RUN THE BALL!!!

[RedSavage]

 

 

Nebraska’s offense is averaging 5.87 sack-adjusted yards per carry against FBS teams this season, tops in the division, second in the Big Ten and 16th nationally.

 

 

http://hailvarsity.com/news/numbers-to-know-nebraska-northwestern/2015/10/

 

This is my favorite part of that article

 

 

 

0 – Giveaways for the Huskers against Minnesota. It was Nebraska’s first game without a giveaway since last season’s Northwestern game, an 11-game span. The Huskers’ offense hasn’t committed a turnover since its first drive of the second half against Illinois, playing just short of 10 full quarters without a giveaway. (Nebraska did fumble the final kickoff against Wisconsin, but I’m not putting that on the offense.) Nebraska’s plus-3 turnover margin against Minnesota was the first time the Huskers were plus-3 or better in a Big Ten game since joining the conference in 2011.

[xlbder]

Nebraska is loaded with good running backs. Minnesota was the first game where the play calling made sense, the run/pass ratio and who was carrying the ball in what situation. I am hoping Riley finally realizes his teams strengths and starts playing to them. That Vine video isn't convincing to me, running 3rd and seven is a long shot no matter who is the running back. I question NOT RUNNING, on third and two. Jano and Cross can move a pile, as Cross demonstrated against Minnesota running for seven in the shadow of the goal line carrying the pile with him.

[cg_8]

 

This is RBs making the line just look bad.

 

There's more to this position than just determination and athleticism, though both are important. Decision-making is key. Melvin Gordon and Ameer Abdullah aren't a thousand times faster or tougher than (I think this is Cross?), but there are a lot of yards to be had on this play.

 

Yep. Lots of people like to say "But look! We ran the ball three times!" But that's a pretty short-sighted view. Yes, we ran the ball. But we ran in straight ahead with our third string RB. In Cross' defense, there wasn't much of a hole there. But he could have at least gained a couple instead of nothing. And that's what happens when you use basically a three tight end set and the defense knows you're going to run it - there are a bunch of defenders really close to the line.

 

A little more creativity and a little less predictability could have gone a long ways. And still would have left plenty of run calls available.

 

My first thought during that drive was exactly that. Why did we come out with 13 personnel?! Personally, I would have liked to have seen us with 22 personnel at least once that drive...

 

Regardless, our RB's have consistently had problems with following blockers. That's something that guys like Ameer were good at. Follow your blockers and squeeze your way to an open field.

[Enhance]

Lucky's "problem" to the extent that being a pretty solid back was a problem, was that he wasn't the kind of runner that we would soon see at Nebraska in Helu, Burkhead, and Abdullah (consecutively!) Perhaps we'll be so lucky again.

To piggyback off of this, I think Lucky's biggest "problem" was, in many people's eyes, he didn't live up to the 5-star reputation. Had he been a 3-star recruit, I think most people here would have a very difference perception of him.

 

Yeah, the point there is that if he follows his blockers on the left side (look at Jano driving his man 5 yards downfield and into the next Wisconsin defender), this at LEAST turns into 3rd and short. Instead it's 3rd & 8 or 9 after a loss.

 

When you put in your power back, you expect to be able to gain at least a couple. Sometimes the defense takes it away,and sometimes you take it away yourself by cutting right into your defenders, and away from your blockers.

 

This can't have been the only play like this. Not to say our OL has been great, either. I'm not trying to pick somewhere to assign the blame (players, coaches, line) -- just pointing out different examples of the run game not quite delivering.

A couple things to point on this play - first, the defender on the left side of the play isn't making a strong effort to drive Jano back. This defender is in an upright, very watchful position while he sees which way Cross is going. I just don't think this is Jano being overpowering - I think the defender was waiting to see where Cross was going because his technique looks deliberately bad.

 

Second, I think we have to give some credit to Wisconsin because they read that play pretty well. They fought well on the interior and took away the cutback.

 

That said, I agree that this play should've at least been a 2-3 yard gain, and that would've been much better than the actual result. I think if Cross had Abdullah-like vision he may have been able to bounce it out to the left for a big gain. Unfortunately, I think as you mentioned above, we've been kind of spoiled with some great backs recently.

 

You bring up some great points though that it's really been a conglomerate of run game issues, not just one thing here or there.

[Mavric]

It's almost like this could work......

[Atbone95]

It's almost like this could work......

Mav, I need a drive by drive breakdown before I'll buy in...

 

PSYCH. LANGSDORF LISTENED AND HUSKER NATION IS HAPPY TONIGHT.

[Mavric]

[adc7236]

I didn't read the whole thread so perhaps this has been discussed? Did anyone think that Langs would panic after we went down by two scores in the first half and go away from the ground game that was working? I sure did. I was surprised and happy that he stuck with it! Also, did anyone see when Riley was bent over at the knees for a long period after a few failed red zone pass plays? (I hope my memory is correct) At first I wondered if he was okay as it looked so unusual, but then I wondered if he was hiding from the cameras as he gave Langs a few strong words? We will never know.....just curious on anyone else's thoughts.

[xlbder]

Yeah, the power run game worked. Worked against MSU, worked against UCLA. Wouldve worked against Purdue, Illinois, etc. Sigh...

[Mavric]

And here's the mindset:

 

[StPaulHusker]

He's not wrong. Look at the Northwestern DT manhandling our OL on several run plays.

[Guy Chamberlin]

Of course you can't run like that every game.

 

Husker fans will never forget a third and one pass play that fails, but they forget all the running plays that get stuffed by defenses lined up to stop the run.

 

They also seem to forget the pass plays that kept drives alive. And scored 26 touchdowns.

 

That stat about how we win when we run more and lose when we pass more? That's a bit misleading. You run more often when the running game is working. When defenses adjust - and the good ones do - it doesn't work as well. When you're physically dominant you can keep running it down a team's throat. Every coach in the game would love to do that, but it's not that easy and this Nebraska team simply isn't there yet. It's not always the decision to run the ball more, it's how well you're actually pounding the rock. And when your own team has a dangerously porous defense, can you afford to be patient with the rushing game when the other team scores on four play, 2:30 drives? It's hardly surprising that the passing numbers skew higher in games where the team is losing in the fourth quarter, but only wishful thinking that more fourth quarter rushes would have succeeded.

 

There is a lot more that has gone into Nebraska's losses than offensive play-calling.

 

And it's a tired Nebraska argument that "exploiting what a defenses is willing to give" is some kind of West Coast philosophy that goes against the concept of power football.

 

Exploiting what a defense is willing to give is what successful coaches have done since the dawn of the game, including those on the four remaining teams in the college football playoffs.

[cm husker]

He's not wrong. Look at the Northwestern DT manhandling our OL on several run plays.

It can be easier to nuetralize an active DT with the run game than by passing. As I recall, that kid bounced around the line, including out to DE. On a couple of plays where NU got beat, the OL was caught in a tough position (for example being asked to reach a 7 tech or a center reaching a 3 tech).

[Enhance]

He's not wrong. Look at the Northwestern DT manhandling our OL on several run plays.

Agreed.

 

My response to Langsdorf, however, is that he certainly did not exhaust all of his options while trying to call an effective run game this season. There were several games Janovich saw zero carries and Ozigbo either saw none or very few. Furthermore, given TA is 0/4 when they throw 40 or more times, that says to me the team's efforts may have been better spent running the ball.

 

Throwing 45 times but only completely 40 percent of those passes means 60 percent of the time they had a play that meant nothing. Granted, some of those pass plays were situational necessities, but look at the 3rd and 1 call in this bowl game when Nebraska was up 27-21 in the 3rd inside UCLA's 5-yard line. Langsdorf called a pass after we had relied on the run to march down the field.

 

Those situations show me he still is not comfortable with a run game, despite much of the evidence suggesting that it should've been relied on more this year.

[StPaulHusker]

 

He's not wrong. Look at the Northwestern DT manhandling our OL on several run plays.

It can be easier to nuetralize an active DT with the run game than by passing. As I recall, that kid bounced around the line, including out to DE. On a couple of plays where NU got beat, the OL was caught in a tough position (for example being asked to reach a 7 tech or a center reaching a 3 tech).

 

I don't really see how anything you said disagrees with my post that he wasn't wrong. Sometimes they just couldn't get it going.