kaelin back to NU at qb

[BeaverSlayerReincarnated69]

YOU'RE the one who brought up the argument that it mattered which conference these players were coming from.

Mountain West and the MAC are equal.

Now you're adding in other variables to your argument that you didn't originally bring up. Such as # of wins at their previous schools and who they beat.

The former you cant truly compare because Colandrea didnt play 20+ games at UNLV like Rourke did. Rourke had 5 years at Ohio (playing 4) and won 21, not 30.

What was Rouke's best win before he went to Indiana? 7-6 Iowa St. Colandrea beat a #18 Pitt.

I'm not saying Colandrea is better than Rourke, but they are a similar comparison in the fact that they both came from G5 schools (which seemed to matter to you when you brought up Mendoza/Colandrea comparison), found success there and are now moving up to a P5 school.

So you want to cherry pick variables that support your "argument for arguments sake" agenda.....

If an MLB hitter has 3 miserable seasons in the BIGs, then gets demoted to AAA, and tears the cover off the ball for 1 season.....Does that make his skills suddenly translate up to the show, where hes previously struggled?

Vs a AAA hitter that tears up that league for 3 years, then moves up to the show?

Of course it matters how many games and seasons these QBs played! It matters that Colandreas play elevated at a lower level of ball and had previously floundered at the higher level of ball......

But you would rather narrow the scope soley to: their most previous seasons were both in lower conferences, so its apples to apples......because that is the most optimistic outlook and it fits your narrative.

 

[Man Woman & Child]

are you high? I just made a thread about a NU qb signing securing 3 qb's for next year, and it turned into bunch of negative nancys crying around..instead of crying on every thread just make 1 thread , the crying thread...

You're missing the point. All things will inevitably come back to some negativity when there is this much going around. It literally impacts every facet of the program. This thread is a perfect example. Want to talk about our 2026 QB room? Great. Expect that will 100% come with some conversation about how it could/should be better and why it isn't. Unless you just want to ignore that enormous elephant in the room (aka all sit around and lie to ourselves). Otherwise, it's part of being a fan of any team. In any sport. No amount of thread police crying about it will ever change that. Also known as reality.

 

[HUSKERFAN66]

we told a dl that signed with cu that we wanted a bigger dl, so maybe there's something in mind

Honestly, for a DT, I would rather have a 6'2" guy than a 6'6" or taller. Lower center of gravity makes it easier to gain leverage. Plug the inside and make the 3 IOL block the dts and the edge rushers can collapse the outside

 

[redwine65]

You're missing the point. All things will inevitably come back to some negativity when there is this much going around. It literally impacts every facet of the program. This thread is a perfect example. Want to talk about our 2026 QB room? Great. Expect that will 100% come with some conversation about how it could/should be better and why it isn't. Unless you just want to ignore that enormous elephant in the room (aka all sit around and lie to ourselves). Otherwise, it's part of being a fan of any team. In any sport. No amount of thread police crying about it will ever change that. Also known as reality.

your oblivious to reality, do you hire or fire? are you mark cuban? these folks crying around are like a 4 year old asking 3 minutes into a road trip if we can pull over..

 

[orclover11]

#3 or better? needed 3 qb's to get thru next year

So our defense is a 2-5-4, and our offense with run with three qbs, and no division 1 running back? I guess we'll see what happens.

 

[redwine65]

Honestly, for a DT, I would rather have a 6'2" guy than a 6'6" or taller. Lower center of gravity makes it easier to gain leverage. Plug the inside and make the 3 IOL block the dts and the edge rushers can collapse the outside

we have our dt's, we are looking for 1 serous rush end now..

 

[orclover11]

Why people ***** on here we have no serious depth at QB . Now you ***** when we being in a p4 backpack to create good depth and competition. JFC how to some of you even function in life?

People are assuming that this is a zero-sum game where paying three qbs impacts how much we can pay a position of need like say DT, or OT, or RB. Now these kids may be giving up thousands of dollars to sit on the bench at NU but that seems unlikely, and we can't assume our NIL is bottomless, we know it isn't. I think people would happy if we got some depth on the dline or had a coach, or even a division 1 running back before we added to qb room.

 

[Man Woman & Child]

your oblivious to reality, do you hire or fire? are you mark cuban? these folks crying around are like a 4 year old asking 3 minutes into a road trip if we can pull over..

Do you hire or fire? Are you Mark Cuban? Then why talk about any of this? Why, in your mind, does that (pointless) argument only apply to posters bringing up negative things?

Again, it seems you think posters should only be allowed to talk about A) things we can control, or B) things that are 100% positive. News flash...neither is reality.

 

[dinglefritz]

Can you please clarify what we are and are not allowed to talk about on this board? Because it seems as though you don't think we should talk about anything that we can't control. But it seems to me that would literally eliminate every single topic. And there wouldn't even be a board if that were the case. So, is it just positive things we can't control that should be allowed? Again, won't be a whole lot left to discuss if that's the case. Or are we only allowed to discuss a negative reality one time? And the rest has to either be positive or fantasy? I'm genuinely curious what you think the actual parameters should be?

Day after day after day after day. It’s the same whining that will never change anything. Your only solution seems to be to fire a coach that would trigger roughly $80 million in buyouts and another roster rebuild. But you do you. Bless your heart.

 

[dinglefritz]

we have our dt's, we are looking for 1 serous rush end now..

That guy is a clown. Can’t stand to watch him.

 

[Man Woman & Child]

Day after day after day after day. It’s the same whining that will never change anything. Your only solution seems to be to fire a coach that would trigger roughly $80 million in buyouts and another roster rebuild. But you do you. Bless your heart.

So, no answer to my question then. Shocking.

 

[dinglefritz]

So, no answer to my question then. Shocking.

Day after the day it’s the same schtick. Don’t be surprised if you get blow back.

 

[inthedeed]

somewhere between the K becomes a 3rd string QB that manages to keep us in a game sometime and the guy that blows us all away with QB magic. potential is there on this one to go either way. I approve.

 

[redwine65]

That guy is a clown. Can’t stand to watch him.

I definatly don't agree with everything he says..but he does make alot of NU videos

 

[HuskerO58]

So you want to cherry pick variables that support your "argument for arguments sake" agenda.....

If an MLB hitter has 3 miserable seasons in the BIGs, then gets demoted to AAA, and tears the cover off the ball for 1 season.....Does that make his skills suddenly translate up to the show, where hes previously struggled?

Vs a AAA hitter that tears up that league for 3 years, then moves up to the show?

Of course it matters how many games and seasons these QBs played! It matters that Colandreas play elevated at a lower level of ball and had previously floundered at the higher level of ball......

But you would rather narrow the scope soley to: their most previous seasons were both in lower conferences, so its apples to apples......because that is the most optimistic outlook and it fits your narrative.

I only brought up the variables YOU mentioned in your original post. It was until later that you started to add variables. That's called, moving the goal post.

If you don't want the scope to be so narrow, then don't start out with a narrow scope. Lay it all out to begin with so you're not adding arbitrary variables down the line.

 

[BeaverSlayerReincarnated69]

I only brought up the variables YOU mentioned in your original post. It was until later that you started to add variables. That's called, moving the goal post.

If you don't want the scope to be so narrow, then don't start out with a narrow scope. Lay it all out to begin with so you're not adding arbitrary variables down the line.

What are you even talking about?

First off, you jumped into the middle of a back and forth with another poster....So how do you get to talk about my original point that you weren't even a party to?

Second, my original post about comparisons, was comparing Mendoza and a Pac12 schedule to UNLV and a mountain West schedule. That is literally the first reply about comparisons.

YOU are the one who then brought in Ohio, Rourke.....to which I said was a poor comparison because A) Mendoza at Cal doesnt compare(competion wise)to either the MAC or the MTW and B) Rourke had played SIGNIFICANTLY more games at Ohio than Colandrea at UNLV.

Those are replies to YOU and YOUR variables.

So YOU shifted it to the MAC. YOU shifted it to Rourke. And my responses to YOUR PIVOTS, brought us to number of games played and Colandrea's past experience at the P4.

You act like some victim of some unfair argument.....when YOU inserted yourself into the conversation(between me and someone else) and YOU are the one who started inserting different QBs who play in different conferences.

 

[huskat]

The question is, why not? And the answer to that question needs to be fixed.

That's not a hard question. We have stunk for 20 years.

 

[Anon1766081794]

Sure he does. He’s just beaten down like the rest of us.

I think there is a fine line between optimism and pessimism and those of us who are beat down need a few game upsets by an average team to remind us of the difference.

Sure he does. He’s just beaten down like the rest of us.

.

 

[redwine65]

That's not a hard question. We have stunk for 20 years.

don't tell the doom and gloomers, they think we have first dibs on the best players and coaches..and can flip them every 1.5 years. rebuild should take a year max, look at cig
oh yeah and outspend everyone...

 

[Anon1766081794]

You are 87?

I am getting close. The benefit is that I am getting better at bedpan shuffleboard than my peers (cause they're all dead).

 

[HuskerO58]

What are you even talking about?

So how do you get to talk about my original point that you weren't even a party to?

When you originally started comparing QBs. Thought that was pretty clear.

Comparing Cal, 1 year removed from the PAC12 conference, and still playing essentially a full PAC12 schedule......to UNLV playing a MWC schedule with no ranked opponents, is apples to oranges.

 

[BeaverSlayerReincarnated69]

When you originally started comparing QBs. Thought that was pretty clear.

Talk about moving the goal posts.....or just being a coward.

Make an asinine accusation. Get receipted. Then respond with short vague walk back.....

 

[RikeMiley]

 

[dinglefritz]

Welcome home

 

[HuskerO58]

Second, my original post about comparisons, was comparing Mendoza and a Pac12 schedule to UNLV and a mountain West schedule. That is literally the first reply about comparisons.

Yes, exactly. Pac-12 schedule vs MW schedule. THIS IS YOUR SOLE VARIABLE in that post of yours. You were clear on that.

Which is why I then brought up a better comparison in Rourke.

and B) Rourke had played SIGNIFICANTLY more games at Ohio than Colandrea at UNLV.

This is what I'm talking about. You're adding more variables. First it was all about conferences (P4 vs non-P4) to you.

Then when I bring up a successful transfer QB that came from a more comparable non-P4 conference, you add more variables in, "number of games each QB played at 1 place."

YOU are the one who then brought in Ohio, Rourke.....to which I said was a poor comparison because A) Mendoza at Cal doesnt compare(competion wise)to either the MAC or the MTW

I never once compared Rourke to Mendoza. Maybe that's where you got confused?

So YOU shifted it to the MAC. YOU shifted it to Rourke.

Yes. To give a better comparison to Colandrea as Mendoza wasnt a good one.

..when YOU inserted yourself into the conversation(between me and someone else)

Yes, this is a message board. Is that not allowed?

 

[HuskerO58]

Talk about moving the goal posts.....or just being a coward.

Make an asinine accusation. Get receipted. Then respond with short vague walk back.....

Haha. Calm down champ. Only had time for 1 quick response. I gave a more thorough one for ya.

No walk back or goal post moving. You're getting caught up in some semantics on "original".

When I say original, I mean your original (and only) variable of "MW does not equal Pac12". Which I agree with.

 

[BeaverSlayerReincarnated69]

Yes, exactly. Pac-12 schedule vs MW schedule. THIS IS YOUR SOLE VARIABLE in that post of yours. You were clear on that.

Which is why I then brought up a better comparison in Rourke.


This is what I'm talking about. You're adding more variables. First it was all about conferences (P4 vs non-P4) to you.

Then when I bring up a successful transfer QB that came from a more comparable non-P4 conference, you add more variables in, "number of games each QB played at 1 place."


I never once compared Rourke to Mendoza. Maybe that's where you got confused?


Yes. To give a better comparison to Colandrea as Mendoza wasnt a good one.


Yes, this is a message board. Is that not allowed?

Read better....It literally says Mendoza AND Pac12. Thats not a single variable. Thats a player AND a conference. And its being compare to Colandrea AND MTW.

I am not adding ****. YOU added Rourke. That changed the comp, so yes my response changes. Those are 2 different comps, so they get 2 different answers.

Why would you not add different variables to different players? If you truly wanted to do a comparison to Colandrea, and his circumstance, you'd have to find a guy that washed out of a P4/P5 school, went to a lesser conference, lit it up, then went back to a P4 conference and had succes......You essentially need the half dozen 2010s Texas QBs who scattered to mi tier conferences, BUT then returned to a contender school.

Rourke doesnt compare well to either....and where this gets conflated is the OP is comparing to Mendoza and you pick that up, but shift it to Rourke

 

[BeaverSlayerReincarnated69]

Haha. Calm down champ. Only had time for 1 quick response. I gave a more thorough one for ya.

No walk back or goal post moving. You're getting caught up in some semantics on "original".

When I say original, I mean your original (and only) variable of "MW does not equal Pac12". Which I agree with.

Well lets just cut the **** then. My point is Colandrea is 5'10 midget who failed at a P4 school, then found success at a lower tier school for 1 singular season, in which they played nobody and still struggled againt the better opponents in their conference AND their MAC bowl opponent.

So unless there are comps out there, that show a non traditionally skilled and measured QB, accomplishing nothing at a school like UVA, decending and lighting up the D league portion of a C league schedule, and then rising like a phoenix from the ashes to deliver an 8-9 win season against a BRUTAL schedule, in CFBs most dominant conference by far.......find me a couple of those comps and I will pump sunshine like everyone else

Otherwise I am going to yell fire where I see smoke. There are some serious red flags with this guy, and he might have been the best we were going to get with Rhules "competition" strategy. Both can be true

 

[HuskerO58]

Read better....It literally says Mendoza AND Pac12. Thats not a single variable. Thats a player AND a conference. And its being compare to Colandrea AND MTW.

Dude, you're impossible. You said Mendoza wasnt a good comparison to Colandrea due to the conference they each came from. The players are the subjects, not the variables.

I am not adding ****. YOU added Rourke. That changed the comp, so yes my response changes. Those are 2 different comps, so they get 2 different answers.

Why would you not add different variables to different players?

Then literally no player could ever be comparable to anyone else. You could always just throw in some random variable and say, "see, this isn't apples-to-apples because of (insert random variable)".

If you truly wanted to do a comparison to Colandrea, and his circumstance, you'd have to find a guy that washed out of a P4/P5 school, went to a lesser conference, lit it up, then went back to a P4 conference and had succes......

But then I could just throw in some random variable and say it's not a good comparison.

Rourke doesnt compare well to either....and where this gets conflated is the OP is comparing to Mendoza and you pick that up, but shift it to Rourke.

Yes, OP brought up Mendoza. You said it wasnt a good comparison because of said conferences (that's the variable at this point).

I agree with you. Mendoza isn't a good comparison so I brought up a better comparison in Rourke to meet your conference variable.

If you're making the players the variables in this discussion then you'll NEVER have an apples-to-apples comparison. Something will always be different.

 

[HuskerO58]

Well lets just cut the **** then. My point is Colandrea is 5'10 midget who failed at a P4 school, then found success at a lower tier school for 1 singular season, in which they played nobody and still struggled againt the better opponents in their conference AND their MAC bowl opponent.

So unless there are comps out there, that show a non traditionally skilled and measured QB, accomplishing nothing at a school like UVA, decending and lighting up the D league portion of a C league schedule, and then rising like a phoenix from the ashes to deliver an 8-9 win season against a BRUTAL schedule, in CFBs most dominant conference by far.......find me a couple of those comps and I will pump sunshine like everyone else

Otherwise I am going to yell fire where I see smoke. There are some serious red flags with this guy, and he might have been the best we were going to get with Rhules "competition" strategy. Both can be true

Sounds good.

 

[Man Woman & Child]

Sounds good.

 

[dinglefritz]

Well lets just cut the **** then. My point is Colandrea is 5'10 midget who failed at a P4 school, then found success at a lower tier school for 1 singular season, in which they played nobody and still struggled againt the better opponents in their conference AND their MAC bowl opponent.

So unless there are comps out there, that show a non traditionally skilled and measured QB, accomplishing nothing at a school like UVA, decending and lighting up the D league portion of a C league schedule, and then rising like a phoenix from the ashes to deliver an 8-9 win season against a BRUTAL schedule, in CFBs most dominant conference by far.......find me a couple of those comps and I will pump sunshine like everyone else

Otherwise I am going to yell fire where I see smoke. There are some serious red flags with this guy, and he might have been the best we were going to get with Rhules "competition" strategy. Both can be true

I don’t think “competition strategy” had anything to do with who we could land at QB. O line concerns, 7 wins, and 9 sacks at Minnesota probably had more to do with who we could get.

 

[BeaverSlayerReincarnated69]

I don’t think “competition strategy” had anything to do with who we could land at QB. O line concerns, 7 wins, and 9 sacks at Minnesota probably had more to do with who we could get.

Which still falls on Matt Rhule. Obvious answer there is Donnie.

But a good example would be DL. Last year we were a program on the rise. Momentum, bowl, DR returning, easy schedule, etc......So there was never a better time to cut loose on the DL portal. We didnt. This season happened. And now we have multiple posters talking about how nobody good is interested in us at x position, regardless of what we pay them, because we only won 7 games.

So if that is your method of thought, how do you break the cycle? Because in this scenario sympathizers lay out, no good players will come here, so our talent is plateauing or regressing......and next year our schedule is more difficult. So its not a stretch to see a worse record next year. So then the cycle continues: "No good players are going to come here, no matter what you pay em, when you only won 6 games last year."

Soooo if that is what you believe, where do we go from here besides down?

 

[RealTucoSalamanca]

The lack of portal DL recruiting is combined with lack of identifying good HS talent and lack of development of both from year to year. It’s been stagnant on the lines. Hopefully the new line coaches will actually develop what we have, and those guys are capable. It’s been bad so far under Rhule.

SIAP - But I think the lack of identifying HS talent is a bit overstated. The 2 of the 3 players he brought in last year were injured and redshirted. I believe Terry and Simpson are going to be really good players, and both have 4 years remaining. Pietrzak played a role on the line as a true freshman, these guys have the physical attributes to be even better.

 

[doathlon]

Pietrzak is a dude. But i think he is best at DE. He and Nwaneri will be very good next season on passing downs. Need at least one P4 experienced space eating DT

 

[Claud-Henry Smoot]

He is getting a total of 1 million over 3 years if he stays to basically be a backup. Decent pay cut from Virginia 650k or so but at this point guessing Virginia had that money slotted elsewhere. Good backup but if he is getting significant minutes in Lincoln then something has gone very poorly.

 

[MissoulaHusker_rivals490203]

SIAP - But I think the lack of identifying HS talent is a bit overstated. The 2 of the 3 players he brought in last year were injured and redshirted. I believe Terry and Simpson are going to be really good players, and both have 4 years remaining. Pietrzak played a role on the line as a true freshman, these guys have the physical attributes to be even better.

It’s a combination of those factors I mentioned that have worked against us. I agree those three you mentioned have potential and now hopefully the coaches can develop them.

 

[dinglefritz]

Which still falls on Matt Rhule. Obvious answer there is Donnie.

But a good example would be DL. Last year we were a program on the rise. Momentum, bowl, DR returning, easy schedule, etc......So there was never a better time to cut loose on the DL portal. We didnt. This season happened. And now we have multiple posters talking about how nobody good is interested in us at x position, regardless of what we pay them, because we only won 7 games.

So if that is your method of thought, how do you break the cycle? Because in this scenario sympathizers lay out, no good players will come here, so our talent is plateauing or regressing......and next year our schedule is more difficult. So its not a stretch to see a worse record next year. So then the cycle continues: "No good players are going to come here, no matter what you pay em, when you only won 6 games last year."

Soooo if that is what you believe, where do we go from here besides down?

So what? Of course it ultimately falls on Rhule and it’s his job to fix it. Your repetitive whining isn’t going th change the fact that we’re probably pot committed to Rhule for 2-3 years.

 

[dinglefritz]

Pietrzak is a dude. But i think he is best at DE. He and Nwaneri will be very good next season on passing downs. Need at least one P4 experienced space eating DT

Pietrzak and Nwaneri are both big enough to be 4 down DEs in a 4 man front. Last I heard Nwaneri was at 270.

 

[dinglefritz]

He is getting a total of 1 million over 3 years if he stays to basically be a backup. Decent pay cut from Virginia 650k or so but at this point guessing Virginia had that money slotted elsewhere. Good backup but if he is getting significant minutes in Lincoln then something has gone very poorly.

Either something went South OR he has matured and is the best QB we have. Dana is going to play the best guy. He won the Elite Eleven accuracy competition and is more athletic than some think. He’s also the biggest QB of the 3. Football IQ is going to win the job IMO. He has a shot.