jsneb83
All-American
Unless they really couldn't separate them and just picked randomly. Maybe they put Vedral on white knowing right now he is ineligible and picked straws for who would join him. :dunno
Spring Game Rosters
- Thread starter Mavric
- Start date
It's not an assumption. It's what Frost said they were going to do.
Going off the list of guys I listed above, it's pretty obvious that most of the guys in the top of the depth chart are on the Red. It doesn't look like it's 100% that way but the vast majority are.
I'd say there are 9 offensive starters on Red with Spielman (not listed) being a 10th. Maybe not quite so much on defense but still at least 7 with Honas the only likely starter on the White - depending on the outcome of Dixon's appeal.
Last edited by a moderator:
StPaulHusker
Banned
I’m sorry I called it an assumptionMavric said:
Danimal
All-Conference
Personally, I'd prefer a more even split of the teams by either draft or 1's vs 1's, 2's vs 2's, but at least this isn't a Callahan Spring game. BC's white team was a glorified scout squad, where at least this one should be able to provide some tussle.
Last edited by a moderator:
husker_fan_from_sweden
Starter
That white sides defense looks to have 4-5 studs who were strategically placed there. Specifically the front 7.
(Over-analysis incoming)
I'm genuinely wondering if Will Honas being on white is about more than just depth. Nick Bahe interviewed Ruud yesterday on Game Time and asked Ruud who he thought had been standing out, who Ruud was going to the other coaches to say good things about after practice, etc. Ruud mentioned 3-4 players and Honas wasn't one of them. Bahe then followed up by asking 'what do you think about Will Honas?' Ruud (paraphrasing here) said something along the lines of he needs to be more sure of his decisions but that he's been working hard and going after it every day.
Then this morning, DB (in his usual, mystical wizardry) said what Ruud said yesterday aligned with DB's personal evaluation after having seen practice recently, and now that Ruud said something, DB felt it was OK to start diving into Honas a bit more and the 'assumed starter' tag people have been giving him. My vibe is that Honas may not be where people think he is right now i.e. he's not a sure starter.
(Over-analysis ending)
I'm genuinely wondering if Will Honas being on white is about more than just depth. Nick Bahe interviewed Ruud yesterday on Game Time and asked Ruud who he thought had been standing out, who Ruud was going to the other coaches to say good things about after practice, etc. Ruud mentioned 3-4 players and Honas wasn't one of them. Bahe then followed up by asking 'what do you think about Will Honas?' Ruud (paraphrasing here) said something along the lines of he needs to be more sure of his decisions but that he's been working hard and going after it every day.
Then this morning, DB (in his usual, mystical wizardry) said what Ruud said yesterday aligned with DB's personal evaluation after having seen practice recently, and now that Ruud said something, DB felt it was OK to start diving into Honas a bit more and the 'assumed starter' tag people have been giving him. My vibe is that Honas may not be where people think he is right now i.e. he's not a sure starter.
(Over-analysis ending)
I don't know why this is so hard to see. Look at the rosters. The four returning starters on the OL are on the Red. The best two receivers are on the Red. The TE that has been getting a lot of pub is on the Red. The two QBs largely considered to be the front-runners are on the Red. This staffs hand-picked RB is on the Red. There are three returning starters on the DL on Red. There is a four-year starting LB on the Red. There are four returning starting DBs on the Red.
And that is what Frost said they were basically going to do.
Are we just looking for something to argue about?
RedDenver
Heisman Trophy Winner
So the #1's are on Red, which I agree looks likely. But you previously posted that the #1&2 are on Red and the #3&4 are on White. But looking at the rosters, I don't think that's the case. No way Avery Roberts is in the top 2 and Will Honas is in the bottom of the depth chart. Same for other guys. I've speculated that it's #1&4 on Red and #2&3 on White, but it might be #1 on Red and everyone else just spread around.
That's what I'm pointing out. And what Frost said they were going to do was vague, so saying you know the exact layout is silly.
I didn't say it was all 1s and 2s. I said that's mostly who it is. And what Frost said wasn't that vague. He said they were going to put the guys who were "standing out" on one team. You're reading into way more than I am if you think that meant something other than the guys who have been practicing the best.
HOL
And several of the scholarship guys on the White are guys who look to be heading toward non-contributor status (Ozigbo, Keyan Williams, Jalin Barnett, Daishon Neal) or pretty young guys (Bradley, Engelhaupt, Will Farniok, Damion Daniels, Deontre Thomas, Chris Walker, Guy Thomas).
The Red team has (probably) the top two (eligible) QBs. They have (probably) the top RB and a guy who is at least a co-#2. They have the top 5 WRs while the White only has one scholarship WR and he's unlikely to play much this fall. The Red has the TE who's been getting a lot of mentions. They have the four returning starters on the OL. So other than OL - where we don't have enough guys to have all the 1s and 2s on one team - it seems like the offense is pretty much 1s and 2s. It's not quite so one-sided on defense but other than the transfers (Honas and Dixon) most of the 1s seem to be on the Red.
Scholarship guys not listed per HOL
Last edited by a moderator:
RedDenver
Heisman Trophy Winner
Here's Frost's comment: "We're going to put the majority of the guys doing well on one side." That could mean the #1's are on one side, or the #1&2's are on one side, or most of the #1&2's are on one side, etc. I'd say that's not specific but vague.
I still think you're reading too much into the #2's being on the Red team, but it's entirely speculation on both our parts, so I won't argue the point further.