Sims vs HH

[Enhance]

That's true. TBH I'm not counting that turnover as a knock against HH in the evaluation process. Most QB's are fumbling that ball in that situation.

[JJ Husker]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

I'm not willing to say Sims has a higher ceiling.  He's started 23 games in his career?  And HH has now started one?  

 

Sims should have enough experience to handle being on the road in places like Minny and CU.  With 23 starts, he should not be making the unforced errors that killed our chances to win those games.

 

HH didn't do those mistakes in his first game.

 

Could Sims beat HH in a foot race?  Probably.  But, that's not the #1 job of the QB.

Maybe calling it a ceiling is incorrect. Obviously we don’t know HH’s ceiling yet. Sims has a much larger body of work to examine and HH has basically had one game.

 

The general idea is that Sims does quarterbacky things better than we’ve seen from HH. Of course the outlier here is turnovers and bobbled balls. I just don’t think we’ve reached the point yet where you permanently replace an experienced portal transfer player who his fellow players deemed worthy of a single digit uni because his backup managed a game against NIU. But I also think the leash and tolerance for stupid turnovers has to be immensely shorter now.

 

It’s just a bit premature to be crowning HH based on 1 game vs NIU and comparing that to only 2 horrendous outings by Sims. If that’s who he ends up being all the time then yeah HH gets the job.

[Hilltop]

I have been giving this a lot of thought.  One reason I give HH the nod is because he is used to winning football games.  I know that sounds lazy but the reality is the kid is 21-3 over his last 24 starts.  Yes that includes high school but winning is winning.  I believe it to be a mentality that has been missing around here for some time.  Sims has only won 8 games in 27 starts while throwing 27 interceptions.  With that record I find it hard to believe Sims steps on the field expecting to win a game.  HH isn't polished, and has a lot to learn, but at least the kid is stepping on the field with a belief he is going to win... that goes a long ways in competition.  

 

I would roll with HH while trying to build back some confidence in Sims.  As mentioned before, both are probably needed this year.  GBR

[Packerhuskerfan]

We all know Simms will have a minimum of 3 turnovers against Iowa if he is around that long as a atarter and cost us the game.  There is no path to a bowl game with Simms.  Maybe, there is a slight chance at a bowl with HH.  Plus, HH has more of a chance to start multiple seasons for Nebraska. I don't see any scenario where Simms returns next season, but I could see HH returning. 

[Scofrosghost]

Sims may LOOK better out there to some but to me it’s an all show and no go situation. I don’t care if he has flashes of -insert any great qb here- but if it’s only a flash in the pan and doesn’t lead to points, let alone wins, it doesn’t matter. He’s done that his entire college career. Shows  flashes but never seems to put it together. Not gonna happen here with this Oline. Cut your losses on the mercenary qb and focus on the local kid that shows he can be reliable until he shows otherwise. 

[Cdog923]

18 hours ago, JJ Husker said:

I’m in the camp that thinks Sims is the better QB in most metrics. His ceiling is much higher because of what he is capable of doing. It’s fairly obvious (so far anyway) that HH’s ceiling is lower. But the turnovers are a trump card. I think Sims starts whenever he is physically capable but he needs to ride the pine in any game before he can commit turnover number 3. Two and he’s out and, if he hits that wall in a few consecutive games, then he needs to slide on down the depth chart no matter his skill set. Unforced turnovers can’t be acceptable.

 

This is pretty much where I'm at as well. Sims is the better athlete, but his costly mistakes are what even him out with HH. If HH fixes some of his mechanics (shorten his stance, transfers his weight better, etc), he'll pull ahead. 

[BigRedRig]

I think the starter should prove able to safely receive the ball from the center and hand it off without it falling into the opponents hands. 

[Red Five]

 

 

[BigRedRig]

I am unsure him being 100% is the answer.  

[DefenderAO]

3 hours ago, BigRedRig said:

I am unsure him being 100% is the answer.  

At 150% do we get 50% more turnovers with it?

[Mavric]

Not sure we can really use the "difference in competition" argument.

 

Total defense rankings:

Minnesota #72

Colorado #128

Northern Illinois #25

Louisiana Tech #95

[Undone]

23 minutes ago, Mavric said:

Total defense rankings:

Minnesota #72

Colorado #128

Northern Illinois #25

Louisiana Tech #95

 

Man. We should have done so much better against Colorado. Ugh.

[McGuillotine]

Call him Heimlich Haarberg because he don't choke like Sims

[ndobney]

34 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

Man. We should have done so much better against Colorado. Ugh.

Yeah and actually la tech as well. However bs penalties hurt us otherwise the score looks a bit better

[Enhance]

Eh, I think it's tough to say how well a team should/shouldn't do based on a metric like total defense. Early season offensive/defensive rankings are usually a bit of a crap show and can be heavily influenced by quality of opponent. I usually don't look at them until at least the halfway or three quarters of the way through a season. I think early on it's better to look at 3rd down efficiency, turnovers, TFL's, sacks, etc. Things that are a little bit more specific.

And then there's the complementary angle of football. If you have a bad offense, chances are your defense is going to be put into a lot of bad positions.