Uncle Milt on Rotate-gate

[Red Five]

From Brian Christopherson/LJS:

 

http://journalstar.com/sports/huskers/life-in-the-red/tenopir-says-cavanaugh-s-o-line-rotating-is-just-how/article_ec725a06-1e26-11e6-bbab-fb792ec9d57b.html

 

You know who thinks Mike Cavanaugh's way of handling his offensive line rotation is just fine? The popular old O-line coach whose name is used by some when trying to make the case that more rotating is necessary.

 

If you take some opinions as fact, you'd come away with the idea that Nebraska's legendary former O-line coach Milt Tenopir used to rotate three to five guys off the bench into the middle of competitive games in routine fashion.

 

It was a popular idea to discuss last fall. It comes up periodically while waiting for the fall ahead.

Well, that idea isn't actually correct according to the best source -- Tenopir. He was more than happy to talk about the subject Thursday as he was making his way up to South Dakota to fish for walleye.

 

"We did it the same way (as Cavanaugh)," Tenopir said. "We just got ahead in so many games where we had the luxury of playing other kids."

 

But go watch the 1995 Orange Bowl against Miami, he tells you. "We didn't sub in that baby. We played those five guys the whole length of that ballgame." If it's a tight game, when it comes to your top group, "you better leave their butts in there."

 

With so many close games a year ago, the luxury Tenopir mentions was not something afforded Cavanaugh. If you think of Nebraska's 2015 season, South Alabama was really the lone game where the lead heading into the fourth quarter was comfortable for the Huskers. (If you bring up the Minnesota game, that was an uneasy 13-point Nebraska lead until the Huskers tacked on 10 points within the game's last 3:06.)

 

"I remember in '97, we went through almost that entire year with six players, and luckily didn't get anyone hurt or banged up," said Tenopir, sharp as can be in naming off his former players. "Matt Hoskinson was our swing guy. And then later in the year, Adam Julch came along, I rolled him in there a little bit."

 

But he relied mostly on his top five: Fred Pollack and Eric Anderson at the tackles, Jon Zatechza and Aaron Taylor at the guards, and Josh Heskew at center. Those starters, to Tenopir's recollection, played at least 90 percent of most every game.

 

"We've always tried to play the best five," Tenopir said. "You don't put kids in just to worry about next year."

 

 

More at the link above

[In the Deed the Glory]

Well, that should pretty much shut the ignorants up on this one.

[Count 'Bility]

Playing your best players until the game is well in hand. What kind of nonsense is this?

 

 

It's ok, someday us as fans wont be nearly as caught with next year anymore that we'll be more willing to understand the things that are best for winning today again.

[Kiyoat Husker]

I'd be interested to see if MT's comments are an accurate recollection. Will someone that is unemployed or with lots of time on their hands look into this?.

 

[Count 'Bility]

theyre accurate

 

But like he said. Lots of times in those days we were well ahead early in the game. How many times do you remember carrying multiple touchdown (not 2 or 3, but like 4or 5) leads into halftime. It seems like there was a lot of rotation back in those days because there was. it's not inaccurate. But it's the huge difference in circumstancs surrounding the lack of rotation in 2015 and the abundance of rotation in the golden era.

 

And the Orange Bowl he speaks of? As much as I've watched it and still cant recall anyone other than Zatecha, Wilks, Graham, Stai, Wiegert in that game at any point. Unless you wanna claim the subbing of Shaw and Gilman at TE a rotation.

[zoogs]

Boom!

[cm husker]

Here's the problem with going off of a memory, even the memory of a legend like Uncle Milt.

 

I popped open the youtube tape of that orange bowl and picked a random spot (~37:30 minutes in). Believe NU was down 10 points in the second quarter at that point.

 

In less than a minute, I saw at least two non-starters in the game (#51 Humphrey and #75 Dishman).

 

The starters that year were: Zatechka, Stai, Graham, Wilks and Wiegert. Sidenote: Wiegert was just a beast.

 

Wouldn't surprise me if some other guys like Treau and Ott were rotated in during "meaningful" minutes, too.

 

Anyway, I express no real opinion on what Cavanaugh should do. Each coach should do what they think is best. I personally don't think that'd be my approach for a number of reasons, though.

[StPaulHusker]

I don't agree or disagree with Milt but I will say this.

 

He coached in an era that players mostly were accustomed to waiting their turn to start/play. That isn't the case so much these days.

[C N Red]

The real question IMO is are we starting our actual best 5? The main reason I wanted some rotation last year is b/c I thought there were guys not getting a chance to play that were better than what was on the field.

[Mavric]

The real question IMO is are we starting our actual best 5? The main reason I wanted some rotation last year is b/c I thought there were guys not getting a chance to play that were better than what was on the field.

 

This. Last year we were told that there was a noticeable gap between the starters and the second string. Yet when those backups got a chance to play later in the year, they played just as well or better.

 

I think the actual reason was much closer to "the starters can pass block better."

[ColoradoHusk]

So what Cav does today is ok because Milt did it 20 years ago? 20 years ago, the younger linemen needed 2-3 years in the weight room to get stronger and to learn the playbook. Today's recruits are much more ready to play early, as they are coming in to the program physically more prepared.

 

I just have an issue of having 15-18 scholarship linemen, and regularly playing only 5 of them. I don't think the gap between 1st and 2nd string is as big as Cav would make everyone think.

[ColoradoHusk]

 

 

The real question IMO is are we starting our actual best 5? The main reason I wanted some rotation last year is b/c I thought there were guys not getting a chance to play that were better than what was on the field.

This. Last year we were told that there was a noticeable gap between the starters and the second string. Yet when those backups got a chance to play later in the year, they played just as well or better.

 

I think the actual reason was much closer to "the starters can pass block better."

Gerald Foster was one player who many thought was a dominant run blocker during practice, but because he wasn't the best pass blocker he didn't start. I understand needing to do "all aspects of the job", but this is where Riley's/Langsdorf's/Cav's focus on the pass game gets in the way of a successful run game.

[cm husker]

So what Cav does today is ok because Milt did it 20 years ago? 20 years ago, the younger linemen needed 2-3 years in the weight room to get stronger and to learn the playbook. Today's recruits are much more ready to play early, as they are coming in to the program physically more prepared.

 

I just have an issue of having 15-18 scholarship linemen, and regularly playing only 5 of them. I don't think the gap between 1st and 2nd string is as big as Cav would make everyone think.

And the thing is, Milt is misremembering what they did 20 years ago.

 

You have to admire milt; he's consistently bolstered every coach, especially every OL coach, since he retired, including heaping praise on Wagner and Callahan and calling Cotton the number one guy he would have picked to replace him.

 

So it's not surprising he'd misremember in this case. And it's not bad either.

[In the Deed the Glory]

So now we are upset that the guys playing are the ones that fit the coach's system not the one we want them to run.

 

Makes perfect sense.

[caveman99]

So now we are upset that the guys playing are the ones that fit the coach's system not the one we want them to run.

 

Makes perfect sense.

Yeah I love how the narrative has conveniently changed