Triaging the QB room

[gobiggergoredder]

12 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Agree that the pick before half wasn’t great. Despite that NU was in great position to win the game before Grant’s fumble.  There were a lot of mistakes by numerous players which led to the NU loss against Minnesota. 

The elephant in the room about the Minnesota game is they are not even in that game without Sims running ability.

 

I still think the only way this team wins another game is with Sims at QB.  While not turning the ball over.  Not good odds.

[ColoradoHusk]

12 minutes ago, gobiggergoredder said:

The elephant in the room about the Minnesota game is they are not even in that game without Sims running ability.

 

I still think the only way this team wins another game is with Sims at QB.  While not turning the ball over.  Not good odds.

Sims played well enough in that Minnesota game, given what he was asked to do within the game plan.  Yes, he had two first half INT’s, and the one before half was killer.  But, he played well in the 2nd half to have NU up by 7 with the ball, midway thru the 4th quarter. It wasn’t Sims who had the false start inside the 5 yard line, when a TD puts NU ahead by 2 scores. Also, as I mentioned before, it wasn’t Sims who fumbled at midfield, giving Minnesota new life in the 4th. That was a team loss, not a QB loss. 

[gossamorharpy]

46 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Grant’s fumble was the costliest turnover for the Minnesota game. 

40 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Agree that the pick before half wasn’t great. Despite that NU was in great position to win the game before Grant’s fumble.  There were a lot of mistakes by numerous players which led to the NU loss against Minnesota. 

Eh, I disagree man- Sims int to end the first half directly took points off of the board and just destroyed momentum we were building.  Not to mention it was such an egregious mistake made by a "team leader" at the most important position on the field.  Grant was known prior to the season to have fumbling issues and I believe was our 3rd string RB entering the game?

 

You can make an argument either way.  I'm just so disgusted by Sims presence in this progrum that I'm probably a bit biased in this lol.  Good riddance to him man, didnt think it was possible for someone to pass the low bar set by sam keller as a total dud entering this program and Sims somehow found a way. 

[ColoradoHusk]

2 minutes ago, gossamorharpy said:

Eh, I disagree man- Sims int to end the first half directly took points off of the board and just destroyed momentum we were building.  Not to mention it was such an egregious mistake made by a "team leader" at the most important position on the field.  Grant was known prior to the season to have fumbling issues and I believe was our 3rd string RB entering the game?

 

You can make an argument either way.  I'm just so disgusted by Sims presence in this progrum that I'm probably a bit biased in this lol.  Good riddance to him man, didnt think it was possible for someone to pass the low bar set by sam keller as a total dud entering this program and Sims somehow found a way. 

Yeah, NU’s momentum was so destroyed by Sims’ pick before half, they went on to take the opening kickoff of the 2nd half for a big return and then successfully run a trick play for a go-ahead TD. Then NU went on and dominated both sides of the ball for the next quarter and a half, and lead by 7 with the ball before Grant’s fumble. I would say the team responded well after Sims INT.

 

I agree that Sims has turned out to be a very bad QB. But, he did enough good things in the Minnesota game for NU to win that game. People just want to take the easy way out and pin the loss on him. 

[gossamorharpy]

7 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Yeah, NU’s momentum was so destroyed by Sims’ pick before half, they went on to take the opening kickoff of the 2nd half for a big return and then successfully run a trick play for a go-ahead TD. Then NU went on and dominated both sides of the ball for the next quarter and a half, and lead by 7 with the ball before Grant’s fumble. I would say the team responded well after Sims INT.

 

I agree that Sims has turned out to be a very bad QB. But, he did enough good things in the Minnesota game for NU to win that game. People just want to take the easy way out and pin the loss on him. 

I mean, yah, if you just want to remember the pick in the first half as his only turnover.  He had 3 INTs on the day- the last one of which occurred AFTER the grant fumble to give minny the ball and a short field to kick the game winning FG.

 

Perhaps that game is a bit shady in your memory bank because Sims doubled down in following weeks with even more atrocious play.  I cant blame ya, I wish I could selectively blank out his clown performances out there

 

[gossamorharpy]

43 minutes ago, gobiggergoredder said:

The elephant in the room about the Minnesota game is they are not even in that game without Sims running ability.

 

I still think the only way this team wins another game is with Sims at QB.  While not turning the ball over.  Not good odds.

These 2 sentences will never occur together, its simply not possible.  11 turnovers in 11 quarters of play?!? Good riddance

[Mavric]

59 minutes ago, gobiggergoredder said:

The elephant in the room about the Minnesota game is they are not even in that game without Sims running ability.

 

That's quite a stretch considering he had 0 rushing yards on our TD drive and 19 yards rushing on our FG drive.

[gobiggergoredder]

2 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

That's quite a stretch considering he had 0 rushing yards on our TD drive and 19 yards rushing on our FG drive.

You’re cherry picking data 

 

The TD drive was two plays.  One was a 1 yard run by Grant.  The other was the fluke TD.

 

The field goal was one big play (27 yards) by Ervin.  Sims had 3 carries on the 8 play drive for 19 yards.  6.3 yards a carry.

[Guy Chamberlin]

Here's the thing about running QBs: 90% of it is about the willingness to run.

 

If you have any semblance of a passing threat, even 15-20 attempts per game, there will be plays where a secondary is wide open for a quarterback who decides to scramble. If you throw in a half-dozen designed QB draws, the play action will likely spring a couple for a good gain. If it's Taylor Martinez, that gap can turn into a 75 yard touchdown. If it's Zac Lee, it might only be an 8 yards, but it's the first down you need. 

 

So it's not like we need a running quarterback. We need a passing quarterback who is not afraid to run a handful of times a game. Given our current quarterbacks fumble perfectly good snaps and handoffs, it appears that passing and rushing are both gambles. I say run the full playbook and see if anything works. 

[Born N Bled Red]

4 hours ago, gobiggergoredder said:

The elephant in the room about the Minnesota game is they are not even in that game without Sims running ability.

 

I still think the only way this team wins another game is with Sims at QB.  While not turning the ball over.  Not good odds.

 

IMO, Sims running ability isn't any more impressive than healthy Haarbergs running ability. Sims is a much greater liability when it comes to ball security. If we turn the ball over one less time, we win that game. Logically we win the game with Haarberg at QB.

[gobiggergoredder]

17 minutes ago, Born N Bled Red said:

 

IMO, Sims running ability isn't any more impressive than healthy Haarbergs running ability. Sims is a much greater liability when it comes to ball security. If we turn the ball over one less time, we win that game. Logically we win the game with Haarberg at QB.

Sims is definitely a bigger liability.  I don’t know how anyone could come to another conclusion.

 

I do not agree they have the same running ability.  I think Sims has far more of an upside.  Haarberg is a robot until he builds up some steam.  

 

I don’t know how anyone could bring “logically” into anything we’ve seen this year.  I think it’s unlikely Haarberg would have won against Minnesota in his first start, but I wouldn’t say it couldn’t happen.

Sims downsides are so bad (the picks, fumbles, going the wrong way) that many have written of the raw ability he has.  A Sims that plays mistake free football gives this team the best chance to win (my opinion).  Based upon what we’ve seen, it’s reasonable to say that’s not even possible.

 

[HuskersNC949597]

On 11/14/2023 at 7:10 PM, lo country said:

This might be revisionist history, but I seeem to remember NU in 95 either neither fumbled or lost a fumble.

That team fumbled 28 times. So if by some miracle of heaven, the Huskers can avoid fumbling for two whole games (and, DARE I SAY, some kind of a. . .bowl game thingy?!!), they'll finish with exactly one fewer fumble than the 1995 team! Unfortunately they've already lost 13 compared to 9 by the 95 squad.

[lo country]

20 hours ago, Born N Bled Red said:

 

Also are you confusing QBR with his completion percent??? 

No.  From the ESPN stat sheet.Total QB rating.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/gamelog/_/id/4362073/casey-thompson

[lo country]

1 hour ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Here's the thing about running QBs: 90% of it is about the willingness to run.

 

If you have any semblance of a passing threat, even 15-20 attempts per game, there will be plays where a secondary is wide open for a quarterback who decides to scramble. If you throw in a half-dozen designed QB draws, the play action will likely spring a couple for a good gain. If it's Taylor Martinez, that gap can turn into a 75 yard touchdown. If it's Zac Lee, it might only be an 8 yards, but it's the first down you need. 

 

So it's not like we need a running quarterback. We need a passing quarterback who is not afraid to run a handful of times a game. Given our current quarterbacks fumble perfectly good snaps and handoffs, it appears that passing and rushing are both gambles. I say run the full playbook and see if anything works. 

Not that we need elite talent like Trevor Lawrence (but it'd be great) is a perfect example of this.  Dude was a decent runner, but he wasn't a running QB.  A few designed runs to keep the D honest and have to account for him and an ability to scramble when needed.   

[lo country]

12 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Another way of saying that is Casey could actually throw deep to open receiver and complete the pass to allow Palmer to bail him out.  That would be nice to have this year.   (And no I don’t think Casey is 10 times the QB but he was better last year than what we have this year and that’s not arguable)   
 

Quite frankly, also I’m tired of talking about a QB’s rushing stats too until the core competency of throwing passes is up to a college P5 upper half level first.  

Look at Caseys stats before he got injured.  It was Palmer.  

 

https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/gamelog/_/id/4362073/casey-thompson

https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/gamelog/_/id/4362073/type/college/year/2022