What did we learn-Wyoming edition

As for what I learned this game:

When you run a defense that puts our guys in a position to succeed, we can make a lot of plays.

I really like what I see out of Nick Gates - guy is a beast

We have the potential to play really well ... hopefully we can figure out how to get that going earlier.

 
BRV920 said:
What play are you calling on first down at the 4 yard line Guy? I was pretty happy with the game overall but that playcall is why I have little faith in Langsdorf.
Click to expand...
That's a play call that successful coaches make every Saturday and Sunday of the football season.

Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't.

Just like the call you or I would have made.

 
Depends what we are trying to accomplish. Maybe the goal was to gain any positive yards forward - in that case, it was a average to poor call. Maybe the goal was to score on the first play - in this case, a slightly better call. Maybe the goal was to confuse the defense for the next play - in this case, ok. Maybe the goal was to set up future games - so the defense has to be prepared for both ( similar to the 2 point conversion by Zach Darlington - do you think they ran that play because it was going to effect that game or a later game? Maybe the goal was to challenge their 4 year starting QB to see what he has - in this case, they found out what they may get going forward.

I know this is a message board and we all have opinions, however I'm shocked at how some try to make our staff look like they are not capable of coaching grade school flag football when it comes to play calling.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm with GBR here. Good call, bad execution. Could have ran it but they rolled Tommy out and gave him the run pass option there and it's unpredictable against a defense that was expecting the run nearly every play. It's tough to get 4 yards on the ground in goal line situations sometimes. Sometimes it opens up and is easy.

With the pass the same is true basically. The d may leave the pass wide open that close or leave a lane for Tommy and make for an easy play. The short field also may result in a more crowded area if the defense is expecting it because the field of play is now about a 15 yard square.

When it's clustered like it was you'd hope the QB would chuck it out of bounds but as we know we cannot really rely on our quarterback to do that. But I don't think that should be a reason to not to call the play. You should expect your players to make the plays.

 
GBRFAN said:
Depends what we are trying to accomplish. Maybe the goal was to gain any positive yards forward - in that case, it was a average to poor call. Maybe the goal was to score on the first play - in this case, a slightly better call. Maybe the goal was to confuse the defense for the next play - in this case, ok. Maybe the goal was to set up future games - so the defense has to be prepared for both ( similar to the 2 point conversion by Zach Darlington - do you think they ran that play because it was going to effect that game or a later game? Maybe the goal was to challenge their 4 year starting QB to see what he has - in this case, they found out what they may get going forward.

I know this is a message board and we all have opinions, however I'm shocked at how some try to make our staff look like they are not capable of coaching grade school flag football when it comes to play calling.
Click to expand...
You're over-thinking it.

Most defenses line up to stop the run on a first and goal because a rushing play is the statistical probability.

Making a quick roll-out with multiple receivers and the option for the quarterback to tuck and run a perfectly reasonable call.

Even if unsuccessful, it might loosen things up for the running play on second down.

The call wasn't cute. It wasn't gimmicky. It was just football.

And our quarterback made a terrible decision.

The same quarterback went on to make several successful completions with a higher degree of difficulty.

If a coach is supposed to scale the game back so far that Tommy Armstrong can't possibly make a stupid play, then Tommy simply shouldn't be playing.

But it would be pretty weird to bench the most prolific offensive player in Nebraska football history.

 
Guy Chamberlin said:
GBRFAN said:
Depends what we are trying to accomplish. Maybe the goal was to gain any positive yards forward - in that case, it was a average to poor call. Maybe the goal was to score on the first play - in this case, a slightly better call. Maybe the goal was to confuse the defense for the next play - in this case, ok. Maybe the goal was to set up future games - so the defense has to be prepared for both ( similar to the 2 point conversion by Zach Darlington - do you think they ran that play because it was going to effect that game or a later game? Maybe the goal was to challenge their 4 year starting QB to see what he has - in this case, they found out what they may get going forward.

I know this is a message board and we all have opinions, however I'm shocked at how some try to make our staff look like they are not capable of coaching grade school flag football when it comes to play calling.
Click to expand...
You're over-thinking it.

Most defenses line up to stop the run on a first and goal because a rushing play is the statistical probability.

Making a quick roll-out with multiple receivers and the option for the quarterback to tuck and run a perfectly reasonable call.

Even if unsuccessful, it might loosen things up for the running play on second down.

The call wasn't cute. It wasn't gimmicky. It was just football.

And our quarterback made a terrible decision.

The same quarterback went on to make several successful completions with a higher degree of difficulty.

If a coach is supposed to scale the game back so far that Tommy Armstrong can't possibly make a stupid play, then Tommy simply shouldn't be playing.

But it would be pretty weird to bench the most prolific offensive player in Nebraska football history.
Click to expand...
That's kind of what Riley said in the post game. He wasn't talking about Tommy, but it's the same idea....if you're gonna make some bone-headed penalty or play every time you're in the clutch then you'll probably be watching.

​I'd still run.

 
Are you running for office Guy? Lol! You still have answered my question. If you are calling the plays what do you call there?

 
I understand it's a perfectly fine play btw but what are we trying to be? We have no identity. If we can't line up there and get 5 yards on Wyoming in 4 plays then we have no business saying we want to be a running team.

 
BRV920 said:
That's why I said most likely Elf or did you miss that. You guys can make all the excuses you want for the call but it still doesn't make it a good one.
Click to expand...
Where did I make an excuse for the call?

All you have is an old, tired, opinion that running the ball is all that matters at Nebraska.

 
BRV920 said:
I understand it's a perfectly fine play btw but what are we trying to be? We have no identity. If we can't line up there and get 5 yards on Wyoming in 4 plays then we have no business saying we want to be a running team.
Click to expand...
who said we want to be a running team? I'm pretty sure the coaches want to be a balanced team, which means throwing it in a first and goal situation time and again
 
Ans what are you bringing to the conversation Elf? I've been pretty consistent in my belief that running the ball is the best way to win games. My theory is backed up by 40 years of success here.

 
Running the ball how much though? You just say running the ball is the way to win games but surely you believe in passing some. So the magic run pass ratio for you BRV?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top