What did we learn? NIU Edition

[Red Five]

Not gonna lie, don't fully understand this metric, but the teams around us are pretty good.

 

 

[ZRod]

12 minutes ago, Enhance said:

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.

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.

[Enhance]

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.

[gobiggergoredder]

1 hour 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? If his mindset is to run through the defender then let him run through defenders. Especially if it motivates our backs to do the same. Gotta get away from this mindset that QB's are fragile. Wish a T.O. era player would comment about T.O's "good on good" practices (Umm.. Benning you around?) and if the QB's wore green jersey's in those scrimmages. How often do we hear it said that players get hurt when going only half speed so, lower your frame and dish out the blow. Besides, it sounds to me that HH enjoys that physical style of running. 

 

Playing Physical

The ole TO days.  You mean 20+ years ago.  Barry Sanders rushed 30+ times per game in 1988.  Should that be the standard?

 

It’s been shown over and over again that QBs that take big hits are going to get hurt.  Does that make them fragile?  I think it’s just common sense.  The players are bigger, faster and stronger.

[JeffKinney87]

1 hour 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? If his mindset is to run through the defender then let him run through defenders. Especially if it motivates our backs to do the same. Gotta get away from this mindset that QB's are fragile. Wish a T.O. era player would comment about T.O's "good on good" practices (Umm.. Benning you around?) and if the QB's wore green jersey's in those scrimmages. How often do we hear it said that players get hurt when going only half speed so, lower your frame and dish out the blow. Besides, it sounds to me that HH enjoys that physical style of running. 

 

Playing Physical

 

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.  

 

This is mainly done (I am no expert) through training and conditioning programs, and in the type of practice you encourage.  

 

This is pure speculation, but I would guess most of the quarterbacks getting injured today is due to sacks rather than "running hard through opponents".  Please see more from a physical trainer Sal Marinello, I like on the "Coach and Kernan" (baseball) podcast.

 

Just my two cents.

 

https://coachsalm.substack.com/

 

 

 

[thexyz]

3 hours ago, MyBloodIsRed16 said:

This was my thought as well reading all the comments about how much better HH decision making was than Sims.  I didn't hear a peep about the one he literally threw right to a NIU player.  But that guy dropped it.  The throw across his body to Fidone was not smart and D probably should have picked that one.  He played good but due to the team he was playing against I'm not sure what type of conclusion you can draw.  

We really can’t arrive at any conclusions. He could’ve played poorly and didn’t. One cannot overlook any area of his play though. 
 

It’s unfortunate that our backup quarterbacks haven’t gotten more in game experience over the last several years. That would be beneficial as well.

 

I think Haarberg playing will elevate his game and the other QB’s as well. 

[soup]

16 minutes ago, M.A. said:

We really can’t arrive at any conclusions. He could’ve played poorly and didn’t. One cannot overlook any area of his play though. 
 

It’s unfortunate that our backup quarterbacks haven’t gotten more in game experience over the last several years. That would be beneficial as well.

 

I think Haarberg playing will elevate his game and the other QB’s as well. 

 Out backup QBs from last year did get game time experience.  The problem is they all left after the season ended.  

[runningblind]

24 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.  

 

This is mainly done (I am no expert) through training and conditioning programs, and in the type of practice you encourage.  

 

This is pure speculation, but I would guess most of the quarterbacks getting injured today is due to sacks rather than "running hard through opponents".  Please see more from a physical trainer Sal Marinello, I like on the "Coach and Kernan" (baseball) podcast.

 

Just my two cents.

 

https://coachsalm.substack.com/

 

 

 

It isn't a problem with the mindset, it is simply a bad idea to have your QB be your leading ball carrier.  They are usually the hardest position to replace in all of sports.  Can you avoid all injuries?  Of course not, but you can make better choices like not having them run the ball a lot and greatly increase the chances of injuries occurring, no matter what training you think you can give them.  This is simply common sense, they get hit less, the risk of injury is lower.  

[thexyz]

9 minutes ago, soup said:

 Out backup QBs from last year did get game time experience.  The problem is they all left after the season ended.  

That’s true.

[Enhance]

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.

[Husker in WI]

10 minutes ago, soup said:

 Out backup QBs from last year did get game time experience.  The problem is they all left after the season ended.  

 

Just now, M.A. said:

That’s true.

 

Purdy is still here! Wondering how much of him being the #3 is health, and how much is just knowing we'll need the QB run game that Haarberg is better equipped to handle.

[BigRedBuster]

Well....I was hoping that HH would start this next game and they would design the offense around him running less,...unless it's needed to win the game in the end.  I was hoping that it would give them time to develop a game plan getting the RBs the ball more in space.

 

Hmmm....now I'm not sure we can just pound the rock continuously with our RB room the way it is.

[JeffKinney87]

1 minute ago, runningblind said:

It isn't a problem with the mindset, it is simply a bad idea to have your QB be your leading ball carrier.  They are usually the hardest position to replace in all of sports.  Can you avoid all injuries?  Of course not, but you can make better choices like not having them run the ball a lot and greatly increase the chances of injuries occurring, no matter what training you think you can give them.  This is simply common sense, they get hit less, the risk of injury is lower.  

 

I understand what you are saying, but some of that thinking is beginning to be challenged.  It may seem counter-intuitive, but think of a pitcher throwing fewer pitches...that should lead to fewer injuries right?  Less stress on his arm...etc.  Instead injuries have begun to explode, even though every precaution has been taken to make these athletes train, practice, and play with less risk.  

 

Like I said before I am no expert, but I know there is a school of thought that says having your QB be protected in practice, training, and games will make the QB more fragile, and more prone to injury, because they AREN'T stressing their bodies to make them stronger and more resilient.  Like I said I am no expert, but it does make sense to me based on some of the things I have seen.  

 

Again just my 2 cents

[JeffKinney87]

3 minutes ago, Enhance said:

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.

 

I agree with most of what you say, and you did not draw any consternation from me, just my opinion.  Taken with a grain of salt. 

 

I added more in my response to runningblind, but I am fine agreeing to disagree.  

[runningblind]

3 minutes ago, JeffKinney87 said:

 

I understand what you are saying, but some of that thinking is beginning to be challenged.  It may seem counter-intuitive, but think of a pitcher throwing fewer pitches...that should lead to fewer injuries right?  Less stress on his arm...etc.  Instead injuries have begun to explode, even though every precaution has been taken to make these athletes train, practice, and play with less risk.  

 

Like I said before I am no expert, but I know there is a school of thought that says having your QB be protected in practice, training, and games will make the QB more fragile, and more prone to injury, because they AREN'T stressing their bodies to make them stronger and more resilient.  Like I said I am no expert, but it does make sense to me based on some of the things I have seen.  

 

Again just my 2 cents

That school of thought is reasonable, I don't know the science either, but I am simply saying I think an offense that has a QB run basically more than 4-5 times per game is a bad idea for a lot of reasons.  Injuries being one of them, concussions, etc. I don't think it works long term in this age of defenses and at the speed at which the game is now played.  I think the age of the running QB has passed, pun intended.