Sunday Conversation: Zac Lee's Potential
12 comments so far
April 26, 2009 by
The writers and publishers here at Big Red Network love to talk football. We jabber about the Huskers and other football topics constantly. Only a fraction of those rambles ever make it to the site. Given that none of us live in the same state, most of our conversations take place over the phone, e-mail and occasional instant message. That said, they are still pretty colorful.
So, this first installment of our "Sunday Conversation" gives you an relatively unfiltered look at a recent e-mail exchange between the BRN staff, this time about Zac Lee's potential. We intend for this kind of back and forth discussion to become a regular feature on the site.
Sure, it's not "Face the Nation", or even "The Sports Reporters" (good thing, too, since Mike Lupica can be an unbearable gas bag). But, maybe the "Sunday Conversation" can be a dose of Husker to go with your brunch.
Darren Carlson – Will Zac Lee be more like Joe Daily or Zac Taylor? Defend your answer.
Steve Hanway – Taylor. Lee was recruited to play in a passing offense and can throw with accuracy (as evidenced by his baseball prowess). Dailey wasn’t recruited to be a passer nor was a baseball prospect.
A carpet is neither a car nor a pet. Discuss.
Darren Carlson – But we are hearing all of this stuff about his speed, and it looks like they want to run the QB more. SOOOO - is Lee a thrower who is being made in to a runner the way that Dailey was a runner forced to throw??
A house without a toilet is uncanny. Discuss.
Renny Vandewege – Taylor with speed.
Why do we drive on a parkway and park on a driveway? Discuss.
Darren Carlson – "Taylor with speed." !?
I just pissed my pants and blacked out for a second at the thought of that. It's like saying "Tommie Frazier with throwing touch" or "Monte Cristo with talent." Just the notion of it makes my head spin.
If you can't tell, I heart Taylor. If that guy could run (at all) he would be... Turner Gill? Are you saying Zach Lee is the next Turner Gill? I think you are.
Can you tell I've had a lot of coffee? Discuss.
Renny Vandewege – I guess, in theory. Don't know that he'll be that good but I think he has potential. A lot of people are worried that he won't progress as much because he doesn't have nearly the competition. I think the pressure of being the guy should be enough to give him the desire to work as hard as he needs to work.
A flute with no holes is not a flute. A donut with no whole is … a Danish. Discuss.
Brandon Vogel – Zac Lee (#3) is Zac Taylor (#13), minus the one. It's the same person. Shaving those few ounces of tackle twill off his jersey combined with clandestine midnight training sessions with Dobson in the years since Taylor "exhausted his eligibility"--I have the flight records to prove this, the two would meet in Enid, OK thrice weekly-- account for the noticeably quicker Zac attack that everyone's talking about.
Just because your eligibility is exhausted doesn't mean that you can't dig deep and find the will to play another year or two. Discuss.
Tom Cudd – I have a man crush on Zac Lee. I had a man crush on Zac Taylor. Hence they are similar.
Sorry, I could try to be pithy, but it would just come off as trying too hard right now.
Steve Hanway – I think I wrote once that Lee was out of the mold of Gill. I maybe even mentioned Elway. I love QB’s that played baseball.
Darren Carlson – Indeed you did, sir. You are a sage, Hanway. Now, if only he had a Rozier and Fryer clone (and Steinkuhler et al up front...) to go along with him.
Did you enjoy this article?
Get Husker news by email
Follow us on Twitter
Related Stories: Predictions
Post a comment
Andrew Graham Apr 26 09
I enjoy the website and check it daily. The stories are usually pretty good with a few misses in between. This 'sunday conversation' is a miss. Not enough meat and a little to much fat.
Greg Morrow Apr 26 09
Lee's in a mucho better situation, than Taylor and especially Daily were. He's had two complete seasons and while injured his first spring, he had 3 springs to get an understanding of the offense.
He's got an offensive roster totally on the same page, as much as a college program can reasonably have. Everybody around him knows what to do. '04 and '05's teams were trying to find guys who could fit and grasp the system. D-linemen were made O-linemen. A 5th year senior safety was moved to receiver. Taylor paid a physical price, a Nebraska QB should never again have to pay.
He's had the same QB Coach and Coordinator, his whole time in town. Watson's slightly more practical with college limitations, than Callahan and Norvell were. They were fully, fully immersed in their WCO philosophy.
Gill, Frazier, Daily, Taylor?
I'm thinking our hero- Gerry Gdowski!
177.3 passer rating. 925 yards of hustle. The 1300 yards vertically, were pretty good, in that system. He had the all around game that would be a good model, moving forward.
Nebraska athlete of the year... Too bad he didn't have more years to start, being behind Steve Taylor.
"We intend for this kind of back and forth discussion to become a regular feature on the site."
Great! It's got rapport, synergy.
Like when Meat first met Cheese. Discuss.
darren Apr 26 09
Andrew - first, thanks for checking the site so often. We certainly appreciate it. It's the reason we put material up so often.
Thanks for the candid feedback on this post. We'll (I'll) do better with future editions. I just know that a lot of back and forth banter happens that doesn't get on the site, and wanted to capture that.
Also I hope that these Sunday Conversations are a good way to get a lot of different perspectives on the day after games during the actual season.
Hopefully, you and our other loyal readers can jump in to the mix like you are discussing the game with your friends over pancakes. Mmmm pancakes...
cvldfg Apr 27 09
I enjoy the "Sunday Conversation". It's nice to have "off the cuff" chats. Sometimes you get a more free flowing debate. Besides, it's coming to that time of the year when relevant topics will be hard to come by.
What is black, white and red all over? Hint: the punchline is the same as it used to be. Discuss.
bnahusker Apr 27 09
Sometimes a little "Light & Fluffy" is needed. I read this AFTER reading the post on the poor draft showing. I needed this today!
Keep up the good, and the light, work!
GBRN!
Bob
Mike in KS Apr 27 09
Andrew, lighten up. I also check the site on a daily basis looking for my Husker fix. One of the things I enjoy about BRN is that you guys get to the point and don't drone on just to see how many words you can put together. Darren, I enjoyed the post. Sometimes there just isn't much to write about and I thought it was a nice change of pace.
DT Apr 27 09
I'm leaning toward Andrew on this one...a group-wide verbal fellating of Zac Lee before he's taken his first meaningful snap?! Whoa, now! Slow down, I don't think I can keep track of all these "perspectives"! I thought Greg Morrow was on the scent, but then he fell victim to the same...I mean, I thought Joe Ganz was the next Gerry Gdowski, so wouldn't that make Lee the next Joe Ganz?
At any rate, my point is that a unanimous hunch that Lee might possibly be the second coming of Zac Taylor and/or Turner Gill and/or John Elway (and/or possibly maybe even Jesus of Nazareth) doesn't really quite qualify as a "back & forth"! I'm relieved to know that one thing's for certain...and that's that Lee ain't gonna reek of the ugly stench of Joe Dailey!
So it has been written, so it shall be done!
(And right now it reads)...
How's Zac Lee gonna be?
a-good
b-really good
c-really-really good
d-great
Discuss...
The folks I've discussed the topic with seem torn as to whether or not Lee was even the best QB on the field during the SPRING GAME!! But two weeks later, he's the next John Elway...good for him, and good for the Huskers!
But I'll leave it at that and see how this goes and I'll try to reserve any further judgment for future installments.
Oh, and Monte Christo was a friend of mine.
Who's got three MNC rings to go with their lack of "talent"?
Monte Christo, that's who!
darren Apr 27 09
Hey there DT, didn't mean to offend.
If you can't tell, we were just going back and forth about Lee, playing around. Everybody here gets that the kid hasn't played a meaningful down yet. Just playing. Steve was only pointing out that QBs who have played baseball often do pretty well.
Re: Monte...yeah, again, I was joking. Yeesh. Dude was good enough to play at NU. I get that. Growing up in Hastings, we played in some of the same basketball tournaments in that central NE area as kids. Other than my ability to foul him, I didn't match up...even a little. Please note that I took a slight shot at Frazier (a holy name at NU) too.
Next time I try to lighten things up on the weekend...I may have to rethink my choice.
DT Apr 27 09
Darren, absolutely no offense was taken...I just didn't "get it", I guess.
Like I said, I'll let you guys hone your craft a bit on this one before I make any further judgments...it's just that this one happened to miss the mark with me--a rarity on BRN, for sure.
The next time I try to comment, I may just have to rethink that and return to my regular routine of just saying nothing...
(You see, incorporating the use of the comic element of "sarcasm" is oftentimes my version of "light"...so you can surely see how either can be easily misinterpreted. But I certainly didn't mean to come off as being hyper-defensive or overly-critical about anything.)
Monte Christo's got nothing on Joe Scherr...
Greg Morrow Apr 27 09
DT
A blog like this, where you're encouraged to have an on topic point, might be a little much for you.
You demonstrated the rare verbal flameout.
Lotta gas, no spark.
DT Apr 28 09
Oh Greg...Nice try. This is hardly my first foray into "a blog like this". Your condescension aside...the on-topic point that you must've missed (here's a clue: it directly followed the words "my point is..." in my first post) was that this didn't really come off as being too characteristic of the "colorful, unfiltered, back and forth" dialogue that it was presented as in the first place. Had any of the BRN guys put forth a dissenting take...it might've panned out more like what I'd expected upon reading the intro. (And again, I want to clearly state this as being an anomaly in the case of my reading this site...as I've been an avid reader since its inception and have commented repeatedly on my enjoyment of all manner of postings). The "point" was to offer my feedback on this new format...no more, no less. I didn't mean to ruin Darren's first effort into something new...just wanted to express my opinion that it wasn't working for this reader just yet. Maybe it felt "forced". Maybe I just didn't find it as funny or whatever else it was intended to be, in which case it pretty much boils down to a simple matter of taste. (However, Ty Webb references are always funny). Maybe I would've received a response more like Andrew Graham received if I hadn't been so "dickish" in my own initial comments. All in all, I don't really care in the slightest if any of this prohibits me from admission into the Greg Morrow club for cool dude blog commenters.
Perhaps if I'd have included some easily-referenced, 20-year-old Gerry Gdowski stats in my comments, I'd be eligible to join your "True Fans who have a right to be here and post their thoughts among the blog comments" organization?
But as long as you're taking it upon yourself to belittle posters on their apparent lack of topical points, what exactly was the point of this?
"The 1300 yards vertically, were pretty good, in that system."
Yeah...almost as good as Keithen McCant! That's a good one--way to go, Sparky!
What your suggesting here is that a vague mix of baseless comparisons with a couple of additional qualifiers completes what you'd present as an "on topic point"?! I mean, honestly...is there ANY measurable way that Lee's game compares to that of Gdowski, other than by way of your trusty "gut instinct"?! Where exactly is the foundation for your almighty "point"? Was it "well, Gdowski could actually hit the broad side of a barn, so Lee's bound to be much more like him than Jammal Lord!"
Since, by your logic, that's all that otherwise separates Lord and Gdowski, in that:
-They both had 3+ springs to prepare to run the offense
-They both had an offensive roster "totally on the same page"
-Everyone around both of them knew what to do
-They both had the same Coach & coordinator to that point
So by the very standards that you've prescribed...Zac Lee would seem to have about an equal chance of seeing the success that Gerry Gdowski witnessed in his first season as a starter as Jammal Lord did in his. Although it feels much better for us all to hope that Lee experiences Gdowski-ish first-year success than a Lord-like cataclysmic failure...so was that supposed to be your point, to make us all feel better?
Whatever your point was, way to go out of your way to ascribe yourself as the grand poobah of who "belongs" in the commenter crowd of "a blog like this"! Yeah, I don't know how I could ever possibly hope to keep up with your ability to cite old passer ratings off of huskers.com!
Might be a little much for me...
Greg Morrow Apr 28 09
DT
Flameout II