TA Starting Per ESPN

[zoogs]

I just don't see that much value in a QB's home run threat running ability. It's nice, but it's extra.

[Mavric]

If we win out here and lose in the CCG- that means we would finish with 1 B1G loss and no more than 3 losses in total

Im guessing 95% of Husker fans including myself would call that a successful season- considering

Consider is a successful season? I would think so. Convince everyone that TM should be starting over TA? Depends on how he plays but somehow I doubt it.

[Mavric]

I just don't see that much value in a QB's home run threat running ability. It's nice, but it's extra.

I don't agree. Perhaps with Newby at RB that would be true. But AA and Cross really aren't home run threats so it's definitely an advantage to have someone in the backfield like that. There is no substitute for an instant six points.

[The King]

A good article on what Oregon is doing http://fishduck.com/...ower-read-play/

I disagree on formations, Oregon likes to formation

Zack Darlington down at Apopka FL was getting pretty efficient at running some of Oregons "new" base plays- Power Read and Sweep Read- really puts the OLB in no mans land

 

Oregon runs a lot of 1 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE sets.

 

It's a lot of the same formation with a lot of motion...

[Mavric]

Oregon runs a lot of 1 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE sets.

 

It's a lot of the same formation with a lot of motion...

I haven't watched a lot of Oregon so i'm not sure but that would be same personnel, not necessarily same formation.

[zoogs]

Well, maybe........but we've seen Taylor go for 92 yards on UCLA and 76 on Wisconsin and that still didn't mean much in the end.

 

Sustained drives, staying on schedule with the down & distance, and being able to distribute the ball to hit the defense in different ways, that's all I ask. He could average 4 yards per carry on the zone read. We have our deep threats in the receivers, and Ameer's plenty fast, but even if he weren't, I don't think it would matter.

 

Still nice and all, but there's a laundry list of more crucial things than that in my opinion.

[The King]

I just don't see that much value in a QB's home run threat running ability. It's nice, but it's extra.

I don't agree. Perhaps with Newby at RB that would be true. But AA and Cross really aren't home run threats so it's definitely an advantage to have someone in the backfield like that. There is no substitute for an instant six points.

 

But Ameer is faster than you think!!!!!!!!

 

Or, at least, thats what I was told to begin the season when I said Newby is quicker, faster, and wouldn't surprise me to see him overtake Ameer next season.

[The King]

Oregon runs a lot of 1 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE sets.

 

It's a lot of the same formation with a lot of motion...

I haven't watched a lot of Oregon so i'm not sure but that would be same personnel, not necessarily same formation.

 

They run a lot of 3 wide to the same side, put the TE on the weak side of the WRs and then motion one of the WRs into the backfield. They consistently run this because you can run a sweep, an option, a zone read, or a PA pass off of it.

[jmfb]

I just don't see that much value in a QB's home run threat running ability. It's nice, but it's extra.

100% agree

This offense is designed so it needs a legit QB running threat- it doesnt have to be one to go 50 yards with a tiny crease

Like you I value consistency

OK you have 1 big play for 75 yards, in the meantime you have 15 other plays that went for a grand total of 15 yards

So you had 1 big play and a bunch of plays that didnt allow you to move the chains.

Your average is 5.5 yards, not bad- but when measured another way, not very good

 

How I used to figure out averages- how many times did we get 5 yards or more on a play (a bread and butter low risk play, higher risk plays had to hit a higher average)

If we got 5 yards or more on say 85% of those plays we might have something like 200 yards on 30 plays

But if we got say 40 yards 2 times and 20 yards another and then 100 yards on the other 27 attempts. Still have that 6.6 ypc average, BUT you had a bunch of 3 and outs too, my guess is you would be by this measurement, getting 5 yards on a play, maybe 20% of the time. I GUARANTEE you we are going to win the game where we can consistently get our 5+ yards we are moving the chains, getting first downs, running the clock. Especially with this team= defense problems.

Obviously we are saying fumbles are constant.

[lo country]

self delete

[Knoxville Husker]

Well, maybe........but we've seen Taylor go for 92 yards on UCLA and 76 on Wisconsin and that still didn't mean much in the end.

 

Sustained drives, staying on schedule with the down & distance, and being able to distribute the ball to hit the defense in different ways, that's all I ask. He could average 4 yards per carry on the zone read. We have our deep threats in the receivers, and Ameer's plenty fast, but even if he weren't, I don't think it would matter.

 

Still nice and all, but there's a laundry list of more crucial things than that in my opinion.

 

Wait a sec I thought you were defending TM feverishly in the aftermath of the UCLA game. Looks like TA has finally won you over, but I don't recall that happening very soon after the SDSU game. Welcome aboard anyway, let's hope its a great ride!

[hskerprid]

This isn't an issue really. Taylor is a special runner...but he can't run hurt. So you start the QB that's healthy and play to his strengths. Thankfully we have capable backups. What I want to see is a leader under center that doesn't shy away from contact...I think this will trickle down to the rest of the team and bring a more physical approach.

wait...what? Taylor is a VERY fast straight ahead hit the seam runner. But to say he's a "special" runner is a bit of a stretch. YaYa I know he holds rushing records and all but he simply out motored others. Then he stands erect before the hit and drops the rock.

[Knoxville Husker]

I just don't see that much value in a QB's home run threat running ability. It's nice, but it's extra.

100% agree

This offense is designed so it needs a legit QB running threat- it doesnt have to be one to go 50 yards with a tiny crease

Like you I value consistency

OK you have 1 big play for 75 yards, in the meantime you have 15 other plays that went for a grand total of 15 yards

So you had 1 big play and a bunch of plays that didnt allow you to move the chains.

Your average is 5.5 yards, not bad- but when measured another way, not very good

 

How I used to figure out averages- how many times did we get 5 yards or more on a play (a bread and butter low risk play, higher risk plays had to hit a higher average)

If we got 5 yards or more on say 85% of those plays we might have something like 200 yards on 30 plays

But if we got say 40 yards 2 times and 20 yards another and then 100 yards on the other 27 attempts. Still have that 6.6 ypc average, BUT you had a bunch of 3 and outs too, my guess is you would be by this measurement, getting 5 yards on a play, maybe 20% of the time. I GUARANTEE you we are going to win the game where we can consistently get our 5+ yards we are moving the chains, getting first downs, running the clock. Especially with this team= defense problems.

Obviously we are saying fumbles are constant.

 

Your overanalyzing an obvious point. We fell in love with TM largely because of a rash of long TD runs his freshman year. Since then we see like 1-2 of those per year, and no consistent run threat at all. You hit the nail on the head at least, we MUST KEEP OUR DEFENSE OFF THE FIELD.

 

One long scoring drive in the 3rd quarter would have completely changed the complexion of that UCLA game. We couldn't do it, got 4 TDs rained on us, and I blamed the offense almost as much as the D. The D is absurd, but the offense was supposed to be a given. Instead the offense was pathetic, when we could have been up 4 TDs at halftime since defense was doing its part.

 

I will add that the offenses' stink a thon began about mid second quarter of that UCLA game, we only got 1.5 quarters out of the offense that game which is atrocious.

[Enhance]

Well, maybe........but we've seen Taylor go for 92 yards on UCLA and 76 on Wisconsin and that still didn't mean much in the end.

Exactly. In 2010, our offense was predicated on big play ability and Martinez making big plays with his feet. When we didn't have those big plays, our offense sputtered and stalled. An instant six points is nice, but sustained drives are what we should be shooting for, far more-so than having a home-run threat.

 

IMHO those home run threats emerge after being consistent and running your offense effectively. Those big plays present themselves and you don't need to have the more athletic guy necessarily to make them work. You just need a good play call and good execution from the team.

[zoogs]

Wait a sec I thought you were defending TM feverishly in the aftermath of the UCLA game. Looks like TA has finally won you over, but I don't recall that happening very soon after the SDSU game. Welcome aboard anyway, let's hope its a great ride!

 

You must be new here; I'm the biggest TM critic on this board Oh in 2010, man was I miffed when Zac Lee lost the starting job over the course of a scrimmage. Still thought that was the wrong, wrong call.

 

People were going overboard though and I didn't like that, so I argued against the points I didn't agree with. I mean there are still poor positions to take on something, in my opinion, and one of the things I keep in mind is ... 'if we're to accept that argument, are we going to hold to it for the next guy?' Another reason why I've been scathingly critical on Bo for a lot of things but lately it's just fighting back in defense of him.

 

Or maybe I just like being contrarian, who knows