Depth Chart for Fresno State

[NUinID]

All depends on how good the walk on is and how much we are counting on them. Reilly at WR is good. Dzuris as starting DE is not. Weber at backup LB is good, Hahn starting at LG probably isn't.

 

Dzuris IMO will be fine. I personally think he is better than Jack Gangwich was last year. He is a little rangyer and more athletic. I think he will surprise people. Hahn will be fine, he transferred from North Dakota St. I do believe he lettered there. He is a big dude probably not as athletic as Foster is but will do just fine. My question is why isn't Jalen Barrett starting at that spot?. He was suppose to be a great prospect. I know he hurt his ankle, but he wasn't being talked about even before that.

[SABER]

 

 

 

It looks like a lot of people here don't like Sam McKewon, but here are his thoughts on the depth chart.

 

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/sam-mckewon-s-takes-on-the-husker-depth-chart/article_e2f0f422-6e1e-11e6-97bf-83d2de3f0f7a.html

His thoughts on the depth chart are fine, all he is trying to do with tweeting out that pictures of the depth chart is stir a pot.

I look at all of the walk-on talent as a positive.

Depending on the walk-on program to fill a large number of holes in the depth chart is an indictment on the program's abilities to recruit and develop talent.

 

It is an indictment on the previous staff to recruit and develop talent. The jury is still out on this staff, but looks very positive.

[ColoradoHusk]

 

 

 

 

 

It looks like a lot of people here don't like Sam McKewon, but here are his thoughts on the depth chart.

 

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/sam-mckewon-s-takes-on-the-husker-depth-chart/article_e2f0f422-6e1e-11e6-97bf-83d2de3f0f7a.html

His thoughts on the depth chart are fine, all he is trying to do with tweeting out that pictures of the depth chart is stir a pot.

I look at all of the walk-on talent as a positive.

Depending on the walk-on program to fill a large number of holes in the depth chart is an indictment on the program's abilities to recruit and develop talent.

It is an indictment on the previous staff to recruit and develop talent. The jury is still out on this staff, but looks very positive.

I agree that the lack of depth at the junior and senior level is Bo's fault.

 

I also think Riley's use of walk-ons at the WR and other spots that are way down the depth chart in order to preserve a RS season by a true freshman is prudent.

[Saunders]

Didn't we argue about the "walk on depth" thing post Purdue and discover our numbers were barely above average?

[Saunders]

 

 

 

 

It looks like a lot of people here don't like Sam McKewon, but here are his thoughts on the depth chart.

 

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/sam-mckewon-s-takes-on-the-husker-depth-chart/article_e2f0f422-6e1e-11e6-97bf-83d2de3f0f7a.html

His thoughts on the depth chart are fine, all he is trying to do with tweeting out that pictures of the depth chart is stir a pot.

I look at all of the walk-on talent as a positive.

Depending on the walk-on program to fill a large number of holes in the depth chart is an indictment on the program's abilities to recruit and develop talent.

 

It is an indictment on the previous staff to recruit and develop talent. The jury is still out on this staff, but looks very positive.

 

Uh, huh... ok RADAR....

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

 

 

 

It looks like a lot of people here don't like Sam McKewon, but here are his thoughts on the depth chart.

 

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/sam-mckewon-s-takes-on-the-husker-depth-chart/article_e2f0f422-6e1e-11e6-97bf-83d2de3f0f7a.html

His thoughts on the depth chart are fine, all he is trying to do with tweeting out that pictures of the depth chart is stir a pot.

I look at all of the walk-on talent as a positive.

Depending on the walk-on program to fill a large number of holes in the depth chart is an indictment on the program's abilities to recruit and develop talent.

 

It is an indictment on the previous staff to recruit and develop talent. The jury is still out on this staff, but looks very positive.

 

Uh, huh... ok RADAR....

 

 

Whoa.

[Dr. Strangelove]

 

I get that Sam is trying to make a point, but I am not sure what good it is going to do. If you went back and looked at the NU depth chart from 1997 you would see a lot of former walk-ons on it and there would be a ton of pride in seeing that.

Sam is trying to find any way he can to push the "not enough talent" narrative.

 

Considering there's only 8-9 true freshmen on the chart, there are 15-20 more names than scholarship players. So there's going to be quite a few walk-ons.

Depends on how this is framed. Enough talent to win the West? Sure. Sam is wrong in that regard.

 

Enough talent to win the B1G? No. The teams in the East are far out pacing Nebraska. We've had 4 years of mediocre recruiting, I find it difficult to disagree with Sam's point.

[Hujan]

I wouldn't read too much in our most experienced running back, who averaged 5.2 yards a carry along with excellent ball security, getting the starting nod for the first game of his Senior year.

 

I believe Devine Ozigbo is a Mike Riley recruit and I don't think Mike is going to withhold Ozigbo as part of his nefarious plan to undermine the rushing game.

 

There were plenty of years in the Husker past where a platoon of RBs competed for playing time, although the season typically ended with a single featured back.

 

That could just as easily be Tre Bryant as Newby or Ozigbo.

 

Take out the pre-season cupcakes and the one blown play against Minnesota and Newby was in the low to mid-4s. The continued support of Newby is perhaps the biggest reason to question Riley and Langsdorf's coaching abilities, IMO. If they can't see that he simply doesn't have what it takes to be a truly effective back at a Power 5 program, I really have to question their opinion of everything else. Eye test, stats, whatever you want to look at, he simply did not have it last year and it's not really even close.

 

Even worse, I fear that his inability to move the chains will only further undermine their confidence in the running game which is already a tough sell for them in general, and thereby embolden their decision to have Tommy sling the rock 30-40 times a game in a driving rainstorm.

[caveman99]

 

Newby is the best LB by far...MRI is well liked because of his major love for the fans and NU but he is not better than Newby.

Disagree here. He is about the best athlete (though Banderas is much better than many give him credit for) but I don't think he's close to the best LB, definitely not "by far." MRI and Young are definitely better.

Comments from press who have seen practice is that Newby has elevated to be the best of the group, at least in camp so will be interesting to see if he can replicate that on game days.

[caveman99]

 

 

Matt Synder 6th string? Is he injured again?

 

Three of the guys ahead of him are seniors who all have quality game experience. Nothing wrong with being behind them.

 

I think his injury last year hampered his body and strength development, which is key for a TE. Hopefully Snyder will be able to get in the weight room and be a contributor for 2017.

I guess I was just expecting to see him no lower than 4th on the depth chart. No disrespect to Hoppes or Ketter, but I don't remember hearing their names during camp.

Hoppes is a name to keep in mind for next year, supposedly a really good athlete.

[drfish]

Don't complain too much about walk-ons around coach Parrella.

 

1997 team had 2 walk-ons in the NFL draft. 7% of Nebraska players drafted have been walkons.

Source.

[Mavric]

We went through all the hand-wringing about the walk-ons last year after the Miami game. In that thread, it was the argument about how much talent Bo left for Riley compared to how much talent Callahan left Bo. People were convinced that we were playing so many walk-ons because of this dearth of talent on the roster.

 

However, as it turned out, we were actually playing fewer walk-ons in that game than played in the first road game under Bo (using the first road game for both teams because of the limited travel rosters). So we were actually playing fewer walk-ons last year than at the end of that supposed boon of recruiting.

 

Now, participating is different than starting so it's not a perfect comparison. But that was 20% participation last year vs. 24-29% participation in Bo's first year (depending on which numbers you want to use exactly). If I had to take a guess, I'd say we'll see about 57 players on that depth chart play and I would guess 14 will be walk-ons which would be 24%.

[Saunders]

We went through all the hand-wringing about the walk-ons last year after the Miami game. In that thread, it was the argument about how much talent Bo left for Riley compared to how much talent Callahan left Bo. People were convinced that we were playing so many walk-ons because of this dearth of talent on the roster.

 

However, as it turned out, we were actually playing fewer walk-ons in that game than played in the first road game under Bo (using the first road game for both teams because of the limited travel rosters). So we were actually playing fewer walk-ons last year than at the end of that supposed boon of recruiting.

 

Now, participating is different than starting so it's not a perfect comparison. But that was 20% participation last year vs. 24-29% participation in Bo's first year (depending on which numbers you want to use exactly). If I had to take a guess, I'd say we'll see about 57 players on that depth chart play and I would guess 14 will be walk-ons which would be 24%.

That's what I thought...

[The Dude]

https://twitter.com/swmckewonOWH/status/770337825485000704

 

Here's a better version of that:

 

Whoa. Super controversial stuff. The balls on that guy.

[84HuskerLaw]

I think walk ons have always been a very important part of the team for several reasons (except Callahan who dumped the entire idea).

 

1. Walk ons tend to be local Nebraska guys who live the dream of being a Husker and play with all the heart and effort a coach can dream of.

2. Being disproportionately Nebraska guys, these walk ons are all but ignored by the national recruiting types so they are not heavily sought after and Nebraska gets an edge in getting what may well be solid 3 or even 4 star types.

3. Many walk ons don't make so the feeling is that if 30% of the walk ons become contributors, that is somehow a great success rate. Arguably the program ought to look at taking 50 walkons each year and awarding 5 schoarships to the top five and letting the bottom 20 move on. Repeat as necessary. Maybe that is effectively what we do now.

4. There has been a certain element of pride in being a walk on and then 'making it' - sort of a chip on the shoulder attitude of 'I'll prove the experts wrong and show em!"