Triaging the QB room

[twofittyonred]

You presumed incorrectly... pretty self-explanatory.

Again, you're ignoring that this is the 1st string QB vs the 3rd string RB. There are already 2 other RB's that the coaches think are better, and we can easily play with the top 2 RB's and not the 3rd stringer.

I agree, HH did fine in limited action, which might mean he should be starting over Sims. I have no issue with that. That's a reasonable comparison between the 1st and 2nd string QB's.

I'm arguing against the idea that the coaches should pull the 1st string QB with turnover issues simply because the 3rd string RB has fumbling issues and didn't play. That ignores all the context of why a backup might play instead of the starter. The coaches should play whichever player gives us the best chance to win, which there's a TON of variables most of which we as fans don't get a chance to even see.

We all watched the game. You've got a weak argument if that's what you're resorting to.

"I'm arguing against the idea that the coaches should pull the 1st string QB with turnover issues simply because the 3rd string RB has fumbling issues and didn't play."

yes, that is the argument....    <_<    :bang  

LOL....  im sorry...  ill just concede and admit you have ZERO understanding of the conversation...  :facepalm:   enjoy your bliss..!!   <_<

 

[Husker in WI]

Even some of the interceptions don’t fall under the trying too hard aspect though.   The one to Fidone was a late read issue.  That’s being bad at his position not trying to do too much. 
 

The interception in the end zone the first game was a misread and not trying to do too much.  He missed the open receiver.  Another pick was an overthrow.  And like you said, the missed snaps are just simple hand/eye issues.  

You can argue it however you want though, we just don't know. Even the late read, he's late because he was scrambling when there wasn't pressure. Why did he scramble? Maybe because he felt like he needed to make something happen outside of the play design, or maybe because he's not great at reads and is great at running fast so decided to try that.

We know what caused the individual turnovers - not catching the snap, bad read, late throw, bad handoff, etc. It's just a theory as to why these are happening now when they supposedly aren't in practice. I can buy it for several of the turnovers, but some are just bad plays by Sims too.

 

[Loe Doesnt Know]

I think most of the offensive's woes are mental. Yes fumbles happen but not being mentally sound often results in error. Throwing into coverage, not keeping the ball high and tight (way to much loose exposing while running). Correct the mental part and the errors will be reduced. As for should Sims get this start. IMO, if he's healthy, yes and if his struggle continues then make a change but yes, first home game against an opponent you should dominate at most positions, yep.. give Sims the start without a leash. Short leashing him will just cause anxiety. Tell him it's his time to shine and build him up. 

 

[Undone]

Even the late read, he's late because he was scrambling when there wasn't pressure. Why did he scramble? Maybe because he felt like he needed to make something happen outside of the play design, or maybe because he's not great at reads and is great at running fast so decided to try that.

Yep, good stuff. I was really worried about things like this heading into the season with Sims. He just doesn't make for much of a "pocket presence" guy at all.

So these coaches need to just start using him like a battering ram to cut down on pocket passing plays on 1st & 2nd down, and on 3rd & long...well, I guess you just cross your fingers and pray he doesn't panic and throw into traffic.

 

[MyBloodIsRed16]

how many times did Peyton Manning or Brett Farve get yanked for throwing INTs?

 

[Husker in WI]

how many times did Peyton Manning or Brett Farve get yanked for throwing INTs?

I'm more on Sims' side than most it seems, but that's not a great comparison. First of all it's the NFL. Second Manning and Favre contributed a bunch of great plays as well - Sims has had some nice runs, but is not particularly close to breaking even in the great play/terrible play count. Late in his career Favre definitely crossed into more bad than good, but at that point he was a hall of famer and it just wasn't going to happen.

Plus their replacements would have been backups, guys who are specifically not expected to play a large role. Haarberg or Purdy will likely start here in the future, so there's an argument to get reps now. There was no benefit to the Colts seeing what Doug Nussmeier could do in 1998 when Peyton was throwing picks. 

 

[MyBloodIsRed16]

I'm more on Sims' side than most it seems, but that's not a great comparison. First of all it's the NFL. Second Manning and Favre contributed a bunch of great plays as well - Sims has had some nice runs, but is not particularly close to breaking even in the great play/terrible play count. Late in his career Favre definitely crossed into more bad than good, but at that point he was a hall of famer and it just wasn't going to happen.

Plus their replacements would have been backups, guys who are specifically not expected to play a large role. Haarberg or Purdy will likely start here in the future, so there's an argument to get reps now. There was no benefit to the Colts seeing what Doug Nussmeier could do in 1998 when Peyton was throwing picks. 

I was talking about college

 

[Husker in WI]

I was talking about college

View attachment 20941

Got it - well he was the backup (true freshman to boot) that got put in when the starter couldn't stop turning the ball over. He is the Haarberg in this scenario.



Flip flopping back and forth probably isn't the move during his bad games freshman year. Then his sophomore year, 16/5 is exactly what you want and from then on he was pretty well established despite the numbers trending back down.

 

[DefenderAO]

I'm not sure I quite buy this with Sims, at least for all of it.

But I do think there is something to this.  I thought the same with Adrian Martinez and why he seemed to turn it over late in games.  When you feel like you have to make a play or your team will lose, you tend to force things.

Seems to happen when you bring back all the glory guys who are in their faces about tradition and winning.  The current kids want to relive that for themselves and end up being so tight they lose for trying so hard to win.

Not the entire diagnosis but I think this is happening to a greater extent than I'd want...

 

[Enhance]

Seems to happen when you bring back all the glory guys who are in their faces about tradition and winning.  The current kids want to relive that for themselves and end up being so tight they lose for trying so hard to win.

Eh, I think that stuff is a fun punching bag, but the problems that actually matter have been more fundamental: poor coaching, poor player development, and poor identification of player talent. Basically what you're alluding too is too much unnecessary outside pressure and I almost lump that in with 'curse' talk (which, the latter is pure nonsense).

I'm sure Nebraska players feel the pressure to do well, so not discrediting that element. But then I think of what it's like at Clemson, Alabama, or Texas. Those places have just as much passion as Nebraska, and their people are nowhere near as nice or tolerant about failure as we have been. There's a lot more pressure to do well and win at Alabama than there is at Nebraska. These Huskers could literally win 6 games and be Gods. The fix to Nebraska's ailments are in the routines and structures that all good football programs are built upon, and those have largely been lost.

 

[BigRedBuster]

Eh, I think that stuff is a fun punching bag, but the problems that actually matter have been more fundamental: poor coaching, poor player development, and poor identification of player talent. Basically what you're alluding too is too much unnecessary outside pressure and I almost lump that in with 'curse' talk (which, the latter is pure nonsense).

I'm sure Nebraska players feel the pressure to do well, so not discrediting that element. But then I think of what it's like at Clemson, Alabama, or Texas. Those places have just as much passion as Nebraska, and their people are nowhere near as nice or tolerant about failure as we have been. There's a lot more pressure to do well and win at Alabama than there is at Nebraska. These Huskers could literally win 6 games and be Gods. The fix to Nebraska's ailments are in the routines and structures that all good football programs are built upon, and those have largely been lost.

I agree. 
 

And, as far as the talent evaluation, it’s very possible that this staff has done decent in this area…other than one position that happens to be the most important. 
 

Im not necessarily down playing it. But, if that’s the case, it’s not a situation to immediately write off the staff as a failure. 

 

[soup]

Yeah, I don't get the talent evaluation being bad.  How many defensive freshmen are playing?  There is some young talent on this team, and I suspect we will start to see more and more of the offensive freshmen start contributing as they learn more and more.

 

[RedDenver]

LOL....  im sorry...  ill just concede and admit you have ZERO understanding of the conversation...  :facepalm:   enjoy your bliss..!!   <_<

How to tell us you don't have a good argument without telling us you don't have a good argument.

 

[Enhance]

I agree. 
 

And, as far as the talent evaluation, it’s very possible that this staff has done decent in this area…other than one position that happens to be the most important. 
 

Im not necessarily down playing it. But, if that’s the case, it’s not a situation to immediately write off the staff as a failure. 

I very much agree.

And to be honest, I was more speaking in general terms from the last 8-10 years or so. I actually think this team overall isn't as bad as the record suggests or as some of their play has suggested. Yeah you are what your record says you are at the end of the day, but the defense looks pretty good, the offense has done some good things, the o-line hasn't been awful.

There's a bowl "team" there right now, IMO. It's just being masked by fumbles and frankly piss poor quarterbacking. I know Sims looked alright against CU but at the end of the day you can't have 7 turnovers in 7 quarters as a starting QB. It's a dense cloud over everything.

 

[Enhance]

Yeah, I don't get the talent evaluation being bad.  How many defensive freshmen are playing?  There is some young talent on this team, and I suspect we will start to see more and more of the offensive freshmen start contributing as they learn more and more.

I agree. To clarify, I wasn't exclusively directing that at Rhule and his staff. Poor coaching, poor player development, and poor talent evaluation have been some ongoing challenges in the program that they're trying to rectify. So, I was speaking a bit more in general terms about why Nebraska hasn't been very good for awhile. It has much more to do with those things than it does pressure from fans or the former players.