Athlon Sports Predicts Huskers Season: six panelists say 10-2 or 11-1

[RedRedJarvisRedwine]

Since when does skin color have anything to do with speed? I'm white and I ran a 4.35 40 yard dash and a 10.7 100m dash and had a 36" vertical leap.

I think you might want to check yourself a bit there.

You're as fast as Denard Robinson?

I hear hippo lips taste similar to snakes legs.

 

[Mavric]

I think Pelini might have cracked the mobile QB code after the Ohio State game. Colter did absolutely nothing and Robinson was sufficiently corralled until he got hurt.

NW helped us out by not playing Colter at QB very much. No idea why.

Robinson wasn't hurting us too badly. We'll see.

Because he wasn't doing anything when he was QB.

The only reason why Northwestern was up in that game was because of the turnovers. We hold onto the ball and we win by 2 TDs instead of sweating out a missed FG. But overall the defense did a great job that game, only 1 break down/great play design and call (the Mark TD) the whole game. Outside of that run, NW only had something like 200 total yards of offense. The D was pretty dialed in that game.

He did so poorly on the first play of the game that their backup was in there by the third play of the game and played extensively in the first quarter???

perhaps our defense had such a good day because their coaches took the ball out of their best players' hands.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I think Pelini might have cracked the mobile QB code after the Ohio State game. Colter did absolutely nothing and Robinson was sufficiently corralled until he got hurt.

NW helped us out by not playing Colter at QB very much. No idea why.

Robinson wasn't hurting us too badly. We'll see.

Because he wasn't doing anything when he was QB.

The only reason why Northwestern was up in that game was because of the turnovers. We hold onto the ball and we win by 2 TDs instead of sweating out a missed FG. But overall the defense did a great job that game, only 1 break down/great play design and call (the Mark TD) the whole game. Outside of that run, NW only had something like 200 total yards of offense. The D was pretty dialed in that game.

He did so poorly on the first play of the game that their backup was in there by the third play of the game and played extensively in the first quarter???

perhaps our defense had such a good day because their coaches took the ball out of their best players' hands.

But the thing is, in both instances you cant deny that the floodgates may have opened for both Colter and Robinson had they played the full game. We had Braxton Miller completely hemmed in for over a quarter too, but they made a little adjustment, broke one long run and then came the avalanche.

It may be a negative approach to saying "what-if", but it is legitimate and I understand the concern.

 

[StPaulHusker]

Personally I think Northwestern is the game I am most nervous about. They have had some strong recruiting the last couple of years and are doing well for 2014. Plus Fitzgerald has proven he can squeeze a lot out of players and coaches pretty well too. Also none of the last 2 games we played against them have been easy.

I think this will be the deciding factor in the Northwestern game. That strong 2014 class will really step up in the 4th quarter and help deliver a victory for the Wildcats.

So am I not allowed to reference 2014 when discussing that Northwestern has been recruiting well the last few years?

In reference to the 2013 game? What do you think?

Them tax cuts provided by our 2016 President elect should really kickstart the economy in 2014 :blink:

I was merely pointing out the fact that he has upgraded the talent there through recruiting and has not slacked off going into the 2014 class. If I need to re-phrase, I guess I would say for the foreseeable future, Northwestern games have me nervous as a Husker fan.

 

[Saunders]

I think Pelini might have cracked the mobile QB code after the Ohio State game. Colter did absolutely nothing and Robinson was sufficiently corralled until he got hurt.

NW helped us out by not playing Colter at QB very much. No idea why.

Robinson wasn't hurting us too badly. We'll see.

Because he wasn't doing anything when he was QB.

The only reason why Northwestern was up in that game was because of the turnovers. We hold onto the ball and we win by 2 TDs instead of sweating out a missed FG. But overall the defense did a great job that game, only 1 break down/great play design and call (the Mark TD) the whole game. Outside of that run, NW only had something like 200 total yards of offense. The D was pretty dialed in that game.

He did so poorly on the first play of the game that their backup was in there by the third play of the game and played extensively in the first quarter???

perhaps our defense had such a good day because their coaches took the ball out of their best players' hands.

Nope. See my post above. Marc had 14 rushes for 35 yards and 1/2 passing for 5 yards. He was also thrown to 6 times and caught 3 for 17 yards. 19 touches for 57 total yards, or 3 yards per touch. He was a non-factor.

The only thing keeping NW in the game was Nebraska mistakes.

 

[Mavric]

I think Pelini might have cracked the mobile QB code after the Ohio State game. Colter did absolutely nothing and Robinson was sufficiently corralled until he got hurt.

NW helped us out by not playing Colter at QB very much. No idea why.

Robinson wasn't hurting us too badly. We'll see.

Because he wasn't doing anything when he was QB.

The only reason why Northwestern was up in that game was because of the turnovers. We hold onto the ball and we win by 2 TDs instead of sweating out a missed FG. But overall the defense did a great job that game, only 1 break down/great play design and call (the Mark TD) the whole game. Outside of that run, NW only had something like 200 total yards of offense. The D was pretty dialed in that game.

He did so poorly on the first play of the game that their backup was in there by the third play of the game and played extensively in the first quarter???

perhaps our defense had such a good day because their coaches took the ball out of their best players' hands.

Nope. See my post above. Marc had 14 rushes for 35 yards and 1/2 passing for 5 yards. He was also thrown to 6 times and caught 3 for 17 yards. 19 touches for 57 total yards, or 3 yards per touch. He was a non-factor.

The only thing keeping NW in the game was Nebraska mistakes.

I agree and I've posted so before.

But the game could have been different if they played Colter at QB the entire (or at least vast majority) of the game.

 

[Saunders]

I agree and I've posted so before.

But the game could have been different if they played Colter at QB the entire (or at least vast majority) of the game.

Sure, it's entirely possible, but not plausible. Colter went nowhere running the zone read, and he's not enough of a threat to throw. He was a non factor and nothing he did helped them score. In fact, it's just as possible (and more likely based on the what he actually did) that NW wouldn't have even been in the game with Colter playing QB, because' Siemian's few passes kept them in it and led to points.

 

[Mavric]

I agree and I've posted so before.

But the game could have been different if they played Colter at QB the entire (or at least vast majority) of the game.

Sure, it's entirely possible, but not plausible. Colter went nowhere running the zone read, and he's not enough of a threat to throw. He was a non factor and nothing he did helped them score. In fact, it's just as possible (and more likely based on the what he actually did) that NW wouldn't have even been in the game with Colter playing QB, because' Siemian's few passes kept them in it and led to points.

The year before he threw for 115 yards and a TD, ran for 57 yards and 2 TDs and had 57 yards receiving. That's 26 touches (plus however many handoffs) on their 78 plays. Last year he only got 19 touches on 75 plays. Perhaps we were doing a better job against him running the ball but Siemian was 15/35 passing the ball instead of the 16/24 they were throwing against us the previous year and Colter was 10/10 the week before (Minnesota, granted), 6/9 the following week (still only Iowa but better), 8/14 the week after that @ Michigan and 13/20 the week after that @ Michigan St. It just didn't make any sense why he didn't get more chances at QB throwing the ball when that's how they torched us the year before.

That is plenty plausible to me.

 

[Chaddyboxer]

Now..I ask the same question you guys are discussing when talking about why Michigan never utilized Gardner instead of Bellomy (until after Dennard went down with a serious injury). What was Hoke thinking when he made Gardner a receiver instead of a QB!?? If you knew the talent was there and that he could shine at the QB position, why put him at receiver? Obviously they know more about the situation than I do, but was he really that much better at wide receiver?

 

[RedDenver]

I agree and I've posted so before.

But the game could have been different if they played Colter at QB the entire (or at least vast majority) of the game.

Sure, it's entirely possible, but not plausible. Colter went nowhere running the zone read, and he's not enough of a threat to throw. He was a non factor and nothing he did helped them score. In fact, it's just as possible (and more likely based on the what he actually did) that NW wouldn't have even been in the game with Colter playing QB, because' Siemian's few passes kept them in it and led to points.

The year before he threw for 115 yards and a TD, ran for 57 yards and 2 TDs and had 57 yards receiving. That's 26 touches (plus however many handoffs) on their 78 plays. Last year he only got 19 touches on 75 plays. Perhaps we were doing a better job against him running the ball but Siemian was 15/35 passing the ball instead of the 16/24 they were throwing against us the previous year and Colter was 10/10 the week before (Minnesota, granted), 6/9 the following week (still only Iowa but better), 8/14 the week after that @ Michigan and 13/20 the week after that @ Michigan St. It just didn't make any sense why he didn't get more chances at QB throwing the ball when that's how they torched us the year before.

That is plenty plausible to me.

So he got 26 touches in 2011 and 19 in 2012. Not much difference there. While it's possible and maybe even plausible, it seems very unlikely to me. I agree with saunders that it's more likely they would have done even worse. Remember that they were trying to get Mark the ball in space, which could be why Colter got a few less touches. I'd MUCH rather Colter had the ball than Mark.

 

[Danimal]

Now..I ask the same question you guys are discussing when talking about why Michigan never utilized Gardner instead of Bellomy (until after Dennard went down with a serious injury). What was Hoke thinking when he made Gardner a receiver instead of a QB!?? If you knew the talent was there and that he could shine at the QB position, why put him at receiver? Obviously they know more about the situation than I do, but was he really that much better at wide receiver?

Think they just figured with Dennard at qb they might as well use Gardner's athleticism at wr. Could be that Bellomy was better in practice, they didn't expect the O to sputter with him in and thus didn't feel it necessary to keep Gardner ready at qb. Obviously they were wrong.

 

[huskerfan92]

Since when does skin color have anything to do with speed? I'm white and I ran a 4.35 40 yard dash and a 10.7 100m dash and had a 36" vertical leap.

I think you might want to check yourself a bit there.

You're as fast as Denard Robinson?

I ran the 400 in college and qualified for NCAA nationals. I didn't place, but I still was there. So yes, I was fast...and VERY fast for the early 1990s. Now I'm old and slow.

 

[AFhusker]

People are talking a lot about the 9am Pacific Time start for the UCLA game. They've got two weeks to prepare for the game, and I'm sure Mora will have them acclimated to the start time. That won't be any kind of advantage.

Plus school doesn't start for them until I believe the week after. So they will likely come to Lincoln a few days early to get used to the time zone. So that shouldn't be that much of a factor.

 

[AFhusker]

I agree and I've posted so before.

But the game could have been different if they played Colter at QB the entire (or at least vast majority) of the game.

Sure, it's entirely possible, but not plausible. Colter went nowhere running the zone read, and he's not enough of a threat to throw. He was a non factor and nothing he did helped them score. In fact, it's just as possible (and more likely based on the what he actually did) that NW wouldn't have even been in the game with Colter playing QB, because' Siemian's few passes kept them in it and led to points.

The year before he threw for 115 yards and a TD, ran for 57 yards and 2 TDs and had 57 yards receiving. That's 26 touches (plus however many handoffs) on their 78 plays. Last year he only got 19 touches on 75 plays. Perhaps we were doing a better job against him running the ball but Siemian was 15/35 passing the ball instead of the 16/24 they were throwing against us the previous year and Colter was 10/10 the week before (Minnesota, granted), 6/9 the following week (still only Iowa but better), 8/14 the week after that @ Michigan and 13/20 the week after that @ Michigan St. It just didn't make any sense why he didn't get more chances at QB throwing the ball when that's how they torched us the year before.

That is plenty plausible to me.

So he got 26 touches in 2011 and 19 in 2012. Not much difference there. While it's possible and maybe even plausible, it seems very unlikely to me. I agree with saunders that it's more likely they would have done even worse. Remember that they were trying to get Mark the ball in space, which could be why Colter got a few less touches. I'd MUCH rather Colter had the ball than Mark.

Just by having him at QB with the threat of the run is what gave them the 80 yard TD. IMO to think that they would have been worse by playing him more doesn't make any logical sense at all. NW's coaches did us a favor last year that they are likely not going to repeat.

 

[Mavric]

I agree and I've posted so before.

But the game could have been different if they played Colter at QB the entire (or at least vast majority) of the game.

Sure, it's entirely possible, but not plausible. Colter went nowhere running the zone read, and he's not enough of a threat to throw. He was a non factor and nothing he did helped them score. In fact, it's just as possible (and more likely based on the what he actually did) that NW wouldn't have even been in the game with Colter playing QB, because' Siemian's few passes kept them in it and led to points.

The year before he threw for 115 yards and a TD, ran for 57 yards and 2 TDs and had 57 yards receiving. That's 26 touches (plus however many handoffs) on their 78 plays. Last year he only got 19 touches on 75 plays. Perhaps we were doing a better job against him running the ball but Siemian was 15/35 passing the ball instead of the 16/24 they were throwing against us the previous year and Colter was 10/10 the week before (Minnesota, granted), 6/9 the following week (still only Iowa but better), 8/14 the week after that @ Michigan and 13/20 the week after that @ Michigan St. It just didn't make any sense why he didn't get more chances at QB throwing the ball when that's how they torched us the year before.

That is plenty plausible to me.

So he got 26 touches in 2011 and 19 in 2012. Not much difference there. While it's possible and maybe even plausible, it seems very unlikely to me. I agree with saunders that it's more likely they would have done even worse. Remember that they were trying to get Mark the ball in space, which could be why Colter got a few less touches. I'd MUCH rather Colter had the ball than Mark.

That's 50% more touches than last year. I'd say that's significant.

And it's not so much what Colter was doing running the ball. He was on fire throwing in the games surrounding ours and they torched us with the pass the year before. But they stuck with the guy completing 43%.