Hercules

it got ROME's attention, per his status update: Mr. Suh almost tears Jake Delhomme's head off, and it's kind of awesome... (link)

Did anybody hear Rome's take on his show this morning?

Touchdown, Aaron Green. 68 yards.

Am i the only one who hopes they never do that this year? If there is even the slightest chance that that was the reason we lost to Iowa st, then i never want to see it again.

Yes, I'm certain that the tunnel walk was to blame for that loss.

 

Their arms were ruined after the arm in arm walk, how else do you explain the fumbles?

Arm in arm? Why would you want to emasculate the entire team right before kickoff? No white skirts with red stripes available? I don't want to dosie-do with a dude right before playing football.

Seriously, guys? Nobody else remembers the greatest and most vicious college football team of all time entering the field holding hands? Didn't seem to affect their ability to completely physically dominate everyone they played.

Why are people arguing about this? Yes, Sipple tweeted that Martinez has a "buzz" which he said like 4 months ago, and other than that there's NOTHING new to this storyline. We're not going to know anything real about the QB situation until gameday.

NO

http://my.journalstar.com/post/Husker_Extra_Group/Husker_Extra/blog/a_lot_of_hitting_going_on.html

 

One member posts that he "heard" that Fish broke his leg today.

 

Lot of hear say. I want facts.

 

USC confirmed through their sources that Fisher was carted off the field with a broken leg. Matt Schick tweeted that one of the photographers who work for the TV station he is affiliated with was at practice and confirmed the same thing.

Yeah, Schick, Sipple and Kugler all tweeting that Fischer was carted off the field.

http://my.journalstar.com/post/Husker_Extra_Group/Husker_Extra/blog/a_lot_of_hitting_going_on.html

 

One member posts that he "heard" that Fish broke his leg today.

 

Lot of hear say. I want facts.

Yeah, he probably "heard" it on a message board like this one.

Accept the bullseye. Love the bullseye. It will only make us stronger.

The only problem I would have running a true option game, would be a pass-run ratio. Let's be honest, you cannot win big games in today's college football world with a 95-5, 90-10, 85-15 RUN to PASS ratio, you just can't. We could get away with running the ball every play almost back then, because no one could touch us in the weight room, and we changed up our defense which in-return brought us National Championships. Defense wins championships and with that I think you could run any offense, but I just can't see a RUN to PASS ratio like the ones I listed above, I think you need to be able to do both.

 

I would be all in favor of keeping our current "style" of offense [Ace, I-Form, Shotgun, Wildcat [that pains me to say it] Pro, Flexbone multiplicity of formations] but have the THREAT to run the OPTION as well has have a POWER RUNNING game out of ANY and EVERY formation, WITH the decent threat of a downward pass. What made our passing solid during those years, was the fact we RAN so well it SET UP the play-action pass.

 

It would take a little bit of time to get the pitches down and some of the blocking formations, but if we kept it a little limited, sprinkled it in for every formation but didn't rely on running the option the entire game, I think it could be do-able. You definitely need to work with the running backs for a power game between and outside the tackles and not just hope your quarterback can outrun the defense like Crouch did most of the time, and yes, I shudder to think how things could have been for Solich without him.

 

For example,

 

On first down you could come out in a Maryland I formation and run straight at them. Then on 2nd and 4 come out in an Ace Trips formation and run a 5 step drop passing play, and then on 3rd down or if you convert 1st down on the pass play, come out in a 5 WR set and run a motion option with the slot receiver. Then on the next play you could line up in a Shotgun formation with 2 running backs and throw some Playaction Zone Read , with the slot going underneath, the X receiver on a fly route, and the Y receiver on a post route, if nothing is open take off and run, and then after that, run the Wildcat formation, after that line up in I-Form Twins WR set and run an Option to the weak side away from the wide receivers unless it's zone, then you motion one of the receivers over to help chip the corner-back.

 

The bottom line I think is Multiplicity with Balance. The effective ability to keep the defense guessing, while having a solid passing attack and a brutal running game. A good RUN to PASS ratio to me would be 65-35, 60-40, or 55-45, and this would have the ability to use ball control when ahead, and to be able to pass when needed to or when behind.

 

The problem I think most of us see with this is that it's incredibly difficult to have that on a yearly basis. It would be a highly complex offense to learn and therefore you might struggle to get your best athletes on the field immediately, which is something Osborne was always able to do.

 

I also get a little tired of hearing people say you have to be "multiple" in order to keep the defense guessing. Just because you run the ball most of the time doesn't mean you're not keeping the defense off-balance. There's a huge diversity of blocking schemes and running plays and playaction passes that Osborne used to constantly keep defenses honest.

 

Point well taken, and I agree with what you said about Osborne, but if I were running the show, I would make SURE the BEST athletes got on the field, in some way shape or form. Which is why we have to get Mike McNeill more involved, get Robinson involved, and even have Martinez on the field in some capacity. I know we got speed, and size on the sideline. If it takes "dumbing down the playbook" to get them on the field, then that's what I would do, or at least simplify it. Our quarterback needs to be balanced or a mobile one, as much as I loved Zac Taylor, the way we are going is mobile quarterbacks, because it's just another weapon the defense has to account for, to create a mismatch obviously.

 

I agree things need to be more simple and shortened, it amazes me how simple some of our playbooks were when I saw the 1997 and 2001 playbooks, simply astonishing. Having multiple formations with fewer plays, instead of multiple formations with multiple plays, may solve some of the problem where guys aren't seeing the field. And I would totally be against having a guy need to know "the whole playbook" before entering, but make sure everyone feels comfortable with what they got or what we can run if it came down to simplifying or dumbing it down.

 

I believe Pelini also said he wanted to go to a Spread Option attack, and I know Osborne said recently if he were still coaching that is what he would run, something that West Virginia or Florida runs, with a few traditional sets I'm sure too.

Yeah, based on what Pelini has said in the past and what we started to see in the Holiday bowl, I think our offense will probably be a mixture of the Spread Option and the type of offense Alabama runs, whatever that might be called.

Here's my mock-up of what it'll look like come gameday.

The only problem I would have running a true option game, would be a pass-run ratio. Let's be honest, you cannot win big games in today's college football world with a 95-5, 90-10, 85-15 RUN to PASS ratio, you just can't. We could get away with running the ball every play almost back then, because no one could touch us in the weight room, and we changed up our defense which in-return brought us National Championships. Defense wins championships and with that I think you could run any offense, but I just can't see a RUN to PASS ratio like the ones I listed above, I think you need to be able to do both.

 

I would be all in favor of keeping our current "style" of offense [Ace, I-Form, Shotgun, Wildcat [that pains me to say it] Pro, Flexbone multiplicity of formations] but have the THREAT to run the OPTION as well has have a POWER RUNNING game out of ANY and EVERY formation, WITH the decent threat of a downward pass. What made our passing solid during those years, was the fact we RAN so well it SET UP the play-action pass.

 

It would take a little bit of time to get the pitches down and some of the blocking formations, but if we kept it a little limited, sprinkled it in for every formation but didn't rely on running the option the entire game, I think it could be do-able. You definitely need to work with the running backs for a power game between and outside the tackles and not just hope your quarterback can outrun the defense like Crouch did most of the time, and yes, I shudder to think how things could have been for Solich without him.

 

For example,

 

On first down you could come out in a Maryland I formation and run straight at them. Then on 2nd and 4 come out in an Ace Trips formation and run a 5 step drop passing play, and then on 3rd down or if you convert 1st down on the pass play, come out in a 5 WR set and run a motion option with the slot receiver. Then on the next play you could line up in a Shotgun formation with 2 running backs and throw some Playaction Zone Read , with the slot going underneath, the X receiver on a fly route, and the Y receiver on a post route, if nothing is open take off and run, and then after that, run the Wildcat formation, after that line up in I-Form Twins WR set and run an Option to the weak side away from the wide receivers unless it's zone, then you motion one of the receivers over to help chip the corner-back.

 

The bottom line I think is Multiplicity with Balance. The effective ability to keep the defense guessing, while having a solid passing attack and a brutal running game. A good RUN to PASS ratio to me would be 65-35, 60-40, or 55-45, and this would have the ability to use ball control when ahead, and to be able to pass when needed to or when behind.

The problem I think most of us see with this is that it's incredibly difficult to have that on a yearly basis. It would be a highly complex offense to learn and therefore you might struggle to get your best athletes on the field immediately, which is something Osborne was always able to do.

I also get a little tired of hearing people say you have to be "multiple" in order to keep the defense guessing. Just because you run the ball most of the time doesn't mean you're not keeping the defense off-balance. There's a huge diversity of blocking schemes and running plays and playaction passes that Osborne used to constantly keep defenses honest.

'The magic of the option offense at Nebraska left when TO retired'.

It ain't coming back. Jeez, let it go people, let it go. please...

 

Yeah, thank God it's gone and not coming back. Now we've got all those awesome horizontal passes and a running threat that does great vs SunBelt teams.

 

 

TO or Solich for 31 years never had an offense that could match last year.

 

Notice I said at Nebraska, the option offense by itself isn't a miracle worker, but it can be effective. It just ticks me off when people think the option itself made Nebraska effective, it was TO and the coaching staff that did it! There were TONS of teams in the 70's, 80's and 90's that ran it with little success. Heck, even when TO didn't have the proper athletes it sometimes didn't work, especially in big games. And it was even worse when Solich took over, our 2003 offense was arguably worse than our 09 offense, and our 2002 offense was pretty bad also.

 

The problem we had in big games (bowl games) in the 80s were generally a result of our defense more than our offensive system. Everybody thought we needed to switch to an air-it-out offense like Florida State and Miami in order to beat them, and TO thought in order to beat Miami and Florida State, we needed to play defense like they did. The switch to the 4/3 and getting way more speed on the defensive side of the ball while basically keeping the offense the same = 60-3 record from 1993-1997 with 3 national championships.

Similarly, it's a little tough to compare the 2002 and 2003 offenses to the 2009 offense, because both of those teams had defenses that were far inferior to the one we fielded last year. If we had either one of those offenses playing along with last year's defense, forget about it. Big 12 champs, at least. Jammal Lord nearly single-handedly beat a good Texas team without the help of Ndamukong Suh (just now thinking about him scrambling for 30 yards on nearly every pass play we called may have just made me change my mind and hope that Martinez wins the job...)

What made the 2009 offense truly memorable was just how awful they were even with all of the opportunities afforded them by our fantastic defense.

The opposite of this, of course, would be the 2007 team, where the defense was SO bad that they gave up touchdowns in the same amount of time it would take last year's defense to get a 3 and out. So, the offense could score 51 points and still lose by 2 touchdowns.

You might want to re-read the final paragraph. He claimed that LARGE athletic linemen aren't required by the option, and that there are a lot of athletic linemen in the 6-3, 280# range that we would have our pick of since other schools overlook them.

We had large, athletic linemen. It's a minor thing, but something I noticed.

On some of those mid-90's teams, Nebraska's linemen were plenty big, but not the kind of linemen other teams recruit. If you're running a pro-style offense, you're looking for guys that were 6'6" or 6'7" and have huge wingspans. Nebraska's dominant lines in the mid-90's were more stout, and they had great feet. They generally ranked more in the 6'2" range. So it is a different type of athlete. However, I have no idea if the type of athlete we had on offensive line in the mid-90's was any more rare than your typical pro-style offense lineman.

As far as the option offense goes, it's still the toughest offense to defend when it's run correctly.

Good lord, I want a true freshman running back like THAT again. Ahman Green ftw.

Smith played some very quality time against Oklahoma when Asante went out hurt, and people should be careful not to put Asante and O'Hanlon up on a pedestal. They were lights out at the end of the year, but there were holes early on (Virginia Tech anybody?) I highly doubt that 2 days of practice have led the coaches to any decisions on who might be their top 2 safeties, and I'm guessing that regardless of who ends up starting, they'll begin the year at a higher level then O'Hanlon and Asante did last year.

 

Cheap shot, AND I think those who placed all of the blame on O'Hanlon were wrong. The CB/LB was just as much to blame. Just because one person is close to the person who makes the catch does NOT mean that it was their sole responsibility. Quite to the contrary actually. That person might be trying to correct a coverage mistake by someone else.

 

O'Hanlon and Asante were both VERY good. They won't be easily replaced.

 

Edit: toned down a bit . . .

I'm not trying to dump on O'Hanlon, or Asante, and I'm not trying to say that they'll be easily replaced. My point was that while they were "lights out" at the end of the year, they weren't perfect at the beginning of the year (the V-Tech debacle was just the most prominent example of a mistake being made).

I also think that if you look at the past, Pelini and Sanders have been able to get a high level of play from inexperienced safeties in a short period of time. In 2003, Pelini's first year as defensive coordinator, the Bullocks brothers had a great year, with Josh Bullocks pulling down 10 or so picks.

I also think that when you put O'Hanlon and Asante in perspective, they're not as tough to replace as many safeties Nebraska has had in the past. That's more what I meant when I said not to put them up on a pedestal. Asante went in the lower rounds of the draft, O'Hanlon wasn't drafted, and Nebraska is a school that has had to replace the likes of Mike Minter, Eric Warfield, Tony Veland, Mike Brown, Josh Bullocks, etc etc.

Replacing O'Hanlon and Asante will be tough, but I kind of feel like fans are fretting about it just to fret about something. Given the coaching ability and the athletic ability in the defensive backfield, there's absolutely no reason to think that this year's secondary won't be just as good as last year's. It'll probably be better.

The pickle juice is supposed to help with muscle cramps.

"His nostrils are a foot and a half wide." --- Artist

Say it to his face.

What did we do that is so unprofessional in his mind? I didn't listen when he took callers questions, but what did we do that in his mind was giving the rest of the Big 12 the "middle finger" as he puts it?

the press confrence "they(nebraska) made a spectacle of it" he's also including the regents meeting in that as well as "unnessary"

Amusing. I imagine KU and MU would have acted in a more "professional" manner had they received the offer.

Please dont group MU in with this idoit. He is a KU product. Got canned in STL not long ago and 810 wouldnt take him back (for good reason) he was nothing more than an annoying sidekick on 810 for years. I have hated him for a long time. He is a rambling idiot

he's a foolish dolt

he's a vociferous schnook.

I like how one of his arguments is that Nebraska should want to stay because the Big 12 North is so weak. Way to dump on all the schools you're rooting for.

Smith played some very quality time against Oklahoma when Asante went out hurt, and people should be careful not to put Asante and O'Hanlon up on a pedestal. They were lights out at the end of the year, but there were holes early on (Virginia Tech anybody?) I highly doubt that 2 days of practice have led the coaches to any decisions on who might be their top 2 safeties, and I'm guessing that regardless of who ends up starting, they'll begin the year at a higher level then O'Hanlon and Asante did last year.

Offense- Joe Ganz; He knew the offense better than Watson.

 

Defense- Demorrio Williams; Remember how much of a beast he was when Bo was our DC.

I agree with this.

 

QB/O-Line is where our biggest weaknesses are, so I would think that improving one of these positions would improve the offense the most. I am unsure of how much of an impact one lineman could make when the rest are average, so I say pick a QB. And our playbook and personnel are built perfectly for Joe Ganz. We aren't built to run triple options anymore, so I don't think a Frazier or Gill would be as effective as they were when they actually played.

 

Defensively, biggest weakness is clearly linebacker. Demorrio Williams, Carlos Polk, Trev Alberts, etc. Either one of those would be exceptional.

 

I'd hope Watson would be able to adjust his Offense to the players he was delt (unless Callihan's inability to adjust rubbed off too much on him)...I think he could do some damage with a Turner Gill or Tommy Frazier pulling the trigger.

 

It's probably also unfair to compare our current Offensive line to our great ones of the past..In the past, we were blazing new trails in weight training/conditioning/creative medicine..Our Great Offensive Linemen were going against much weaKer competition relatively speaking whereas now the competition has more than caught up.

 

But then I also fail to see what was so special about Ganz or Z.Taylor..They were more than servicable, but I doubt much better than Lee will be..But how well will he be at not getting hurt again? Few teams make it with the same guy starting through the whole year.

 

 

I highly doubt this thread would even have mention of Ganz or Z.T. ten years from now.

That's because we've seen them succeed in this offense before. All of the other QB's haven't played in this offense, so how do we know they will succeed or not. I know we could just go by their strengths, but that doesn't neccessarily mean that they would succeed in this offense. Would your rather have a QB that we know has been successful in this offense or one that we aren't so sure how well they would play in this system.

I would take Frazier or Gill in ANY offense over Zac Taylor or Joe Ganz.

And frankly, no one outside of the team/staff knows what "this offense" is going to look like. It's not going to look like it did last year, or in 2008, or in 2006. The best hint at where this offense might be going is the Holiday bowl, and recent recruiting (Brion Carnes, Jamal Turner, Bubba Starling)...

Still can't believe people are arguing for Zac Taylor and Joe Ganz over Tommie Frazier, Turner Gill, Vince Ferragamo, Brook Berringer, Jerry Tagge, Dave Humm, Scott Frost, Eric Crouch, Dennis Claridge etc etc etc...

My question is why are following not part of the 105 man fall roster linebacker Micah Kreikemeier, offensive lineman Nick Ash, cornerback Lazarri Middleton, defensive back Josh Mitchell and receiver Kenny Bell?

Talk was that Nick and Kenny could play this year

Well, according to previous posters, Mitchell and Middleton got into some trouble this summer... Kenny Bell has a hamstring injury, and Pelini said he was about 10 days away from being healthy, so they decided to give his fall camp spot to someone else that could make the most of the camp.

As for the others, I haven't seen any details anywhere.

Lazari Middleton is also not on the roster.

 

Team That'll Surprise

Colorado – There will be some rough moments with road trips to California, Oklahoma, Missouri and Nebraska, and a home game against Georgia won’t be a peach, but the Buffaloes are just experienced enough, and just motivated and angry enough, to finally start to make positive steps under Dan Hawkins. Taking care of the winnable home games against Hawaii, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, and Kansas State is a must, and coming up with a win in the opener over Colorado State could make or break the season before it really gets started, but the pieces are there to come up with a winning season.

 

[/i]

Wrong.