(02-11-2016 05:53 PM)SaintsOwl Wrote:  

(02-10-2016 08:57 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  Not that it means a lot, but...

126. Nate German, Rice

German is an intriguing prospect for coach David Bailiff, but he has only two pass attempts in his career. He spent 2015 at receiver and caught 18 passes for 379 yards and three scores.


http://athlonsports.com/college-football...kings-2016

I think we are screwed this season. Stehling is not the answer which has been proven. This is on Bailiff / Edmondson shoulder for not preparing a QB for this season. Heaven knows we have had plenty of opportunities to get Stehling and German meaningful playing time. I still go back to two seasons ago at the La Tech game where we were routed. Game was out of reach and our backup QBs were carrying the clip board. Stehling was brought in to hand the ball off. Spoke to parents and fans that made the trip and they were pissed. Some folks thought German should have been the starting QB since his freshman year. We saw him last year in the first game against Wagner and never reappeared as a QB. This starts at the top. IMO it doesn't matter who we put back there the common denominator is coaching. Edmondson and Bailiff have yet to develop any QB here since their arrival. If anything they get worst the more time they're in the program. Taylor and DJ played better when they first arrived. I think we are screwed as German hurt his shoulder last game of the season and is not going back to QB. Cannot blame him, go play WR and don't waste time taking snaps. We will go 3-9 and Bailiff will play Granato and use it as an excuse that we are rebuilding with a young QB. Great excuse and keeps his dad happy. Based on last spring ball, Granato is not the answer. Slower than Tyler and last time he threw a ball was against very weak 2A teams at best. Hope lies in Tyner or Glarsmann. So it's a mess and our AD stands on the sidelines with his arms crossed.

Hopefully it isn't as big of a mess at the position as you think it will be.

The "good" thing is that, IMO, there is 0% chance that a 3-9 season this year leaves JK standing on the sideline again, regardless of the circumstances. I'd be confident enough to bump that up to 5-7. If we hit 6-6, then I become less confident of JK making a move since I thought the prudent move was to make a move at the end of the season, but I still think 6-6 doesn't cut it in the end for JK.

(02-11-2016 06:12 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 06:08 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:49 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:42 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:31 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Sure, lot's of bodies are returning, but very, very few are proven players. We stunk all around last year. Period.

Yep, which is why there is hope that they'll get better. I think there has to be some expectation that players get better the more they play and the older/more mature they get, so since we have such a large number of returners, it isn't outlandish to expect that we are better. The question just becomes how much better we get. Do we go from stinky to smelly? Or do we start smelling like Coco Chanel?

QB is really the only position where I am worried we won't be somewhat better, but that is because a single player is responsible for that position and we lost our starter.

Bailiff doesn't know what Coco Chanel smells like. His body of work gives 0 confidence that we will go anywhere near the Chanel level of product.

Whether we go to from stinky to smelly isn't really relevant as we still smell.

Hence my bolded comment...

But I really think your post added something beneficial to the conversation!

Sorry, but I don't think it's anywhere near a given that we get better next year. You're assuming our OL and DL will improve, despite both being horrid last year and both losing key players. I just don't buy that logic. And given QB is the most important player on the field, and we'll be going with a complete unknown with hardly any in-game experience at that position, I have a hard time rationalizing how our on-field performance is likely to improve.

There was another thread where we didn't see eye-to-eye on the talent we lost this year on the d-line and o-line. I don't think we lost any of particular note, with regards to who replaces them, outside of DJ and Reue. I think any other starter anywhere else on the field is replaced by, at worst, equal talent, except DJ, where the talent is just plain unknown.

The unknown part of the equation is a big deal because it's at the QB position, obviously the most influential player on the field. But if we assume that we at least get a player who is a wash to DJ last year, which isn't a stretch, then I find it hard to rationalize that we WON'T improve.

It just seems like you view the loses on d-line and o-line as more of a concern than I do. I can go a bit more into why I don't find them as concerning if you would like.

(02-11-2016 06:12 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 06:08 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:49 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:42 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:31 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Sure, lot's of bodies are returning, but very, very few are proven players. We stunk all around last year. Period.

Yep, which is why there is hope that they'll get better. I think there has to be some expectation that players get better the more they play and the older/more mature they get, so since we have such a large number of returners, it isn't outlandish to expect that we are better. The question just becomes how much better we get. Do we go from stinky to smelly? Or do we start smelling like Coco Chanel?

QB is really the only position where I am worried we won't be somewhat better, but that is because a single player is responsible for that position and we lost our starter.

Bailiff doesn't know what Coco Chanel smells like. His body of work gives 0 confidence that we will go anywhere near the Chanel level of product.

Whether we go to from stinky to smelly isn't really relevant as we still smell.

Hence my bolded comment...

But I really think your post added something beneficial to the conversation!

Yep. It pointed out that you post a lot of very true yet hopelessly irrelevant stuff.

How was what I said irrelevant? Aren't we talking about, at the moment, how our team will perform? Not how our team will perform in relation to college football and the grand scheme of things?

Sorry for talking about the micro, which is far more interesting than the macro since there isn't much point beating a dead horse to death for the millionth time.

I really think you just point out how much you need to watch The Big Lebowski.

(02-11-2016 05:31 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:08 PM)Pan95 Wrote:  Brad Luvender DL JR
Grant Peterson DL SR
Parker Hanusa DE JR
Graysen Schantz DE JR

Sure, lot's of bodies are returning, but very, very few are proven players. We stunk all around last year. Period.

All 4 of these guys were hurt for large chunks of 2015. All 4 had high expectations heading into 2015. If they are all healthy in 2016, along with returning talent like Brown, Abercrumbia, Thompson, Wright, Womac, et al., I have 100% confidence that Rice's defensive line will be significantly better in 2016. This is the one area where I feel like injuries really took their toll, though I agree with you and others that injuries still do not excuse the defense's miserable performance.

(02-11-2016 06:33 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:31 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:08 PM)Pan95 Wrote:  Brad Luvender DL JR
Grant Peterson DL SR
Parker Hanusa DE JR
Graysen Schantz DE JR

Sure, lot's of bodies are returning, but very, very few are proven players. We stunk all around last year. Period.

All 4 of these guys were hurt for large chunks of 2015. All 4 had high expectations heading into 2015. If they are all healthy in 2016, along with returning talent like Brown, Abercrumbia, Thompson, Wright, Womac, et al., I have 100% confidence that Rice's defensive line will be significantly better in 2016. This is the one area where I feel like injuries really took their toll, though I agree with you and others that injuries still do not excuse the defense's miserable performance.

Really? We had 0 pass rush for almost the entire season. No pass rush means the QBs we faced (from mostly high powered offenses in Baylor, WKU, USM..etc) could just sit back and pick our young DBs apart. Even if you have pro bowl corners you can't give a QB 5+ seconds every snap to find a target (which we did).

(02-11-2016 06:17 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 06:12 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 06:08 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:49 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:42 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Yep, which is why there is hope that they'll get better. I think there has to be some expectation that players get better the more they play and the older/more mature they get, so since we have such a large number of returners, it isn't outlandish to expect that we are better. The question just becomes how much better we get. Do we go from stinky to smelly? Or do we start smelling like Coco Chanel?

QB is really the only position where I am worried we won't be somewhat better, but that is because a single player is responsible for that position and we lost our starter.

Bailiff doesn't know what Coco Chanel smells like. His body of work gives 0 confidence that we will go anywhere near the Chanel level of product.

Whether we go to from stinky to smelly isn't really relevant as we still smell.

Hence my bolded comment...

But I really think your post added something beneficial to the conversation!

Sorry, but I don't think it's anywhere near a given that we get better next year. You're assuming our OL and DL will improve, despite both being horrid last year and both losing key players. I just don't buy that logic. And given QB is the most important player on the field, and we'll be going with a complete unknown with hardly any in-game experience at that position, I have a hard time rationalizing how our on-field performance is likely to improve.

There was another thread where we didn't see eye-to-eye on the talent we lost this year on the d-line and o-line. I don't think we lost any of particular note, with regards to who replaces them, outside of DJ and Reue. I think any other starter anywhere else on the field is replaced by, at worst, equal talent, except DJ, where the talent is just plain unknown.

The unknown part of the equation is a big deal because it's at the QB position, obviously the most influential player on the field. But if we assume that we at least get a player who is a wash to DJ last year, which isn't a stretch, then I find it hard to rationalize that we WON'T improve.

It just seems like you view the loses on d-line and o-line as more of a concern than I do. I can go a bit more into why I don't find them as concerning if you would like.

The losses wouldn't be considered that big a deal if others in the OL and DL and played well. Unfortunately, both lines were horrid last year, and I don't buy your argument that simply because a bunch of young guys got experience that they'll be better next year; especially since the experienced guys we are losing were not the reasons the OL and DL performed so poorly.

(02-11-2016 06:55 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 06:17 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 06:12 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 06:08 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:49 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Bailiff doesn't know what Coco Chanel smells like. His body of work gives 0 confidence that we will go anywhere near the Chanel level of product.

Whether we go to from stinky to smelly isn't really relevant as we still smell.

Hence my bolded comment...

But I really think your post added something beneficial to the conversation!

Sorry, but I don't think it's anywhere near a given that we get better next year. You're assuming our OL and DL will improve, despite both being horrid last year and both losing key players. I just don't buy that logic. And given QB is the most important player on the field, and we'll be going with a complete unknown with hardly any in-game experience at that position, I have a hard time rationalizing how our on-field performance is likely to improve.

There was another thread where we didn't see eye-to-eye on the talent we lost this year on the d-line and o-line. I don't think we lost any of particular note, with regards to who replaces them, outside of DJ and Reue. I think any other starter anywhere else on the field is replaced by, at worst, equal talent, except DJ, where the talent is just plain unknown.

The unknown part of the equation is a big deal because it's at the QB position, obviously the most influential player on the field. But if we assume that we at least get a player who is a wash to DJ last year, which isn't a stretch, then I find it hard to rationalize that we WON'T improve.

It just seems like you view the loses on d-line and o-line as more of a concern than I do. I can go a bit more into why I don't find them as concerning if you would like.

The losses wouldn't be considered that big a deal if others in the OL and DL and played well. Unfortunately, both lines were horrid last year, and I don't buy your argument that simply because a bunch of young guys got experience that they'll be better next year; especially since the experienced guys we are losing were not the reasons the OL and DL performed so poorly.

The Oline looked fine against UT and that was the last time it wasn't being shuffled around due to injuries. I don't think we had the same lineup after that game... The Dline didn't do anything all year so we can't get worse. We get a bunch of guys who were supposed to contribute back from injury. And our freshmen Dlinemen (highest recruited Dlinemen under Bailiff) will be playing with a year of S&C under their belts. Remember almost every Dlineman in the country redshirts.

(02-11-2016 06:55 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 06:17 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 06:12 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 06:08 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 05:49 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Bailiff doesn't know what Coco Chanel smells like. His body of work gives 0 confidence that we will go anywhere near the Chanel level of product.

Whether we go to from stinky to smelly isn't really relevant as we still smell.

Hence my bolded comment...

But I really think your post added something beneficial to the conversation!

Sorry, but I don't think it's anywhere near a given that we get better next year. You're assuming our OL and DL will improve, despite both being horrid last year and both losing key players. I just don't buy that logic. And given QB is the most important player on the field, and we'll be going with a complete unknown with hardly any in-game experience at that position, I have a hard time rationalizing how our on-field performance is likely to improve.

There was another thread where we didn't see eye-to-eye on the talent we lost this year on the d-line and o-line. I don't think we lost any of particular note, with regards to who replaces them, outside of DJ and Reue. I think any other starter anywhere else on the field is replaced by, at worst, equal talent, except DJ, where the talent is just plain unknown.

The unknown part of the equation is a big deal because it's at the QB position, obviously the most influential player on the field. But if we assume that we at least get a player who is a wash to DJ last year, which isn't a stretch, then I find it hard to rationalize that we WON'T improve.

It just seems like you view the loses on d-line and o-line as more of a concern than I do. I can go a bit more into why I don't find them as concerning if you would like.

The losses wouldn't be considered that big a deal if others in the OL and DL and played well. Unfortunately, both lines were horrid last year, and I don't buy your argument that simply because a bunch of young guys got experience that they'll be better next year; especially since the experienced guys we are losing were not the reasons the OL and DL performed so poorly.

I'm not saying the lines WILL be GREAT, just that I expect it to be better due to the return of numerous high-quality players from injury, AND the line having a collective year under its belt.

What makes you believe that extra time won't make any of these players better? Or is it that you think that their performance was so poor that they would have to improve exponential to even be a decent contributor?

I think you should look at the SBNation article I posted earlier. In it a link to this article was provided: http://www.sbnation.com/college-football...e-stanford

Near the end of the article the author goes into how both offense and defense can be show to statistically benefit from returning experienced players (e.g. starters) and how on the defensive side of the ball, you get better bang for your buck. It's a pretty interesting take.

(02-10-2016 09:59 PM)gsloth Wrote:  I, too, am fearful of the QB situation. I don't care how many good RBs you have - the QB stirs the drink (to use a bad metaphor), and unless Rice gets much better QB play, I'm not sure we're going to see even an average offense next season.

This may suggest putting an athlete like German there, but put me in the camp that thinks he could be special at WR. Yeah, without a decent QB to get him the ball, he can't show it off, but I've got to think if he aspires at all to the NFL, it's going to be as a receiver. I'm not a scout, but there's something about him at receiver when I watch him in games that says with practice, he could really be a force.

Agreed. If Stehling is the QB, I'm even more excited for German at WR as we know that Stehling can get the ball to German. My only concerns then would be Offensive line play. But Stehling is big and mobile. With Alaka, Z Wright, German, and either of Dillard/Ellerbee/Stewart/Walter/Davis out of the backfield, the passing game could be serviceable.