Offensive Line, 4th Quarter

[BigRedBuster]

I don't have a problem with very little or no rotation during games that are on the line. However, I hope that the second string is getting major reps of some type in practice instead of just standing around watching the 1s go.

[HuskerNBigD]

Not subbing your offensive linemen is something NFL teams do out of necessity. Some colleges who can't recruit a lot of quality o-linemen will do that too. I would classify Oregon State under a college team that can't recruit a lot of quality o-linemen.

 

 

Cav needs to realize that he is at Nebraska, where they have the ability to bring in over 15 scholarship linemen. Throw in quality walk-ons and there should be quality depth across all the o-line positions. Rotating in backup linemen adds to the quality of depth, and would give the coaches game film to teach the backups.

 

Cav is hamstringing his own offensive line by only playing his top unit. It creates physical and mental fatigue, which can create penalties. Isn't NU worst in FBS in # of penalties? Oh yeah.

 

Sub out the LT and we'd see a drastic reduction, ammirite?

 

For the most part, the line is young and I feel like Cav is having them play a majority of the game to develop chemistry and continuity. Not saying they are playing phenomenal, although I have been fairly impressed, but I'd rather have 4-5 really solid players vs. 10-12 halfway decent players - which is what you'd get if you continually rotated. It takes time for the guys to gain confidence in themselves and their teammates.

[StPaulHusker]

 

Playing every snap is too much for the OL. An equal rotation isn't needed, but at least give the 2nd string a couple of series. We also need to build depth for next year or in case of injury. I also agree that it would help in the 4th quarter.

I didn't want to criticize Coach Cav for this, but looking at the philosophy, it just doesn't make any sense.

 

1) Starters aren't getting any rest during games, and that could lead to fatigue and/or injury

2) Backups aren't getting any in-game snaps, so they are less prepared if there is an injury to a 1st stringer

3) Backups aren't allowed to prove themselves in games, so there is no pressure for the starters, as long as they are doing good enough in practice

4) What is the need to carry 16 scholarship linemen if only 5 are going to play during a game?

 

I agree most with #4. Why would a lineman want to come to a team where the ONLY chance to play is if you're a starter?

 

I have to believe that we will begin to see rotation once league play begins.

[NUinID]

There is no right or wrong in this discussion it is just one preference vs. another. Everyone thinks the way Milt did it is the right way. That is because when Nebraska was playing 4 50 pt blowouts a games a year you saw a lot of bodies in the game. Most years he wasn't subbing all that much in close games. If he had players close in ability he usually had a swing guard and a swing tackle. That is about it.

 

I am not sure where everyone gets the idea that Nebraska was subbing a ton of linemen under BP. They subbed when guys got hurt, that was about it.

[DomiNUs]

There is no right or wrong in this discussion it is just one preference vs. another. Everyone thinks the way Milt did it is the right way. That is because when Nebraska was playing 4 50 pt blowouts a games a year you saw a lot of bodies in the game. Most years he wasn't subbing all that much in close games. If he had players close in ability he usually had a swing guard and a swing tackle. That is about it.

 

I am not sure where everyone gets the idea that Nebraska was subbing a ton of linemen under BP. They subbed when guys got hurt, that was about it.

It's not an idea, it's a fact. Straight from the horse's mouth. Link

[The Dude]

 

 

 

 

Playing every snap is too much for the OL. An equal rotation isn't needed, but at least give the 2nd string a couple of series. We also need to build depth for next year or in case of injury. I also agree that it would help in the 4th quarter.

I didn't want to criticize Coach Cav for this, but looking at the philosophy, it just doesn't make any sense.

 

1) Starters aren't getting any rest during games, and that could lead to fatigue and/or injury

2) Backups aren't getting any in-game snaps, so they are less prepared if there is an injury to a 1st stringer

3) Backups aren't allowed to prove themselves in games, so there is no pressure for the starters, as long as they are doing good enough in practice

4) What is the need to carry 16 scholarship linemen if only 5 are going to play during a game?

I agree most with #4. Why would a lineman want to come to a team where the ONLY chance to play is if you're a starter?

 

I have to believe that we will begin to see rotation once league play begins.

For the same reason a QB would go to a team where the only chance to play is if they're a starter. Because they're realize that's how it normally works at that position.

 

What the f#*k, you guys.

[BaytownHusker]

Its just another reason for another Husker fan to complain about some thing... I am pretty sure if you look or can find any O-Line stats you will see not many team if any other then the New England Patriots rotate their O-Line.

There may be a couple teams but not many. Our O-line will be just fine.

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

 

Playing every snap is too much for the OL. An equal rotation isn't needed, but at least give the 2nd string a couple of series. We also need to build depth for next year or in case of injury. I also agree that it would help in the 4th quarter.

 

I didn't want to criticize Coach Cav for this, but looking at the philosophy, it just doesn't make any sense.

 

1) Starters aren't getting any rest during games, and that could lead to fatigue and/or injury

2) Backups aren't getting any in-game snaps, so they are less prepared if there is an injury to a 1st stringer

3) Backups aren't allowed to prove themselves in games, so there is no pressure for the starters, as long as they are doing good enough in practice

4) What is the need to carry 16 scholarship linemen if only 5 are going to play during a game?

I agree most with #4. Why would a lineman want to come to a team where the ONLY chance to play is if you're a starter?

 

I have to believe that we will begin to see rotation once league play begins.

For the same reason a QB would go to a team where the only chance to play is if they're a starter. Because they're realize that's how it normally works at that position.

What the f#*k, you guys.

Good point. But I think QB is a different universe than subbing OL.

 

Also, I don't necessarily have a problem with what Cav is doing. I mean, if it works he's a genius. If not, well.....

[HuskerShark]

People also neglect to remember that Pelini's offensive lines were incredibly inconsistent. They were taught to play aggressively, and with a heavy running offense, they were able to fire off the ball.

 

Cav's reason for 5 guys is so they develop chemistry with each other, which makes sense because those 5 guys have to play as a unit. We've seen signs of high quality line play this year as Tommy hasn't taken many hits and has had plenty of time to throw, and many of our most talented linemen are young still (Gates, Foster, etc.). Cavanaugh is a solid hire, and I'm more than satisfied with him so far. The offensive side of the ball (with the exception of the running game) has been doing well.

[wanderful]

Gentlemen (and ladies?), this just occurred to me and I wanted to see what your thoughts are on it:

 

If it's a stated team position that only the best 5 OL play, how would you feel as a 2nd stringer?

 

1) Bitter at the coaches that you're not starting -- making you consider leaving the team.

2) Angry at yourself that you're not a starter -- making you work harder than you would have if you knew you were going to get in 50% of the playing time as a 2nd stringer.

 

Pretty sure some players end up feeling like #1, but honestly, we don't want players like that around so better to flush them out.

 

If we have a whole team of #2, they'll work harder than they would normally and either A) get better and push themselves into the 1st string, or B) get better and scare the 1st stringers into also working harder, so they don't get their position taken.

 

So basically, I think making it a competition for first string status like this will push people to work harder than they would if they knew they only needed to try hard enough to make second string, and then they'd get 50% of the playing time.

[Mavric]

We definitely rotated our OL more over the past few years than most teams do. And I see Cav's point about chemistry because that is important as well.

 

But I don't think subbing a guy or two for a series here and there is going to totally destroy the chemistry. And it would let a couple top backups get some chemistry with the rest of the starters in case he has to be a starter at some point.

 

I'm all for playing the best guys most of the time but saying only the best guys should play completely ignores the fatigue factor. One guy might be better when he is 100% but if he's tired later in the game and is only going at, say, 85-90%, perhaps a fresh backup is better. Or if you give him a rest at some point in the game maybe he's still running 95% at the end.

 

And I think it's interesting that we have such different philosophies on the two sides of the ball. We rotate defensive linemen all the time. It's a regular occurrence that we sub someone on the DL after the first play of a possession. If we want the best players to play, shouldn't that be true on the DL as well?

 

I guess bottom line for me is I don't necessarily have an issue with it, but I think it would make sense in a lot of ways to rotate a little bit. Maybe give each guard and tackle one series off per half. I probably wouldn't rotate the center.

[The Dude]

It's different on the defensive line because getting gassed is a legitimate concern, unlike the offensive line.

 

Chasing running backs and QBs all over the field requires more cardiovascular endurance than blocking.

 

Not to mention there can be different personnel packages for different situations and offensive looks.

[zoogs]

We usually hear about offenses wearing defenses down -- and not the other way around. In the NFL it is also far more common to rotate defensive linemen, and I suppose that's generally true as well.

[GSG]

Yup. It's a stupid topic we fans have dug deep to bitch about because some of you bitch about everything. I've watched football on every level for a long time and this is how it is done almost everywhere. If Pelini and staff did do a lot of rotating, you'd think we fans would not want to see it anymore considering all the inconsistency we've seen up front.

 

 

You don't constantly rotate offensive linemen. Maybe a guy needs to tap for a few plays, but that should be it. Maybe Cav thinks these guys need to get their asses in shape a little bit. I've seen a few of our guys around here lately who don't look like football players, they look like professional eaters.

 

I'd say the offensive line is looking like they are coming together a little bit and actually having some spots in games where they look very good. The run blocking is still a bit of a work in progress but this pass blocking seems far better than it has been in awhile.

 

So if it's going better, and the players themselves aren't bitching about it, then maybe we ought to stop? Just a thought.

 

 

MOST PROFESSIONAL EATERS ARE SKINNY SO THEY HAVE LESS BELLY FAT PUSHING DOWN ON THEIR STOMACH