Interesting stat on NU's OL performance

[lo country]

Reading the article, Rhule and Co have their work cut out wanting to develop a team that wins the games in the 4th by running and body blows.  

 

According to the graphic, the Cornhuskers managed just 1.76 yards per rush before contact. That sounds bad on its own. It means the Nebraska football team was 57th among 69 Power 5 programs in the country.

https://huskercorner.com/2023/07/08/nebraska-football-offensive-line-struggles/?fbclid=IwAR2uNBSWxpku68PruKxjTfDhW6AOs-g-HvDUaZh_c2GHv7T70uwMMD9Jv40

[lo country]

To add, I am unsure stats from the previous years, but I am assuming this might have been a huge reason our goal line or 3rd and short play calling went against the "norm" on down and distance.  Hard to pick up 3rd and short when we get less than 2 yards before contact.  And have not had backs that can truly bulldoze guys.  Also might be the reason we saw so many RB's quickly bounce to the outside. I am also assuming that this stat was not from the LOS, but from getting the handoff.  This would mean that the majority of the time 1st contact was at or behind the LOS.  Some one smarter please correct if the LOS not handoff is the starting point.

[brophog]

A couple things on this.

 

While the Big Ten, particularly the teams on the back end of Nebraska's schedule, did have some of the best run defenses in the nation, practically every team on the schedule held Nebraska to less than their opponent's rushing average.

 

Now, the good news (maybe) is a lot of this is play calling. The Indiana game is a good example. Early in the first quarter, Indiana was playing with 2 high Safeties and their LBs backed off and Nebraska ran the ball quite well. By the end of the first quarter, however, Indiana adjusted and Nebraska didn't. There were times they can bring 8 in run support vs only 6 blockers. Indiana would actually spend a decent amount of the game with all 11 guys within 5-10 yards of the LOS.

 

If you're a team ranking very low in this stat, you're giving up a lot of early penetration, and while the offensive line and RB play a part in that, the offensive design has to use their formations and play calling to limit those opportunities and punish teams that get too aggressive.

 

UCLA, which led the country in this stat, blocked well, but they also used a lot of cross motion. They pull LB's out of the box so they can't get that early penetration. You see a lot of times in their games LBs that don't know if they should follow that man or not and that little bit of hesitancy often meant they either found a hat on them or the RB was going the other way. A play they loved to run was to have a backside wing come across the formation. They could either throw to him, have the QB keep it running behind him, or give to the RB going the other way. That level of deception simply wasn't in Nebraska's offense last year.

 

 

 

 

[Huskerfollower4life]

15 minutes ago, brophog said:

A couple things on this.

 

While the Big Ten, particularly the teams on the back end of Nebraska's schedule, did have some of the best run defenses in the nation, practically every team on the schedule held Nebraska to less than their opponent's rushing average.

 

Now, the good news (maybe) is a lot of this is play calling. The Indiana game is a good example. Early in the first quarter, Indiana was playing with 2 high Safeties and their LBs backed off and Nebraska ran the ball quite well. By the end of the first quarter, however, Indiana adjusted and Nebraska didn't. There were times they can bring 8 in run support vs only 6 blockers. Indiana would actually spend a decent amount of the game with all 11 guys within 5-10 yards of the LOS.

 

If you're a team ranking very low in this stat, you're giving up a lot of early penetration, and while the offensive line and RB play a part in that, the offensive design has to use their formations and play calling to limit those opportunities and punish teams that get too aggressive.

 

UCLA, which led the country in this stat, blocked well, but they also used a lot of cross motion. They pull LB's out of the box so they can't get that early penetration. You see a lot of times in their games LBs that don't know if they should follow that man or not and that little bit of hesitancy often meant they either found a hat on them or the RB was going the other way. A play they loved to run was to have a backside wing come across the formation. They could either throw to him, have the QB keep it running behind him, or give to the RB going the other way. That level of deception simply wasn't in Nebraska's offense last year.

 

 

 

 

Even though Scott Frost had been around a whole bunch of good coaches do you think that his inexperience as a head coach played apart of him not adjusting to what the other teams were doing once they made the adjustments themselves or was it just he was so stuck in his ways he figured if he kept running plays a certain way that eventually he would be able to crack one open?

[brophog]

30 minutes ago, Huskerfollower4life said:

Even though Scott Frost had been around a whole bunch of good coaches do you think that his inexperience as a head coach played apart of him not adjusting to what the other teams were doing once they made the adjustments themselves or was it just he was so stuck in his ways he figured if he kept running plays a certain way that eventually he would be able to crack one open?

 

A couple of things before I answer that.

 

When I talk last year's offense, I'm referring to Whipple.

 

Second, Frost's offenses weren't all bad. A couple ranked in the Top 25 in yards per play and a couple others were basically mid tier. The bigger problem was scoring. Field position seemed like a constant issue, the kicking game was often problematic, the offense simply weren't good enough in the redzone, and so a lot of yards were wasted on stalled drives that got into plus territory. One stat I put on here recently was a comparison of his yards per point vs Rhule's of the same period. I like that stat because it's not just an offensive stat, it really reflects how well all three phases interact when it comes to scoring. Short story, Nebraska was dreadful in that category during Frost's entire tenure.

 

To answer your question, I don't know the answer. Certainly many believed his dual role as HC and OC had a lot to do with it. Problem is they didn't make the change until he was dead man walking, and I don't think the marriage of him and Whipple was a particularly good schematic fit. Preparation was probably also an issue. He'd make comments in his pressers about how a team came out in a defensive front he wasn't expecting and apparently that means you can't run your offense anymore.

 

I don't know why it all didn't really come together because there are some really good concepts in that offense.

[lo country]

3 hours ago, brophog said:

A couple things on this.

 

While the Big Ten, particularly the teams on the back end of Nebraska's schedule, did have some of the best run defenses in the nation, practically every team on the schedule held Nebraska to less than their opponent's rushing average.

 

Now, the good news (maybe) is a lot of this is play calling. The Indiana game is a good example. Early in the first quarter, Indiana was playing with 2 high Safeties and their LBs backed off and Nebraska ran the ball quite well. By the end of the first quarter, however, Indiana adjusted and Nebraska didn't. There were times they can bring 8 in run support vs only 6 blockers. Indiana would actually spend a decent amount of the game with all 11 guys within 5-10 yards of the LOS.

 

If you're a team ranking very low in this stat, you're giving up a lot of early penetration, and while the offensive line and RB play a part in that, the offensive design has to use their formations and play calling to limit those opportunities and punish teams that get too aggressive.

 

UCLA, which led the country in this stat, blocked well, but they also used a lot of cross motion. They pull LB's out of the box so they can't get that early penetration. You see a lot of times in their games LBs that don't know if they should follow that man or not and that little bit of hesitancy often meant they either found a hat on them or the RB was going the other way. A play they loved to run was to have a backside wing come across the formation. They could either throw to him, have the QB keep it running behind him, or give to the RB going the other way. That level of deception simply wasn't in Nebraska's offense last year.

 

 

 

 

Great point to the bolded.  Pelini was the last coached that seemed to be able to counter an aggressive D.  Those teams also seemed to have better talent than we have seen since then as well (all throw in coaching staff also).   We seem to have forgotten ways to call plays to punish a D that simply fires off the ball with their ears pinned back.  

[brophog]

1 hour ago, lo country said:

Great point to the bolded.  Pelini was the last coached that seemed to be able to counter an aggressive D.  Those teams also seemed to have better talent than we have seen since then as well (all throw in coaching staff also).   We seem to have forgotten ways to call plays to punish a D that simply fires off the ball with their ears pinned back.  

 

It was certainly there at times under Frost. The Michigan game I remember they were always walking Safeties up, playing a lot of 1 high and the first couple of TDs we caught them. I think an RPO to Allen and Rahmir (I think) got that wheel route.

 

That's all in the past, though, I'm only really interested in what Satterfield will do in this regard.  He says he wants to be a 'positionless' offense, and I hope he means that because I think we have a few guys that could make that idea interesting.

[Undone]

On 7/9/2023 at 11:49 AM, brophog said:

Now, the good news (maybe) is a lot of this is play calling. The Indiana game is a good example. Early in the first quarter, Indiana was playing with 2 high Safeties and their LBs backed off and Nebraska ran the ball quite well. By the end of the first quarter, however, Indiana adjusted and Nebraska didn't. There were times they can bring 8 in run support vs only 6 blockers. Indiana would actually spend a decent amount of the game with all 11 guys within 5-10 yards of the LOS.

 

The bold is the dynamic I've been talking about for many seasons now, and you can replace 'Indiana' with so many other games in the Frost era.

 

There were a couple seasons where Scott did try some alternatives to work the ball outside when the line was struggling. Might have been the 2019 season where the swing pass was so vilified by fans (but can't quite remember). I seem to recall 2020 & 2021 being seasons where Frost would try the inside zone handoff over and over in the first half and when it was inevitably stuffed in so many games, the game would be put on Martinez to improvise to move the chains.

 

I think it's hard to define what the threshold is for a team that's struggling because of play calling. To be honest I tend to doubt our results would have differed much last season if Whipple had gotten it into his head to run a bunch of cross motion like you mentioned with UCLA. A good chunk of the starting 11 in general was flat out piss poor with execution, for whatever reason.

 

Satterfield doesn't strike me as all that creative just from his resume - but all young coaches have lots of room to grow and maybe he really surprises some people this season. Actually, it's maybe not creativity that's needed as much as just the ability to see how to counter what the other team is lining up with.

[Toe]

On 7/9/2023 at 11:23 AM, lo country said:

To add, I am unsure stats from the previous years

 

Football Outsiders has quite a few O-line stats, although they don't have average rush yards per contact. One stat they have that's probably pretty close is stuff rate - carries by the RB that are stuffed at or behind LOS. There, we ranked #77 out of FBS (not just P5). That was down from #60 the previous year. Another one is power success rate - runs on 3rd or 4th and 2 or less that resulted in a 1st down or TD. We went from #82 in 2021 to #61 in 2022. Kinda hard to draw a clear trend between the two years (and OL coaches) - overall neither was great, obviously.

 

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaa/sp/overallol/2022

[Undone]

2 hours ago, Toe said:

One stat they have that's probably pretty close is stuff rate - carries by the RB that are stuffed at or behind LOS. There, we ranked #77 out of FBS (not just P5). That was down from #60 the previous year.

 

Damn, that's a bad look for sure. Ugh.

[brophog]

14 hours ago, Undone said:

Satterfield doesn't strike me as all that creative just from his resume

 

It's interesting that you'd use that word. He was not popular at South Carolina, and one of the common complaints was that his offense was too complicated...too many personnel groups, too many formations, and too many plays. There's the narrative down there that the offense played better in those final 3 games and two reasons they've cited for the improvement was that he either wasn't calling the plays anymore or the offense was simplified. (They were still lining up tight ends at running back against Tennessee, so if someone else was calling the plays he must also have a fetish for tight ends.)

 

In the context of this thread, his rushing numbers at SC are not encouraging in the slightest. They had 4 games averaging less than 2 yards per carry, and in 2 of those they averaged less than 1.5. Two of those opponents were borderline Top 100 rush defenses. It's pretty hard to average less than 2 yards per carry because you basically get that for just falling forward. Maybe they had short running backs.

[I am I]

Feels good to be on a wait and see approach. 

throw everything out except the schedule and who the players we have heading into the season, plus health. Everything else remains to be seen. 
At  least we have a head coach in July 

[twofittyonred]

20 hours ago, Undone said:

 

The bold is the dynamic I've been talking about for many seasons now, and you can replace 'Indiana' with so many other games in the Frost era.

 

There were a couple seasons where Scott did try some alternatives to work the ball outside when the line was struggling. Might have been the 2019 season where the swing pass was so vilified by fans (but can't quite remember). I seem to recall 2020 & 2021 being seasons where Frost would try the inside zone handoff over and over in the first half and when it was inevitably stuffed in so many games, the game would be put on Martinez to improvise to move the chains.

 

I think it's hard to define what the threshold is for a team that's struggling because of play calling. To be honest I tend to doubt our results would have differed much last season if Whipple had gotten it into his head to run a bunch of cross motion like you mentioned with UCLA. A good chunk of the starting 11 in general was flat out piss poor with execution, for whatever reason.

 

Satterfield doesn't strike me as all that creative just from his resume - but all young coaches have lots of room to grow and maybe he really surprises some people this season. Actually, it's maybe not creativity that's needed as much as just the ability to see how to counter what the other team is lining up with.

[twofittyonred]

The kool-aid has been poured for months now but I havent sipped it yet...  to many variables...  I refuse to fall for the banana in the tail pipe trick again...  very excited though..!!  GBR!!! 

[Undone]

19 hours ago, brophog said:

 

It's interesting that you'd use that word. He was not popular at South Carolina, and one of the common complaints was that his offense was too complicated...too many personnel groups, too many formations, and too many plays. There's the narrative down there that the offense played better in those final 3 games and two reasons they've cited for the improvement was that he either wasn't calling the plays anymore or the offense was simplified. (They were still lining up tight ends at running back against Tennessee, so if someone else was calling the plays he must also have a fetish for tight ends.)

 

In the context of this thread, his rushing numbers at SC are not encouraging in the slightest. They had 4 games averaging less than 2 yards per carry, and in 2 of those they averaged less than 1.5. Two of those opponents were borderline Top 100 rush defenses. It's pretty hard to average less than 2 yards per carry because you basically get that for just falling forward. Maybe they had short running backs.

 

I don't know if lining up in lots of different looks and having pre-snap motions and things like that are necessarily in the category of "creative," though. The defense is usually still manning up against their same assignments; that stuff amounts to frills a lot of the time. Not necessarily any real substance to it, nor with having a massive playbook.

 

Creativity in this context is probably more of doing something out of any given set that the defense isn't expecting, or doing something that the defense isn't expecting situationally. I'm not sure if Satterfield did that last year for the gamecocks.

 

But the rushing stats you shared are probably bigger issues. That looks like Mike Riley Ball type stuff. Some of Frost's stats probably even look like that (when excluding Martinez's scrambles from the data).