Creativity in the run game

[Mavric]

WhereTF is Wilbon?

 

Apparently in Riley's doghouse. Cramped quarters with Ozigbo in there as well.

[QMany]

 

Another note on the running game:

 

This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.

 

People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.

 

We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.

The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.

Those three NFL RBs were two three-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.

[cm husker]

 

WhereTF is Wilbon?

 

Apparently in Riley's doghouse. Cramped quarters with Ozigbo in there as well.

 

 

Hey, if you can't "pass protect" in this offense, you're a liability at RB.

 

Ameer Abdullah would have struggled to see the field in this offense.

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

Another note on the running game:

 

This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.

 

People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.

 

We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.

The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.

Those three NFL RBs were two two-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.

 

Because we know that as long as they are ranked higher in HS, they immediately are better in college? C'mon.

[QMany]

 

 

 

Another note on the running game:

 

This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.

 

People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.

 

We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.

The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.

Those three NFL RBs were two two-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.

 

Because we know that as long as they are ranked higher in HS, they immediately are better in college? C'mon.

You're right, I prefer the StPaulHusker unbiased eye-test over professional recruiting services in evaluating "talent."

[Mavric]

 

Another note on the running game:

 

This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.

 

People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.

 

We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.

The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.

 

 

That may be.

 

It also may be that they played in a system more conducive to their skills.

 

Much was made about how this new staff likes to use tight ends and fullbacks more. There was extensive rejoicing over that. The downside of that is that the more offensive players you have in the formation, the more defensive players are going to be in the box.

 

The previous staff ran a lot of 11 personnel - 1 RB, 1 TE. With three receivers wide, defenses had to have three corners and at least one if not two safeties spread over the field. That leaves only 6 or maybe 7 defenders in the box and thus more open space around the line.

 

The new staff likes to run 21 or 22 personnel. That leaves only one or two wideouts so now there are at least 7 if not 8 or even 9 defenders in the box. More defenders means less room to run. We're probably hurting ourselves by allowing the defense to load up the box and not giving our backs a chance to get going.

 

It's the difference between having to block a defender and having that defender far enough away from the point of attack that you don't have to block them.

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

 

 

Another note on the running game:

 

This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.

 

People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.

 

We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.

The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.

Those three NFL RBs were two two-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.

 

Because we know that as long as they are ranked higher in HS, they immediately are better in college? C'mon.

You're right, I prefer the StPaulHusker unbiased eye-test over professional recruiting services in evaluating "talent."

 

This is your logic:

 

Three star Ameer Abdullah was coached to be an elite back by the previous staff. Four star Newby (despite two years of coaching by that same staff) has been coached for half a season by the current staff and isn't as good as Abdullah. Conclusion: these coaches suck.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

 

Another note on the running game:

 

This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.

 

People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.

 

We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.

The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.

Those three NFL RBs were two two-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.

 

Because we know that as long as they are ranked higher in HS, they immediately are better in college? C'mon.

You're right, I prefer the StPaulHusker unbiased eye-test over professional recruiting services in evaluating "talent."

 

This is your logic:

 

Three star Ameer Abdullah was coached to be an elite back by the previous staff. Four star Newby (despite two years of coaching by that same staff) has been coached for half a season by the current staff and isn't as good as Abdullah. Conclusion: these coaches suck.

 

 

That's not really his logic.

 

1. Go back and look at Ameer's stats as a rFR and SO. He was showing flashes of his athleticism, but he was far from an elite back. He didn't step out on the field a finished product. He was developed over a number of seasons.

 

2. Play calling matters. Creativity in the run game produces mismatches, overmatches (i.e., more blockers than defenders at POA) and space for RBs to pick up chunk plays. I sincerely believe that if we were still running last year's system, NU would look a ton better at RB and OL right now. This version of the WCO is just a mess. I honestly watch the games and have no idea what Riley and Langs are trying to accomplish play in and play out in terms of manipulating a defense.

[QMany]

If those are the conclusions you want to jump to, fine.

 

Coaching encompasses more than development, it also includes playcalling and much more.

 

If you want to just look at our roster of capable running backs, ignore their recruiting rankings, overlook the questionable misuse of practically all of them, forget no commitment to the run, and just deem them all untalented, that's your prerogative.

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Another note on the running game:

 

This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.

 

People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.

 

We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.

The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.

Those three NFL RBs were two two-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.

 

Because we know that as long as they are ranked higher in HS, they immediately are better in college? C'mon.

You're right, I prefer the StPaulHusker unbiased eye-test over professional recruiting services in evaluating "talent."

 

This is your logic:

 

Three star Ameer Abdullah was coached to be an elite back by the previous staff. Four star Newby (despite two years of coaching by that same staff) has been coached for half a season by the current staff and isn't as good as Abdullah. Conclusion: these coaches suck.

 

 

That's not really his logic.

 

1. Go back and look at Ameer's stats as a rFR and SO. He was showing flashes of his athleticism, but he was far from an elite back. He didn't step out on the field a finished product. He was developed over a number of seasons.

 

2. Play calling matters. Creativity in the run game produces mismatches, overmatches (i.e., more blockers than defenders at POA) and space for RBs to pick up chunk plays. I sincerely believe that if we were still running last year's system, NU would look a ton better at RB and OL right now. This version of the WCO is just a mess. I honestly watch the games and have no idea what Riley and Langs are trying to accomplish play in and play out in terms of manipulating a defense.

 

Newby is not, was not, and won't be better than Abdullah. It doesn't matter who is calling any play.

[StPaulHusker]

If those are the conclusions you want to jump to, fine.

 

Coaching encompasses more than development, it also includes playcalling and much more.

 

If you want to just look at our roster of capable running backs, ignore their recruiting rankings, overlook the questionable misuse of practically all of them, forget no commitment to the run, and just deem them all untalented, that's your prerogative.

I didn't deem anyone untalented. I said that there was a drop off in talent from the last 3 RB's to the ones we have now. Anyone can see that.

 

But whatever. People are going to find everything imaginable to criticize. I don't suspect you or anyone else on this board to be any different.

[Igetbored216]

 

 

It would help the running game a lot if the coaches decided to put actual running backs out there. Sorry, but neither Newby or Cross are good running backs and I'm not sure why the coaches can't see this yet eight games into the season.

And who do you recommend putting in there. Hard to run anywhere when there isn't any holes

How about the RB who had seven carries for 70 yards against Illinois, when Mr. Pass Pro had five carries for 15 yards in the same game? Just a thought. I mean, I know using a player that can actually run at the running back position seems really stupid, but why not give it a try?

[Undone]

How about the RB who had seven carries for 70 yards against Illinois, when Mr. Pass Pro had five carries for 15 yards in the same game? Just a thought. I mean, I know using a player that can actually run at the running back position seems really stupid, but why not give it a try?

 

I think at this point, this is where I land as well. So what if on first down you've got Ozigbo, and the other team knows you're going to hand it off to him?

 

It'd surely be at least worth a shot compared to continuing to do what we're doing now...

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Another note on the running game:

 

This will be the first year since 2009 that we finish out of the Top 20 in the country in rushing. Twice in that span we were in the Top 10. We're currently 50th.

 

People have been complaining about how bad our OL for years. But all we did was crank out yards.

 

We have two starters back from last year's #19 rush offense and we lost one starter that many liked to mock. So it doesn't seem like we've had a large talent down-grade.

The last 3 RB's are currently in the NFL. Not one on the roster today fills that role. I think there is a significant talent downgrade.

Those three NFL RBs were two two-stars and one four-star recruits before they got here. Many wanted Ameer to play in the secondary. We have four four-star talents on the RB depth chart. What is the difference? Coaching.

 

Because we know that as long as they are ranked higher in HS, they immediately are better in college? C'mon.

You're right, I prefer the StPaulHusker unbiased eye-test over professional recruiting services in evaluating "talent."

 

This is your logic:

 

Three star Ameer Abdullah was coached to be an elite back by the previous staff. Four star Newby (despite two years of coaching by that same staff) has been coached for half a season by the current staff and isn't as good as Abdullah. Conclusion: these coaches suck.

 

 

That's not really his logic.

 

1. Go back and look at Ameer's stats as a rFR and SO. He was showing flashes of his athleticism, but he was far from an elite back. He didn't step out on the field a finished product. He was developed over a number of seasons.

 

2. Play calling matters. Creativity in the run game produces mismatches, overmatches (i.e., more blockers than defenders at POA) and space for RBs to pick up chunk plays. I sincerely believe that if we were still running last year's system, NU would look a ton better at RB and OL right now. This version of the WCO is just a mess. I honestly watch the games and have no idea what Riley and Langs are trying to accomplish play in and play out in terms of manipulating a defense.

 

Newby is not, was not, and won't be better than Abdullah. It doesn't matter who is calling any play.

 

 

 

Who ever claimed he would be? Abullah's level of production was generational at NU. I hope he can get it going for a terrible Lions team.

[alexhortdog95]

 

 

Anyone have a take on this one?

 

It doesn't look like we ran straight into a stacked box again like I hear so many claims to today.

 

So was #57 supposed to block on this play?

 

Bad read by the QB.