brophog

26 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I feel like the team sees Prime once a day for about 10 minutes at the start of practice and 10 minutes at the end of practic

He sits on his phone DM'ing portal guys all day. All he's ever known as a 'coach' is how to use his personal brand to out talent the other team. He has nothing of himself personally invested in most of these guys. They are, by all definition, disposable to him.

Quote

How would Title IX be impacted?

This should not be buried in that article like it's a minor obstacle. That's a federal statute that has huge ramifications.

6 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Are we at the point where there can be no second string? If a hotshot recruit discovers someone is ahead of him on the depth chart, does he just say ef-it, I'm outta here? 

Every time the NCAA gets sued the rules get looser and looser. We're almost at the point.....and I'm not joking....we're almost at the point you'll see a team go to the opposing team's locker room at halftime and offer their QB a bag of money.

One thing  I'd like to highlight as a difference to last year is how wide our offense was this weekend. Everything played very narrow last year and it led to stacked boxes and defenders jumping routes.

One play I think highlights how good Dylan is was his first TD to Bonner. Bonner is playing in "big slot' role as the 3rd receiver to that side. He runs a corner route with the two outside receivers running double ins which against man coverage are designed to hold the safety in the middle of the field. Bonner runs a really good route to create separation and Raiola throws a perfect ball with anticipation and placement so the defender has no chance.

I think this is one of those plays that Raiola almost hurts his own hype because he makes that throw look so easy. He's on about the 23 yard line  throwing to the right pylon....from the left hash mark. That's a very difficult throw to make and far more difficult than it is at the pro level because the narrow hash marks effectively make the field play narrower at the pro level.

Lastly, other than being a great throw, why do I choose this play, in particular, as someone that is excited about what I saw this spring? Because last year we threw picks with this play. In particular, it's the play that cost us the Maryland game. Now, I didn't love the play call in that situation because we're on the 7, throwing to the short side of the field so everything is more condensed and that helps the CB drop off his man to intercept the pass. But the biggest culprit is we ran that route a little too flat and Purdy drastically under threw the ball. If he throws that ball more towards the back corner it's either a TD or we're attempting a chip shot for the lead.

Not only did we see that same play, executed and called so much better in the spring game, but we saw that same scenario. Dylan threw two passes in a row towards the end zone on a drive where it was either our ball or no ones. We missed the FG attempt, unfortunately, but we gave ourselves the chance that we so often didn't last year.

I hope anybody that thinks the spring game doesn't matter will read this and see how we're taking the same scenarios, even the same plays, that cost us games last year and executing at a much higher level this year. 

2 hours ago, RedDenver said:

I think HH has an important role to play this season still, and as I said, that's not a popular opinion right now.

This entire offense is being set up for the pocket passers and they're training Haarberg to work within that. They're not setting this offense up like last year and training the new QBs to work within that style. Everyone needs to take last year's tape and burn it. Yes, it's the same offense in the sense it's the same language and organization and so forth but that QB heavy run style that we were forced to adopt by circumstance is completely gone. You may see an occasional zone read here or there, especially if Haarberg is needed for a sustained time, but Raiola and Kaelin are just not built for that style of play.

That's why what Haarberg did this spring was so impressive. He's being asked to play in an offense built for someone else, and I think he's doing a great job. But, there's no QB controversy here. Rhule is just dipping into his psychological bag of tricks to get what he wants from these guys. He knows exactly who his starting QB is.

Barney is emerging as that player you just have to figure out how to get on the field.

Have we tried him at kicker, seems he's successful everywhere else.

1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

Remains to be seen if the rest of the team is good enough for DR to succeed without the threat of the QB run and option

I love the option as much as the next guy, but year on year there are fewer and fewer coaches that know how to call and teach the option and Satterfield isn't one of them.

1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

Can the OL protect and the receivers get open against B1G defenses?

See all of those screens and RPOs designed to get the ball out quickly. That's what Satterfield does well, but he tends to lose focus of what's working and decides to play with his other toys.

It's important to actually read that link in the tweet to understand what this exercise is and isn't doing. The methodology and source materials are linked.

TLDR: It's not about how good a player is, what he's projected to be, how good he fits on a particular team or anything like that. It's simply looking at what draft pick a player went vs where that player was projected to go. If you have a grade A bum who is projected to go in the 5th and you got him in the late 6th, then in this analysis it was a pick that would score well regardless of the fact he's a bum.

8 hours ago, floridacorn said:

I'll piggy back off this by echoing this as well as a noticeable difference in his mechanics.  He's still figuring it out and there were a few passes where he put too much air under the ball because he's still thinking about his mechanics.  There were a few plays where you could see him working through his progression while remaining poised in the pocket and we never saw that last season.  Hard to look at that and not believe Rhule made the right call bringing Thomas in.  

I thought Haarberg looked like the backup QB and I mean that as a compliment. What do you want your backup to do: don't take unnecessary risks, check down when necessary, throw it away when necessary, get completions and move the chains. He played within himself and listened to his coaching and because he's a very talented guy he can do that and still make some big plays. I said coming in that he was the QB I wanted to see the most because he was the benchmark last year and that benchmark has risen substantially.

I thought Kaelin looked like a talented freshman. I've seen some people out there say they were disappointed in him, but it's not a crime for a freshman to play like a freshman. There's a reason why even the most talented freshman QBs rarely play significant time their first year. It's not an easy transition to make and I thought he did some good things and some bad things but overall showed he's a very capable player with an exciting career ahead of him. I don't think it's fair to compare him or Haarberg to Raiola because I'm not sure by the end of the season it'll be fair to compare any college QB to Raiola.

I think if the offense continues to make strides this summer and fall (and a lot of people did a lot of good things today) then once Raiola starts stacking games on top of each other and learning from those experiences......I just think his trajectory will be very steep. He just makes things look so easy, and not easy "for a freshman" but easy for anyone. He has the physical tools, the intangibles, the leadership, the work ethic, all of the coaching resources in the world......but he lacks the experience. 

I'll tell you what you can't do if all of your players leave via the portal....play a spring game.

Anybody catch any of CU's spring game? I've seen more competitive games at recess.

I know some people don't like the perimeter passing game because of how it was utilized under the previous crew, but if you can combine it with deep threats, crossers, and the running game it becomes extremely difficult for the opposing safeties and corners.

We have TE/HB players that can hit the flats, the corners, and attack the seams. Fidone's TD is a zig off a stacked release where he runs a beautiful route on a mismatch. A lot of big, athletic bodies to create mismatches with and I thought for a 'vanilla' spring game we saw a ton. Under center, shotgun, pistol, all sorts of screens, switch releases, stacked releases, compressed sets, spread sets, empty, etc.

This offense needs refinement and better execution and all of those sorts of things that come with spring ball, but conceptually you can see where this thing is going and I think it's really exciting. I thought last spring was promising, too, but circumstances meant we didn't get to see that version of the offense. This spring, imo, is a monumental step up from any point last year and while getting more capable QB play is a definite plus, credit to the staff if they can take the types of things we saw today and re-produce that regularly in the fall.

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

But, my totally non expert eye believes we saw some throws today that we haven’t seen in a long time from a Husker QB. 

People will very correctly tell me I'm putting the cart before the horse, but in the modern pass happy era of college football Nebraska has not had a comparable QB. He's so professional in his approach that it isn't fair to other freshman QBs to call him a freshman.

One example comes from his interview where he's describing the long TD pass today and how when they ran that in practice on Tuesday he took the checkdown only to notice in film study that he had the deep shot. Made the adjustment today for a nice, easy TD.

We knew they planned to throw a lot today, so that's not a surprise. But  RPOs and QB decisions also make a big difference in the final tally.

We've heard all spring that the QBs have been given quite a bit of latitude to change things at the line, and Haarberg's press conference today I think was the most illustrative of the 3 QBs. Simple things like throwing it out to a receiver against soft coverage or getting the ball to a TE in the flat against box counts are many times taking the place of runs.

The last thing to consider, and this goes for almost any team that isn't run dominant by design, is how many runs come when you're in control of the game to kill clock and that situation didn't come up today.

Every WR should take notice....those two are going to be tough to keep off of the field.

The thing I really notice as a positive change with Haarberg is his comfort factor. He knows he can't get hit, so maybe that has something to do with it, but he was so indecisive and skittish last year. In the spring game, they're not all amazing plays but he checks down when he needs to, he throws it away when he has to, and he stands tall in the pocket.

1 hour ago, JJ Husker said:

Spring game or not, it’s very easy to see that our QB talent is lightyears ahead of where’s it’s been.

Absolutely. I'd also say the QB coaching is light years ahead of where it's been. Danny struggled a bit but felt like he was a little jacked up, seemed better when the game sped up and he could get into a rhythm. If he's 3rd, I'm more than OK with that. The best thing for him and the program is if we have the luxury to put another year between him and Dylan. Haarberg looked far, far more capable as a passer.

I'd have to watch the game more to say anything too specific, but overall the offense did a way better job getting the ball out of the QBs hands on time and in rhythm. A little messy with the penalties but not surprising given the parameters of the game. First reaction is the offense made some major strides with the ability to get a lot better.

26 minutes ago, Mavric said:

Because the gap to the next guy is A LOT.

And the guy on the backside of that gap is a former top QB prospect whom, at times, can look better than everybody else. I think he just fell to the point where his potential is so high someone has to take that chance.

2 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Then they grab this Pearsall guy, despite there being several WRs on the board rated higher.

There are a lot of people in the league that really like Pearsall. I don't know what it'll mean for their salary cap issues with those other guys, but this is considered by many to be a very good pick.

4 hours ago, runningblind said:

He isn't at #2 out of being good, he's simply the second best option right now.

I'm not drawing that, or any other conclusions about the QBs, until we can see more of them. Right now, the best guys like Sipp can do is rely on gossip from those inside the program. The media gets to see practically nothing.

RE: Taking a pick too high

I don't know about anyone else, but this is one of those annoying things draft analysts say every year.

Mathing it out, it makes sense on the surface. You value a player at a certain spot and don't want to spend any more than you need to get that pick. The logic breaks down when you quickly realize you have picks at set intervals. Usually that is 32 picks apart, but in Denver's case they didn't have a 2nd round pick, so that pick is now 64 picks apart. Is Bo Nix still there at 76? Probably not. That leaves the option of trading down/up to maximize your pick slot.

The only thing more annoying is everyone suggesting a team should trade down. Everyone knows trading down is usually a high value play, and because of that, very few teams want to trade up. One of the few positions worth trading up for, especially in this draft, is QB.

Denver didn't have a lot of options here and everyone knew that when Russ was cut. As the draft got closer and closer and it became more and more apparent a lot of QBs would go early, Denver had their hands tied as to what choice of QB they may get. The didn't have the draft capital to move around the board, and they were pretty desperate for a QB. The fact next year's QB class doesn't look great also likely played a big part in many teams making the QB decisions they did.

44 minutes ago, runningblind said:

Where is the throw up emoji?

If Haarberg is that good, then great. I'm not taking Sipp's word for it, though.

57 minutes ago, commando said:

sounds like passthedamnballguy is going to be happy

They've been trying to placate runthedamnballguy in the press conferences by saying they're just not focused on the running game because they're confident in it from last year, but anyone even remotely paying attention should see right through that.

They know they have a kid with a rocket laser arm and a room of potentially very explosive wide receivers and most of those aforementioned pieces are simply young and inexperienced. What we see a lot in teams fitting Nebraska's profile of having to start a young QB after coming off a season where they ran the ball pretty effectively and had a pretty good defense is to protect the young QB and rely on those other elements.

Are we seeing that in practice? No, not even close. Two of these guys should be worried who they're taking to the senior prom right now and instead are watching White play dial-a-blitz on them. They're trying to cram as much experience into these young guys as they can. My opinion, and that's all it is worth, is there is a belief in that building that if this offense can even remotely approach its potential that this can be an extremely good team this year. They're not treating this like they just need to win a couple more games and go bowling. 

As perplexing as it is for Atlanta to draft an old prospect to sit behind a QB they just paid 9 gajillion dollars to, Buffalo is almost as big of a dud.

From Buffalo's perspective, the trade makes a lot of sense without context. They didn't see any more value to be extracted from the first round, and between the Chiefs trade and subsequent Carolina trade they only move down 5 spots and pretty substantially upgrade from a 4th to a 3rd and a 6th to a 5th and swapped 7ths. That's some pretty good extracted extra value. They didn't get any more picks, but they already had 10 picks so from their viewpoint they saw a lot of value to get back into the 3rd round which the Chiefs provided.

But trading to KC? They know what that means for them. Just a few weeks prior when they moved Diggs the rumor was he could go anywhere but KC. So, instead, they allow KC to trade up when KC was heavily linked to the fastest WR in the class. When that speed can unlock this suddenly stagnant KC offense.

When KC is the team that knocks them out nearly every year since Mahomes was drafted.......consequently the last time the Bills traded down with KC.

They'll take Edwards if they can land him, not sure I'd say he's leaning Nebraska's way, though.

3 hours ago, Husker in WI said:

I know Satt loves his TEs, but how many do we need?

Much like the defensive side recruits a lot of DB body types to turn into potentially something else, the offensive side recruits a lot of TE body types. They may stay at TE or become a WR or OL or HB/FB or whatever. The staff's philosophy is all about getting good athletes and then developing them into whatever they are best at after they are here.