brophog

The one thing no one is tweeting is where the PAC is getting mo money from. Until that happens, people are gonna keep flirting with other dance partners.

This is more entertaining than an actual PAC football game.

They were pretty similar in terms of limiting explosive plays in 2021 until late where some injuries got to them. They've done very good there the last two years. That's the upside of those stats. The downside is they allowed the opposition to move the ball pretty consistently last year. Now, the opponents moved the ball slowly which aided in allowing Syracuse to grind out wins against lower ranked teams. Also note, they didn't have some massive talent that just wrecked shop, either. As talent rises, so should these numbers.

Coach Rhule might be taking Kemp into the dark alley, but I'm taking Gabe Ervin.

A couple of things I'd say in that. First, Steele bases his models strongly on returning production, and for good reason. It tends to correlate year on year with wins at this level. So given the turnover Nebraska has had over the years, not to mention the poor record, those rankings should not come as any surprise nor do they really tell us anything we don't already know. I want to address this passage from SSO, specifically. Going in reverse order, I'll address Sims running ability. He is very much a pass first QB. This is not Lamar Jackson or Michael Vick here. His running ability is not where his bread is buttered. He's a better athlete than Charlie Brewer and PJ Walker, Rhule's first two QBs but he's similar in how you'd want to use him. Certainly call some designed QB runs, but do it smartly. The big thing I want to address is to say completion percentage is not accuracy. Accuracy is the ability to place the ball where you want. It's a component of completion percentage, but things like play calling and decision making are as important as mechanics. With Sims, it's really important to highlight this because he's shown he's capable of games with a good completion percentage, even if his overall average isn't what you'd want. Case in point, 2022: 7 games, overall 58.5% 23/36 63.9% vs Clemson 21/32 65.6% vs UCF 23/34 67.6% vs Duke In 3 of his 7 games, these are the kinds of numbers we'd like to see. Where's the problem? 11/26 42.3% vs Pitt This is typical of Jeff Sims the past 2 years. A few games he puts up a good percentage and a few are big stinkers. Looking at his games at Georgia Tech, by and large his placement is pretty good. Satterfield has mentioned a few things he'd like to address that can help that, and that's something to watch for. What I see that causes problems is when Sims' process gets sped up. He can be woefully inaccurate when that happens. In the media days he talked about bulking up and the reporters all saw that from a running perspective, but it's my hope that it gives him the confidence to stand in the pocket and deliver the pass he wants to deliver. You don't want to have your QBs take anymore shots than necessary, but Tom Brady wouldn't have played 200 years if the rules weren't made to protect QBs in the pocket, either. From a play calling perspective, what I've said about insulating the offensive line in the past goes here, too. Keep those chains moving. In that game against Pitt, as an example, GT was constantly in 2nd and 10, 3rd and Long. Pitt was throwing every garbage blitz they had at them and GT's receivers weren't getting open. Good recipe for a 42% completion day.

Rhule brings up the Iowa game to the players a lot. Some of that is it was the last game. Some of it is because it was probably the most significant win in a long time. A lot of it is because of what you guys are talking about. (Notice how often he's pairing offense and defenses together in the dorms, probably not a coincidence.) There are times in a game that if you make a play you greatly increase your chances of winning. Sometimes that's late in the game, sometimes it is early in the game. Against Iowa it was early. Got that fumble in the 2nd Quarter already up 10-0. Punched it in to go up 17-0, which is a huge score against that particular opponent. But the next Iowa drive they went 3 and out and on that drive Nebraska played as fast and aggressive as they had in years. That's what Rhule's teams at Baylor and Temple did well. They didn't often blow teams out and they didn't put up gaudy stats, but they more often than not won these little stretches that decide winning and losing.

If we play as well as we talk to reporters, this will be a helluva football team.

If they can get something out of the QB, they may not be quite so much sit around and wait for the clock to expire.

The sad part is most of those lines were in the 30s....

The end game is when the TV contracts go bust.

What did Rhule say the other day in regards to young players finding playing time? They got to know the playbook. In his opinion, that's what keeps younger guys from seeing more playing time. That's his way of saying he has to trust they know what they're doing. You're talking a different context than football, but you hit the nail on the head. The reason coaches often play the upperclassmen and not the talented young guy is simply trust. Anyone wondering why they should feel this Year 1 is different than Temple and Baylor.....it's because this extended conversation we're all having here didn't happen at those stops. Rhule didn't get what he wanted out of his upperclassmen and so he played the young guys even if it meant they'd lose every game. That's not what we're seeing here. I get the strong feeling these guys are tired of losing and they seem to be embracing this more structured approach.

Others have made that comparison and I don't really like it. The Peso was really just a big nickel. It was a nickel - LB hybrid and none of the calls really changed when it was implemented. It was not much more than a personnel change, imo. Pelini always wanted to be in 2 high Safety. That was a base philosophy that everything else flowed from. That's where he differs so greatly from White who will use a lot more coverage shells and fronts than Pelini did. Subsequently, this Rover role (+and everyone else) has need to be much more versatile than the Peso role did.

You learn the best by teaching. A lot of these players in interviews are talking about teaching other players, often times the younger guys. That's not a completely selfless act at the end of the day, they're making themselves better, too. You really find out how well you know something when teaching it to others. It's nice they're moving people between groups and making them 'uncomfortable' as Rhule says. If you're the 3rd string QB when you get on the field, it's now your offense. If you were a 3rd string LB in fall camp, you may be 1st string on a cold afternoon in late November due to injuries. You don't want that player acting like he's the 3rd string guy just because he wasn't treated that way up to that point.

This is also why play action is effective even if the offense hasn't been particularly good at running the ball. For the vast majority of snaps, the ability to instantly read your keys allows you to play very fast. Against something like play action, it also means there is a slight hesitation before you realize your response is wrong. This is also why film study is very important. The offense will often leave little hints as to what they're doing. WR line splits may slightly change, an OT may open his stance more expecting a pass rush, an offensive coordinator may have a strong tendency to call draws on 2nd and 10 from his territory. What White was trying to tell the reporters today, and I'm not sure they understood because they're all trying to write the articles for pregame instead of Day 2 of camp, is he's focusing right now on them playing fast. The details will come with time. This defense isn't about being super gap sound and hoping the one guy free makes the tackle. It's about creating chaos and knowing you can create chaos because 10 other guys are running to the ball. The reporters are unintentionally and probably unknowingly doing a disservice here asking players about roles and responsibilities when White's message right now is just violence, aggression and running to the ball. To the player's credit, I think they've handled those questions well.

He's both. And he's neither. Maybe think of him like you would any other nickelback, because that makes everyone else's role make more sense, but he's not going to line up like your average nickelback. It largely depends on the call and the opposing formation. A guiding principle is the two safeties are your coverage guys and the Rover will usually occupy whatever role of those 3 deep players that requires the least coverage skills. A few practical examples. If you have a 2x1 set with 3WR that slot is usually a Safety whereas traditionally it's a nickelback. Rover is likely FS or in the box where he can get TE/HBack/RB types. If you have a 2x2 set with 4WR, those slots are usually a Safety with the Rover having some sort of deep responsibility. Against a jumbo look, a Safety will act as FS and the Rover will be down in the box like a LB. None of that is set in stone, White is a creative guy. But, I think you'll find that guiding principle above is a good rule of thumb to whether the Rover lines up more like a LB or S in any particular alignment.

Judging by his tape, Rover would make sense. Brian Urlacher played there under Rocky Long, they called it something different but it was very similar. He bulks up entering the NFL and becomes a MLB in a Tampa 2 system. So there's a lot of crossover, just depending on how want to develop a young guy and it sounds like they're still making a lot of those decisions. I know there has been some conjecture that they're bringing in too many DBs in recruiting, but in this defense that body type could potentially be molded into many positions.

All of this panty talk is getting me excited.

I'm going even further off topic of this thread, but in the name of clock management and time of possession, here is a good example of Rhule's usage. 2016 Navy vs Temple. Early in the game Temple has the playbook open. Go up 2 scores early in the 2nd quarter and they get the ball back. Out come the fullbacks and it's time to pound. Against most teams, it's probably too early to go into ball control mode, but this is Navy they are playing. Due to Navy's style of play, they're already going to limit the number of available possessions. So Temple is pound pound pound then they take a shot downfield and go up 3 scores. Navy pulls back a FG and Temple gets it with about 5 mins remaining in the 2nd half. Out come the fullbacks again, pound pound pound. Then they break a long run. Eventually get across midfield late in the quarter. Now you have a chance to score, so off come the fullbacks, jump into Shotgun and take some shots. They have to settle for a FG, puts them up 24-3 going into the half. Temple wins 34-10. One of the ways Rhule is going to turn those close losses into wins is clock management like this. It's not a question of playing fast or slow, it's more of a question of knowing when it's more valuable to use clock vs when it's more valuable to try to score. I thought this was a good, and particularly pertinent, example of this.

We all may be doing so and for a very good reason. There are a lot of pieces of this offense that just haven't been that productive. However, there is a lot of potential in this offense, it certainly not without talent. I just think offenses tend to have an easier time transitioning that defenses because they have more control of things. Defenses often need a few pieces to shore up their weaknesses because the opposing offenses can attack their weaknesses. On the flipside, there are many productive offenses with significant weaknesses that still do quite well because they can choose to find other ways of moving the ball. Me too. What we saw in the spring and what we heard at B10 media days match: a QB that is maturing into a team leader. I'm very excited to see him play.

Rushing is also an inverse correlation to winning. Obviously there are a handful of teams that run the ball regardless, but for the vast, vast majority teams that is the case. That's why you'll often here stats like a team having a ludicrous winning percentage when rushing for 200 yards despite the fact the game has greatly trended towards the passing game at all levels. If rushing for 200 yards was the great secret to winning an extremely high percentage of games, you'd think everyone would be lining up in the Maryland I.

I agree with this disagree. Rhule will look to do it responsibly, play action, max protect, that sort of thing, but he absolutely wants to take his shots down the field.

Yes, but not a lot. Charlie Brewer and PJ Walker were both capable runners, but not guys whom you build an offense around their legs. This is pure speculation, but based on how much Satterfield used the wildcat last year and some of the things we saw them try with Haarberg in the spring, I wonder if they're at least tinkering with the idea of using him in some wildcat-esque packages. A lot of defenses want to stay in 2 high these days which means they have trouble accounting for both the QB and RB. Yeah, you don't see many teams anymore really press the edge. It's more approach the corner and make a business decision.

Even though long term I'm much more excited about the defense, in the short term my thinking is this goes the other way. It's not really a complicated defense, but to maximize it you do need athleticism and versatility. We brought in some good pieces to aid there, but the new guys aren't bringing much experience with them. It's a high risk, high reward style of play and even in this first year i think it'll be exciting to watch, but mistakes will be costly. Meanwhile, the offense gained a tremendous amount of experience at QB, Center, and a Possession WR. I'm not saying either side 'carries' the defense, necessarily, but I think it gets up to speed quicker in Year 1 before the defense makes a tremendous leap in Year 2.

First, Time of Possession (usually) does not lead to winning, winning leads to being in a position to lead in time of possession. Time in which you have the ball is time in which you are not scoring. Sometimes possession is more important and sometimes scoring is more important, but it's an alternate possession game and you can't do both at the same time. If you have a big time of possession advantage and are successful in the game, then you more than likely have at least a pretty good defense that day. If you have a big time of possession advantage and your defense is doing poorly, then that likely means they're scoring very fast and (if) you're scoring it is very slow. That's usually not a relationship conducive to winning because long drives are harder to sustain obviously than quick ones. Teams that want to play a clock control game have to play decent defense because with the number of drives being low the clock quickly becomes their enemy if they get too far behind. Second, I don't think I agree that there even is a relationship in terms of Nebraska's defense and time of possession. The three lowest scoring opponents after the coaching changes were Rutgers, Wisconsin, and Iowa. Against Rutgers, Nebraska did have a TOP advantage but the number of plays were nearly identical (66 vs 68) and Nebraska only gained 4 first downs rushing. 29 rushes for 72 yards. Wisconsin dominated both TOP and the stats. Nebraska only gained 171 total yards that day. Iowa makes everyone's defense looked good. Note, though, this also wasn't a game in which Nebraska controlled the clock. Yes, they led in TOP, but only 3 rushing first downs and only 51 yards on 35 carries. Iowa ran more plays (65 vs 72) but Nebraska had the bigger plays. Indiana is the closest I would say to this relationship holding true, but under closer examination it falls flat, too. The defense held a shutout the second half, but what did the offense do? First 4 possessions of the second half: 6 plays, 19 yards, 2:33 PUNT 1 play INT 5 plays, -2 yards, 2:29 PUNT 3 plays, -5 yards, 1:46 PUNT Nebraska does break the 21 all tie with a 71 yard bomb to Palmer, and eventually has a 12 play TD drive, but that's the only drive of the half that is in any way a ball control drive. Meanwhile, Indiana went 3 and out on nearly every drive in the second half.

In some respects, the Wisconsin game last year is the best example of Nebraska football over the past 5 years. Five minutes and change left, the offense can win the game by maintaining possession and killing the clock. They do not. The defense gets on the field with about 3 minutes left, just needing to keep them out of the end zone. They do not. It's really about executing when the victory condition makes it self available. That doesn't even have to be in the 4th quarter. You could be about to go up 2 scores before half and be receiving it after halftime. That's a very strong position to be in with so few drives remaining. Nebraska has not executed well, regardless of time in the game or what unit was on the field, when victory made itself apparent.