CBS: Four things Matt Rhule must do to get the Cornhuskers back to relevancy

[Saunders]

Quote

 

At some point this spring, billions of cicadas will emerge from the ground across the eastern half of the United States. Some will have been underground for 13 years, while others will have been waiting for 17 years. Regardless of the time each cicada spent in the cold, damp Earth, awaiting the moment to finally see the sun and be eaten by a bird, they will all ask the same question.

 

"What the hell happened to Nebraska football while I was down there?"

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/nebraska-football-at-a-crossroads-four-things-matt-rhule-must-do-to-get-the-cornhuskers-back-to-relevancy/

 

[Saunders]

Quote

Since 2018, Nebraska kickers have converted 67% of their field-goal attempts. That number ranks 120th nationally. The success rate drops to 44% on attempts over 40 yards, which ranks 124th.

 

I knew our kicking hasn't been great... but woof.

[Dogs In A Pile]

Well researched article and seeing detailed how utterly dreadful NU has been over the last few years in TO, passing and kicking it's almost surprising we've won as many games as we did.

 

Quote

As a team, Nebraska turned the ball over on 20.1% of its possessions last season.

 

Michigan was 3% for comparison, 7X better than DONU. 

[caveman99]

6 hours ago, Dogs In A Pile said:

Well researched article and seeing detailed how utterly dreadful NU has been over the last few years in TO, passing and kicking it's almost surprising we've won as many games as we did.

 

 

Michigan was 3% for comparison, 7X better than DONU. 

That is absolutely mind blowing, how is it even possible to turn the ball over on 1/5th of your offensive possessions. Makes you really appreciate what the Blackshirts did last season even more.

[UniversalMartin]

41 minutes ago, caveman99 said:

That is absolutely mind blowing, how is it even possible to turn the ball over on 1/5th of your offensive possessions. Makes you really appreciate what the Blackshirts did last season even more.

You have to want to turn the ball over that much

[Undone]

I maintain that by and large, the turnovers have less to do with inferior talent than they do with the players being so scared of making mistakes. So many of our guys are playing tight and scared instead of loose and confident. I think there's also just a general sense of desperation that obviously does way more harm than good.

 

I'd count the false starts as being tied to this as well. Now of course we fielded two QB's last season that really were 6'4" running backs and that was a big part of the problem, but you can still just throw the ball out of bounds or take a sack instead making some of the throws those guys made.

 

This is where position coaches and overall team culture is really important. Change the mindset of stepping onto the football field.

 

The article was good. And to the fourth point (keeping the defensive momentum), giving Tony White a 60% raise was the cornerstone to that. We probably should have just made it an even doubling of his salary, the guy seems to just be that good.

 

 

[Mavric]

Just now, Undone said:

I maintain that by and large, the turnovers have less to do with inferior talent than they do with the players being so scared of making mistakes. So many of our guys are playing tight and scared instead of loose and confident. I think there's also just a general sense of desperation that obviously does way more harm than good.

 

I guess I've tended to think that it's more the opposite.  We've lost a ton of games by one score and so they're forcing things to try to "make a play" that will get us the win.  But when you're pressing that hard for that long, you're bound to make mistakes.

[Lorewarn]

5 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

I guess I've tended to think that it's more the opposite.  We've lost a ton of games by one score and so they're forcing things to try to "make a play" that will get us the win.  But when you're pressing that hard for that long, you're bound to make mistakes.

 

 

I think you're mostly saying the same thing as undone, and agree with the general sentiment. I think that was the verdict on Adrian in a certain sense - his ceiling was 9 gamebreaking highlights per game and they kept us in the game, but we needed him to have 10, and that final one was often the one that killed us.

[Undone]

8 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

I guess I've tended to think that it's more the opposite.  We've lost a ton of games by one score and so they're forcing things to try to "make a play" that will get us the win.  But when you're pressing that hard for that long, you're bound to make mistakes.

 

Good point there that there is maybe a separate, more specific discussion that is focused on second half turnovers.

 

Still so many examples though (and we could even pick ones from last season) where I feel like you can basically just write off the late-game turnovers because of the first half mistakes. We're often times playing tense and scared from the opening kickoff, and that sets up the failures at the end of a game.

[brophog]

On 5/6/2024 at 12:25 PM, Undone said:

Still so many examples though (and we could even pick ones from last season) where I feel like you can basically just write off the late-game turnovers because of the first half mistakes. We're often times playing tense and scared from the opening kickoff, and that sets up the failures at the end of a game.

 

I don't feel you can write them off at all. As an example, see a post of mine from after the spring game comparing the final interception in the Maryland game to Raiola's first TD of the spring game. Same play, same read, better execution by both players and coaches in the spring.

 

Did the coaches start making bad decisions because they were scared of turnovers? At least in the Wisconsin game they did. Played super conservative for OT when the right choice was to attempt to win it in regulation. Hard to blame them based on previous games, though.

 

Too many fumbles were just sloppy ball handling, especially by the QBs. The interceptions were a combination of not recognizing defenses, especially Safeties and underneath Linebackers, and poorly executed routes and throws. A lot of the interceptions last year were clean pocket throws.  

 

I strongly feel, based on the tape, that the number one culprit was bad execution. Not pressure from the situation, often not even because of the opponent's pass rush, but bad execution. Sims threw the game sealing INT against Minnesota right to a Safety playing Cover 1. That ball should never be thrown against that Coverage, but he did that kind of thing constantly. He just can't seem to read a defense. His third pick against Maryland comes game tied, 12 mins left, 1st and 10, cleanest pocket you could ever ask for......throws it into triple coverage.

[Undone]

11 minutes ago, brophog said:

I strongly feel, based on the tape, that the number one culprit was bad execution. Not pressure from the situation, often not even because of the opponent's pass rush, but bad execution. Sims threw the game sealing INT against Minnesota right to a Safety playing Cover 1. That ball should never be thrown against that Coverage, but he did that kind of thing constantly. He just can't seem to read a defense. His third pick against Maryland comes game tied, 12 mins left, 1st and 10, cleanest pocket you could ever ask for......throws it into triple coverage.

 

These are both really good examples. Definitely a good point that when a QB intentionally throws to a guy who is covered like glue, that's an execution problem by the quarterback.

 

I do still think that a lot of mistakes the team has made over the last six seasons are rooted in some kind of team psychology/mentality sort of thing. I think that checks out with how our relative recruiting talent level stacks up against so many of these middling Big 10 teams...in yet we're on a seven year skid of losing seasons and constantly rank in the top 5 or top 10 in turnover.

[brophog]

45 minutes ago, Undone said:

I do still think that a lot of mistakes the team has made over the last six seasons are rooted in some kind of team psychology/mentality sort of thing.

 

I care about fixing the things that were bad last year and making the things that were good, better. In that vein, a lot of what we did this spring were plays we ran last year. Those plays were run so much cleaner this spring. The execution was by no means perfect, but the proof of concept that we can fix these things is on tape. It's now a question of taking the confidence gained this spring in knowing we can execute and refining that through summer workouts and fall camp.

 

52 minutes ago, Undone said:

I think that checks out with how our relative recruiting talent level stacks up against so many of these middling Big 10 teams

 

I don't think securing the football is a talent issue. Put two hands on the ball, they rip it free....those things happen at times. Watching your QB dangle the football out like he's feeding a horse some carrots, that's just not acceptable on any level. 

[Undone]

19 hours ago, brophog said:

I care about fixing the things that were bad last year and making the things that were good, better. In that vein, a lot of what we did this spring were plays we ran last year. Those plays were run so much cleaner this spring. The execution was by no means perfect, but the proof of concept that we can fix these things is on tape

 

I need a second watch this weekend, but I noticed that we seemed a little more committed to "spreading out" a bit on offense. We weren't, like, a spread offense. But formation-wise and what we did out of those formations I was really encouraged by what I saw.

 

My line of thinking: if we've brought in more talent at QB and WR, lining up in 22 man personnel is potentially a waste of your weapons. Now calling out 22 man personnel is a bit of an intentional overstatement as we really didn't run that much of it last year, but you know what I mean.   

[brophog]

11 hours ago, Undone said:

I need a second watch this weekend, but I noticed that we seemed a little more committed to "spreading out" a bit on offense. We weren't, like, a spread offense. But formation-wise and what we did out of those formations I was really encouraged by what I saw.

 

Very much so. The spacing was way better on the offense, and we can do it in some interesting personnel packages.

 

I'll go back to my favorite example from the game, Raiola's first TD to Bonner. 3x1 set, the single side is an inline TE. It was a receiver much of the day, but in this example it's a TE who along with the RB stay in for a 7 man protection. Bonner is in the 'big slot' about 2 gaps off the Tackle, and of course, two WR out side of him.

 

That big slot could be a TE/HBack/WR....whatever we're calling things in this offense....but we have several athletic big bodied 220 lb-ish guys that could play there. On that play, the defense has to defend the full width of the field because as we saw Raiola can make that long throw from the far hash, and yet it's effectively out of 12 personnel where you can still run the ball with mismatches in the blocking game. 

 

Haarberg a few drives later hits Barney on the go route using the same formation, except he's the single WR on the short side. He gets 1 on 1 because the defense rotated to Cover 1 to cover the 3 man side. Here's how that formation's ability to run the ball helps the passing game. On that play, the RB is aligned to the single receiver side in Shotgun, meaning the running strength is to that 3 man side, a big reason why the defense rotates that way. Barney is going to be a helluva WR, and this formation gives him the opportunity to use those remarkable talents of his.

 

The width was better, but the playcalling using that width was also so much better. Again, 3x1 set with the single on the short side, defense rotates wide to account for the strength and they throw a RB screen to that near side. Next play, same setup, seam route on the wide side where if that defender drops to cover it, there's a drag coming from across the field.

 

4 plays I listed, all some form of 3x1 to the wide side and all three stress the defense in different ways. All of those screens to slots, tight ends, hbacks, running backs, all of that stuff helps establish width and then with that width we hit Corner routes, Seam routes and Go routes.

[BigRedBuster]

28 minutes ago, brophog said:

 

Very much so. The spacing was way better on the offense, and we can do it in some interesting personal packages.

 

I'll go back to my favorite example from the game, Raiola's first TD to Bonner. 3x1 set, the single side is an inline TE. It was a receiver much of the day, but in this example it's a TE who along with the RB stay in for a 7 man protection. Bonner is in the 'big slot' about 2 gaps off the Tackle, and of course, two WR out side of him.

 

That big slot could be a TE/HBack/WR....whatever we're calling things in this offense....but we have several athletic big bodied 220 lb-ish guys that could play there. On that play, the defense has to defend the full width of the field because as we saw Raiola can make that long throw from the far hash, and yet it's effectively out of 12 personnel where you can still run the ball with mismatches in the blocking game. 

 

Haarberg a few drives later hits Barney on the go route using the same formation, except he's the single WR on the short side. He gets 1 on 1 because the defense rotated to Cover 1 to cover the 3 man side. Here's how that formation's ability to run the ball helps the passing game. On that play, the RB is aligned to the single receiver side in Shotgun, meaning the running strength is to that 3 man side, a big reason why the defense rotates that way. Barney is going to be a helluva WR, and this formation gives him the opportunity to use those remarkable talents of his.

 

The width was better, but the playcalling using that width was also so much better. Again, 3x1 set with the single on the short side, defense rotates wide to account for the strength and they throw a RB screen to that near side. Next play, same setup, seam route on the wide side where if that defender drops to cover it, there's a drag coming from across the field.

 

4 plays I listed, all some form of 3x1 to the wide side and all three stress the defense in different ways. All of those screens to slots, tight ends, hbacks, running backs, all of that stuff helps establish width and then with that width we hit Corner routes, Seam routes and Go routes.

And, if the running strength is to the 3 WR side and the RB is lined up on the 1 WR side and you run a few running plays to the 3 WR side, there should be an opportunity for a quick pitch to the RB going to the 1 WR side, correct?