EmeraldIngot

Careful; hope is a hell of a drug. Just look at what it's doing to Rhule! That thing with his tongue is getting worse!

Let's analyze this, shall we? The volleyball team plays 29 regular season games, with up to 5 playoff games in the post season. (I think? Not too sure about how that all works...). Of the 29 regular season games, 17 of them are home games. So. Take the premise that a dome should be built over Memorial Stadium and the field should be converted to a volleyball court on a more permanent basis. Second, assume that ticket prices will be roughly comparable to football tickets. Third, assume good attendance (~80% capacity, if not full sellouts). Compare 7 sellout home games for football to 17 80% or greater attendance at home games for volleyball. Ticket revenue, in that situation, would be substantially greater for volleyball. Granted, that wouldn't take into account the revenue from the conference TV deal, since only 20 of the 29 volleyball games are expected to be televised this year, whereas every football game certainly will be. This might not be a significant factor if the football games are played at some other venue, if only to keep us in the conference and keep that TV deal money coming in, since the media rights money is paid to the conference, then distributed to the schools from there. As long as we remain in the B1G, we should still continue to receive the TV deal money, even if the football program was put on the back burner. Of course, this assumes that the volleyball program can generate as much diehard fanaticism as the football program does. The recent volleyball sellout at Memorial Stadium could be attributed to it being a special event. If fans could expect a home volleyball game at Memorial Stadium 17 times per season, would all 17 games be sellouts? Could the athletic department rely on 80% or greater attendance on a regular basis? Is the demand for tickets high enough to meet the significant increase in supply that converting Memorial Stadium to a volleyball court on a more permanent basis would create? I don't know. If the demand can soak up a good portion of that supply, then volleyball would generate more revenue, as far as ticket sales were concerned, than the football program would simply because they play more home games each year. If regular attendance averages less than 50%, though, then the overall revenue would likely be less. And, as I alluded to earlier, this assumes Nebraska stays in the B1G conference and the TV deal revenue does not change. Scrapping or significantly downsizing the football program could possibly jeopardize that membership. Remember, only 20 of Nebraska Volleyball's 29 regular season games are expected to be televised this year. The demand for televised volleyball games is certainly much lower than the demand for televised football games, and projected viewership and the subsequent add revenue plays a major part in determining the value of that TV deal. IF volleyball can generate regular ticket sales in Memorial Stadium, and IF the volleyball games can draw TV viewership, then volleyball could potentially generate more revenue than the football program. However, one sellout of Memorial Stadium for a special event does NOT prove that attendance will be that high if all 17 home volleyball games were played in Memorial Stadium, and the fact that only 20 of 29 regular season games are expected to be televised this year means that the viewership numbers are likely too small to justify the current media rights revenue. In short, volleyball COULD be a major revenue generating sport, but only if a number of factors come together just right. But since the general popularity of volleyball is far lower than the popularity of football, those factors are highly unlikely to positively reward such a major change. Even a below average football program (like what we have now) is more likely to generate more revenue than a premier volleyball program (like what we have now). But hey, the way things are going, maybe that will change...

Since we're being silly... "Coach, coach, over here! Jake, from State Farm. Did you know you could save 15% or more by switching to Liberty Mutual, so they can customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need?" Now, being serious... "Coach, James, from Kearney, do you intend to integrate the modern forms of the read option and triple option into your run game? If so, are you going to limit yourself to the RPO, or will you be including more traditional pitch options? If not, do you think that a more conventional pro-style running attack is a viable option for Nebraska, considering the physical challenges of the Big 10, and are you capable of recruiting the necessary players to run such a scheme?"

Maybe they can help with the DBs? Learning how to high point and spike a ball might help our pass defense. Lol.

I don't know for sure, but I think the analysts are responsible for cutting film to point out mistakes and wrinkles, probably 'analyzing' the opposing team's schemes on O and D, pointing out coverage, alignment, blocking schemes, pass routes, and so on. They likely also go over film of practice; it was mentioned that Frost likes to run a lot of reps in practice, then correct player's mistakes in the film room later. The analysts are probably responsible for that. If they have any role in games, it's only to sit in the box and tell the coordinators what the opponents are doing. Edit; The coordinators are usually responsible for the scripted series. Since before this year Frost was calling the plays, he was probably responsible for scripting the first series. But I've never been a part of a big time football team, so I don't know for sure.

I have a tendency to go into excruciating detail when talking about subjects I love. I hope the content was just as valuable as the word count. Lol.

Being diplomatic, I think it's an issue of focus. Under Frost, it seemed as if the focus had been on perfecting his plays as they would have to be against the opposing team's base defense (or against whatever defensive schemes they're expected to run against Frost's offense. With 3 or 4 wide, he could expect a nickel or dime defense, not a 7-in-the-box base defense), and maybe against some of the wrinkles they'd seen on film before. The best example of this was last year, the opening game against Illinois. After we lost, Frost came out and said in the presser that he didn't expect them to come out in an odd front, and that it threw off his play calling (or something like that). It showed that he was only practicing against whatever he expected his opponent to do, and not teaching his players how to handle many different schemes. I'm not the most well versed in line play, so take what I say with a grain of salt. That said, we seem to have a very hard time adjusting to twists and stunts, and when opposing D-linemen slant away from a gap, we have a tendency to leave massive holes for blitzing linebackers to attack untouched. Our line can't seem to pass off a D-linemen to his neighbor and pick up those blitzes on their own. Furthermore, our linemen struggle with footwork and hand fighting; they can't seem to break D-linemen's leverage and regain proper leverage on their own. Once they're beaten on a play, they can't seem to regain the advantage, so the other team gets a lot of penetration. It's been getting a bit better, but OU was way too good. If, instead of ONLY focusing on what the upcoming team is likely to do, the coaching staff should teach them how to attack many different schemes. In terms of o-line play, that means learning how to handle different defensive fronts. Not all 4-down fronts are the same; the rush end might line up in a 3 technique, a 5 technique, or (if a TE is on that side of the line) a 7 technique; the tackle on that side will need to be ready to counter him, depending on if the TE is staying in to block or not, or if the DE is going to be unblocked as part of a zone read. DTs might be lined up over the center (and shaded to one side or the other) or, in some cases, as far out as between a guard and tackle. These different alignments call for adjustments in blocking assignments, both in the pass and the run game. Stunts and twists need to be accounted for, and the line needs to practice how to hand off responsibility to a neighbor if necessary. (To be fair, the o-line has been improving at this since the Northwestern game. OU was just way too athletic and skilled to stop, though). The same goes for 3-man fronts too, but that can be just a bit more complicated. Which OLB is going to rush, or is one of the MLBs going to do it? Again, need to practice the basics against the scout team, then focus on the specific wrinkles the upcoming team uses. The basics should be laid down during spring and fall camp, leaving game prep each week to focus on the specific wrinkles the upcoming opponent uses, as well as likely wrinkles you can expect them to use, even if they haven't shown them yet. The same principles apply to the defense; learn different coverages and how to adjust to different formations (2 TE and 2 RB formations require a different alignment than a 4-wide 1 RB formation. Heavy sets should drop a safety into the box, while more wideouts need a nickel or dime formation). Learn flexibility in the off-season, then specifics during game prep. And above all, by learning so much, you can take concepts from different coverages and plays, and apply them as in-game adjustments. For example, if the opposing defense usually uses a Cover 2, you can run two fades and a post rout down the seam in between the two safeties to attack that coverage. If a safety (on either side) closes the post route down the middle, you will have one-on-one coverage on one of the fades. If you trust your QB and WR, you'll take that chance. However, that play is easy to counter simply by rotating into a Cover 3. The Dagger concept (TE or split end streak and WR 15-yard in route on the same side of the field) attacks the space between the deepest LB and the center safety; that area will be cleared out by the TE on a streak route. If you don't know which coverage they're going to run, you can run a fade and post on one side of the field, and a dagger concept on the other side of the field. That way, either coverage they shift into will be exploited. (Cover 6 is, effectively, a cover 3 in one side of the field and a cover 2 on the other; specifically developed to counter this exact offensive adjustment). In short, while I don't think we have world-beaters at any position, I do think that coaching has been deficient. Our players are more physically talented than most other teams we will face all year. Skill drills seem to have been mostly adequate, but not exceptional. The biggest deficiency had been in teaching our players football theory. We need to teach them how to attack many different styles of defense, how to adjust to unusual situations, and how to adapt to the opponents' adjustments. If Mickey Joseph and the remaining staff can use the bye week to do some intensive film study (not just on upcoming opponents but on other highly-ranked matchups and NFL games) and a lot of reps against the scout team (who would run different alignments and coverages in defense, and different formations and offensive styles on offense) to give them the next best thing to 'live reps', I think there's a chance we'll see a decent jump in execution against Indiana, and likely further improvements as the season progresses. Don't expect miracles; this is the kind of thing that takes more than a single bye week to fix. I doubt even a single off-season would be enough. That said, if MJ can get the team to a bowl game this year, I think he'd be the right kind of coach to get us at least back to the 9-win threshold either next year or the year after. As we've seen over the past few years, a lot of the problems have been mental mistakes (especially missed assignments) and a lack of adjustments by the coaches and the inability to execute those adjustments. These are time-consuming, but ultimately correctable issues.

Scripted drives are drawn up based on previous film, and are made up of plays that both attack the usual defensive scheme the other team uses and are complementary to each other. For example, an off tackle run coupled with an off tackle play action rollout. They're supposed to probe the defense, find weaknesses, and attempt to exploit them. And yet, when opposing defenses adjust their schemes (switching from Tampa 2 to Quarters, or from Cover 3 to Cover 6 for example) we often fail to adjust. Or worse, when we adjust, the other team adjusts again. The o-line is also easily fooled by twists, stunts, zone blitzes... Pretty much anything, really. The o-line is a large part of our inability to adjust; they can't stop the rush long enough for the QB to read rotating coverages, and can't seem to adjust their run blocking assignments whenever the defenses do anything different from what's on film. Part of that is coaching (gotta prepare the guys to go against all kinds of defenses, not just what's on film; the scout team is SPECIFICALLY supposed to run all kinds of fronts and coverages so that the first and second team knows the basics of how to attack those kinds of defenses), but part of it is a lack of football IQ across the board (but again, coaches are supposed to teach, not just drill the players). It's very frustrating to watch. It is, because the scripted drive is probably practiced repeatedly. I suspect Frost focused far too much on scripted drives and what's been shown on film, and didn't account for hypothetical situations. Players need to know how to attack different types of fronts, alignments, and coverages; film study is supposed to cover the specific wrinkles each team mixes in to their specific scheme. Good coaches prepare their teams for many different situations, and can recognize in-game adjustments and adjust in turn. The problem is that the ability to execute those adjustments relies on players having at least a basic understanding of many types of defenses and how to attack them. Great players are both physically talented, highly skilled, and have a high football IQ. Two out of those three can be taught by the coaching staff, and two out of those three we've been struggling with.

On offense: power run blocking scheme out of the pistol with an H-back filling the role of a fullback. You can pull play designs from the offset I formation playbook and plug them in with little difficulty. You can go 3-wide for a spread look, or 2-wide and an extra TE (or two) for short yardage situations. With the RB directly behind the QB and not offset to one side or the other, you can run the ball to either side of the formation and, with the H-back and a pulling guard, get a numbers advantage at the point of attack. You can run traps, off tackles, and counters to either side without any complicated changes to the scheme. You can run an aggressive vertical or air raid passing scheme out of the same formation, with the H-back filling the role of the 4th wide out and the RB running checkdown routes in the flats. Best of all, you can still run read options and, with a WR on an orbit motion (something Frost was already doing) you can run a surprise triple option. In short, you can attack both vertically and horizontally in the pass game, and run in the center or attack the edges in the run game. Wherever a defense isn't defending well, this offensive scheme will be able to attack it. On defense: run a 4-3 with a cover 2 or quarters coverage as the base defense, and a 4-2-5 nickel package and 3-2-6 dime package. D-line responsibilities should preach spill concepts on run fits (stuff the middle, force the RB to cut outside where LB and DB can either tackle them in space, or force them out of bounds before they can turn the corner and get up field). Make them waste time and energy running side to side, not getting up field. D-line should focus on penetration and getting off blocks, even when (or especially when) DE has backside contain; can't stop the cutback, counter or reverse if you can't get off a block. LBs should be taught to fill the gaps that the DL can't. They're lineBACKERS; let the line penetrate as best as they can, and let the LBs clean up if the DL can't stuff it or TFL. LBs should focus on avoiding and shedding blocks, and run tons of drills to that effect. Teach LBs to flow toward the playside; playside OLB cuts off playside bounce outs, MLB cuts off the upfield cut, and backside OLB covers the cutback, each with an eye towards covering any gap the RB tries to choose. Since backside DE will have backside contain on cutback, counter, and reverse, this should result in few open run gaps. If our guys can win hat-on-hat matchups, we'll see a lot of TFLs or short gains. If the opposing OL elects to double team our D-linemen, LBs will be mostly unblocked and able to stuff plays. On run plays, safeties will be coming down to help close gaps; if power concepts and pulling blockers can get to the LBs, either other LBs will clean it up or the safeties will. Run primarily matchup-zone concepts in the secondary; cover zone in short yardage concepts (which typically kill man coverage) that hopefully can smoothly shift to man coverage on longer routes. This takes a lot of concepts from quarters matchup zone philosophy. Be able to rotate into cover 3 when necessary (would require having an OLB capable of being the flat-to-curl defender) or a cover 6 when the opponents are running a lot of quick routes or mesh concepts. Let the D-line be aggressive, teach the LBs how to back then up, and preach a ballhawk mindset in the secondary. Teach them to jump routes wherever they can. Either INT or knock it down. No catch should ever be unopposed. Make the QB afraid to pass it to anyone who isn't wide open, make him hesitate; it'll allow the aggressive D-line to get to him more often. Double moves will be a weakness, though, as will pump fakes; gonna have to have excellent eye discipline and not jump routes until the ball is in the air. If defense is struggling, slow down the offense, extend drives, and let them rest. If offense is struggling, be more aggressive on D, generate turnovers, and give them more opportunities. Not every play has to be a home run, but every play should be designed to get a first down. Be able to chew clock when necessary, or drive down the field quickly when you must; flexibility is key. But most importantly, play fundamentally sound, disciplined football.

Don't forget the afternoon; we're bad then too.

Almost like something changed in the coaching staff. Wonder what it could be?

I dunno about y'all, but I've seen some improvement in the RBs this week. Marvin Scott looks a lot better now than he did in the spring game or earlier in the year.

Have the play side WR run a deep fade, rather than block the S. Have the QB fake the give and run a bootleg, pass it deep to the wide open WR.

QB, obviously, though I could see him at HB.

I'd like to see Frost run this play. Old school trap block, using H-back instead of RG, like a variation on the inside zone split. Run it with an orbit motion WR for a Triple Option look out of the pistol. RB is 1-on-1 with backside S, give read is playside end man on the line of scrimmage (in this pic, the playside OLB), pitch read is the CB. RB makes backside S miss, it's a house call. QB keeps, and CB takes pitch man, QB makes backside S miss, and it's a house call. CB takes QB, and pitch man should be far enough outside to make backside S unable to catch him. Nice thing about this play setup is you can run a Counter off of it. Just have C take the NT rather than fire to the backside ILB, and have the H-back lead block around the backside. Orbit motion should fool the defense into keying towards the right, when the play is going left. Old school power football fundamentals, run out of a modern pistol formation. Ah... I'd love to see it in action.

I suspect you're probably right.

No, Frost will finally try a run up the middle, but Benhard will whiff his block and it'll be a safety.

And now they take your order literally.

I agree!

We're far more than just 1-2 players away. We need a starting pass rusher and a serviceable backup (2) We need a starting quarterback and a reliable backup (another 2) We need two new O-Tackles, and serviceable backups (Another 4) because neither Benhard nor Corcoran are performing. On top of all of that, we need reliable replacements for all the superseniors that leave at the end of the season. (Another 8ish). That's at least 16. Now, if I remember correctly, we have 17 open scholarship slots. A good coach will have all of those replacements lined up and committed, either Freshmen or JC transfers. Guys who are ready to step in and play right away. Granted, I haven't been following recruiting very closely this year, but it seems that the current class does not meet that requirement. I'd been a believer in Frost. I thought he would get it together. I'd hoped that, with the brutal schedule this year, he'd be able to get us to 7-5 or 8-4, a good bowl game, and momentum into year 5. That just isn't happening. He's tied his wagon to Martinez, and 2AM, for all his talent, chokes in big moments and is far too prone to make mistakes to be an effective QB. Now, maybe, MAYBE if Frost plays Smothers or Haarberg (who I believe has better upside) and the team manages to upset OSU and win out, and get a bowl game, I'd be willing to give him another year. I just don't see that happening. The big sticking point, however, is the contract buyout. 20 million isn't a small amount of money. It's possible Alberts could use the illegal special teams practices as an excuse to get out of that buyout. If Frost doesn't get a bowl game, if he continues to stick with 2AM, if he can't make necessary changes, he needs to be replaced. Alberts, if he was smart, would already be putting feelers out to potential replacements. Chadwell, from Coastal Carolina, because he has a proven record of building up programs and runs a system I like, tops my list. But I'm just a dude on a forum board, what the hell do I know.

I think Haarberg has better upside. Only three games left in the season, let Haarberg play them, it won't burn his redshirt.

And another INT. Like clockwork

That guy from Coastal Carolina. I like the blend of Triple Option and a good pass game.

I'd rather see Smothers or Haarberg finish out the game at QB. The game is a loss, might as well prep one of them to take over for the rest of the year.

That one works too, lol.