QB Recruiting - Past & Present

[desertshox]

 

Give me 6 QB's. Most important position in football let's get the best there. If you have a really special QB it can make a team. I feel like we should never have less than 4 QB's. take one each year and put on scholarship redshirt or not so technically have 5. I'd be perfectly fine with that given our amazing QB depth the past 6 years after QB1 has gone down or played injured and not performed to normal abilities.

People who say this actually expect 5 QBs to stick around when they're not starting... that just doesn't make sense, to anyone.

 

 

there are 4 quarters in a game. we are nebraska and we should be ahead by enough to give 4 qbs reps in every game.

 

(was the sarcasm thick enough?)

[Atbone95]

 

 

Give me 6 QB's. Most important position in football let's get the best there. If you have a really special QB it can make a team. I feel like we should never have less than 4 QB's. take one each year and put on scholarship redshirt or not so technically have 5. I'd be perfectly fine with that given our amazing QB depth the past 6 years after QB1 has gone down or played injured and not performed to normal abilities.

People who say this actually expect 5 QBs to stick around when they're not starting... that just doesn't make sense, to anyone.

 

 

there are 4 quarters in a game. we are nebraska and we should be ahead by enough to give 4 qbs reps in every game.

 

(was the sarcasm thick enough?)

 

No

[84HuskerLaw]

6 QBs on scholarship is too many. You need to be redshirting one each year and have 3 ready to play at the start of the season with a walk on able to run a core of basic plays in an emergency situation. The state of Nebraska should produce atleast one QB capable of filling the role of the walk on player each year. If we stagger them out, then once you have a walk on and four scholarship guys that figures one scholarship recruit each year of a high caliber should be sufficient. ideally, you would have a junior or senior as your starter each year and a sophomore and junior backing them up in the 2 and 3 spots. The order is not critical of course but all three MUST be ready and able to play the position in 'winning' fashion.

 

Your backups are not just 'mop ups' and if they are not good enough to play winning ball in your offense as it is intended and designed, then the coach needs to make changes. Move guys to other positions or encourage a transfer out if they are just not ready/able to be prime time players. Callahan was criticized mightily early on when he 'disbanded' some argued the walk on program by dismissing a bunch of guys shortly after he was hired. The reason was simple. There were 30 or more walk ons and a few scholarship players who were NOT anywhere close to D1 players. I knew of a couple individuals who shall remain nameless that were let go that attempted to walk on at small colleges and were unsuccessful, even at the NAIA level. Those guys had no busines using up coaches time and taking up roster space if they were not D1 athletes at all. If we have some of those types now, Riley and staff need to have serious sit downs with each and tell the truth. It is wrong to let them go on toiling and working with any misconceptions or dellusions of granduer.

.

 

Of course there will be some drop off from starters to back ups to thirds and fourths but that drop off should not be so significant that the entire team's ability to win most of their games is in jeopardy. Depth is not just names and bodies on a roster sheet. They are serious players who are working their tails off to win the job and not ride the pine as additional cheerleaders and clip board holders.

[ColoradoHusk]

I think it's probably fair to recruit 2 QB's per class, and assume that one of them is going to transfer after a year or two. That way, you are better prepared for guys transferring and are replenishing the QB group with a couple guys each year.

[Mavric]

Of the 72 quarterbacks who signed with Power 5 programs in 2013, 59 did not finish their collegiate careers with the team with which they signed.

 

ESPN via LJS

[B.B. Hemingway]

 

Of the 72 quarterbacks who signed with Power 5 programs in 2013, 59 did not finish their collegiate careers with the team with which they signed.

 

ESPN via LJS

 

 

And 42 of them transferred to Wisconsin....

[ScottyIce]

 

Of the 72 quarterbacks who signed with Power 5 programs in 2013, 59 did not finish their collegiate careers with the team with which they signed.

 

ESPN via LJS

 

Does this surprise anyone?

2017: Gebbia

2016: POB

2015: ----

2014: Zack Darlington (position change*) AJ Bush - Transfer

2013: Johnny Stanton - Transfer

2012: Tommy Armstrong (4 Year Starter)

2011: Bubba Starling (never made it)

2010: Brion Carnes - transfer

2009: Taylor Martinez (4 Year Starter)

 

So in the past 9 classes, we have had 9 scholarship QB's.

3 Transfers

1 Never Arrived

1 Position Switch

2 4 Year Starters

2 guys that have barely been on campus thus far

[Enhance]

The QB situation at Nebraska seems to be in line with what we see nationally. Most football positions see a rotation to some degree, but outside of injuries or blowout victories, backup quarterbacks almost never see the field. I can easily understand why it fuels a desire to transfer. To Matty's point, it's not shocking, but seeing the statistics is certainly interesting.

[Red Five]

Good stuff in this

 

 

If it seems like high-profile quarterback recruits transfer at an unusually high rate, well, it’s because they do. Using 247Sports’ composite rankings, FOX Sports researched the careers of every Top 50 quarterback recruit that signed from 2011-14.

 

Exactly half — 100 of 200 — transferred from their original school.

[84HuskerLaw]

The QB situation at Nebraska seems to be in line with what we see nationally. Most football positions see a rotation to some degree, but outside of injuries or blowout victories, backup quarterbacks almost never see the field. I can easily understand why it fuels a desire to transfer. To Matty's point, it's not shocking, but seeing the statistics is certainly interesting.

I maintain that we should be playing more than one QB so we are not finding ourselves in the messes we've suffered through when dealing with injuries (major or minor) to our starter. This year was a glaring example of the problem this presents but certainly we've had similar situations in many recent seasons. The 'starter' rarely makes it through a season unscathed and his backup must be ready to go on a moments notice.

 

I would submit that we won't see so many transfers if there is more than one QB with a legit chance of significant playing time and the opportunity to demonstrate why he may be the better 'starter'. It is quite common for players (it sure used to be anyway) to be listed as 'co-number 1s' on depth charts and to get plenty of snaps in either situational or 'platooning' cases at most other postions. The QB is the single most important player on the team, according to most commentators, and it seems just ludicrous that far too often teams go from being very good to mediocre if the starting QB goes down with injury or whatever.

 

Give the players a reasonable opportunity to compete and live game snaps are a key part of it. You can't make a truly fair and final decision based solely on practice, unless the seperation between two players is wide. In such cases, you immediately find another 'backup' to provide the needed depth and competition. IMO

[In the Deed the Glory]

 

The QB situation at Nebraska seems to be in line with what we see nationally. Most football positions see a rotation to some degree, but outside of injuries or blowout victories, backup quarterbacks almost never see the field. I can easily understand why it fuels a desire to transfer. To Matty's point, it's not shocking, but seeing the statistics is certainly interesting.

I maintain that we should be playing more than one QB so we are not finding ourselves in the messes we've suffered through when dealing with injuries (major or minor) to our starter. This year was a glaring example of the problem this presents but certainly we've had similar situations in many recent seasons. The 'starter' rarely makes it through a season unscathed and his backup must be ready to go on a moments notice.

 

I would submit that we won't see so many transfers if there is more than one QB with a legit chance of significant playing time and the opportunity to demonstrate why he may be the better 'starter'. It is quite common for players (it sure used to be anyway) to be listed as 'co-number 1s' on depth charts and to get plenty of snaps in either situational or 'platooning' cases at most other postions. The QB is the single most important player on the team, according to most commentators, and it seems just ludicrous that far too often teams go from being very good to mediocre if the starting QB goes down with injury or whatever.

 

Give the players a reasonable opportunity to compete and live game snaps are a key part of it. You can't make a truly fair and final decision based solely on practice, unless the seperation between two players is wide. In such cases, you immediately find another 'backup' to provide the needed depth and competition. IMO

 

This is ridiculous. You said the QB is the single most important player on the team and you want to rotate them? That makes zero sense and is quite frankly a stupid idea.

[Enhance]

 

The QB situation at Nebraska seems to be in line with what we see nationally. Most football positions see a rotation to some degree, but outside of injuries or blowout victories, backup quarterbacks almost never see the field. I can easily understand why it fuels a desire to transfer. To Matty's point, it's not shocking, but seeing the statistics is certainly interesting.

I maintain that we should be playing more than one QB so we are not finding ourselves in the messes we've suffered through when dealing with injuries (major or minor) to our starter. This year was a glaring example of the problem this presents but certainly we've had similar situations in many recent seasons. The 'starter' rarely makes it through a season unscathed and his backup must be ready to go on a moments notice.

 

I would submit that we won't see so many transfers if there is more than one QB with a legit chance of significant playing time and the opportunity to demonstrate why he may be the better 'starter'. It is quite common for players (it sure used to be anyway) to be listed as 'co-number 1s' on depth charts and to get plenty of snaps in either situational or 'platooning' cases at most other postions. The QB is the single most important player on the team, according to most commentators, and it seems just ludicrous that far too often teams go from being very good to mediocre if the starting QB goes down with injury or whatever.

 

Give the players a reasonable opportunity to compete and live game snaps are a key part of it. You can't make a truly fair and final decision based solely on practice, unless the seperation between two players is wide. In such cases, you immediately find another 'backup' to provide the needed depth and competition. IMO

 

I see what you're saying but quarterback has always been a different breed because it's the most important position on the field. Everything flows through him and that's usually why they almost always play. Playing two quarterbacks jostles the timing, communication between the center, the line, everything. You put the overall success of your offense at great risk by trying to ensure you have two quarterbacks ready to play. I don't think you'll find many head coaches who want co-numbers 1s.

 

In the 15 years I've been closely watching college football, I've seen far more two quarterback systems fail than I've seen succeed. They can work but it's uncommonly rare. It's also uncommon to have coaches who can plug in a quarterback and not miss a beat (see Belichick/Meyer).

[ScottyIce]

 

 

In the 15 years I've been closely watching college football, I've seen far more two quarterback systems fail than I've seen succeed. They can work but it's uncommonly rare. It's also uncommon to have coaches who can plug in a quarterback and not miss a beat (see Belichick/Meyer).

 

 

Oh absolutely. 2 QB systems are generally thought of as a terrible idea.

 

The most recent example? tOSU last year, when they rotated Cardale and JT. No flow to their offense. This is the main reason why I'm even hesitating about the ZackCat offense for next year. It can sometimes absolutely ruin the flow.

 

It's also insane the way BB has been able to plug QB's in for NE at times. I am excited for Brady to retire, to see if he can continue that.

[Mavric]

Nebraska seems to be taking its time with the evaluation of new quarterback targets, and that isn’t out of the norm considering Danny Langsdorf’s history.

 

It’s been about two weeks since Colson Yankoff committed to Washington. He was undoubtedly one of the top quarterbacks on NU’s board, but the Huskers haven’t rushed to extend scholarship offers to other passers. Nebraska has offered nine quarterbacks in the 2018 class, but no offers have gone out since the fall.

 

The evaluation period will kick off April 15, the same day as Nebraska’s spring game. Expect Langsdorf to hit the trail hard as he looks to identify the next signal caller he will try to lure to Lincoln. And in the past, the spring of quarterbacks’ junior years or the summer before their senior year has been when Langsdorf finds his guys.

 

Prior to Tristan Gebbia, who was identified relatively early, no other high school quarterback Langsdorf signed in the last decade — including at Oregon State — was offered before the spring of his junior year.

 

OWH

[Making Chimichangas]

 

 

Of the 72 quarterbacks who signed with Power 5 programs in 2013, 59 did not finish their collegiate careers with the team with which they signed.

 

ESPN via LJS

 

Does this surprise anyone?

2017: Gebbia

2016: POB

2015: ----

2014: Zack Darlington (position change*) AJ Bush - Transfer

2013: Johnny Stanton - Transfer

2012: Tommy Armstrong (4 Year Starter)

2011: Bubba Starling (never made it)

2010: Brion Carnes - transfer

2009: Taylor Martinez (4 Year Starter)

 

So in the past 9 classes, we have had 9 scholarship QB's.

3 Transfers

1 Never Arrived

1 Position Switch

2 4 Year Starters

2 guys that have barely been on campus thus far

 

It gets even worse for Nebraska once you figure in all the other QBs we signed in the last nine years who: a) either never panned out or b) transferred (aside from those you mentioned):

 

Kody Spano

Cody Green

Zac Lee

 

All in all, we've had a pretty terrible run of QBs. I mean that with all due respect to Taylor Martinez and Tommy Armstrong. They were fine QBs given their running skill set, but their passing (and ability to throw accurately) left a lot to be desired.