Haa."a fair crap"? It looks like you were trying to type "a fair shot" but board rules don't let me say how I know.
Dang keyboard mis-type plus board correct all in one.
-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
HuskerMax readers can save 50% on Omaha Steaks .
Casey Thompson’s dad said Rhule told him to transfer.
- Thread starter Husker1995
- Start date
Dang keyboard mis-type plus board correct all in one.
It seems you didn't understand my reply. I meant I was changing it completely to my new comment.
"I THINK, a player would perceive a coach saying you should leave, means the coach doesn't have your back or confidence in you"
Here it is inserted in place of the old comment -
That aside, the right thing to do, IMO, is to lay out all the info and what to expect, but encourage him to stay. Why would a coach ever need to tell a player he SHOULD look elsewhere? The player has plenty of people to help him decide what's best. Family, friends, other players etc. "I THINK, a player would perceive a coach saying you should leave, means the coach doesn't have your back or confidence in you". Any coach should know that is how it will be perceived at least.
If there was an ultimatum, then the player is taking away all confidence in the coach. It works both ways. Wanting a point blank guarantee exhibits one of a few things. Fear, arrogance, entitlement, to name a few. Based on what I have seen of Rhule I would think that he might have prefaced any reference to transferring with something akin to "I would love for you to stay and compete for the position".
Last edited:
There are plenty of scenarios where a coach might have the players best interest in mind and encourage a player to move on.
Seems it isn't clear exactly what was said, which is ok and also not surprising, not for nefarious reasons, but because responsible people generally try to avoid talking about personal conversations, really as a courtesy to the people they talk to. Kind of just good manners.
So we're speculating. And I'm gonna play too.
In the old days it may have been all for the team and "Dear old Nebraska U". That was nice and I would have been happy to stick with that, but in college football, like everything else, that's gone by the wayside, especially for QBs with ambitions.
So you can't blame Casey for wanting to play. We brought him in a year earlier as a transfer, so obviously as a program we are on boàrd with the transfer game, as really everyone is.
So the question is, if you want to play and are willing to transfer, is it ok to as your coach what he's thinking are your chances? Sure. And if it's not really definite from his answer what will happen and you want more definite direction, is it ok to say that you need a stronger answer and if the answer isn't that you'll definitely start? Also yes. It may be an "ultimatum", but it's also just being clear in a negotiation. That's the way it is nowadays.
If anything, if Casey knew he would transfer if he didn't get the job, he was doing Rhule a solid favor by being upfront and giving him a chance to decide and then plan if necessary. And of course Casey was right to advocate for himself too. You don't ask you don't get.
For his part then, Rhule could say, sure I will guarantee you are the starter. Or if you don't think Casey warrants that kind of commitment especially if you plan in being run heavy, or whatever, you could say I can't make that commitment, and then say, I'd like to keep you, but if you need a guarantee, (then from your perspective) you should go.
That's not Rhule running Casey off, that's Rhule deciding what he's willing to do that fits his plans for the team, and then communicating it clearly to Casey so Casey can decide what to do.
Casey and his father may or may not have a problem with it, but only that they think keeping Casey was worth giving a guarantee. They can't really complain how Rhule treated Casey.
And the thread title saying Rhule ran Casey off, isn't true. Rhule made a decision what he was willing to do and it included Casey as a player but gave no promises as to his playing. Then he honestly communicated it to Casey so Casey could decide.
If you think Rhule made the wrong decision, that is one thing. But accusing him of bad faith or bad process as "running someone off" is loaded language to convey in this context, is not warranted. Looks to me like both sides were open with each other and acted like grown ups.
Rhule does have a huge challenge dealing with the consequences of his choices here, which might not be pretty. But that's why we pay him the big bucks.
So we're speculating. And I'm gonna play too.
In the old days it may have been all for the team and "Dear old Nebraska U". That was nice and I would have been happy to stick with that, but in college football, like everything else, that's gone by the wayside, especially for QBs with ambitions.
So you can't blame Casey for wanting to play. We brought him in a year earlier as a transfer, so obviously as a program we are on boàrd with the transfer game, as really everyone is.
So the question is, if you want to play and are willing to transfer, is it ok to as your coach what he's thinking are your chances? Sure. And if it's not really definite from his answer what will happen and you want more definite direction, is it ok to say that you need a stronger answer and if the answer isn't that you'll definitely start? Also yes. It may be an "ultimatum", but it's also just being clear in a negotiation. That's the way it is nowadays.
If anything, if Casey knew he would transfer if he didn't get the job, he was doing Rhule a solid favor by being upfront and giving him a chance to decide and then plan if necessary. And of course Casey was right to advocate for himself too. You don't ask you don't get.
For his part then, Rhule could say, sure I will guarantee you are the starter. Or if you don't think Casey warrants that kind of commitment especially if you plan in being run heavy, or whatever, you could say I can't make that commitment, and then say, I'd like to keep you, but if you need a guarantee, (then from your perspective) you should go.
That's not Rhule running Casey off, that's Rhule deciding what he's willing to do that fits his plans for the team, and then communicating it clearly to Casey so Casey can decide what to do.
Casey and his father may or may not have a problem with it, but only that they think keeping Casey was worth giving a guarantee. They can't really complain how Rhule treated Casey.
And the thread title saying Rhule ran Casey off, isn't true. Rhule made a decision what he was willing to do and it included Casey as a player but gave no promises as to his playing. Then he honestly communicated it to Casey so Casey could decide.
If you think Rhule made the wrong decision, that is one thing. But accusing him of bad faith or bad process as "running someone off" is loaded language to convey in this context, is not warranted. Looks to me like both sides were open with each other and acted like grown ups.
Rhule does have a huge challenge dealing with the consequences of his choices here, which might not be pretty. But that's why we pay him the big bucks.
Last edited:
The only fact is CT transferred on his own. It could be argued he was pushed just as easily as it could be argued that he didn’t want to compete.
What this fact brings is zero relevance because he is gone and based on his performance there, there is zero evidence to believe the theory being pushed by this op matters anyway.
What this fact brings is zero relevance because he is gone and based on his performance there, there is zero evidence to believe the theory being pushed by this op matters anyway.
I agree with you. I created a poor title for this thread.
Is it more than a guess that CT gave an ultimatum/guarantee?
I always thought it really odd that CT transfer again after just one year. If it had been to a better program or even a lateral one I would think it was a bit odd. That it was to a non power 5 school is really odd. So when I saw the tweet claiming his dad said CT was pushed out....it made sense.
I agree with you. I chose a bad title for this thread. I am still rooting for Rhule’s success and believe he should be given time.
Any where it's a starting QB, that should at least be seen as being as good as the incoming QB, and for sure better than any other on the depth chart? Should have Nate Mason, Brook Berringer, been encouraged to move on?
Rhule did a bad evaluation of QBs if he couldn't see that CT gave him a better chance at winning more games this year.
If i'm giving benefit of the doubt, maybe Rhule thought he could get 6-8 wins from Sims this year and then develop into a QB that gives us 9-11 next year. AND that is better than just ONE seasons with CT and 7-9 wins. Maybe that still plays out, but we are off to a horrible start.
Is it possible we only way we got Sims( a JR) is by promising him he'll start? Which would explain encouraging the SR CT to leave.
I say you encourage CT to stay and give him a fair shot at starter. If that means Sims doesn't transfer, so be it. Hit the transfer portal again next year and also recruit a stud. We need to play well and win some big games NOW in to get and keep momentum going. WIth the moral, with the recruiting and with fans.
Last edited:
I hear ya. He also went to a school coached by his old coach Tom Herman.
I will try to be as objective as possible. This is just my thought - Maybe CT did not fit what MR wanted the offense to look like with more mobility at the position. CT ended up hurt because of poor line protection. A mobile QB can cover up OL deficiencies. CT would have likely ended up hurt again playing behind our line. Hindsight is always 20/20. MR was aware of the turnover issues but looked at Sims athletic ability and thought they could clean up that part of his game. Personally I think they need to shut down the offense like they did with Zack Lee and play good defense.
