Enhance

3 hours ago, runningblind said:

Sims 2 starts were on the road as well, Haarberg at home. People greatly underestimate that.

TBH I think most people are perceptibly aware of and acknowledge that playing a G5 school at home is a bit different than playing two power 5 teams on the road, particularly a ranked one, when it comes to comparing HH vs. Sims.

I think what's pushing people is that HH played competently and didn't turn the ball over, and he did it against a type of team that Nebraska has lost to several times in recent years. So, it's definitely not an apples to apples comparison, but I also think most people appreciate the competition and situations Sims played in. They just don't like that he looked bad doing it.

21 hours ago, HuskerNation1 said:

Rhule's decision to go back to Sims given the 3 games we have seen this seen is mind boggling and has lowered my confidence in Rhule.  NIU is quite a bit better than LA Tech so Sims will need to help the team win by at least 30 points.

Personally, I don't think there's a huge difference between NIU and LA Tech in terms of what it means in the greater scheme of the QB situation. Nebraska "should" beat both teams by three or four scores. Whether HH or JF starts, I'll be looking more at how they command the offense and lead drives vs. what the actual point differential is.

I would hold steady on your confidence in Rhule though, and perhaps I can even offer a different perspective. I think what you're seeing right now is a balance of coach speak, but also him wanting to support his players and give them opportunities to prove themselves. Sims earned the job and a lot of respect from his teammates in the pre-season, so it's something Rhule has to navigate very carefully with the players so that he doesn't shake their trust and confidence in the process. What's happening and being evaluated behind closed doors may not necessarily be exactly what he's telling all of us.

And if Sims does start, all we can do is really trust that Rhule thinks it's what's best for the team and that Sims had a good week of practice. My only hope is that if Sims continues to struggle though, the decision to sit him is instantaneous.

14 hours ago, walksalone said:

Is Sims actually gonna start against La Tech???

It's basically going to be a game time decision, according to Rhule. We probably won't know for certain until they release the roster two hours before kick off.

3 hours ago, secretasianman said:

Glad I read the thread because I was going to say exactly this.

 

Also, through 3 games: 

Johnson- 12 carries, 65 yds., 0 TD’s

Ervin Jr.- 38 carries, 196 yds., 1 TD 

 

Neither are game breakers.  Feel bad for the guys, but realistically, shouldn’t be difficult to replace. 

I agree they are not game breakers, but they were the 2 of the 3 best runners behind a shaky offensive line, and that’s the scary part more than anything. They absolutely will be difficult to replace.

14 minutes ago, Street Novelist said:

So if Grant gets hurt, we would be playing guys who have never seen the field? 

Unfortunately, as far as true running backs go on the roster, that's pretty much true.

Despite the 1-2 start and the loss of Ervin/Johnson, I still feel like Nebraska is probably a fringe bowl team which is where I had them pre-season. I think 6-6 is a reasonable best case scenario, but 4-8 or 5-7 is feeling more like the appropriate landing spot now.

Looking at their remaining schedule, this is how I feel at the moment:

• La Tech: W
• Michigan: L
• Illinois: Coin Flip
• Northwestern: W
• Purdue: Coin Flip
• Michigan St.: W
• Maryland: Coin Flip (this is a tough one because they're undefeated but have played three inferior and/or bad teams)
• Wisconsin: L
• Iowa: L

So, that's three more W's I feel fairly confident about, three games that I think are coin flips, and three L's that I'm just expecting based off of precedent. I'm not necessarily married to some of those coin flips and L's at the moment and they will assuredly fluctuate on a week-to-week basis now.

19 minutes ago, JeffKinney87 said:

I agree 100% with the bolded!  In almost every sport (especially baseball) they are doing more and more to create a "fragile" athlete.  This is always sold as a way to prevent injuries, but after 10-20 years of this mentality, the injuries are not being reduced at all, in fact in some sports they've gone sky high.  We also tend to have a lot of non-contact injuries now compared to in the past.  You cannot wrap these guys in bubble-wrap.  In a chaotic world, the best you can do is train them to be able to not only handle adversity, toughness, and injury, but train them to be resilient in the sense that the likelihood of injury is lower overall.  

FWIW, nobody (specifically, myself, whose post drew the attention of Loebarth in the first place) is calling for teams to treat their QB's as "fragile." It's football, not Jenga.

But, there's a lot of value in playing physical and smart, and knowing when it's time for one vs. other. He'll gain that experience over time.

It's a bit bizarre to me that this viewpoint would draw consternation. I don't know about you guys but I'd rather not have my QB shatter his collar bone on his 15th run of the game in a situation where he didn't need to AND could've slid/run out of bounds to fight another down.

2 minutes ago, Fru said:

I’m confident there are several RBs on the roster that could have filled in during garbage time. A 25 point swing in 6 minutes? C’mon. 

FWIW, I don't think you're wrong. I think it's just a crappy situation.

While I think we can make a cogent argument for why Grant/Ervin shouldn't be in the game up 24 with 6 min. left, I also think it's a freak injury and there's a possibility that the coaches were using it as a way to get more reps and continue to build confidence for the team. It looks bad in hindsight because a player is now out for the season, but I also don't recall sitting on my couch at that point in the gaming thinking "man, they really shouldn't have Ervin in there." It felt appropriate/normal. And they were probably on the verge of that being among his last carries for the game.

I guess my point is that if Ervin hadn't been injured, I don't think many of us would be sitting here on a Monday wondering why Ervin got a carry with 6:30 left in the game. We're hyperaware of it now because of something bad that happened. So, I try to judge the decision based on the moment and the situation as opposed to the result, and in the moment, it didn't necessarily feel wrong or inappropriate to have him in there. Just my two cents though.

4 minutes ago, Crusader Husker said:

In my Roy Kent voice:

 

fffffffffuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu.......................

Love that show.

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

This was a freak injury.  Very unfortunately, but I don't blame the coaches for this.

Agreed.

I can think of several times over the last 15-20 years where we had starting running backs in the game with about that much time left and we were up by a few scores. That's a circumstance where I think most coaches will still have a large volume of their starters in, especially for a program like Nebraska that's trying to rebuild itself and grow confidence.

8 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

maybe Emmett is more advanced but he's small

I'm going to make a very surface level body comparison and come to a ridiculous conclusion because of it. Prepare your butts.

Ameer Abdullah was 5'9" and 180 lbs as a freshman. Emmett Johnson is 5'11" and 190 lbs.

Based on that metric and that metric alone, I say play him. 

Oh, I'm laughing to hide the tears right now.

Looks like just a freak injury based on that angle. So frustrating.

Sims to RB?

Joking.

(kind of).

1 minute ago, Fru said:

Gabe’s injury happened on that last meaningless drive didn’t it? 

I don't remember if it was the last drive, but I do remember seeing him walk off the field holding his hip near the end of the game. That really sucks.

My best to both of them. Hopefully the coaches/players can identify some opportunities to work around this news and find other players who can step up.

4 minutes ago, ZRod said:

I remember Crouch being pretty beat up (don't recall Lord), and Armstrong as well, but from the stats I posted I think it's pretty clear your QB should be running the ball no more than 12 times per game, plus/minus 1 to 2 extra carries as need. Anymore than that and he's not going to finish the season unless he's Wolverine.

Precisely. I remember T-Magic suffered an injury as well (think it was a high ankle sprain) and Adrian also had an injury that sidelined his playing time/development.

I wager the coaches don't think 20 carries are ideal, and I imagine they'll be talking to him this week too about making some safer decisions with his body. As a teammate, I appreciate a physical QB who isn't shy of contact, but I also appreciate a QB who wants to keep himself healthy for me and my teammates. Both can be signs of a good leader and a good QB.

34 minutes ago, Loebarth said:

Really, would you have said that in the T.O. days when it wasn't at all unusual for our QB's to run through defenders?

It would depend on the circumstance but I think that's comparing apples to oranges a bit. T.O's teams didn't regularly feature quarterbacks that ran 20+ times into the teeth of defenses. Frazier averaged only 8 carries per game his senior season. Assuming HH remains the starter, the chances of his body holding up running the way he does for 15-20 times a game are very, very low. We also know that T.O.'s teams had more talent, depth, and could sustain injuries much more efficiently.

There are times to be physical and fight for the extra yard, and there are times to be a leader and do what's right for your team. He's a young guy and he'll likely figure it out if given the opportunity.

39 minutes ago, Mavric said:

This is definitely true.  But I don't think that really makes it any better for Sims. 

 

Everyone is going to screw up.  It's everyone else's job to help cover for those screwups.  You can't take a slightly bad situation and make it 10 times worse.  Especially when you're the QB.

100% agree.

I think that's where I tend to push back a bit against Rhule's narrative from the last week or so. I'm sure he's not technically wrong when he said that 'things happened that weren't Jeff's fault' which helped lead to turnovers, but there's a fine line to be drawn there. For example, is he suggesting that Sims threw interceptions because maybe a receiver ran a wrong route and/or the line didn't pick up a blitz correctly? Because yes, that is a bad situation going against your QB, but to your point, your QB can't then go and make a bad decision on top of all of it. That's where the ball security and mindfulness as a QB has to come into play.

1 hour ago, Red Five said:

HH played a fine game.  Nothing flashy, but better than what we saw from Sims (albeit probably against worse defenses).  Don't think he is the answer long term, but might have to be for this season.  Although if he keeps playing and running 15+ times/game we will see Sims or Purdy again.

If HH keeps the starting job, and keeps running 15+ times a game, I hope he got his proclivity for bruising defenders out of his system. I think he can sustain 10-15 runs per game but not if he's going to truck stick linebackers and DB's every chance he'd get. If he runs 15 times a game it'd be nice if he gave himself up or ran out of bounds on at least 5-6 of them.

16 hours ago, Nebhawk said:

I do have a question:  Can our base defense contain anyone, or do we have to blitz or apply pressure to get things done?  What I mean is it seems as if we have to bring some heat to make things happen.  That concerns me to a point.  We now have game film on us and our defense.  Will stronger opposing teams have all they need to scheme against us knowing our defense is a one trick pony.  As long as our D can make the pressure work, its no big deal.  We will find out against Michigan.

I think @Undone just had a really good post on this, but it's my understanding that one of greatest strengths of the 3-3-5 is it allows you to create nearly endless blitz packages, but then also allows you to put 8 into coverage in obvious passing situations out of what is effectively your "base defense." But, it is pretty dependent on those blitz packages creating pressure and confusion. Without it, you get the 3-3-5's weakness, which is the creation of passing lanes and gaps in the defense, potentially allowing for some big chunk plays.

I think Nebraska's defense has done a pretty good job of creating pressure this season and playing pretty decent coverage. This may not be statistically accurate, but it feels like they're doing a better job of controlling the LOS and creating pressure than in some previous seasons.

Urban Meyer had a segment about Nebraska's defense last week on BTN. I think this is the correct clip but can't watch it at the moment to confirm.

2 hours ago, huskerfan702 said:

Stones pal. Stones. 

And with that, you proved why this thread is serving little to no value.

I'm not sure which group of people gets triggered more easily - the Deion haters, or the people who can't handle the Deion haters.

52 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

This is a thread about Sims vs HH, not about if NU has struggled against similar opponents or not. HH played NIU at home. Sims played Minn and CU both on the road. It's really hard to know whether HH is truly better than Sims.

Nebraska hasn’t been consistently good against any level of competition for a long time, particularly at the QB position, so it’s really bizarre that we have fans waving off HH’s performance because it was against NIU. We LOSE to teams like NIU.
 

I agree the circumstances for both were not apples to apples. There were also 8-9 months of things that happened we didn’t see, including Sims’ teammates voting for him as a single digit. They must’ve had good reason to.

3 minutes ago, huskerfan702 said:

Hey pal don’t use the kings English to deflect. His success bothers many around here. A person with a decent set of stones wouldn’t be so bothered is all. 

Hey friend, people are well within their rights to feel however they want to feel about him. Doesn't mean the same tired conversations need to be brought up time and again in the wrong forum.

I don't see much perceptible difference between the people bothered by Sanders and the people that are bothered by the people who are bothered by Sanders. Seems like they're all just bothered.

4 minutes ago, BaytownHusker said:

Lets talk about this when HH play Michigan.  We played NIU lmao.

Is this post supposed to be clever, witty, or clairvoyant? Because it is none of those.

Nebraska hasn't been a bowl game since 2016. It lost at home to NIU in 2017. They also lost to Troy and Georgia Southern within the last five years.

So, it is a bit silly that some of our fans are 'laughing their asses off' about good performances against perceptibly less talented teams. One would think this fan base would've moved beyond that type of vanity.

2 minutes ago, huskerfan702 said:

It’s amazing how a man can have an entire fan base in a chokehold 

I agree - the amount of people who have insisted about bringing him up on this board over, and over, and over again in the last 12 months is astounding.

He doesn't belong in the Husker football forum unless it's Colorado week. And if people really want to have a debate about whether or not they'd prefer him over Rhule, power to 'em - here's their feeding ground!

At one point, I may or may not have verbally lamented that I wished Ervin/Grant had just that little bit of extra speed to turn those 8-yard runs into 15-20+ yard runs. I thought back to what it felt like watching Abdullah, where defenders would have promising angles and Abdullah's speed would be just too quick for them. 

I think Grant and Ervin are good players but it does look like they're a quarter or half step slower than what would make them a true difference maker.

Against my better judgement, I didn't kill the thread, but I did move it out of the football forum. It should have never been in there in the first place. It's a low brow topic largely serving as a way for some people to self-gratify over Deion Sanders. It's also an irrelevant hypothetical.

So, if you want to keep discussing the topic, welcome to your new home!