Offensive Line Woes

[Mavric]

Here's an interesting stat. It's more relevant to a slightly different discussion but it's something to keep in mind going forward:

 

 

So Georgia Tech - who runs a ton of quick-hitting plays and would would easily be expected to have the fewest such plays because of the offense they run, not to mention competition they play - still has 20% of their plays fail to gain positive yards. And part of that stat is Georgia Tech would probably have about the fewest sacks of anyone because of how few times they throw the ball.

 

Last year Nebraska had 587 rushing attempts. That means we would have 9 no/negative yard plays per game IF WE WERE THE BEST TEAM IN THE COUNTRY in that particular metric.

Edited September 17, 2015 by Mavric
GT had 20 sacks last year - less than 1.5 per game - good for T-27 in the country.

[Mavric]

So far in 2015, the Huskers would have 7.5 no/negative yard plays per game based on 20% of our rushing attempts. I'm not sure what the actual numbers are.

[True2tRA]

 

 

 

 

"We take too many runs with nothing there, Riley said after Saturdays scrimmage. He was being kind; several running plays lost yards. Youd like to see three or four yards at least. Theres too many that are not good-looking runs.

 

I posted statistics from game after game where Nebraska has 15-20 rushing plays per game last season that went for 2 yards or less, sometimes for losses, in every single game.

 

That's with one of the best RB's ever to step into this program.

 

Our offensive line has not been good and until it is, the offense will struggle. Why this is so surprising or appears to be news to anyone is really baffling. It all starts up front. Nebraska has been below average up front for a long time now.

And you continue to insist that pointing out a few plays here and there is proof of your narrative.

 

Here are a set of runs from a team last year:

Game 4 - Runs of 2,-2,-2,2,2,0,-2,0,3,1,2,-1,2,-3,-4,-5,1

Game 5 - Runs of 1,2,2,2,2,2,-8,2,2,-3,2,2,2,0

Game 11 - 0,0,-1,1,1,1,-2,-3,-3,-3,1,1,2,0,1,-1,-12,-2,2,-1

Game 12 - 1,2,-2,1,2,2,1,1,2,2,2,0,-1,2,1,1,-3,2

Game 13 - 2,2,1,2,1,-1,2,1,1,0,0,1,0,-1,1,0,-1,1,-1,0

 

So that's five games - and I didn't look through their entire schedule - where this team had 15-20 runs that went for two yards or less, sometimes even for losses, in every single game.

 

That team was Georgia Tech. They averaged 6.1 yards per carry for the year and led the nation in rushing.

 

So did their offensive line struggle as well?

Don't they run the option?

 

Georgia Tech had 790 rushing attempts last year. There was a game where they ran the ball 48 times and threw it 3 times.

 

As far as I know, they've never claimed to be "multiple".

 

Is them having 15-20 plays a game of 2 yards or less comparable to Nebraska's offense having the same results? Don't they run an offense where the QB literally pitches the ball backwards 85% of the time?

 

Damn, that'd have been fun to see Abdullah run the ball in an offense like that though.

 

Thanks for bringing that up. Hell of a comparison there?...........

 

I could keep going, but no.........we've had all these discussions before. We disagree about the offensive line play at Nebraska the last 5-7 years or so. I'm fine with that. I've watched the games, I'll continue thinking they were not very good. There's literally reports that have come out, and Tenopir himself said he didn't think the offensive line got enough focus.

 

You can think whatever you want, and I'm fine with that too.

 

They'd better step it up or once again, the better defensive lines we face, or aggressive teams like McNeese St. will rip us a new a-hole unless Langsdorf is able to gameplan around it a little better than Beck did.

Here's an interesting stat. It's more relevant to a slightly different discussion but it's something to keep in mind going forward:

 

https://twitter.com/ESPNStatsInfo/status/644609356588183553

 

So Georgia Tech - who runs a ton of quick-hitting plays and would would easily be expected to have the fewest such plays because of the offense they run, not to mention competition they play - still has 20% of their plays fail to gain positive yards. And part of that stat is Georgia Tech would probably have about the fewest sacks of anyone because of how few times they throw the ball.

 

Last year Nebraska had 587 rushing attempts. That means we would have 9 no/negative yard plays per game IF WE WERE THE BEST TEAM IN THE COUNTRY in that particular metric.

You remember this conversation?

 

Wait??? What?

 

Georgia Tech would be expected to have fewer rushing plays of negative or no yards because of the offense they run?

 

HUH?

 

It'd be the total opposite! They ran the ball 790 times! They run the option IN WHICH YOU PITCH THE BALL BACKWARDS.

 

EVERY TEAM THEY PLAY KNOWS THE RUN IS COMING. Their offense faces 8 men in the box every single play.

 

This is a testament to the option offense and how crazy difficult it can be to defend when executed as well as Georgia Tech does.

 

You need to own this. You are wrong.

 

By the way, Nebraska doesn't play the stiffest competition in the books either, especially last year bud.

[Mavric]

You remember this conversation?

 

Wait??? What?

 

Georgia Tech would be expected to have fewer rushing plays of negative or no yards because of the offense they run?

 

HUH?

 

It'd be the total opposite! They ran the ball 790 times! They run the option IN WHICH YOU PITCH THE BALL BACKWARDS.

 

EVERY TEAM THEY PLAY KNOWS THE RUN IS COMING. Their offense faces 8 men in the box every single play.

 

This is a testament to the option offense and how crazy difficult it can be to defend when executed as well as Georgia Tech does.

 

You need to own this. You are wrong.

 

By the way, Nebraska doesn't play the stiffest competition in the books either, especially last year bud.

You obviously have not actually watched Georgia Tech play. Just catching the highlights doesn't work.

[caveman99]

 

 

 

 

 

"We take too many runs with nothing there, Riley said after Saturdays scrimmage. He was being kind; several running plays lost yards. Youd like to see three or four yards at least. Theres too many that are not good-looking runs.

 

I posted statistics from game after game where Nebraska has 15-20 rushing plays per game last season that went for 2 yards or less, sometimes for losses, in every single game.

 

That's with one of the best RB's ever to step into this program.

 

Our offensive line has not been good and until it is, the offense will struggle. Why this is so surprising or appears to be news to anyone is really baffling. It all starts up front. Nebraska has been below average up front for a long time now.

And you continue to insist that pointing out a few plays here and there is proof of your narrative.

 

Here are a set of runs from a team last year:

Game 4 - Runs of 2,-2,-2,2,2,0,-2,0,3,1,2,-1,2,-3,-4,-5,1

Game 5 - Runs of 1,2,2,2,2,2,-8,2,2,-3,2,2,2,0

Game 11 - 0,0,-1,1,1,1,-2,-3,-3,-3,1,1,2,0,1,-1,-12,-2,2,-1

Game 12 - 1,2,-2,1,2,2,1,1,2,2,2,0,-1,2,1,1,-3,2

Game 13 - 2,2,1,2,1,-1,2,1,1,0,0,1,0,-1,1,0,-1,1,-1,0

 

So that's five games - and I didn't look through their entire schedule - where this team had 15-20 runs that went for two yards or less, sometimes even for losses, in every single game.

 

That team was Georgia Tech. They averaged 6.1 yards per carry for the year and led the nation in rushing.

 

So did their offensive line struggle as well?

Don't they run the option?

 

Georgia Tech had 790 rushing attempts last year. There was a game where they ran the ball 48 times and threw it 3 times.

 

As far as I know, they've never claimed to be "multiple".

 

Is them having 15-20 plays a game of 2 yards or less comparable to Nebraska's offense having the same results? Don't they run an offense where the QB literally pitches the ball backwards 85% of the time?

 

Damn, that'd have been fun to see Abdullah run the ball in an offense like that though.

 

Thanks for bringing that up. Hell of a comparison there?...........

 

I could keep going, but no.........we've had all these discussions before. We disagree about the offensive line play at Nebraska the last 5-7 years or so. I'm fine with that. I've watched the games, I'll continue thinking they were not very good. There's literally reports that have come out, and Tenopir himself said he didn't think the offensive line got enough focus.

 

You can think whatever you want, and I'm fine with that too.

 

They'd better step it up or once again, the better defensive lines we face, or aggressive teams like McNeese St. will rip us a new a-hole unless Langsdorf is able to gameplan around it a little better than Beck did.

Here's an interesting stat. It's more relevant to a slightly different discussion but it's something to keep in mind going forward:

 

https://twitter.com/ESPNStatsInfo/status/644609356588183553

 

So Georgia Tech - who runs a ton of quick-hitting plays and would would easily be expected to have the fewest such plays because of the offense they run, not to mention competition they play - still has 20% of their plays fail to gain positive yards. And part of that stat is Georgia Tech would probably have about the fewest sacks of anyone because of how few times they throw the ball.

 

Last year Nebraska had 587 rushing attempts. That means we would have 9 no/negative yard plays per game IF WE WERE THE BEST TEAM IN THE COUNTRY in that particular metric.

You remember this conversation?

 

Wait??? What?

 

Georgia Tech would be expected to have fewer rushing plays of negative or no yards because of the offense they run?

 

HUH?

 

It'd be the total opposite! They ran the ball 790 times! They run the option IN WHICH YOU PITCH THE BALL BACKWARDS.

 

EVERY TEAM THEY PLAY KNOWS THE RUN IS COMING. Their offense faces 8 men in the box every single play.

 

This is a testament to the option offense and how crazy difficult it can be to defend when executed as well as Georgia Tech does.

 

You need to own this. You are wrong.

 

By the way, Nebraska doesn't play the stiffest competition in the books either, especially last year bud.

You seem to be confused, GT had the FEWEST no gain/negative yard run plays NOT the most. Point being that if 20% is the best, how does that make NU look? I would like to see NU's stats this year to see how many no gain/negative yard run plays they have had and compare it to the gold standard of 20% before I make a decision. I think it would also be good to understand what the median and average is in this stat, especially since 20% is considered really good.

[BigRedBuster]

Just for a point of reference, I read an article a year or two ago that talked heavily about the Oregon offense and their zone read option. they claimed that Oregon lead the nation in rushing plays that lost yards. It's just a fact of life with that rushing attack that when the play goes well, it really goes well. When it goes bad, it really goes bad.

 

I would guess that most on here would be happy with Oregon's offensive line the last few years.

[Undone]

Just for a point of reference, I read an article a year or two ago that talked heavily about the Oregon offense and their zone read option. they claimed that Oregon lead the nation in rushing plays that lost yards.

That's right. But here's the difference...and I'm going to preface this by saying that I LOVE TOMMY ARMSTRONG and everything he is and does for our team...but the difference is, Oregon recruits QB's whose arms are ready to go, right out of high school.

 

So their chances of converting those third & longs increase dramatically.

 

Of course, Tommy's accuracy seems to have improved noticeably during the off-season. And it shouldn't come as a surprise either - He's getting way more reps throwing the ball in practice, as opposed to spending a huge chunk of that time practicing the read (and the option as well, under Beck). Point is, I'm glad we've moved away from the zone read. Tommy's becoming a better passer. We just need to OL to come up to speed, and this is a great looking offense.

[4skers89]

 

Just for a point of reference, I read an article a year or two ago that talked heavily about the Oregon offense and their zone read option. they claimed that Oregon lead the nation in rushing plays that lost yards.

That's right. But here's the difference...and I'm going to preface this by saying that I LOVE TOMMY ARMSTRONG and everything he is and does for our team...but the difference is, Oregon recruits QB's whose arms are ready to go, right out of high school.

 

So their chances of converting those third & longs increase dramatically.

 

Of course, Tommy's accuracy seems to have improved noticeably during the off-season. And it shouldn't come as a surprise either - He's getting way more reps throwing the ball in practice, as opposed to spending a huge chunk of that time practicing the read (and the option as well, under Beck). Point is, I'm glad we've moved away from the zone read. Tommy's becoming a better passer. We just need to OL to come up to speed, and this is a great looking offense.

 

http://journalstar.com/sports/huskers/sipple/steven-m-sipple-armstrong-wisely-rebuffed-first-wave-of-recruiters/article_88c6fd7a-8904-5260-a907-41ce963dee31.html

 

 

 

Rice, by the way, recruited him as a quarterback early in the process, Armstrong recalled. Baylor also came after him as a QB. Then, it was Kansas, Oregon and of course, Nebraska.

 

In case you didn't know.

[Undone]

In case you didn't know.

 

I love Tommy. I love his potential, and I love the trajectory of his development. He's an outstanding QB and leader of our offense.

 

But the zone read doesn't work well without a guy who's comfortable in 3rd & long. We got by with a decent OL and two guys named Burkhead & Abdullah.

 

I'm glad the zone read is out.

[4skers89]

 

In case you didn't know.

 

I love Tommy. I love his potential, and I love the trajectory of his development. He's an outstanding QB and leader of our offense.

 

But the zone read doesn't work well without a guy who's comfortable in 3rd & long. We got by with a decent OL and two guys named Burkhead & Abdullah.

 

I'm glad the zone read is out.

 

I think Tommy could really have a good year in Riley's offense.

[RADAR]

 

 

In case you didn't know.

 

I love Tommy. I love his potential, and I love the trajectory of his development. He's an outstanding QB and leader of our offense.

 

But the zone read doesn't work well without a guy who's comfortable in 3rd & long. We got by with a decent OL and two guys named Burkhead & Abdullah.

 

I'm glad the zone read is out.

 

I think Tommy could really have a good year in Riley's offense.

 

If he has a good outing this weekend, and continues to improve, he will contend for B10 honors.

[Kernal]

 

 

In case you didn't know.

 

I love Tommy. I love his potential, and I love the trajectory of his development. He's an outstanding QB and leader of our offense.

 

But the zone read doesn't work well without a guy who's comfortable in 3rd & long. We got by with a decent OL and two guys named Burkhead & Abdullah.

 

I'm glad the zone read is out.

 

I think Tommy could really have a good year in Riley's offense.

 

 

I hope so. I'm tempering my optimism somewhat because BYU's pass defense was rotten, as was all of S. Alabama's defense. But last year, Tommy isn't even making those throws and the recievers aren't making the catches, so there's some reason for optimism anyway. So much depends on how well the line holds up, and if the running game can be productive enough to keep some possibilities in the passing game open.

[Undone]

Yeah. He's threaded the needle several times in two games, and clearly his accuracy and field-reading ability is growing greatly. Again - Not surprising at all, because he's got a ton of potential, and now he has a *real* QB coach, and isn't spending so many practice hours on learning the read and practicing the option.

And the fact that he can scramble to boot bodes really well against The U. I love our chances tomorrow.

[Mavric]

Just for a point of reference, I read an article a year or two ago that talked heavily about the Oregon offense and their zone read option. they claimed that Oregon lead the nation in rushing plays that lost yards. It's just a fact of life with that rushing attack that when the play goes well, it really goes well. When it goes bad, it really goes bad.

 

I would guess that most on here would be happy with Oregon's offensive line the last few years.

 

I would believe it. I've long said that Oregon does not have an unstoppable offense. They just have such great athletes that if you make any mistakes, it's going to be a huge play.

 

That's why Stanford has had as much success as anyone against them over the last several years. They are a physical team with good athletes but they're also very smart and they don't make many mistakes. Thus, they don't give up many big plays and Oregon has trouble against them.

[Kernal]

Yeah. He's threaded the needle several times in two games, and clearly his accuracy and field-reading ability is growing greatly. Again - Not surprising at all, because he's got a ton of potential, and now he has a *real* QB coach, and isn't spending so many practice hours on learning the read and practicing the option.

 

And the fact that he can scramble to boot bodes really well against The U. I love our chances tomorrow.

 

I'm not sold that Tommy needs to still be running zone read or option. But he will absolutely kill teams if he gets comfortable enough to know when to scramble after opening up the defense with passing.