Apparently in Riley's doghouse. Cramped quarters with Ozigbo in there as well.WhereTF is Wilbon?
Apparently in Riley's doghouse. Cramped quarters with Ozigbo in there as well.WhereTF is Wilbon?
Those three NFL RBs were two three-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.Another note on the running game:
This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.
People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.
We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.
Hey, if you can't "pass protect" in this offense, you're a liability at RB.Apparently in Riley's doghouse. Cramped quarters with Ozigbo in there as well.WhereTF is Wilbon?
Because we know that as long as they are ranked higher in HS, they immediately are better in college? C'mon.Those three NFL RBs were two two-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.Another note on the running game:
This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.
People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.
We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.
You're right, I prefer the StPaulHusker unbiased eye-test over professional recruiting services in evaluating "talent."Because we know that as long as they are ranked higher in HS, they immediately are better in college? C'mon.Those three NFL RBs were two two-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.Another note on the running game:
This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.
People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.
We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.
That may be.The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.Another note on the running game:
This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.
People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.
We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.
This is your logic:You're right, I prefer the StPaulHusker unbiased eye-test over professional recruiting services in evaluating "talent."Because we know that as long as they are ranked higher in HS, they immediately are better in college? C'mon.Those three NFL RBs were two two-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.Another note on the running game:
This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.
People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.
We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.
That's not really his logic.This is your logic:You're right, I prefer the StPaulHusker unbiased eye-test over professional recruiting services in evaluating "talent."Because we know that as long as they are ranked higher in HS, they immediately are better in college? C'mon.Those three NFL RBs were two two-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.Another note on the running game:
This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.
People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.
We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.
Three star Ameer Abdullah was coached to be an elite back by the previous staff. Four star Newby (despite two years of coaching by that same staff) has been coached for half a season by the current staff and isn't as good as Abdullah. Conclusion: these coaches suck.
Newby is not, was not, and won't be better than Abdullah. It doesn't matter who is calling any play.That's not really his logic.This is your logic:You're right, I prefer the StPaulHusker unbiased eye-test over professional recruiting services in evaluating "talent."Because we know that as long as they are ranked higher in HS, they immediately are better in college? C'mon.Those three NFL RBs were two two-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.Another note on the running game:
This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.
People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.
We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.
Three star Ameer Abdullah was coached to be an elite back by the previous staff. Four star Newby (despite two years of coaching by that same staff) has been coached for half a season by the current staff and isn't as good as Abdullah. Conclusion: these coaches suck.
1. Go back and look at Ameer's stats as a rFR and SO. He was showing flashes of his athleticism, but he was far from an elite back. He didn't step out on the field a finished product. He was developed over a number of seasons.
2. Play calling matters. Creativity in the run game produces mismatches, overmatches (i.e., more blockers than defenders at POA) and space for RBs to pick up chunk plays. I sincerely believe that if we were still running last year's system, NU would look a ton better at RB and OL right now. This version of the WCO is just a mess. I honestly watch the games and have no idea what Riley and Langs are trying to accomplish play in and play out in terms of manipulating a defense.
I didn't deem anyone untalented. I said that there was a drop off in talent from the last 3 RB's to the ones we have now. Anyone can see that.If those are the conclusions you want to jump to, fine.
Coaching encompasses more than development, it also includes playcalling and much more.
If you want to just look at our roster of capable running backs, ignore their recruiting rankings, overlook the questionable misuse of practically all of them, forget no commitment to the run, and just deem them all untalented, that's your prerogative.
How about the RB who had seven carries for 70 yards against Illinois, when Mr. Pass Pro had five carries for 15 yards in the same game? Just a thought. I mean, I know using a player that can actually run at the running back position seems really stupid, but why not give it a try?And who do you recommend putting in there. Hard to run anywhere when there isn't any holesIt would help the running game a lot if the coaches decided to put actual running backs out there. Sorry, but neither Newby or Cross are good running backs and I'm not sure why the coaches can't see this yet eight games into the season.
I think at this point, this is where I land as well. So what if on first down you've got Ozigbo, and the other team knows you're going to hand it off to him?How about the RB who had seven carries for 70 yards against Illinois, when Mr. Pass Pro had five carries for 15 yards in the same game? Just a thought. I mean, I know using a player that can actually run at the running back position seems really stupid, but why not give it a try?
Newby is not, was not, and won't be better than Abdullah. It doesn't matter who is calling any play.That's not really his logic.This is your logic:You're right, I prefer the StPaulHusker unbiased eye-test over professional recruiting services in evaluating "talent."Because we know that as long as they are ranked higher in HS, they immediately are better in college? C'mon.Those three NFL RBs were two two-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.Another note on the running game:
This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.
People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.
We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.
Three star Ameer Abdullah was coached to be an elite back by the previous staff. Four star Newby (despite two years of coaching by that same staff) has been coached for half a season by the current staff and isn't as good as Abdullah. Conclusion: these coaches suck.
1. Go back and look at Ameer's stats as a rFR and SO. He was showing flashes of his athleticism, but he was far from an elite back. He didn't step out on the field a finished product. He was developed over a number of seasons.
2. Play calling matters. Creativity in the run game produces mismatches, overmatches (i.e., more blockers than defenders at POA) and space for RBs to pick up chunk plays. I sincerely believe that if we were still running last year's system, NU would look a ton better at RB and OL right now. This version of the WCO is just a mess. I honestly watch the games and have no idea what Riley and Langs are trying to accomplish play in and play out in terms of manipulating a defense.
Bad read by the QB.![]()
Anyone have a take on this one?
It doesn't look like we ran straight into a stacked box again like I hear so many claims to today.
So was #57 supposed to block on this play?