Our Identity

[ajt1970]

This is a comment I want to make with regards to the recent article from Sports Illustrated suggesting NU should go back to its roots of running the ball with power and option football.......

 

 

-----

 

Yes, absolutely NU should go back to power and option offense.

 

1) it will be hard for defenses to prepare for since they would only have a few days to prepare, plus they might not have the talent on scout teams to mimic a highly efficient and powerful running attack since it is so rare these days,

 

2) is just damn prettier to see a well executed running play than a passing play. I'd rather see a fullback trap than any kind of pass,

 

3) I'd rather NU get back to physically beating up an opponent, and this simply does not happen with a passing game. On a pass play, when the ball is snapped, what do the offensive linemen do? Backpedal and form a nice cushy pocket for the QB. Not aggressive at all. On a running play, the O-line fires off the ball and tries to physically dominate the defender in their way. Pancake city. To put it bluntly, I'd rather run a team over than play monkey-in-the-middle by trying to throw over their head so they can't get it,

 

4) Football is a toughness sport, and that should INCLUDE the QB. In passing games, what is the QB trying to do...avoid being hit, sliding, running out of bounds. Wussy football. As a running QB, he MUST participate in the mental and physical toughness of football by lowering his shoulder and trying to get those extra yards...he is an active participant in the RUGGEDNESS of the game, not being a prima donna and not wanting to ever to be hit...a QB should have the mentality of DOING THE ACTUAL HITTING on a potential tackler, lower the shoulder and run him over, not always just wanting to hand the ball off or be a gunslinger in the pocket throwing the ball.

 

I could go on and on why I think the running game would be much better for NU and for fans, but I'll stop here for now.

[Mavric]

Thanks for your comments. I merged them into an existing thread.

[Scratchtown]

My problem with Oregon is they like to get slumped big time when it matters, and they've been known to struggle against power teams. I want to be the one doing the bruising, not receiving it.

What?! Just stop.

 

After they got beat by Arizona last year, they won every game going away, none of them were even close. They smashed Stanford, smashed Arizona in the rematch IN THE CONFERENCE TITLE GAME. Clearly that's a game that matters. I would think the Michigan State game was one that "mattered" too. They won that going away too.

 

They smashed FSU, in a game that mattered. They just happened to lose the national championship game. I know I'm arguing because of bias but good grief.

 

The argument that Oregon loses when it matters is grasping at straws and is NOT true. They hold the best record in the nation in games since 2010. No they don't have a national title, but they are a tough "out" ALWAYS. Something NU isn't.

 

Since 2010. Oregon has been beaten by 3, 13, 3, 3, 6, 26, 7, 15. The national title was closer than the score too. They were down by 15 really late and went for it on 4th down way deep in their own territory. OSU could have kneeled it like most teams would but they ran up the score, so I don't count the last TD. Time was inside of a minute.

 

 

[Scratchtown]

When I think of NU with Coach Riley and they way NU will run offense, I feel like NU will look like a version of Michigan State.

[True2tRA]

Stanford and Wisconsin ran power football offenses that started with big, talented, cohesive offensive lines.

 

But they also ran multiple, take-what-the-defense-gives-you offenses at the same time. Stanford played a lot of between the tackles football and even utilized the fullback(!) and there were games where Andrew Luck rarely had to throw the ball. Then there were games where Andrew Luck threw the ball a lot, and they looked like a classic pro-set offense. It was nice to have the choice. Stave is no Luck, but Wisconsin ran a similar mix.

 

When we talk about identity it always seems to be about the run-pass ratio; the all-in rushing teams like Georgia Tech or the balls-out passing teams like BYU and Texas Tech. The spread is a scheme. I'm not so sure it's an identity. Good teams do a lot of things well. If you don't like the word "multiple" come up with another one, because that's how winning teams play. And when you're winning, nobody debates your identity.

 

I think you're misunderstanding the point when people talk about identity.

 

You said yourself, good teams do a lot of things well.

 

What is up for debate is what that thing was for Nebraska? Or even, was there something that we could say we did well? That's what people are asking.

 

When people say they want Nebraska to have an identity, they're just saying they want Nebraska to start somewhere. Establish something you do well first, then build on it, add a few more things. There's no debate on that. To be good, you'll probably have to be able to do multiple things well. Each different opponent can/will force you to be good at something else each week.

 

just start somewhere and build on it. You can't throw the whole book at the guys and you can't watch the same guys execute 20 things sloppily. How about getting your guys to execute 5 things to perfection, then build on it. I think that's what some of the better coaches out there do. They don't move on to the next thing until the team get's the first thing right. You'd get the impression that sometimes practice here lately was more of a cram session instead of focusing on execution.

 

I believe the coaches themselves even related it to something like drinking from a firehose?

[Scratchtown]

 

Stanford and Wisconsin ran power football offenses that started with big, talented, cohesive offensive lines.

 

But they also ran multiple, take-what-the-defense-gives-you offenses at the same time. Stanford played a lot of between the tackles football and even utilized the fullback(!) and there were games where Andrew Luck rarely had to throw the ball. Then there were games where Andrew Luck threw the ball a lot, and they looked like a classic pro-set offense. It was nice to have the choice. Stave is no Luck, but Wisconsin ran a similar mix.

 

When we talk about identity it always seems to be about the run-pass ratio; the all-in rushing teams like Georgia Tech or the balls-out passing teams like BYU and Texas Tech. The spread is a scheme. I'm not so sure it's an identity. Good teams do a lot of things well. If you don't like the word "multiple" come up with another one, because that's how winning teams play. And when you're winning, nobody debates your identity.

I think you're misunderstanding the point when people talk about identity.

 

You said yourself, good teams do a lot of things well.

 

What is up for debate is what that thing was for Nebraska? Or even, was there something that we could say we did well? That's what people are asking.

 

When people say they want Nebraska to have an identity, they're just saying they want Nebraska to start somewhere. Establish something you do well first, then build on it, add a few more things. There's no debate on that. To be good, you'll probably have to be able to do multiple things well. Each different opponent can/will force you to be good at something else each week.

 

just start somewhere and build on it. You can't throw the whole book at the guys and you can't watch the same guys execute 20 things sloppily. How about getting your guys to execute 5 things to perfection, then build on it. I think that's what some of the better coaches out there do. They don't move on to the next thing until the team get's the first thing right. You'd get the impression that sometimes practice here lately was more of a cram session instead of focusing on execution.

 

I believe the coaches themselves even related it to something like drinking from a firehose?

 

Ya, Imagine if Ga Tech actually had something aside from what they do with the flexbone? They would be nasty to deal with, even more so than they are.

[xlbder]

I grew up in the 1970s, and remember Nebraska as a big, simple dominating machine. It was my favorite team, probably because of the National Championships in the early seventies when I was 14 and just getting into watching football. I liked the simple, unadorned red N, on the helmets. Nothing fancy, they just came out to play and win.

 

Years later, my good friend's son started playing for Nebraska, I started following the team again, and enjoyed reading the game day thread on Huskerboard. But in place of that solid reliable, "in your face we will beat you" attitude, there was this spread offense, and sort of a schizophrenic identity where the team seemed to beat itself as often as the opponents. That is dang frustrating to watch. I also watch Georgia Tech, as I attended that school, and feel like many that the power running game would have yielded better results. Flexbone? I didn't even know what that was called. But yeah, I'd like to see something like that.

[walksalone]

Remember that Miami game last year, when we pounded the rock, and poor bastards like me got their hopes up, then Beck played the cruelest trick ever...

[True2tRA]

Remember that Miami game last year, when we pounded the rock, and poor bastards like me got their hopes up, then Beck played the cruelest trick ever...

 

 

Another poor bastard right here......man I thought we were on to something.

[Landlord]

Remember that Miami game last year, when we pounded the rock, and poor bastards like me got their hopes up, then Beck played the cruelest trick ever...

 

 

What trick was that?

 

 

The game after we had 458 rushing yards.

The game after that was Michigan State, where we sucked ass and got no yards rushing, but it wasn't for lack of trying.

Then Northwestern, 234 yards rushing.

Then Rutgers, 292 yards rushing.

 

 

I'm just confused what you mean exactly.

[walksalone]

 

Remember that Miami game last year, when we pounded the rock, and poor bastards like me got their hopes up, then Beck played the cruelest trick ever...

 

 

What trick was that?

 

 

The game after we had 458 rushing yards.

The game after that was Michigan State, where we sucked ass and got no yards rushing, but it wasn't for lack of trying.

Then Northwestern, 234 yards rushing.

Then Rutgers, 292 yards rushing.

 

 

I'm just confused what you mean exactly.

 

 

The game where Beck being Beck, being Watson, found something that worked, and the minute it was working perfectly, stopped doing it...

[lo country]

 

Remember that Miami game last year, when we pounded the rock, and poor bastards like me got their hopes up, then Beck played the cruelest trick ever...

 

 

Another poor bastard right here......man I thought we were on to something.

 

One more here. A quote from the announcers even had them thinking this was a good thing...

 

All the dancing, talking and fighting and they shoved it in their face with the running game

[walksalone]

 

 

Remember that Miami game last year, when we pounded the rock, and poor bastards like me got their hopes up, then Beck played the cruelest trick ever...

 

 

Another poor bastard right here......man I thought we were on to something.

 

One more here. A quote from the announcers even had them thinking this was a good thing...

 

All the dancing, talking and fighting and they shoved it in their face with the running game

 

 

Well remembered...

[True2tRA]

No way was that gameplan sustainable though. They ran the ball 54 times and passed 13. Abdullah's legs would have came off if he'd had been asked to do that for the rest of the year.

 

What was so different about that game?

 

The numbers guys will tell you that we ran the ball plenty last year, and we probably did. Maybe could've done so a bit more but really there was no lack of commitment to the run game.

 

I remember it as we seemed to run straight at them a few more times. Didn't Tommy go under center a few times? I also remember the use of the H-Back quite a bit more. I don't remember seeing much of that again until the USC game.

 

Maybe I am wrong. Maybe there wasn't much different about it at all. That game, that crowd, the team and the fighting that night all made it such an incredible game that maybe that's why I remember it as a favorite. Maybe it was purely just an effort thing that night.

 

One thing that seems entirely different looking back at it a little bit, it seemed like the offensive line was firing right off the ball and going man to man straight up field blocking. Seemed like a more aggressive straightforward type of blocking that night. I'm not an x's and o'x know it all when it comes to blocking schemes, but it looks a lot different than the usual mess we saw.

[cg_8]

No way was that gameplan sustainable though. They ran the ball 54 times and passed 13. Abdullah's legs would have came off if he'd had been asked to do that for the rest of the year.

 

What was so different about that game?

 

The numbers guys will tell you that we ran the ball plenty last year, and we probably did. Maybe could've done so a bit more but really there was no lack of commitment to the run game.

 

I remember it as we seemed to run straight at them a few more times. Didn't Tommy go under center a few times? I also remember the use of the H-Back quite a bit more. I don't remember seeing much of that again until the USC game.

 

Maybe I am wrong. Maybe there wasn't much different about it at all. That game, that crowd, the team and the fighting that night all made it such an incredible game that maybe that's why I remember it as a favorite. Maybe it was purely just an effort thing that night.

 

One thing that seems entirely different looking back at it a little bit, it seemed like the offensive line was firing right off the ball and going man to man straight up field blocking. Seemed like a more aggressive straightforward type of blocking that night. I'm not an x's and o'x know it all when it comes to blocking schemes, but it looks a lot different than the usual mess we saw.

Yep, Miami was about as close to great execution as it can get.

 

Just look at how the line moves forward, and how easily it is for them to just get to the second level and make (and sustain) each block. We did this all game... I mean, Westerkamp even blocks the safety in addition to the guy he's blocking.

 

I mean look at this, this is a thing of beauty, the play, and especially the execution. Granted Miami's side of the ball wasn't great, but this is what getting a hat on a hat looks like.

 

Even with MIami's speed, the line wasn't consistent like they were against Miami.

 

What a great game.