Predict the season outcome based on what we've seen thus far

[Redux]

All true. But know your personnel. Taylor is interception prone when its a forced play. Make it three straight passes and its at best a 3 and out, worst a pick 6. Our WRs are going to florish when they arent being hawked by double coverage because the defense knows its a pass. Our WR corp could be the best in the nation if used sparingly. We are a running team. Our RB Stable is as deep as its ever been. Use it to the point they cant even line up against the guy running through or over them. Running chews time off the clock when your down as precious as that time is. However, Putting a hot offense back on the field against your own tired defense is a faster way to get behind. For proof that running the ball can result in quicker than passing drives consult the Jackrabbits first Touchdown on us.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I love a good ground game. Every coach loves a good ground game. I want to know that given three downs the Huskers will always get at least 10 yards. But it's not as simple as some folks here want to think. Beck doesn't abandon the running game too quickly. We tend to forget those three and outs where we ran the same rushing plays that had worked in the first half, only to find the defense had adjusted. When the coach of a trailing team runs the ball three times in a row before punting, the fans howl even louder. We have more fumbles than we do interceptions, so that excuse really doesn't play. And when you're down a couple scores in the fourth quarter, an incomplete pass is preferable to a four yard run that lets the clock burn. Passing sets up the run as much as running sets up the pass. Beck's balance is pretty reasonable, but nothing looks good when desperation sets in, and that's a teamwide issue, not a playcalling issue.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Huskers so far this season:

202 rushing attempts, averaging 5.6 yards per attempt

111 passing attempts, averaging 7.8 yards per attempt.

Five lost fumbles

One interception

 

[Redux]

This occurs in the 3rd quarter as well. I dont know, to me a pick six when down 14 is more costly than a short run that burns 30 seconds. If they dont have to respect the run they can focus all attention on the pass.

 

[True2tRA]

I love a good ground game. Every coach loves a good ground game. I want to know that given three downs the Huskers will always get at least 10 yards. But it's not as simple as some folks here want to think. Beck doesn't abandon the running game too quickly. We tend to forget those three and outs where we ran the same rushing plays that had worked in the first half, only to find the defense had adjusted. When the coach of a trailing team runs the ball three times in a row before punting, the fans howl even louder. We have more fumbles than we do interceptions, so that excuse really doesn't play. And when you're down a couple scores in the fourth quarter, an incomplete pass is preferable to a four yard run that lets the clock burn. Passing sets up the run as much as running sets up the pass. Beck's balance is pretty reasonable, but nothing looks good when desperation sets in, and that's a teamwide issue, not a playcalling issue.

Huskers so far this season:
202 rushing attempts, averaging 5.6 yards per attempt

111 passing attempts, averaging 7.8 yards per attempt.

Five lost fumbles

One interception

Decent numbers there, and a bit more balanced than a lot of people would think.

I think we are good not great in the run game, and I feel the same way about the passing game. Good not great. Although, I think the passing game upgrades with Armstrong and RK3 at QB.

That aside, I guess my only other goal for this offense is just to take that next step. Become great at something. Establish a part of your offense that you feel like you could impose your will on someone at anytime when needed. I just want that staple, that thing that we fall back in that when other things are failing, we feel like we can always fall back and execute "this" to perfection.

I know this is easier said than done but I felt like we had it at one point. Back when Taylor burst onto the scene our zone read was just unstoppable. Now understandably, that aspect kind of faded when Taylor suffered a few injuries over the last few years. Still, I felt like we never expanded on that zone read enough. It seems we almost put it on the back burner trying to turn Taylor into a passer. We could have taken a lot of pressure off Taylor by using those zone reads with two backs in the back field. Maybe even more use of that "diamond" formation that everyone loved so much. These were neat aspects that our offense clearly could have built upon and learned to execute to perfection. Instead we ran that very periodically til they've almost faded from memory.

The one question that I don't know that can be answered is "what is the direction of this offense"? Is it passing oriented? Is it option? Is it zone read? Is it power running? Or are we really going to try to be all of the above. I hate this multiplicity concept. I think it holds us back from once again being "great" at something. I hope we figure it out soon because I think we have a special one up and coming through the QB ranks.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I dont know, to me a pick six when down 14 is more costly than a short run that burns 30 seconds. If they dont have to respect the run they can focus all attention on the pass.

That's a weird choice. How about Martinez throwing a touchdown instead of Abdullah fumbling the ball? Those things happen, too.

Beck's not an idiot. He knows he has to run to set up the pass. I think he does it more in the second half than you choose to remember. If you latch onto a series of three incomplete passes, or a Taylor pick, it may make you hate the entire passing game, but look closer and you'll find several unsuccessful rushing plays and a fumble, too. When the wheels come off the defense ala UCLA, you don't have the luxury of sticking with your gameplan.

And that was a pretty sweet mix of running and passing in the first half against UCLA, including three TD passes. Beck actually got crap for going conservative in the third quarter, instead of sticking with what got us the lead. You can't win. (you really can't when the D gives up 28 points in 16 minutes)

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I hate this multiplicity concept. I think it holds us back from once again being "great" at something. I hope we figure it out soon because I think we have a special one up and coming through the QB ranks.

If multiplicity is rushing for 5.6 yards per attempt, and passing for 7.8 yards per attempt, I'll take it anyday.

I'd argue that "great" teams are comfortable running and passing the ball, boast a strong offensive line no matter what the scheme, and can shift gears when opposing teams think they have you scouted.

Geez, who wouldn't an offense loaded with multiplicity?

Yeah, I know. Husker fans who wish it was 1995 again.

 

[True2tRA]

Oh I'd love an offense that executes everything to perfection. But since you didn't read what I said, and I constantly have people here at Huskerboard being a smartass to me and putting words in my mouth, let me make it simple for you.

We don't have an offense that executes multiple things to perfection. We bumble up the run game just as much as we bumble up the passing game and if you don't see that then I don't know who the f#*k you are watching friendo. So stick by your numbers all you want but it sure looks to me like we are still fighting pretty hard out there to create things in offense.

I said it holds an offense back. Period. Get good at something and build on it. A lot of you here have this strange teaching concept and it's the same concept Bo and Co apparently have. You take a kindergartener and you throw a three hundr page book at them and tell them you want a book report by Friday. Well what the f#*k ever happened to teaching the kids how to read first?

Oh but multiplicity on offense and defense just sounds soooo good, who cares if they can't execute it worth a sh#t. Good lord.

 

[True2tRA]

f'ing guy quotes two sentences from your entire paragraph, ignores the rest of everything you said and then claims you wish it was 1995 again. Is this what they call trolling? I honestly didn't think this guy was a troll.

The only ranked team we've played on our schedule held this offensive juggernaut at Nebraksa scoreless for an entire second half of football. Hate to tell ya bud, but there are three or four teams on the schedule that could also be ranked by the time we get to them......I hope your impressive numbers hold up.

 

[Redux]

I dont know, to me a pick six when down 14 is more costly than a short run that burns 30 seconds. If they dont have to respect the run they can focus all attention on the pass.

That's a weird choice. How about Martinez throwing a touchdown instead of Abdullah fumbling the ball? Those things happen, too.

Beck's not an idiot. He knows he has to run to set up the pass. I think he does it more in the second half than you choose to remember. If you latch onto a series of three incomplete passes, or a Taylor pick, it may make you hate the entire passing game, but look closer and you'll find several unsuccessful rushing plays and a fumble, too. When the wheels come off the defense ala UCLA, you don't have the luxury of sticking with your gameplan.

And that was a pretty sweet mix of running and passing in the first half against UCLA, including three TD passes. Beck actually got crap for going conservative in the third quarter, instead of sticking with what got us the lead. You can't win. (you really can't when the D gives up 28 points in 16 minutes)

28 in 16 min. Exactly my worry. The drives he called against UCLA went nowhere in the 2nd half. They couldnt control the pace or the clock. The plays seemed to be rushed and unorganized, like they were winging it. Maybe Im being too hard on Beck but it worries me. I do like him as an OC though, just has some things to work on.

 

[Mavric]

Against UCLA, there were four dropped passes and I know three of them would have been first downs (can't remember the fourth one for sure). Two were on the first possession and one was in the third quarter that Wullenwaber missed a sliding catch. None were great passes but they were all easily catchable and would have moved the chains. It doesn't make a lot of sense to put all the blame on the coaches when little more than routine plays - i.e., catching balls that hit you in the hands - would have kept drives alive. It's not as black-and-white as some would like to believe.

 

[Huskerfan1985]

f'ing guy quotes two sentences from your entire paragraph, ignores the rest of everything you said and then claims you wish it was 1995 again. Is this what they call trolling? I honestly didn't think this guy was a troll.

The only ranked team we've played on our schedule held this offensive juggernaut at Nebraksa scoreless for an entire second half of football. Hate to tell ya bud, but there are three or four teams on the schedule that could also be ranked by the time we get to them......I hope your impressive numbers hold up.

Nah, i don't think Guy is trolling but there are plenty of posters that still wish it was 1995. I think Guy's point is that if you focus on being "great" at one thing there is a good chance you're going drop in production elswhere and may not even be as successful as the "one" thing you're supposed to be good at. Being multiple gives you the ability to spread things around, keep everyone involved and makes the defense prepare for more.

Yeah UCLA held NU scoreless for the second half but there were good passes in there that got dropped on third downs too as well as Abdullah's fumble. I think more people need to realize what a TOTAL team game college football has become. Offense and Defense go hand in hand and play off of each other.

 

[True2tRA]

f'ing guy quotes two sentences from your entire paragraph, ignores the rest of everything you said and then claims you wish it was 1995 again. Is this what they call trolling? I honestly didn't think this guy was a troll.

The only ranked team we've played on our schedule held this offensive juggernaut at Nebraksa scoreless for an entire second half of football. Hate to tell ya bud, but there are three or four teams on the schedule that could also be ranked by the time we get to them......I hope your impressive numbers hold up.

Nah, i don't think Guy is trolling but there are plenty of posters that still wish it was 1995. I think Guy's point is that if you focus on being "great" at one thing there is a good chance you're going drop in production elswhere and may not even be as successful as the "one" thing you're supposed to be good at. Being multiple gives you the ability to spread things around, keep everyone involved and makes the defense prepare for more.

Yeah UCLA held NU scoreless for the second half but there were good passes in there that got dropped on third downs too as well as Abdullah's fumble. I think more people need to realize what a TOTAL team game college football has become. Offense and Defense go hand in hand and play off of each other.

Key is, I said great at "something" not" one" thing. I didn't mean it as we should limit ourselves to one thing. That doesn't make any sense and I don't se how it even came across that way. I said establish a go to. Something you feel like you can rely on when other things are not working so well. You can't always be a one dimensional offense and be successful. You can't try to execute your entire playbook each game and be successful either IMO. I think Nebraska has hurt itself by tryin to do too much on both sides of the ball......

But what the f#*k do I know.

 

[Redux]

Against UCLA, there were four dropped passes and I know three of them would have been first downs (can't remember the fourth one for sure). Two were on the first possession and one was in the third quarter that Wullenwaber missed a sliding catch. None were great passes but they were all easily catchable and would have moved the chains. It doesn't make a lot of sense to put all the blame on the coaches when little more than routine plays - i.e., catching balls that hit you in the hands - would have kept drives alive. It's not as black-and-white as some would like to believe.

No doubt our struggles come from a gray area between coaching technique and play calls. I dont want anyone to get .e wrong. I think Beck has do e a great job overall. Its just that we have one of the most talented rosters in the country but at times it cant move 6 yards in three tries.

 

[Mavric]

Against UCLA, there were four dropped passes and I know three of them would have been first downs (can't remember the fourth one for sure). Two were on the first possession and one was in the third quarter that Wullenwaber missed a sliding catch. None were great passes but they were all easily catchable and would have moved the chains. It doesn't make a lot of sense to put all the blame on the coaches when little more than routine plays - i.e., catching balls that hit you in the hands - would have kept drives alive. It's not as black-and-white as some would like to believe.

No doubt our struggles come from a gray area between coaching technique and play calls. I dont want anyone to get .e wrong. I think Beck has do e a great job overall. Its just that we have one of the most talented rosters in the country but at times it cant move 6 yards in three tries.

Agreed. But I also think that goes back to what Beck said after the UCLA game: They thought they had so much experience and talent of offense that they could do a million things. After that game, they figured out they better cut back and try to be really good at a few things rather than average at a lot. I think that's part of why our offense looked so much smoother against SDSU, in addition to a weak opponent and good execution from the players.