True2tRA

Is this based on recruiting rankings of the incoming class when they sign? Or is it based upon the number of guys that are actually still on the team or panned out? I mean, if they're just including committed classes, is that really an accurate way to do things? We have a lot of guys that were Pelini recruits that never made an impact when Pelini was here, and haven't been impact players in Riley's tenure yet. A bunch of them aren't even on the team anymore. Obviously though, if we're talking about Riley doing less with more in THIS SEASON then it's only fair to judge him on what he actually has? Or is this just another one of those things we come up with to dump on Mike Riley....? Mauro Bondi Joe Carter Max Pirman Charles Jackson Aaron Green David Santos Zach Sterup Bubba Starling Ryan Klachko Tyler Moore Aaron Curry Corey Whitaker Leroy Alexander Jared Afalava Avery Moss Thomas Brown Paul Thurston Drake Martinez Trevell Dixon Dwayne Johnson Boaz Joseph Matt Finnin Ernest Suttles David Knevel D.J. Singleton Adam Taylor Zach Hannon Johnny Stanton Gabriel Miller Kevin Gladney Greg Hart Courtney Love A.J. Natter Deandre Wills A.J. Bush Sedrick King Jariah Tolbert Joe Keels Jaevon Walton Robert Lockhart Peyton Newell Lorenzo Stewart Monte Harrison Zack Darlington Trai Mosley Tanner Farmer I mean.....that's a lot of names. Those are all committed players from 2011-2014 that have not really been impactful here at Nebraska. Riley's only been here 10 months. Are all those let downs Rileys fault too? Get f'ing' real.

Check out the interview too if you've got about fifteen minutes.

This is an interview with former Husker Matt Vrzal on 1620 The Zone this morning. A lot of truth spoken. Listen to it, get educated by someone who knows a little bit better than we do. https://soundcloud.com/game-time-with-nick-bahe/october-26-seg-11-matt-vrzal Here he talks about Nebraska's commitment to the run game or lack thereof. Says he can't blame Langsdorf for not being able to commit to such an inconsistent part of the game. "What do you commit to? That your execution is so average that you might gain six yards on one play and lose twenty on the next? I mean, I couldn't commit to it and I want him to". This link picks up there: https://soundcloud.com/game-time-with-nick-bahe/october-26-seg-11-matt-vrzal#t=4:19 Great part of the interview where Vrzal talks about taking the gloves off and "de-starring" players who think they are basically above the idea of hard work. https://soundcloud.com/game-time-with-nick-bahe/october-26-seg-11-matt-vrzal#t=5:43 Jump ahead here if you like. Some good stuff about how the culture was established here at Nebraska. A culture that has literally been destroyed as of now as far as I am concerned. https://soundcloud.com/game-time-with-nick-bahe/october-26-seg-11-matt-vrzal#t=6:16 From that segment " You either bought in, or if you didn't fit our culture YOU GOT GONE. We didn't tell you to leave, we didn't force you out, you just knew you didn't fit in and it was time for you to leave. And that's okay, there were guys that left, that's fine with that. We seem to go out thinking oh my gosh he's so upset because he's redshirting and he's not playing. Hey! Junior, the door swings both ways.....don't let it hit ya where the good Lord split ya. If you don't like it, bounce, we don't care but we're into this "catering" to athletes kind of thing and it's just frustrating". Vrzal goes on to talk about effort on this team and he can't say for sure that we are seeing it. Effort is one thing that should never be in question at Nebraska, but somewhere along the line, the leaders on this team have let the standard die. It's sad. Listen to that whole interview though, you'll be better for it. It ain't all on the coaches boys. It sure as hell isn't all on a coaching staff that has been here for 10 months. The coaches are not exempt though, they've got a lot to learn about how their gonna be successful here especially in how we practice, but there are some players on this team with a toxic mentality. We need these guys to man up or move on. They discuss Will Compton and Kenny Bell's tweets as well. This shot from Benning on the sideline says more than words can say: How this team can come out flat, be in such a tight game on a day like this, and be sitting around on the bench as if they couldn't care less what's happening on the field?........I don't get it, but I want it gone from this program and I can't wait until it is.......

You can't possibly believe what you write here. Did you even bother to look at the total running plays in that game back in '11? It was 61. For 222 yards. Not even that amazing of a day running from a ypc, but it's a way to grind out an WIN a game. NU put it up 22 times in that game. Contrast that with the loss on Saturday. 38 runs. 48 passes. No, not entirely. I think I was drinking. I just found it funny that 38 was the record number of carries for Burkhead, and 38 was the number of carries we had in a game that people swore we "didn't run the ball enough". When you're averaging two yards a carry, how much should an offensive coordinator continue to call the run? 38 times seems like enough times to either find a rhythm and establish something, or give it the f#*k up. So when you can't run the ball, the only other way I know in this game that an offense can legally move the ball down the field is to throw it. So I'm assuming that's where the 49 passes comes from. It seems really logical to me, but very confusing for some others here. It's okay, it's not just you. The key isn't 38 times. It's timing, ball carriers and type of play. 16 total carries by the starting IB. He goes for 40 on 10 carries in the first half. Not a massive amount of yards, but 4 ypc and no negative plays (as usual in this offense, there weren't any real big plays either.. just steady 3 to 8 yard pick ups). During that time, NU threw it 27 times. 10 runs versus 27 passes. In a half. You can't get your RB or OL in rhythm when you're calling your play selection like that. I thought it came down to their defensive line beating the piss out of our offensive line. Especially on the one side. So if Tommy needs 10 passing plays to get into a rhythm, and the run game needs 15-20 consecutive or closely called together runs to find a rhythm, what the hell is Langsdorf supposed to do? Seriously, an offensive line needs a bunch of plays to get into a rhythm? Is this one of those things that just applies to Nebraska football? I think we're getting carried away with that. The RB maybe, the QB maybe but not all the time, but the offensive line needs to get in a rhythm now too? You're either physical or you're not. You're either powerful or you're not. You either know what you're doing or you don't. You can either beat the man across from you or you can't. Serious question, when is the last time you saw a Nebraska offensive linement just dominate the man across from them all game long. And don't name just one game and call it the overriding rule. I'd like to know the last linemen that consistently owned his gap. Spencer Long maybe the only one in a long time....?

You can't possibly believe what you write here. Did you even bother to look at the total running plays in that game back in '11? It was 61. For 222 yards. Not even that amazing of a day running from a ypc, but it's a way to grind out an WIN a game. NU put it up 22 times in that game. Contrast that with the loss on Saturday. 38 runs. 48 passes. No, not entirely. I think I was drinking. I just found it funny that 38 was the record number of carries for Burkhead, and 38 was the number of carries we had in a game that people swore we "didn't run the ball enough". When you're averaging two yards a carry, how much should an offensive coordinator continue to call the run? 38 times seems like enough times to either find a rhythm and establish something, or give it the f#*k up. So when you can't run the ball, the only other way I know in this game that an offense can legally move the ball down the field is to throw it. So I'm assuming that's where the 49 passes comes from. It seems really logical to me, but very confusing for some others here. It's okay, it's not just you.

How the hell could you have ever watched Tim Becks offense and then dare to even think of uttering those words? Haha! Not a chance in hell this offense is the most disorganized offense you've ever seen. Not unless you just started watching Nebraska football after Tim Beck was let go.

You really are circling the wagons when it comes to defending Riley. Trying to. Not with everything, but with some things. I don't like some of the issues he seems to be ignoring on this team. I really wish he'd take control of this thing and make some changes. Other than that though, I do think the firing talk is absolutely stupidity and I think he and his staff deserve a little longer than 10 months. At least maybe get a shot with some of their own recruits.

I'd love to hear the story behind this. Banderas was saying something to Collins afterwards and it appeared Collins didn't want to hear it. Then the timeout was called and Collins was being talked to by Riley and another coach on the team (not sure who). Collins did not come back out, not that he needed to. The game was over after that penalty if not already before that. Unfortunate. Again the leadership on this team is in a position to be questioned. Not a good sign. I never saw Gangwish speaking with Collins so I'm not sure about that. I wish somebody on this team would up the expectations and accountability a little bit, but I just don't know if we have that guy on the team right now. Hard to say without being in the locker room. .

Face the simple fact though, at Nebraska, you expect to have offensive linemen that can line up and smash the defense in the mouth for more than two yards per carry. No matter who is running the ball or who is calling the plays.

I guess I see where you say the tackle kicks out so in your world that doesn't count as an "outside" run, but in my world, if it's outside the tackle box then it's an outside run. The second one is borderline. I think he did try to bounce it outside, not sure if it is designed that way. Still proves my point. There was some very poor effort and execution up front. The plays I put in there from the 3rd quarter was just my mistake. I didn't see that when I made those GIFs. It'd be funny if we sat here and changed the argument to "why the hell did Langsdorf continue to run outside in the second half!?" considering the entire argument started with people on this board saying we needed to get creative and run outside more often instead of just running it straight down the middle. Yeah, some of the personnel decisions are baffling. I don't get it. I won't debate the personnel stuff, I agree. I'm just defending the playcalling. I think 38 carries is showing a fair amount of commitment to the run game, especially when every outside run was a tackle for a loss or darn near it, and the inside game only averaged 2 yards per carry. There's a reason they say it all starts up front. I just wish Tommy would make better decisions in the passing game and it would disguise some of the ugliness of the run game. Our passing offense could be scary good if we would just take what is there for the taking, but we continue to try to hit the home run ball and personally, I'm tired of watching it. The lack of progress is frustrating, but I didn't expect these coaches to be able to fix it all right away. I was hoping for more than what we are seeing but I'm beginning to think they're gonna need some new players in there to get things going in the right direction.

I'm not one to jump on the players usually and I know you're not either Kernal, but at some point folks around here need to acknowledge some fault in execution and effort instead of hounding this coaching staff every single week after we lose. In this game, lack of execution was evident as ever. It seemed like it was bash Langsdorf season on this board yesterday after the loss, and I agree, the offense was pathetic and cost us the game, but it wasn't playcalling. When the six times you tried to run outside you were stopped for a loss or no gain, you don't draw up more "creative" runs to the outside. That's stupid.

There's what I've got so far. That's from the first half. From what I can round up from stats, we ran the ball 16 times in the first half, and there's six plays that we went outside. I think that is all six times that we tried to run outside in the first half. I haven't gotten to the second half to see how much we tried it in the second half, proabably have to do that another night. Maybe a "ton" was a strong statement. It was only about a third of our carries that went outside. Maybe they stuck out to me more because they were so ugly. Honestly, I'd hope to find less outside running plays in the second half based on the looks of these plays. It'd be more of an indictment on Langsdorfs playcalling if he listened to you guys and went outside with the run game. It was clearly not happening on Saturday. Point proven in those six GIF's there alone.

Please let us know which plays were the runs to the outside. There's three of them in GIF's on the first page. So "a ton" = three? And running inside a kickout block is not running to the outside. That's what's known as "off tackle". That's not what I said. I said there's three of them in GIF's on the front page. And that's it? Yes, those three are the only ones I made GIF's of and they're on the front page. So, like I said, to you "a ton" = 3. No. There's 3 GIF's of runs to the outside on the first page. And which others? The ones in the game that I didn't make GIF's of that aren't on the first page. I imagine at some point in the game we kind of backed away from trying to go off tackle to one side of the field at least. Not sure about the other side of the field. There was a NW defensive end that was having a really good game owning one side of the field. Not sure how much we went outside on the other side. I'll have to rewatch again and keep track for ya sometime. When I said a "ton" I didn't mean we ran 2000 lbs. to the outside Mavric. Sorry you took it so literal. We gave the outside run more than it's fair share of establishing itself. If you've felt your argument is so dead that you want to argue semantics on my use of the word ton, I can assure you we do not have a 2000 lb. running back, although I'm sure at some point someone will complain that Langsdorf should run 2000 times during a game. So if there were so many of them it shouldn't take you very long to come up with a list of examples, right? It didn't take long at all, I gave three examples in GIF form this morning on the first page. I can look back and find examples where runs up the middle went for yards and didn't go for yards too. I don't think the problem is where we ran the ball. The play calling was fine. It's just that the plays weren't executed very well.

Please let us know which plays were the runs to the outside. There's three of them in GIF's on the first page. So "a ton" = three? And running inside a kickout block is not running to the outside. That's what's known as "off tackle". That's not what I said. I said there's three of them in GIF's on the front page. And that's it? Yes, those three are the only ones I made GIF's of and they're on the front page. So, like I said, to you "a ton" = 3. No. There's 3 GIF's of runs to the outside on the first page. And which others? The ones in the game that I didn't make GIF's of that aren't on the first page. I imagine at some point in the game we kind of backed away from trying to go off tackle to one side of the field at least. Not sure about the other side of the field. There was a NW defensive end that was having a really good game owning one side of the field. Not sure how much we went outside on the other side. I'll have to rewatch again and keep track for ya sometime. When I said a "ton" I didn't mean we ran 2000 lbs. to the outside Mavric. Sorry you took it so literal. We gave the outside run more than it's fair share of establishing itself. If you've felt your argument is so dead that you want to argue semantics on my use of the word ton, I can assure you we do not have a 2000 lb. running back, although I'm sure at some point someone will complain that Langsdorf should run 2000 times during a game.

Please let us know which plays were the runs to the outside. There's three of them in GIF's on the first page. So "a ton" = three? And running inside a kickout block is not running to the outside. That's what's known as "off tackle". That's not what I said. I said there's three of them in GIF's on the front page. And that's it? Yes, those three are the only ones I made GIF's of and they're on the front page. So, like I said, to you "a ton" = 3. No. There's 3 GIF's of runs to the outside on the first page.

Please let us know which plays were the runs to the outside. There's three of them in GIF's on the first page. So "a ton" = three? And running inside a kickout block is not running to the outside. That's what's known as "off tackle". That's not what I said. I said there's three of them in GIF's on the front page. And that's it? Yes, those three are the only ones I made GIF's of and they're on the front page.

Please let us know which plays were the runs to the outside. There's three of them in GIF's on the first page. So "a ton" = three? And running inside a kickout block is not running to the outside. That's what's known as "off tackle". That's not what I said. I said there's three of them in GIF's on the front page.

Please let us know which plays were the runs to the outside. There's three of them in GIF's on the first page.

Tom Herman actually has long term potential wherever his next stop is. Riley is just an old man padding his retirement account. Riley is? Well I'll be..... We better fire him. Its the only logical thing to do. I wish we'd have known that about him before we hired him. You must be pretty close to the situation to claim that knowledge.

Fire Tom Herman before he's even hired! That's how Nebraska does business! Hell ya!

We tried to run the ball to the outside a ton in this game. You better go back and rewatch it. Northwesterns DE was in the backfield all day long, and it's not because we block the edges well.

In the OP, True, you say "the Blackshirts played great overall". Those are your exact words. What part of playing "great" allows a terrible offense to rack up 23 points and can't make a stop in the 4th quarter? http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/76978-banker-mcmullen-big-time-commodity/ Post #10. But what is evidence I thought this game was a pretty strong effort. The Minnesota game wasn't horrible, but against Northwestern was a pretty solid effort all around. A few breakdowns here or there, but I think the offense was given more than enough opportunities to put this game away. And I mean by a lot. I still wouldn't say a mediocre Minnesota performance and a pretty solid Northwestern performance overrides the times we've looked pretty bad. This defense still has a ways to go, but I give em credit in this one. It was a good effort by them for the majority.

Our offensive coordinator should call plays that have a high degree of success. Running Newby who is a speed back up the middle a majority of the time, forcing Tommy Armstrong to be Tom Brady, forgetting you have Janovich to use in short yardage situations is not ever going to be successful. Signed, Logic Which ones? You keep saying that. Which plays should he call that have a high degree of success? I'm willing to bet that the plays that we execute on, end up working well, and the plays we don't execute on, don't work. So which plays would you call?