Guy Chamberlin

I mean ... these type of comments are getting really old. If you think how we played is all the better we can play and it'll be good enough to beat Oregon, Wisconsin, Ohio State and whoever we play in the B1G championship, that's great for you. But otherwise why can't we also talk about things that can be done better? Yeah but.....how old is the "run the damn ball!"argument getting? And here's the thing: we ran the damn ball 43 times. We ran it inside. We ran it outside. We ran misdirection. We had 7 different ball carriers. We had designed running plays for Tommy including two TDs (one called back). Craig Bohl likely watched our Fresno State game film a decided to stop the run first and dare Tommy Armstrong to beat them with his arm. So Tommy threw for 377 yards and three touchdowns. And we needed pretty much every one of those running plays to make the passing game successful. I never remotely suggested this is all the better Nebraska can play, nor that it's good enough to beat better teams. Far from it. I just happen to think the team needs to get better at a lot of things. Better play in the secondary. Something/anything from special teams. Senior leadership and decision-making from Tommy. Better discipline and execution across the board. Of course this is on both players and coaches. But I think there's a lot of odd misreading of Nebraska playcalling -- going on 12 years now. It simply doesn't accept a good passing day as a successful offense. Fun fact: Alabama went pass-happy to beat Western Kentucky. Michigan went pass-happy to beat UCF. Both teams are likely to mix it up as the season goes on. To answer your original question, we got 550 yards by playing a team that was last in their division in the Mountain West last year. A team where our backups were far superior to their starters. And all we had to do was chuck the ball as far down the field as we could throw it and let our receivers outrun their DBs. Yeah, it was fun, but I don't think it translates very well into winning games that matter a lot more later in the season. Part of wanting to have a good run game is being able be balanced against teams that actually have a defense. Part of wanting to have a good run game is not being in the bottom five of interceptions thrown again this year. Part of wanting to have a good run game is that we have a QB who has proven over and over again that he is prone to bad decisions and the fewer opportunities he has to make those bad decisions, the better off we'll be. And you continue to want to throw out stats without having any context to them. "LOOK!!!! We ran the ball! All is well with the world!" Our OLine outweighed Wyoming's DLine by 50 pounds per man and yet the guy who many consider our best RB averaged 2.9 yards per carry on 14 carries. You're welcome to feel like everything is fine and mock those who bring up the part that we might need to be better than that. But that's a pretty naive view. Yes, the team needs to be better at a lot of things. But considering this is a thread about our Running Backs, I thought discussion them and the associated running game may be appropriate. Crazy thoughts, I know. And you might need to direct your "why are you complaining about these big wins" toward a more appropriate source - Riley and Langsorf. Riley was definitely not pleased last week. Langsdorf did everything but say TA isn't getting the job done last week. And here's Sipple's comments about Langsdorf's response to this week's game which you don't think can be complained about: LJS I agree with Langsdorf's comments. They don't run counter to any of mine. I'm not sure you actually read my post #147.

Nebraska should be defense based. We would win more games and stop worrying about our offensive identity.

What is Alabama trying to be?

Nebraska rushed 43 times against Wyoming and passed 35 times. Alabama rushed 39 times against Western Kentucky and passed 42 times. Florida State rushed 36 times against Charleston Southern and passed 35 times. Even Iowa rushed 36 times and passed 30 times in dominating Iowa State. Michigan and the coach we wished we had rushed 41 times for 119 yards against UCF and passed 41 times for 328 yards in a dominant win In the same game, UCF and the coach we wish we had rushed 46 times for 275 times and completed 6 of 22 passes for 56 yards in the loss. The best teams in college football run and pass and change the ratio from game to game and don't really care what you call their identity as long as they're winning. I don't wish for Harbaugh or Frost.... They're both good coaches. Who are likely to call the same plays as Nebraska's current coaching staff.

Yeah. That's the thing. I've been on this board for years now and the people who bring up the "offensive philosophy/identity" question only consider three possible answers: Run First, Pass First, or Balanced. And two of those options will never work at Nebraska. So thanks for asking, but I'll pass. I mean, run.

Nebraska rushed 43 times against Wyoming and passed 35 times. Alabama rushed 39 times against Western Kentucky and passed 42 times. Florida State rushed 36 times against Charleston Southern and passed 35 times. Even Iowa rushed 36 times and passed 30 times in dominating Iowa State. Michigan and the coach we wished we had rushed 41 times for 119 yards against UCF and passed 41 times for 328 yards in a dominant win In the same game, UCF and the coach we wish we had rushed 46 times for 275 times and completed 6 of 22 passes for 56 yards in the loss. The best teams in college football run and pass and change the ratio from game to game and don't really care what you call their identity as long as they're winning.

Who the hell cares what I'd call? I'm just another guy on a fanboard who thinks his play call would totally have worked because he knows it will never, ever have be put to the test. Personally? I love the naked bootleg. I like fullback traps in that situation, too. If I have only one call with Tommy around the goal, it's probably some kind of rollout that spreads the d-line and gives him the choice to cut in, stretch out to the pylon, or make a short easy throw to one or more open receivers. If it's only first down he can kill the ball and have two or three more shots. I'm almost certain Langsdorf didn't call for Tommy to throw the ball directly into the hands of a Wyoming player. You may forget that Nebraska finds itself first and goal more than once in a game and like every other coach in football, Langsdorf will have more than one call in that situation. IIRC, he called two QB keepers for Tommy and he got two touchdowns out of them, though one was called back.

I mean ... these type of comments are getting really old. If you think how we played is all the better we can play and it'll be good enough to beat Oregon, Wisconsin, Ohio State and whoever we play in the B1G championship, that's great for you. But otherwise why can't we also talk about things that can be done better? Yeah but.....how old is the "run the damn ball!"argument getting? And here's the thing: we ran the damn ball 43 times. We ran it inside. We ran it outside. We ran misdirection. We had 7 different ball carriers. We had designed running plays for Tommy including two TDs (one called back). Craig Bohl likely watched our Fresno State game film a decided to stop the run first and dare Tommy Armstrong to beat them with his arm. So Tommy threw for 377 yards and three touchdowns. And we needed pretty much every one of those running plays to make the passing game successful. I never remotely suggested this is all the better Nebraska can play, nor that it's good enough to beat better teams. Far from it. I just happen to think the team needs to get better at a lot of things. Better play in the secondary. Something/anything from special teams. Senior leadership and decision-making from Tommy. Better discipline and execution across the board. Of course this is on both players and coaches. But I think there's a lot of odd misreading of Nebraska playcalling -- going on 12 years now. It simply doesn't accept a good passing day as a successful offense. Fun fact: Alabama went pass-happy to beat Western Kentucky. Michigan went pass-happy to beat UCF. Both teams are likely to mix it up as the season goes on.

Ah. I think the Oakland Raiders came out with 7 defenders on a potential game-winning field goal after just taking a time out against the Saints today.

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.

BTN treats Nebraska like a newcomer to the Big 10, who every year promises to disrupt the order but never really delivers.

I don't get it.

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.

How on earth did we get 550 yards on 78 plays?

Against Wyoming: Nebraska ran 43 times for 138 yards Nebraska passed 35 times for 412 yards Nebraska was 8 of 14 on Third Down Conversions You'd never guess that -- or the final score -- from this thread.

I learned that it's pretty funny to read the Huskerboard Game Thread after you already know the final result.

• The offense is going to need every weapon it has. Could be fun. • I like individual players in the Husker secondary, but if I were an opposing OC I would pass every play. • Tre Bryant is the best running back. • Starting rough and finishing strong isn't the worst problem to have. • If the first two games make Husker fans feel nervous, how should Clemson and Georgia fans be feeling right now?

Talent and coaching says 8 win best case scenario! Mike Riley had four 9+ win seasons with lesser talent. So you're back to being wrong. And all is right with the world.

I'm simply siding with Coach Mike Riley, who said the Huskers won't be able to get away with their Fresno State performance against better teams. Meaning little has been proven in Week One. That's why we play the games.

You have just described just about every team in the country. Just saying it's not a total Debbie Downer move to fret about our lesser opponents.

I'm not inclined to agree with Marko Polo on anything, but until further notice the University of Nebraska football team is capable of beating or losing to anyone on their schedule.

I watched the game again with a different POV and less agitation. Our offensive line was getting a lot of push. Particularly the left side. But Tommy and Ozigbo seemed to instinctively cut back to the middle. i.e. the offensive line was opening some holes that weren't put to good use. Not a bad problem to have at the moment. I honestly don't care who starts or gets the most carries. I'd encourage platoon competition for half the season, then start narrowing down the roles. Ending with Tre Bryant beginning his four year run as featured RB.

I honestly didn't realize people were criticizing Tommy's game. This was a gameplan for an offense still finding its strengths and limiting its liabilities. Tommy played perfectly well within that gameplan. Two touchdowns rushing, a pocket passing TD bomb and no turnovers. And a whole lot to practice on this week.

They arn't very good, they were 2-9 last year. The really good Oregon teams would have won this game 70-14. It was just the first game of the season, but Davis played within 2 TDs the whole game. Oregon has a lot of work to do on defense and the offense was a little shaky. Their return game looked great. I might be basing this on U.C. Davis upsetting Stanford on the road in 2005, which is already a long time ago.

fwiw....U.C. Davis has a history of looking better than they are against teams that overlook them.