(10-26-2014 02:13 AM)KMR_NIU_13 Wrote: I'm not sure what the big advantage of Hare is if he can't make the passing game work. Lynch made the offense work with minimal throws down the field. Throwing was Hare's upside over maddie wasn't it? The offense looks the best when maddie/hare are running the ball. Maddie gets the advantage there, so why not try him for an extended session?
Yes, he's made a few poor decisions that could've been INT's, but that should go away with game reps.
Agree or disagree?
Does Maddie really have the advantage in running? When Hare gets some running room he seems to have some vision and gets extra yards. Maddie has not really had much running room but that's partly because none of our opponents are convinced he can throw, so they just worry about the run.
(10-26-2014 02:13 AM)KMR_NIU_13 Wrote: I'm not sure what the big advantage of Hare is if he can't make the passing game work. Lynch made the offense work with minimal throws down the field. Throwing was Hare's upside over maddie wasn't it? The offense looks the best when maddie/hare are running the ball. Maddie gets the advantage there, so why not try him for an extended session?
Yes, he's made a few poor decisions that could've been INT's, but that should go away with game reps.
Agree or disagree?
Does Maddie really have the advantage in running? When Hare gets some running room he seems to have some vision and gets extra yards. Maddie has not really had much running room but that's partly because none of our opponents are convinced he can throw, so they just worry about the run.
I agree, Hare has really improved his running...unfortunately his passing has seemed to get worse. I don't think there's much difference between the two right now, Hare just a little better from a decision making process.
(10-25-2014 08:28 PM)numbersdontlie Wrote: This team is rebuilding. I think we're going to be OK. Are we going 10-2? probably not but we need to be more consistent on D and O. Both have shown flashes but neither side has put together a complete game.
Agree with that completely. With a few days of extra prep for Balls, I expect us to fix/change something's and play a much better complete game next week.
Really hope Olootu gets all the reps from here on out too. As others have said Moore is horrible and Logan isn't far behind.
Hare has shown he can win games with his arm against NW and UNLV. We haven't set him up like we have in those games. We should be using outs, slants and flats along with our rushing attack. When we have that going the double moves should get our guys wide open. Why we can't do that is beyond me. Our coaches should just watch the ECU offense and copy their play calling. Hopefully they'll learn something.
Rod Carey @niucoachcarey · 27m27 minutes ago
Great job fighting through adversity by our team yesterday. Time to get back to work and get better! #GoHuskies #TheHardWay
(10-26-2014 02:13 AM)KMR_NIU_13 Wrote: I'm not sure what the big advantage of Hare is if he can't make the passing game work. Lynch made the offense work with minimal throws down the field. Throwing was Hare's upside over maddie wasn't it? The offense looks the best when maddie/hare are running the ball. Maddie gets the advantage there, so why not try him for an extended session?
Yes, he's made a few poor decisions that could've been INT's, but that should go away with game reps.
Agree or disagree?
Does Maddie really have the advantage in running? When Hare gets some running room he seems to have some vision and gets extra yards. Maddie has not really had much running room but that's partly because none of our opponents are convinced he can throw, so they just worry about the run.
I agree, Hare has really improved his running...unfortunately his passing has seemed to get worse. I don't think there's much difference between the two right now, Hare just a little better from a decision making process.
Maddie does not have the running ability for this offense, Hare is a more instinctive runner than Maddie. The only spot Maddie outshines Hare is that occasional run where you have to reach the edge, which is not really what NIU's QB ground game usually consists of. Even Maddie's speed advantage is not really advantage as he is a lateral runner and not a south-north runner. The more you watch Maddie, the more you realize this guy really is Demarcus Grady.
Bottom line is Hare obviously gives NIU the best chance to win, we have known that since the Northwestern game.
Jesus, stop comparing Maddie to Grady. It's stupid. Grady STARTED 4 games and played the entire game in 3 games in 2009 and threw a total of 43 passes for the entire season. Whenever Grady played, it was an extremely dumbed down version of the offense. Maddie is a better player than Grady was.
And NIU's run game doesn't consist of any outside runs because they have no speed on offense, not because it's the design of the offense. Both Hare and Maddie have proven to be effective runners. Hare is the clear starting QB and Maddie will continue to play.
There really isn't much of a difference between the two. Hare's the starter because he has proven to be a really good decision maker and he's great at taking care of the ball. That's his strength. He's also ungodly inaccurate and has a long throwing motion.
HE ALSO THREW FOR 44 YARDS YESTERDAY. FORTY-FOUR. He's not a very good QB. The only thing that's changed since his Kent State and CMU debacles is they've gone back to running QB power (thank God) and the offensive line has protected better. If NIU gets in a game where they're not blowing the opposing team off the line like they have the past two weeks, NIU's in deep doodoo. The good news is, there's really no reason this offensive line shouldn't be able to bully every defensive line left on the schedule. They've already proven they can do it.
(This post was last modified: 10-26-2014 10:45 PM by 7.)
Yeah, they need to finish drives better, especially with how poorly Wedel is kicking FGs. Not a real surprise that they've struggled a bit in the redszone when you consider they really don't have a QB who they trust. Windows to throw become smaller as the field shrinks.
(10-25-2014 04:59 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote: Hare might be bad, but he is far far far and away the best option to win right now. I really would like to see how Hare operates with a well called game from a play calling perspective. There is no doubt Hare has not been put in position to succeed this year, yet even so, he has still provided ways to win.
I think Hare does a decent job, he runs well with the ball. If he could get snaps that were more higher than his shoe tops I believe he'd be far more effective
Give EMU credit as well, they played hard for Creighton Saturday, Bell is a real talent under center and if not for some alligator arms on the Eagle receiving corp that game would have been even closer than the score indicated
(10-26-2014 10:41 PM)7 Wrote: Jesus, stop comparing Maddie to Grady. It's stupid. Grady STARTED 4 games and played the entire game in 3 games in 2009 and threw a total of 43 passes for the entire season. Whenever Grady played, it was an extremely dumbed down version of the offense. Maddie is a better player than Grady was.
And NIU's run game doesn't consist of any outside runs because they have no speed on offense, not because it's the design of the offense. Both Hare and Maddie have proven to be effective runners. Hare is the clear starting QB and Maddie will continue to play.
There really isn't much of a difference between the two. Hare's the starter because he has proven to be a really good decision maker and he's great at taking care of the ball. That's his strength. He's also ungodly inaccurate and has a long throwing motion.
HE ALSO THREW FOR 44 YARDS YESTERDAY. FORTY-FOUR. He's not a very good QB. The only thing that's changed since his Kent State and CMU debacles is they've gone back to running QB power (thank God) and the offensive line has protected better. If NIU gets in a game where they're not blowing the opposing team off the line like they have the past two weeks, NIU's in deep doodoo. The good news is, there's really no reason this offensive line shouldn't be able to bully every defensive line left on the schedule. They've already proven they can do it.
The Hare/Harnish comparisons are foolish, but Grady and Maddie are the same QB, actually pretty eerie how similar they are. I actually think Grady might be a bit better though just because he probably had the stronger arm of the two. I would not read much into passing numbers Saturday, nobody was going to throw the ball well in that kind of wind. Heck, EMU only had 125 yards I think.
(10-26-2014 10:41 PM)7 Wrote: Jesus, stop comparing Maddie to Grady. It's stupid. Grady STARTED 4 games and played the entire game in 3 games in 2009 and threw a total of 43 passes for the entire season. Whenever Grady played, it was an extremely dumbed down version of the offense. Maddie is a better player than Grady was.
And NIU's run game doesn't consist of any outside runs because they have no speed on offense, not because it's the design of the offense. Both Hare and Maddie have proven to be effective runners. Hare is the clear starting QB and Maddie will continue to play.
There really isn't much of a difference between the two. Hare's the starter because he has proven to be a really good decision maker and he's great at taking care of the ball. That's his strength. He's also ungodly inaccurate and has a long throwing motion.
HE ALSO THREW FOR 44 YARDS YESTERDAY. FORTY-FOUR. He's not a very good QB. The only thing that's changed since his Kent State and CMU debacles is they've gone back to running QB power (thank God) and the offensive line has protected better. If NIU gets in a game where they're not blowing the opposing team off the line like they have the past two weeks, NIU's in deep doodoo. The good news is, there's really no reason this offensive line shouldn't be able to bully every defensive line left on the schedule. They've already proven they can do it.
The Hare/Harnish comparisons are foolish, but Grady and Maddie are the same QB, actually pretty eerie how similar they are. I actually think Grady might be a bit better though just because he probably had the stronger arm of the two. I would not read much into passing numbers Saturday, nobody was going to throw the ball well in that kind of wind. Heck, EMU only had 125 yards I think.
(10-26-2014 02:13 AM)KMR_NIU_13 Wrote: I'm not sure what the big advantage of Hare is if he can't make the passing game work. Lynch made the offense work with minimal throws down the field. Throwing was Hare's upside over maddie wasn't it? The offense looks the best when maddie/hare are running the ball. Maddie gets the advantage there, so why not try him for an extended session?
Yes, he's made a few poor decisions that could've been INT's, but that should go away with game reps.
Agree or disagree?
Does Maddie really have the advantage in running? When Hare gets some running room he seems to have some vision and gets extra yards. Maddie has not really had much running room but that's partly because none of our opponents are convinced he can throw, so they just worry about the run.
Maddie is not as good as I thought he would be. He obviously is not a good thrower so I though his running ability would be high. As it turns out Hare is a much better runner. I can see palying Maddie one series in the first half just in case Hare goes down. At least Maddie will not be a deer in headlights. Offensively, I would like to see us throw more vertically and use the middle of the field. Also, have to get more of out offensive players involved. Bourgeran had 2 carries in 1st half vs EMU.