest recruit.  ESPN has him at 8 recruit but #1 qb.  

I've seen his videos and highlights, you dont see an arm that alive often at the age of 16 & 17 when his recruitment took off.  

The whole concept of On3 is dubious to begin with.  They're basically compiling their own ranking and taking into account all the other major services as part of theres.  Which is pretty much what 24/7 that came out the past decade.  The line below adds further murkiness directly from on3 site....

"For football, the algorithm is weighted as follows: On3 (35%), 247Sports (35%), Rivals.com (20%) and ESPN (10%). "

I'd love to see how DR actually ranked in On3s ranking given how high he is on the other services.  Does On3 slot DR into like the #200 recruit? lol

31 minutes ago, Undone said:

Raiola is very mobile. I think our fan base might not be understanding that when they read the words "#1 rated pocket passer in his class."

 

He's a mobile guy that can throw as well as any other high school QB in the country. Think Marcus Mariota at Oregon, but with maybe an even better arm. We literally couldn't get a better QB to run the modified zone read system that Rhule has.

Hes def mobile.  I dont think he has mariota's speed to just pull away from the defense but definitely can run it, if needed.

Given our up and down line play, we really could use a guy with a cannon, who throws a phenomenal deep ball, with touch/catchable ball at all levels of the field... paired with great footwork fundamentals and a pocket presence/IQ to evade pressure, if needed.  Its gonna be a fun 3-4 years 

12 minutes ago, Pedro G said:

 

 

 

 

Totally two different styles of QBs. But no one would ever have more impact on this program than Tommie. No he wasn’t the only player, but he seemed to had led the Huskers back after TO teams started to falter some. Yes TO’s wins and loses were still very good but they had some blowout losses. Maybe — hoping he will  — when it’s all said and done, DR “hopefully” will have as much of an impact. But you never know for sure. But being a pocket passer compared to an option QB, it will be very difficult to ever say who would be better on the college level. However, until DR proves himself, I will go with Tommie.  

I dont know why this is even a conversation point on this board right now.  DR hasnt played a single snap- quite the limb you're going out on saying you'll take one of the greatest college qbs of all time over a 18 year old who hasnt played a down in college lol

I still consider this Raiola recruitment win a MUCH bigger story than Tommie Frazier's recruitment.  They were pretty similar in recruiting ranking stature (sites that go back that far indicate Frazier was the 3-5 ranked player).  

In one situation you had a program that was pretty much top 10 for 20 years straight and put together squads to make a title run.  A program that missed out on a couple titles (referencing the 80s).

In another situation you have a program that hasnt had a winning season in 7 years.  Have set seemingly every program record in futility, yet despite this, they get the #1 qb in the class and get him from the 2 time defending champ.  

Raiola win is insanely more impressive to me given how s#!t we've been.  The chances of him surpassing frazier, once he's played, is probably not very high.  But that doesn't mean the recruitment story (you know, the only thing we can actually base off fact at this time given DR hasnt even stepped foot on campus) isn't more impressive.

2 minutes ago, Big Red Viking said:

Means noting unless he produces

I imagine we'll start seeing some immediate return in the very near future in the form of added commits and access to talent at the skill positions for the 25 class that we simply wouldnt have had prior to DRs commit.  

This means a lot even before he has a chance to produce on the field