Jump to content


2023 - 2024 Portal - Ins and Outs


Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Packerhuskerfan said:

An MSU QB?  They got their butts handed to by most teams, not including us.  Very underwhelming.  I wish the big donors would go after a good QB rather than reducing seating in the stadium.

Why are they going to reduce seating. I haven't read anything on the reason for that. 

 

GBR!!!

Link to comment

10 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

And, only 2 Huskers?  I know they are obviously coming because we need to get our numbers down.  I'm still surprised we haven't heard about more yet.

Probably not a huge market for a lot of the Husker players...

 

Plus, you are at a great school with a great tradition and fans.  Amazing facilities and a P5 conference.  

  • Plus1 1
  • TBH 2
Link to comment
27 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Probably not a huge market for a lot of the Husker players...

 

Plus, you are at a great school with a great tradition and fans.  Amazing facilities and a P5 conference.  

You're saying basically what I believe.  Players want to be here and they believe in the coaching staff.

 

And, if there's not a market for the players, many might just be opting for the program to honor the academic commitment.

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
52 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Probably not a huge market for a lot of the Husker players...

 

Plus, you are at a great school with a great tradition and fans.  Amazing facilities and a P5 conference.  

 

As much as people bash our NIL, maybe we are paying them well so they don't have to chase a payday at another school.

 

I guaran-damn-tee you there would be a big market for our young guys on defense (Princewill, Lenhardt, RVP) as well as the guys on the line where its tough to find experienced starters (Ty, Nash, Benhart).

  • Plus1 2
  • TBH 3
Link to comment

1 hour ago, huskered17 said:

Why are they going to reduce seating. I haven't read anything on the reason for that. 

 

GBR!!!

 

It's mainly a function of giving more space so people aren't crammed in as much.  Plus there isn't nearly the demand for tickets as there was before.

 

So mostly improving comfort and amenities to keep people coming to games.

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 1
  • TBH 1
Link to comment
10 hours ago, Wistrom Disciple said:

Sims earned it. Purdy was hurt and Haarberg was playing QB, but moonlighting as a tight-end. Until HH started winning (against the largely the easiest teams on our schedule), the assumption was that Sims would come back and start once healthy. Bummer for him, but we kept winning and couldn’t justify swapping. Then when he did get opportunities, he did not capitalize and solidified his spot on the bench. 

 

"Until HH started winning" is a pretty back-handed way to talk about the guy who won the first two games he started and five of his first six - which is the only five games we won this year - with the only loss coming to the #1 team in the country.

 

But keep trying to convince yourself that Sims is really better than he is.

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment

13 minutes ago, Wistrom Disciple said:

Please expand on how and why we won because of HH instead of winning despite HH. I'm assuming you'll fail to mention his 49% passing completion percentage and the way he regressed through the season. But I know your schtick is to nitpick single pieces of a larger statement to try and get a rise out of others. If that gives you your jollies, so be it.

 

My comment was answering the question of whether Sims earned the starting spot at the beginning of the season versus being handed the position. I did not hear a peep from others suggesting that Purdy or Haarberg should be the starter so I tend to assume that neither of them earned the starting spot. Sims' performances did not justify the starting spot and consequently he was benched.

 

Who caught the snap, made the runs and threw the passes on the scoring plays? You couldn't count on Sims to do any of that, and Purdy wasn't available. Without Haarberg we don't win those games because we didn't have anyone else on the roster. He played the most important position on the field in each of our wins. We won because he was on the field. 

  • Plus1 2
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
14 minutes ago, Husker03 said:

Fixed it for you.  Haarberg is a horrendous Div 1 QB. To argue otherwise is insanity.

 

Derp. You didn't fix anything, Haarberg might not be the best QB out there, but we would not have won those games if he wasn't on the field. No other QB on our roster would have won those games. Haarberg was the primary contributor on offense. We won because of him, to argue otherwise is dumb. That he may not be the long term solution for us a QB does not dimish his significant contributions in our wins. 

  • Plus1 3
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Born N Bled Red said:

 

Derp. You didn't fix anything, Haarberg might not be the best QB out there, but we would not have won those games if he wasn't on the field. No other QB on our roster would have won those games. Haarberg was the primary contributor on offense. We won because of him, to argue otherwise is dumb. That he may not be the long term solution for us a QB does not dimish his significant contributions in our wins. 

In the end it doesn't matter Nebraska didn't win the games that mattered and HH won't be the starting qb next year.  

  • Plus1 1
  • TBH 4
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...