Listening to Bennings Description of His Interview with Langs

[cm husker]

I also question your "most teams were around 150" estimate considering NU's opponents threw about 22 times per game against them.

 

http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/nebraska/1971.html

 

 

Take out Rodgers 57 catches, and NU's receivers had 21 catches combined.

 

That is not "pass heavy."

[ZRod]

I also question your "most teams were around 150" estimate considering NU's opponents threw about 22 times per game against them.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/nebraska/1971.html

Take out Rodgers 57 catches, and NU's receivers had 21 catches combined.

That is not "pass heavy."

Question all you want the stats are out their for you to look at. I chose the top 10 to simplify things.

 

Just stop. I looked at attempts not catches. You take away any teams best reciever stats and things will look a lot different...You're sounding like a fool right now.

[cm husker]

 

Just one example of that "pass heavy" offense against one of best defenses it faced:

http://www.huskermax.com/games/1971/oklahoma71.html

59 to 13 run to pass ratio.

They probablyprobably installed some packages for that week.

 

 

Stop trying to build a strawman out of one game and admit you just put your foot in your mouth.

1 game?

 

NU ran the ball 68% of the time that year.

 

On no planet is that "pass heavy."

[Red Dead Redemption]

 

 

 

Texas won Champiinships with the wishbone in the 60s. How dare Mack Brown do it withthe spread almost twice 4 years later.

Oklahoma won umpteen titles with the wishbone. How dare Stoops do it with a pass heavy spread 15-20 years later.

 

Bob Devaney won two national championships with Tom Osborne running a balanced, more throw heavy offense.

 

How dare Tom Osborne do something differently than Tom Osborne did before him?

" throw heavy"

Demonstrates your knowledge of husker history. Those offenses were anything but "throw heavy."

And, Osborne, over 30 years, moved to his system for some specific reasons dictated by the reality of his circumstances.

It's cool. We'll see how the current departure plays out the next few years.

Demonstrates you're knowledge of football in general.

 

Demonstrates your knowledge of grammar. :stickouttongue:

[cm husker]

 

I also question your "most teams were around 150" estimate considering NU's opponents threw about 22 times per game against them.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/nebraska/1971.html

Take out Rodgers 57 catches, and NU's receivers had 21 catches combined.

That is not "pass heavy."

Question all you want the stats are out their for you to look at. I chose the top 10 to simplify things.

 

Just stop. I looked at attempts not catches. You take away any teams best reciever stats and things will look a lot different...You're sounding like a fool right now.

The top 10 what? Rankings or scoring offense or total offense?

 

68% of their plays were runs.

 

Only in an Orwellian world would that be termed "pass heavy."

[ZRod]

 

 

Just one example of that "pass heavy" offense against one of best defenses it faced: http://www.huskermax.com/games/1971/oklahoma71.html

59 to 13 run to pass ratio.

They probablyprobably installed some packages for that week.

Stop trying to build a strawman out of one game and admit you just put your foot in your mouth.

1 game?

NU ran the ball 68% of the time that year.

On no planet is that "pass heavy."

Consider the era you're talking about. If you don't understand context I can't help you. You're wrong. Good night.

[cm husker]

Here you go. Here's the stat list for 1971. NU's starting QB threw it 258 times. To break the top 10, you'd have to be throwing it 325 times. NU was extremely efficient in the passing game, like they were in the 90s, but were by no means "pass heavy."

 

http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/years/1971.html

[Elf]

Here you go. Here's the stat list for 1971. NU's starting QB threw it 258 times. To break the top 10, you'd have to be throwing it 325 times. NU was extremely efficient in the passing game, like they were in the 90s, but were by no means "pass heavy."

 

http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/years/1971.html

I'm pretty sure he was talking about the AP/Coaches rankings when it came to the top ten.

 

We started something recently in our house, when someone does something totally silly we say they just had a "Moe Ron" moment. It's our cue to each other that we should stop and think about what we just did or said. You just had a Moe Ron moment.

[cm husker]

Color me unsurprised that you had to come up with a system for that situation.

[Count 'Bility]

 

Texas won Champiinships with the wishbone in the 60s. How dare Mack Brown do it withthe spread almost twice 4 years later.

Oklahoma won umpteen titles with the wishbone. How dare Stoops do it with a pass heavy spread 15-20 years later.

 

 

Bob Devaney won two national championships with Tom Osborne running a balanced, more throw heavy offense.

 

How dare Tom Osborne do something differently than Tom Osborne did before him?

I LOL'd. I was gonna say this. But I didnt wanna deal with Mrs all knowing cm spinning one option play a game by Tagge into the base offense.

[Elf]

Color me unsurprised that you had to come up with a system for that situation.

It started off as humor when my wife did something silly. We all stop and laugh when it happens, it diffuses any need for anyone to get defensive about their words or actions. And most importantly it works for us.

 

That doesn't change the fact that you had a Moe Ron moment.

[suh_fan93]

 

Texas won Champiinships with the wishbone in the 60s. How dare Mack Brown do it withthe spread almost twice 4 years later.

 

Oklahoma won umpteen titles with the wishbone. How dare Stoops do it with a pass heavy spread 15-20 years later.

 

 

Bob Devaney won two national championships with Tom Osborne running a balanced, more throw heavy offense.

 

 

Otherwise known as the I-formation! I know they let Jerry Tagge throw though that's for sure.

[Red Dead Redemption]

 

 

Texas won Champiinships with the wishbone in the 60s. How dare Mack Brown do it withthe spread almost twice 4 years later.

Oklahoma won umpteen titles with the wishbone. How dare Stoops do it with a pass heavy spread 15-20 years later.

 

Bob Devaney won two national championships with Tom Osborne running a balanced, more throw heavy offense.

 

How dare Tom Osborne do something differently than Tom Osborne did before him?

I LOL'd. I was gonna say this. But I didnt wanna deal with Mrs all knowing cm spinning one option play a game by Tagge into the base offense.

"Mrs"?

 

Attempting to insult someone by implying they are female? Is it time to play the sexism/misogyny cards already?

[drfish]

Couple of random thoughts on this thread. The Husker team in question had passed 30% of the time. That was a fairly high ratio for the time. They ran about equally from the I and the 1 back "spread" (though the spread had a tight slot on one side and a tight flanker on the other with only 1 receiver split out).

 

I distinctly remember one of the former running backs (might even have been DB) talking about the size of the playbook that they had and how there would be a specific subset of that playbook that they would prepare for each game and that the subset varied. He also said there were formations and plays that were in the playbook that never saw the light of day the whole year long.

 

A fair reading of the sit down is that they talked about mostly non-football things. They talked about the recruiting strategy and thought it was similar. Osborne said that with the weather, there are situations in which a team that can't consistently run the ball is at a distinct disadvantage which Riley agreed was true. There are no words or implications that TO sat MR down to school him on how to do things. That seems very unlike the TO philosophy toward a head coach. I am not sure how you could come to the conclusion from the linked article that Osborne was trying to set Riley straight on anything. That is a real leap, IMO.

[cm husker]

I never even implied that he tried to "set Riley straight."

 

I was simply saying that as a single piece of evidence, among many, that NU is unique (or disadvantaged) based on its circumstances and the system needs to be adapted to that uniqueness. TO has on numorous occasions had talked (and written) about those circumstances and the reasons he refined and shaped his system the way he did.

 

I find it interesting that so many people on here apparently think we can do whatever we want and model ourselves after whomever we want and we'll be more successful than everyone else.

 

I think NU can get back to being a .700 program doing things that way, but I don't see NU getting to .800+ doing that.