cg_8

This is outside the "3rd and 7" discussion... So don't think this is attached. I think our run scheme is better than we think. There are plenty that has surprised me on certain plays. The first week, we saw zero pulling lineman. The next week, I saw a pulling C. Then there was the FB trap. I really like that QB sweep play if we had a leading RB blocker who didn't lead Tommy outside like he runs the ball. I think it's better than we think. I think the real problem is the players showing more consistency well enough to adhere it to a game plan. Call me wrong on that, but there's still some good things. We just haven't seen it. And that right there is the problem. We need to see more of it. Either way, something could be said about how much we've aired it out. I watched the FAU-Miami game and while watching FAU run at will against Miami's 3-4 front, the whole time I'm thinking "we should have a hey day if we run it down their throat..." We didn't do that. We ended up dropping 3rd down passes. I think we could've controlled Miami with a running attack game plan. Similar to 2014. But that wasn't the game plan, and IMHO, it should have been. I mean FAU... C'mon...

So they're still going with the story that it wasn't a called pass play? I mean, it HAD to be called a pass play, even if that's not what Langsdorf called. It has all the ingredients of a pass play, regardless of how much you tell your QB "don't throw the ball" Pass Blocking - So no illegal man downfield. Tommy knows that on this play. 3 guys running routes - Devine runs the flat as if it's a pass. I get he's a freshman, but I have a feeling that if he had known it was a run play, he would've at least bumped the guy coming after Tommy. Devine also was very prepared for the ball, looked back quite quickly. Tommy said that he thought it was important to stay in FG range. That makes sense for a player out there just trying to do the best for his team. I'm still shaking my head over this. If you don't want your player to accidentally throw the ball, don't put your lineman in pass blocking. Anyway, I'm still getting over it, but I'm also ready to move on. It was a mistake that shouldn't have happened. I'm still a fan of Langsdorf because of how well this offense has come together. Play calls are somewhat questionable, but tbh, they always have been and always will be, no matter the OC.

This is what Ohio St was doing in the playoffs last year. They killed Bama/Oregon with the same power play all night long. It was a beauty to watch. I agree that it was a beauty to watch, but the blocking scheme was actually a zone. See the center would point out the middle of the opponents defense. Usually a MLB, but it could also be a nose guard when going against a 3-4 defense. The left guard and tackle would double team the D lineman immediately to the left of the center's middle guy, but the guard would only hold him long enough for the tackle to engage and then move ahead to block the second level. The backside DE would be taken care of by the H-back who would go from the play side to the backside and seal it off. The QB would read the unblocked backside OLB. If the OLB moved towards the middle, the QB would run the ball outside. If the OLB stayed outside, he would hand it off to the HB, who would find the best running lane in the middle where they had 4 blockers (LG, C, RG, and RT) on four defenders (RDT, RDE, ROLB, MLB). Elliot would just hit the hole and be gone. Almost every time they ran that play, it was a Safety that made the tackle. It was a beautifully designed and very well executed play, but it was a zone play. Sure, it had elements of power, but at its heart it was a zone play. They call it "wham", and what a thing of beauty...

The signs point to a young player whose practice habits and/or personality are setting a bad example. i.e. a true freshman acting a little too big for his britches. The benching would be both punishment and motivation. Hardly uncommon. Mike Riley isn't necessarily "nice" if the situation doesn't call for it. Here's hoping they figure it out, because no one is denying Wilbon's talent. But the lack of an Imani Cross thread for the first time in years, and no one outside of Texas curious about Adam Taylor's invisibility, means Wilbon is the Man. Bad practice habits would make sense. Too bad if that's the case. That is an attribute that hurt him in areas outside of football. Has anyone used this yet? If not... I'm gonna do it... Ahh, screw it!

Agreed. I noticed that A LOT under Bo. It was annoying. Another thing I'll add to this is our problem with crack blocks. LB's need to do a better job or recognizing it. It has allowed for some big gains on wheel routes from RB. Makes it easy for any QB.

The only difference is that LB's release to Safeties after 8-10 yards, something Bo never did. We run the Double A gap blitz like they do, it's nearly identical in fact. The only difference is that some of our LB's don't run it very efficiently. There was one time I saw an LB allow himself to be blocked by the center who also blocked the other blitzing LB. That's both LB's being blocked by one guy. The lane was there for the second LB to get home, but he didn't. I've also noticed a timing issue, and our LB's don't do a very good job of disguising it. They give it away almost every time.

TBH, this sort of reminds me of the start of 2013. LB's were inexperienced. With out LB's being in and out of injuries and our most experienced ones (Banderas and Rose-Ivey being juniors), we have needed a hodgepodge of LB's that have been mostly made up of Sophomores and Freshmen. Dedrick is a Freshman, and Newby is a sophomore. In 2013, we didn't find the right positions for LB's until later. Santos started the season at MIKE. Banderas started at MIKE, too. After that it was Rose-Ivey, who then finished the season. I mean, Gerry started as a "hybrid" LB, nickelback. Anyone remember that? I think we have a similar issue, and that issue is inexperience. In 2013, we allowed 600 yards to Wyoming. This year I am seeing some similar issues (allowing crack blocks to be effective, not matching correctly and just plain not quick on recognition that comes with better experience, there is no room for error against QB's who have run their system for 2-3 years already, as was the case with Brad Smith of Wyoming in 2013, and QB from Southern Miss this year). This won't win some over, as I have barely scratched the surface (I could spend many pages explaining other things like our effectiveness when our interior DL's line up in 0 technique and 4 technique), but it's what I am seeing. This is also a new scheme for these guys. Some of these guys have to learn their own best way to approach this. There's no other way to learn that than during the games. We're watching their learning experiences, and as anyone who learns new things, there will be struggles. There's more to talk about other than the LB's, I know this, I am just merely using this as an example of stuff we have seen before and how growth actually did occur, as I think it did for our LB's in 2013. The interesting thing to me is this. The offense is waaaaayy further along that I could have imagined. The fact that the game has clicked for those guys on offense should cause applause. I mean, personally, I always saw some of the good in Tommy, but to some other guys, this year is like night and day. That's promising. The fact we saw a FB trap this weekend was great. It showed how versatile we can be. I honestly didn't think we could be so versatile in the run game. Personally, I think our run game would be more effective if Newby was better at running the ball. It's good that he's versatile, but I think he leaves too many yards on the field... Does anyone else think if we hired a big name guy like Tressel, that similar struggles would have been brushed off? I have a feeling that had that occurred, we would have been more forgiving. Or maybe I'm just crazy... Either way, it's early in the season, we have all new schemes, and we should allow the players to grow into their roles that puts the team in the best position.

There was an excellent QB sweep play called on a 3rd down early in the game. It was blown up, Lewis couldn't hold his block. Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jyjtlreRhk?t=20m26s I like the play, and wonder how it will be utilized going forward. Just getting around to re-watching the game and noticed that play as well. It's an interesting look but it's not so much Lewis not holding his block as it is Carter not getting his down block. But the guy Carter is supposed to block down on is inside the tackle. That's a long way to go to get a block. That guy doesn't make the tackle but he disrupts the timing of the play. If TA gets to the hole quicker, it was probably there. There was also another called run for TA a few plays before that so there were a couple here and there. Good point. I guess you always really catch the most obvious portion of a play that doesn't work. In this case, the guy that tackles him. Overall, I think all the runners in our offense could hit holes quicker. That's something I think we are lacking in our running game. Granted, we've gotten pretty spoiled with watching eventual NFL draftees hitting holes consistently quickly. As much as I'd hate to say it, seeing as this is a pro-Wilbon thread, I think Wilbon consistently doesn't hit holes fast enough. It's mainly because he seems eager to juke someone out, but he essentially jukes the hole out when he just needs to hit that hole as fast as he can. Maybe I'm crazy for seeing that, and maybe I'm wrong about that. But if I am correct, it's something that experience will teach him. He's gotta get used to the speed of the college game and how we play it. But he's gotta get more snaps to get that experience.

There was an excellent QB sweep play called on a 3rd down early in the game. It was blown up, Lewis couldn't hold his block. Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jyjtlreRhk?t=20m26s I like the play, and wonder how it will be utilized going forward. I don't know how I feel about Newby yet. It's still early... I'd like to know where Ameer was when he got the start due to Burkhead injury. I remember him being good, but he wasn't "Ameer good" at that point. There's something that Newby doesn't do that I saw both Ameer and Burkhead do. And that is driving you legs during and after contact. Burkhead was really good at it, and you could tell Ameer picked that up. I haven't seen Newby do it. It seems when he gets hit, that's it. I'd like to see Newby at the end of the year. I have to admit that after the USA game, I wasn't overly impressed with Newby's 198 yards. You'd have to be crazy to say that, but it's true. I honestly like Wilbon. Regardless of how we usually like to "view" back ups as "better", I wouldn't say that if I was impressed with the starter. It might just plainly come down to his pass protection. It might not be up to par. That might be a huge factor. I hope to see more of him throughout the year.

What the heck is going on here? Is it good or bad to have Walk Ons? I thought it was good, but now I'm hearing its bad? Someone seriously needs to tell me what I need to believe from here on out about walk ons... Someone needs to provide me with my opinion...

Man... Well. This comment isn't going to be heard, but screw it. Here goes! A bad coaching staff doesn't help a team comeback from 23 points down in one quarter. A bad coaching staff allows that 23 point comeback to happen.

Eh, I'm not so sure about that. We gained four yards on the first play of the game. Then threw two incomplete passes and punted. The next time we got the ball back we went run for 5, pass for 4, run for 5, run for 10, incomplete pass, run for 1, in complete pass. It's not like the run wasn't working. We just kept deciding to pass. If you move the sacks to the passing stats (like the NFL does), we had 30 runs for 176 yards (5.9 yards per play) and we had 47 passing plays for 286 yards (6.1 yards per play). Now, a good chunk of TA's rushing yards came on called passing plays but it's not like we were that much more effective passing the ball than running. When you factor in the interceptions, you could say we were more effective running the ball. We just chose to pass. Starting with the last first down of each possession, our first four possessions went: Run for 4, Incomplete pass, incomplete pass Incomplete pass, run for 1 yard, incomplete pass Run for 3, penalty, pass for 8, run for 1 Penalty, pass for 0, pass for 14, sack on 3rd and 1 That early in the game, we were by no means forced into passing. But twice we passes on two out of three plays and once got sacked on third and 1. We didn't make much of an attempt to commit to the run. That's not what Langsdorf does. I normally wouldn't say this about this offense, and I know this is going to sound as dumb as the next guy that comes and says "RUN THE BALL!!" But against a team like Miami, and seeing what I saw against FAU, we really needed to come out and establish the run the way we did against USA. That being said, that didn't happen. Considering what did happen, the way the game played out was obviously the best scenario considering we came back from 23 points down. That should be commended. I still believe, against Miami, we needed to pound the ball as early and often as possible. We didn't. We had the opportunity to on that first drive, but we didn't. Call me crazy, but I think we have better control of the game if we ran the ball early in the game. Unfortunately, we played catch up all game, and after the second series, it had to become a passing happy offense. Which I am fine considering I think we will be successful with that with the majority of our opponents. But this game, I feel differently about. That being said, I have a lot of trust in Langsdorf. Who knows what would have happened had we not dropped a few of those balls.

That's something we aren't talking about a lot. Miami's D is on the weak side. I mean, just look at what FAU did... https://streamable.com/6ujg and https://vine.co/v/eFh3HD5j2WI I mean, that's FAU... This game would have been very interesting had FAU not turned the ball over and had to play catch up. We could have a pretty good day on the ground if Miami continues this poor showing. I think we'll have a fairly decent day on the ground. Let's also remember that FAU played with their back up QB seeing his first collegiate action and their leading RB didn't really play the second half.

I am with you that is just crazy talk. You can't just go by what S. Alabama did to our DB's, and specifically DD and say well they did this so just double that for Miami. S. Alabama knew they were over matched and said what do we do well and where can we try and get some quick scores and big plays. They went with the deep fade basically off of a 3 step drop. They had some success, good for them. Miami is definitely aware of this and will take 2-3 shots at this, but they are not going to build a game plan around trying to hit a low percentage pass to win this game. Miami is going to play the game they think they need to play to win the game. They will want to be able to run the ball and hit RB out of the backfield. That is going to be their plan. Not just heave it up and hope for the best. I'm not being too crazy, and it's not like I'm just doubling it because "Kaaya and Miami". I get that they aren't going to throw the fade every down. But that doesn't mean that those 8-10 yard receptions don't add up. Also, I don't know why it's so implausible considering his numbers last year against the pass stingy Bo D (359 yards, 3 TD's, 2 Ints) and our numbers last week (313 yds, 1 TD, 1 Int.). His longest pass was 32 yards last year, and was still able to get to 359. Sure his average is low now, but that's because they shutout their first opponent and were given the short field a couple times to allow them to help pad a lead.

Damn, watching the last Miami game, I had a lot of confidence. Their 3-4 D was weak, especially against the competition. I usually blow off these picks, but it's a little too lopsided to ignore. I thought FAU had a chance to keep the game close, but you can't do that with 5 turnovers. In a way, bad teams find a way to lose, and I think that was the case with FAU. Miami did take advantage of those opportunities, so credit Miami for that. Ultimately, I could see Kaaya getting 400+ yds this game, while also being sacked 4 times and still winning this game. I don't know if we've seen Nebraska "playing bad" yet. Have we seen the worst we can be in that 2nd quarter vs BYU? Or can it get worse? Can we consistently be resilient like we were against BYU, or was that just how that game went? BTW, what's up with the DN guys? They must have a ban of kool-aid at the DN.

You and me both. Every time we blitz the A gap, it's like a tangled mess and no pressure is applied. We're having a lot more success coming around the outside. Even then, those outside blitzes, we don't always get there fast enough. What are you seeing preventing those A gap blitzes from being more successful? There's no way Valentine and Collins should be getting held up and controlled, but it seems they are. There's just no gap for the Linebackers to get through. Is the lane integrity with the DT's just not what it needs to be? Are they crashing in when they should be going out? You can't tell me the opponents we've faced are skilled enough to handle those guys like that, but they seem to be. I think somebody is doing something wrong. I'd say your first point about VV and Collins. They should be doing better. But not necessarily the way you would think. In a way, you'd like them to be controlled, because you want them to create that hole the LB's go through. Most importantly, I think it's bad timing and lack of disguise. And that might be due to the fact that we haven't really had our true starters on the field at the same time. Here's how MSU runs their double A gap. It should be noted that that's some bad blocking for one. Cotton does pretty much nothing. Perfect time to run this blitz, because the G pulls and each of the DE's are unblocked. It's a disaster... But it's still effective generally for MSU. MSU's line does a good job of creating a hole for both LB's to get into, but also the LB's timing seems to work well. In our case, I think both of our guys are coming in too close to each other. Take a look at us running it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVEtseJQhHA?t=14m23s The timing of the LB's seems off. Also, they both are showing that they are blitzing in the A gap, while MSU does a great job of disguising it. Look at MSU presnap. There is almost no indication they are blitzing. While our guys are showing it big time. This gives a big heads up to C who makes a decent block, enough to disrupt both guys. But that timing, they both get block by the Center. Only one should be, and the other has a clear lane, but for some reason, he finds a way to get block by the Center, too. If he were a bit behind the other LB, he's got a clear lane to the QB. I think they'll get there, but on that play, it would've been effective had they executed it better.

I don't think this is right either. Bando is indeed in some sort of zone coverage but there is no receiver within 15 yards of him so he is basically "doing nothing." We are completely manned up on the trips with Gerry as the robber on the other side (Gerry had no chance to help on this play because he was the short route robber and they threw the deep seam route, exactly like the play above). You can tell this because the CB runs deep with the outside receiver and Williams follows the inside slot across the field on the crossing route, ending up in the same place as Gerry. If it was a zone coverage, Williams would have stayed in his quarter of the field and had help for Cockrell over the top. But because they're all in man, Cockrell has no help and is left to try to cover his man anywhere he goes on the field. Since his man is just outside the hashmarks, he can run basically any route imaginable, making that a very tough spot for Cockrell to be all by himself. I don't think the play is so ingenious as it is taking advantage of our man coverage with little pass rush and giving a pretty good quarterback time to find any of three receivers who are able to beat their man. They aren't running a true zone though. It's a pattern match under with the LB's until they release to the safeties. At which point, it becomes m2m. Which is why Williams follows his guy after Bando releases him to Williams. The Trips was a bad example, because there are different ways to cover trips in quarters. In this case it looks like a M technique in a nickel personnel. Which means #1 WR and #2 WR are actually in m2m to CB and NB. The Mike then takes on the role that the usual OLB would take (which is a pattern match on any under routes), and Banderas is playing his "zone" until he releases to Williams, who then plays him m2m. It's not a "true zone" in what some might see as "man has this Quarter of the field". It's more nuanced than that in our case. Our LB's look like they aren't doing anything sometimes, because when the route is deep enough and #3 isn't a threat to their "zone" they are pretty much doing nothing. Like I said, trips was a bad example, I am just using these plays because at the time, I remember watching the LB's release to safety. I haven't re-watched the whole game again, so I am going off of memory. I'm not saying you're wrong. We're actually both right, because the safeties do play m2m when LB releases. Which is why it has the m2m look. For example, if both #2's run deep posts, our guys would man up to each #2's and end up on the other side of the field. Maybe there are plays where we man on specific plays. I know we go zone when we blitz, especially on our double A Gap Blitz (which isn't as effective as I thought it was going to be). Listen, I'm not here to say "I know more than anyone" so I don't want this to sound like I'm saying you're wrong. I want this to be more informative than anything, and from what I see, this is what it looks like to me. Maybe I am wrong, and in that case, I am wrong, so be it. I am just merely relaying the information the info I know and applying it to what I remember what I see.

Which is possible, depending on what the play is. However, watching a lot of the BYU game, I see releases from LB's, and coverage from both LB's. Here are two plays that I see both coverages. Here's a play with LB in coverage while you have both safeties have robber roles. Quick pass from Hill, smart read, he knows whats going on. LB stays in coverage, while Cockrell becomes robber. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoOU5N2PCoM?t=25m47s The play after, you can see Dedrick release the guy to Safety. And on this trips play, you can see Banderas begin to cover the third guy in, but as soon as he passes him, he releases him also. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoOU5N2PCoM?t=16m40s That play is ingenious, because they attack on one side, leaving two guys having to play m2m. Gerry is robber on the play,but he bites a bit on the PA fake, so that split second keeps him out of the play. And with the LB releasing to Cockrell, he's essentially out as a robber. But you might be right. There might be certain plays where we play that type of role, but I see the m2m with LB's on the under, as well as the release to the Safeties.

Well, what I know about Cover 4/Quarters is based off of MSU's scheme, which might be nuanced enough to be different. I haven't really had time to dive deep into how we use it, but from my eyes, there are plenty of similarities for me to recognize they have "that" cover 4/quarters look. In Quarters, the safeties generally play closer to the line. MSU liked this because it potentially put 8-9 guys in the box, while simultaneously being in pass D. On what can be recognized on the pass play, the outside guys are on an island. CB's match up with outside guys which we'll call #1's. #2's are the next guys in, and #3's the same (usually RB). Now, #2's are LB's responsibility in their zone, until they go deep enough for the Safety (+8 yards or so). Then, those guys are essentially the Safety's responsibility, which then becomes m2m coverage at that point. If the #2 stays under (8 yards-ish and under), they stay the LB's responsibility. At which case, the safeties then become a "robber", meaning they help with #1's. Which is what happened on Gerry's INT. He was free to become a robber, and came up with INT.

Where were these when I was in high school? Those are sweet!

I find the hypocrisy to be delicious. Apparently we can only refer to his time in Corvallis when talking about the handful of players he put into the NFL and the few times he beat (over rated) top 10 teams. But his overall record, losses to FCS teams, and lack of championships are off limits. Mmmmkay. But what does any of that have to do with 2015 Nebraska?

I would say this is wrong. The average Nebraska fan might have that impression because many of us had no idea who he was. Not that name stature is very important. As the HC of Nebraska now, everyone will know who he is. This would be true even had the hire been, say, our version of Derek "Who???" Dooley. I live in Louisiana. Just for kicks, today I asked 10 of my coworkers, all of whom are avid football fans, if they knew who Mike Riley is. The number who knew? Zero. I'll stick with my opinion. If they don't know the name of the coach of Nebraska and they are avid college football fans....that just shows how far Nebraska has fallen. True, but on the other side of the coin (did I use that saying correctly? I'm terrible at using those), just how avid are they if they don't know the HC of a major football program? I get we aren't ranked and such, but I have tons a football fan friends and family who could name the coach of flippin' Maryland and that he was the HC at UConn before Maryland. I have a bunch of other football friends who couldn't name the HC at Texas. Those guys, I wouldn't call "avid" fans... Maybe my POV is skewed since I am an avid fan and know who the HC is at schools like Hawaii, Arkansas State, and Louisiana Tech. You should ask those "avid" fans who will win the Big East this year...

I was all bent out of shape about how out of position a couple guys were, but then I saw this image. This image shows just how close it was. Just looking at the image you don't know who has the advantage here. What happens if he jumps a split second later or earlier? What happens if QB throws it a bit later? Or Earlier? I mean, the window to make the catch that he did is minuscule. Could we have played it better? Yes, we can always play each play better, but sometimes the game just comes down to perfect timing, and a great play by a single individual. Game of inches, and as we Husker fans know all too well, game of seconds (specifically 0:01).

Only if she's 5'-3"

I'm always down on kickers. They have one job. Ever since 1994 Orange Bowl. Call me bitter.