Hujan

I still, for the life of me, don't understand why people think the fan angst has such a big impact on recruiting separate and apart from the reason for the angst in the first place. For one, as long as the stadium is full on game days, it is only relevant if one assumes that fan angst will translate into a coach's firing and we all know that ADs don't fire successful coaches just because the fans are in uproar (assuming fans would even be in uproar if the coach was successful, itself a dubious assumption). Two, it unrealistically assumes that other programs experiencing similar problems are magically going to have much more patient, well-behaved fans than ours. But if you're read any other teams' message boards, you'd know that the angst is at best a wash and, more realistically, other teams' boards make Nebraska's message boards look like The Reading Rainbow. You think Texas, USC, LSU, or Alabama have less caustic boards than Nebraska? They will tar and feather their coaches if the margin of victory is not to their liking. Half of our fanbase would feel guilty about getting angry at Riley if he tortured dogs in his free time and would probably find a way to blame themselves for him doing it. Blaming the message boards for paltry recruiting is at once a very arrogant and very self-loathing thing to say, IMO.

Depends how it's ingested. A pipe on a frequent basis is maybe not awesome. A vape or water-based device is perhaps less of an issue. If I were to have ever engaged in such activities, I would have found that it had a surprisingly insignificant effect on my cardio. Allegedly.

For this offense we also need a high quality passing qb and high quality receivers. If we had all of that, this offense would be very exciting. See, that's the problem with the pro-style offenses. In order to be great, it requires great talent across the board at every position. It can work at schools like USC or Alabama or Florida State, where it's easy to recruit to. But, spread and option offenses don't require amazing talent up and down the offensive roster. Colorado ran a pro style offense in the early 2000's under Gary Barnett and they whipped us in 2001 62-36. Wisconsin/Bielema ran a pro style power run offense when they destroyed us in the B1G 70-31. Bielema continues to use a power run pro style offense. So, I disagree with you that it can only work at schools like USC, Alabama, Florida State. Nebraska has to get better up front and become a more physical unit in that regard. Nebraska can be a physical team like Stanford, Alabama, and others if it is the mentality they acquire and work their butts off. This is a great point and is lost on many people. "Pro-style" is not necessarily the problem. Traditionally, a "pro-style" offense is mostly a reference to being under center and tighter formations with more TEs and RBs and fewer WRs, traits that were historically a trademark of NFL offenses. This fact has become blurred as more NFL teams have adopted "spread" concepts with QBs in shotgun or even Pistol formations with 3-4 WRs and single-back sets and TEs whose skillsets are less "offensive lineman" and more "wide receiver." But, as you point out, a "pro-style" offense does not have to be pass-dominant. There are examples of more run-oriented pro-style systems that worked quite well. Over the last decade, the Ravens might as an example. Certainly the Seahawks the past complete of seasons. I'd also argue the Vikings. In the college ranks, Wisconsin is perhaps the most obvious example, with Stanford another possible example. The common-denominator in those offenses is a strong offensive line, RBs who can run between the tackles, and an offense that does not ask the QB to put the team on his back every play like Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Peyton Manning, and Tom Brady have to. With a good enough line, TEs, and RBs, a very mediocre QB who is careful with the ball and decently accurate can command a very, very productive offense. Elite QBs are very rare at the NFL level. At the college level? Give me a break. That is why the most consistently successful programs at the college level have a strong running game. Sure, you can point to some flash-in-the-pan programs who had a lot of success airing it out, but it's fleeting and very dependent on having the rare elite QB at the helm. The Mariottas, Lucks, Leinarts, and RGIIIs of the college world are few and far between. Better to focus on recruiting stout linemen, tight ends, and running backs (in that order), than to hope you land that rare elite QB who can make a pass-heavy offense work on a consistent basis. And that's not even taking into account the region/weather. If you are in the midwest or rustbelt, it's even more imperative.

I agree. It was especially concerning to me when he called a pass play in the waning moments of the game and killed the clock after a negative run play. That could have backfired on us but it didn't so not a lot of people are talking about it. I'd like to believe Langsdorf has learned from this season not to take play calling for granted and is able to manage a game better. Agree. The 3rd and 1 pass play on the drive that resulted in the field goal had me upset. We were bulldozing them and could have had 1st and goal from the 2 while taking another minute plus off the clock. This is what has caused the Husker fans to go nuts all year long. Passing the ball from the one foot line on third down drives me crazy. We were running the ball for 3-7 yards pops all game long, and then the OC throws the ball from the one foot line. I don't think the OC can help himself, he is pass first oriented and wants to pass the ball. The West coast and NFL teams do this all the time and this is what he believes will work. Look how it played out this year. It can and does work, when you have an offensive line that can consistently provide protection, a quarterback that doesn't throw off his back foot regularly and you need receivers that reliably catch the ball. (UCLA had 1 drop iirc.) Since we don't have any of that on a consistent basis, you'd agree it was foolish of Langsdorf to try it, right? Look, when we have Tom Brady under center and Gronkowski on the end of the line, he can throw it from the one foot line all he wants. Until then, RUN THE f'ing BALL.

I like seeing cool swag on the players. It's little things like that that maybe get kids excited about playing for DONU. I will say that the youngins' do seem to be into the gear and looking fresh out there, which I dig. After all, when you look good you feel good, and when you feel good you play good.

I've heard good things about the Davis twins, but I am surprised people keep penciling them in at the DT spots. Last I looked, they were listed at ~250 lbs., which is WAY too small to play DT in the Big Ten. They will get plowed over. As bad as Banker's D was at times, it could at least count on two +300 lbs. tackles plugging up the middle. If you put in two 250 lbs. tackles, teams are going to start doing to us what we did to UCLA. We'd have problems stopping the run AND pass. IMO, if they are that light, I'd like to see what the Davis twins can do on the outside. If they have the athleticism to be premier pass rushers, having a tandem like that on the outside with a couple big heavies to plug the middle would be amazing.

My opinion on Armstrong's status as the starter really depends what Riley & Langsdorf want to do with the offense. If they insist on a pass-first offense and aim to sling the ball around 35-40 times a game, then you can't start Armstrong IMO and even a rookie QB who is a prototypical pocket passer (i.e., POB) would be better. But if they are open to a power-run offense that uses the run to setup the pass and limit Armstrong to ~20 passes a game, then I think Armstrong's experience, moxie, leadership qualities, and overall athletic ability justify starting him over a freshman QB, particularly insofar as it allows POB a year to grow into his body and adjust to the college game without the risk of damaging his confidence from starting him off too early with high expectations.

Good list. For some reason, I thought Maurice was a senior, but your list made me check. Wow, I feel a LOT better about losing Collins now. Maurice is no Collins, but #55 was a very disruptive force when he was healthy. Not sure about Kalu at the other corner spot. He seemed out of position a lot this year. I think he is very talented, but I wonder if he doesn't get passed up by one of the redshirts. Would love to have picked up a JUCO DE and maybe slide McMullen inside. Regardless, next year's squad could be very salty if we stay healthy.

To predictable? Didn't hurt Iowa Mich St to much. There are a ton of other teams that are pretty predictable and had a lot of success I'd rather be unpredictable than predictable. I'd rather have the defense guessing what's coming next. i would rather show you something you can't stop and dare you to adjust. Yup. Let's recruit some big nasties in the trenches and feed the ball to Ozigbo. Unpredictability and change of pace can come from play-action passes to the TE or a streaking WR downfield.

LJS If you don't have the mind-set that you can pound the rock against people, it's unlikely to happen. Yup. Can't just wait to run power against smaller, overmatched teams. Gotta man up and dedicate yourself to running against the stouter teams, too.

You know what other teams's rush defense had been abysmal all season long? Purdue: This season the Boilermakers gave up about 220 yards per game on the ground. Although I wish I had at-the-game statistics to see where Purdue was immediately before the contest, I do know they've given up about 244 yards per game on the ground in their last 3 games, so the average would've been slightly lower at the time of the Nebraska game. Nevertheless, they were and are the worst rush defense in the Big Ten. For this game, I'm only going to focus on Nebraska's playcalling when it was a 3-possession game in the first half, and a 2-possession game in the second half; Nebraska was inexplicably down big this game, which forced us to pass in order to chip away at Purdue's lead--that's inevitably going to skew the split. Nebraska's First Possession (1st quarter tied 0-0) Terrell Newby rush for 4 yards Ryker Fyfe pass incomplete Ryker Fyfe pass complete to DPE for 12 yards Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Brandon Reilly for 13 yards Terrell Newby rush for 1 yard Brandon Reilly rush for 20 yards Terrell Newby rush for 3 yards Terrell Newby rush for 18 yards Terrell Newby rush for 2 yards DPE rush for a loss of 5 yards Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Brandon Reilly for 2 yards Drew Brown 41 yard field goal good Breakdown: 7 rushes (5 RB, 2 WR), 4 passes (75% completion rate) Nebraska's Second Possession (1st quarter, trailing 7-3) Terrell Newby rush for 3 yards Terrell Newby rush for 3 yards Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Jordan Westerkamp for 4 yards Terrell Newby rush for 2 yard loss Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Terrell Newby for 13 yards Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Jordan Westerkamp for 20 yards Imani Cross rush for 3 yards Terrell Newby rush for 2 yards Ryker Fyfe rush for 24 yard loss; FUMBLE recovered by Purdue and returned to Nebraska's 16 yard line Breakdown: 5 rushes (5 RB, 0 WR); 3 passes (100% completion). Nebraska's offense was doing a pretty good job moving the ball both through the air and on the ground. It's a shame that that snap sailed well over Ryker's head, and that he didn't just fall on it. But that's game inexperience for you. Nebraska's Third Possession (2nd quarter, trailing 14-3) Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Jordan Westerkamp for 14 yards Terrell Newby rush for 22 yards Ryker Fyfe pass incomplete to Brandon Reilly Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Devine Ozigbo Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Stanley Morgan for 20 yards for a TD; PAT Blocked Breakdown: 1 rush, 4 passes (75% completion, TD). Again, Nebraska had 0 problems moving the ball both through the air and on the ground. Nebraska's Fourth Possession (2nd quarter, trailing 14-9) Ryker Fyfe rush for 8 yard loss (assuming this was a called pass/sack) Ryker Fyfe pass incomplete Ryker Fyfe rush for 3 yards (once again assuming that this was a called pass that Fyfe decided to scramble on) Breakdown: 0 rushes, 3 passes (0% completion). This was an unbelievably bad series for Langsdorf, considering where Nebraska was (inside their own 20) and given Purdue's inability to stop the run at this point in the game. Also notice the lack of WR runs in the last couple of series, which is just another way to mix up the running game. Very strange. Nebraska's Fifth Possession (2nd quarter, trailing 14-9) Imani Cross rush for 4 yards Ryker Fyfe pass intercepted returned to Nebraska's 22 yard line. Breakdown: 1 rush, 1 pass (0% completion, INT) Purdue has just punted the ball after consecutive 3-and-outs, and Nebraska was pinned inside their own 10 yard line, which again makes the decision to throw the ball very, very strange and it resulted in giving Purdue the ball in good field position. Nebraska's Sixth Possession (2nd quarter, trailing 21-9) Imani Cross rush for a 1 yard loss Ryker Fyfe rush for 7 yards (assuming this was a called pass play) Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Stanley Morgan for 3 yards Breakdown: 1 rush, -1 yards, 2 passes (100% completion). Part of what's frustrating about Danny's playcalling this season is his impatience with the running game. We don't get a big gain running on 1st down, so the next play is automatically a pass play. Nebraska's Seventh Possession (2nd quarter, trailing 21-9) Ryker Fyfe pass incomplete to Jordan Westerkamp Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Cethan Carter for 15 yards Ryker Fyfe pass incomplete to Jordan Westerkamp Ryker Fyfe pass INTERCEPTED and returned to Purdue's 19 yard line. Breakdown: 0 rushes, 4 passes (25% completion, INT). The possession started with 1:19 left in the half on Nebraska's 38 yard line, so the passing is a little more acceptable. Nevertheless, I think Nebraska still had all 3 of their timeouts at this point so the clock still could have been stopped. Just want to note: Nebraska's defense was stout for that second quarter, only giving up 87 yards on 26 plays (3.34 yards per play). Unfortunately they were put in unfavorable positions twice and gave up touchdowns on both those possessions. Nebraska's Eighth Possession (3rd quarter, trailing 21-9) Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Jordan Westerkamp for 5 yards Imani Cross rush for 2 yards Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Jordan Westerkamp for 4 yards Ryker Fyfe pass incomplete to Devine Ozigbo Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Lane Hovey for 16 yards Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Devine Ozigbo for 30 yards Ryker Fyfe pass incomplete Imani Cross rush for 9 yards, TOUCHDOWN Breakdown: 2 rushes, 11 yards, TD; 6 passes (67% completion--1 RB, 3 WR). A solid drive, a lot of passing, but a few of those passes to running backs which are about as good as run plays. So not a bad drive to start the second half. Unfortunately, the defense couldn't prevent Purdue from scoring. Nebraska's Ninth Possession (3rd quarter, trailing 28-16) Imani Cross rush for 6 yards Ryker Fyfe pass complete to Jordan Westerkamp for 13 yards Ryker Fyfe pass incomplete Ryker Fyfe pass incomplete to Devine Ozigbo Ryker Fyfe pass incomplete to Jordan Westerkamp Breakdown: 1 rush, 6 yards, 4 passes (25% completion--1 RB, 3 WR). Drive started well enough with a solid rush by Imani and a completed pass to Westerkamp, but three consecutive incompletions stalled out the drive. Nebraska's Tenth Possession (3rd quarter, trailing 35-16) Down by 3 possessions, Nebraska passed once and it was intercepted Nebraska's Eleventh Possession (3rd quarter, trailing 42-16) Down by 3+ possessions, Nebraska scored Nebraska's Twelfth Possession (4th quarter, trailing 42-23) Down by 3 possessions, Nebraska scored again Nebraska's Thirteenth Possession (4th quarter, trailing 42-31) Ryker Fyfe pass INTECEPTED Nebraska never got the ball when it was a 2 possession game. So, let's take a look at the breakdown. Nebraska ran it 18 times and passed it 31 times when the game was still considered "close". Against the worst run defense in the conference, that's just inexcusable. tl;dr Nebraska gave up on the running game too early against Purdue, but it's hopeful for that future that Nebraska continue to take advantage of a weak run defense when given the chance; even after going down 21-7. Edit: I don't know what happened with code...so enjoy the bold! Shouldn't we ask how we got behind against Purdue in the first place? Did it have anything to do with incompletions in the pass game so that our O was off the field quickly and our D on far too long? Not to mention the turnovers by our unseasoned backup QB? Had we abandoned the run last night and gone to the pass when we were down 21-7, the game would have snowballed very quickly. Sure, we might have made a late run in garbage time to keep it respectable, but we would have lost and probably by a couple TDs. Establishing the run keeps our O on the field our D off, chews clock, slows down the tempo, and opens things up for the pass for us to make big plays down field. This stuff is honestly so easy, I'm alarmed that Langsdorf refuses to recognize it for what it is.

Now that the off-season is officially upon us, who do you think starts on O and D in 2016? My guesses: OFFENSE QB: Tommy Armstrong RB: Devine Ozigbo FB: ??? TE: Cethan Carter WR: Jordan Westerkamp WR: Stanley Morgan OT: Nick Gates OG: ??? C: ??? OG: ??? OT: ??? DEFENSE DE: Freedom Akinmoladun DT: Vincent Valentine DT: Kevin Williams DE: Greg McMullin OLB: Michael Rose-Ivey MLB: Josh Banderas OLB: Dedrick Young / Marcus Newby CB: Chris Jones FS: ??? SS: Nate Gerry CB: ???

People will point out that UCLA is weak against the run and that's true, but we shouldn't just wait to run against the weak teams. That is a defeatist mentality. We should impose our will on our opponents, not the other way around. Stanford piled up 311 rush yards against UCLA, but they also piled up a lot of rushing yards against other teams. We may not have put up 300 rushing yards against everyone we played, but committing to the run* would have been a sounder offensive strategy than asking your athlete QB to sling the ball 40 times a game in foul weather. Anyone who doubts that Langsdorf is, at bottom, scared to run and defaults to throwing should no longer dare open their mouths after watching Langsdorf throwing the ball on short "goal to go" situations on not one but TWO drives late in the game, until even he knew that he would be shot if he didn't run it. And guess what, we punched the ball in for the game-sealing TD. *"Committing to the run" means more than just the run-pass ratio. That is a factor, but so too is putting your best foot forward by entrusting the ball to your best running back (i.e., not Newby), bringing in some heavies to block, and dialing up some creative plays.

Tommy makes mistakes but he also needs to be put into position to succeed. He's at his best when he's commanding a strong rush attack and can use the run to setup the pass. He is not going to be effective throwing 30, 35, or 40 times a game. Limit his passes, dial up some shorter routes to bring up his confidence, and let him throw off of play-action and he will succeed. It's really not rocket science and I hope the coaches finally understand how to best use Tommy.

Bummed but not surprised. It would have been awesome to have him back next year, but I wish him the best at the NFL combine.

Agreed.

It only took all year. Now, if we can just get our defense up to snuff...and Langsdorf can learn his lessons...Riley may actually be successful next season. Question is--why the f*** did it take them all this season to learn these lessons? Old, stubborn coaches BS. UCLA stinks against the run. So we ran. Go look at our running stats against Iowa. We ran there too, but not for a lot of yards because their run D was better than UCLA's. Run D is their weakness and we took advantage. That's it. That game plan doesn't work against everybody. What part of the game plan called for a pass on 2nd down when we're trying to run out the clock? No doubt UCLA's D called for a run-heavy attack, but so did Purdue, even without your second-string QB in the game. The coaches could have, and should have, leaned more on the run this year. It's as simple as that.

HELL YES!!!!!!! Told you guys accepting the bowl bid was a good idea.

Why did we get away from this stuff? Stop with the single-back sets. Run power FFS.

Thank you.

Good gain, but let's please take Newby out and put Jano in with either Cross or Ozigbo behind him. Two hands on the ball.

NICE PLAY!

Rick Neuheisel's kid, I believe. Looks like a very ugly girl.

NOW RUN THE f'ing BALL THREE STRAIGHT TIMES, LANGSDORF, YOU STUPID SONUVABITCH!!

He literally called the 2nd down play on 3rd down and the 3rd down play on 2nd down. Literally.