Langsdorf Mulling Options for 2016 Offense

[84HuskerLaw]

We will go 3-9 and waste a ton of talent if we throw it 70% of the time.

Amen. We will also give up a bunch of yards and points if we have an average time of possession (per possession) of something like 1 minute and 10 seconds. We will likely have the nation's number one punter and he will be the team's MVP. Kind of reminds me of a couple seasons under Solich where our punter became a national CFB household name and a fan favorite. When we punt more than twice a half, we are not doing very well offensively in my view. We need to make teams stop us from running the ball. How many times have we heard the nation's best coaches repeat the basic fundamental football truisms: Make your opponent stop the run first. and You must stop them from running the ball and make them one dimentional. If you force them to throw, you know what they are going to do much more often and they become predictable. We must first establish the run. While some may say you open up the run game by being successful throwing but in general this is the rebuttal offered up by a team that has trouble running the ball period.

[huKSer]

 

We will go 3-9 and waste a ton of talent if we throw it 70% of the time.

Amen. We will also give up a bunch of yards and points if we have an average time of possession (per possession) of something like 1 minute and 10 seconds. We will likely have the nation's number one punter and he will be the team's MVP. Kind of reminds me of a couple seasons under Solich where our punter became a national CFB household name and a fan favorite. When we punt more than twice a half, we are not doing very well offensively in my view. We need to make teams stop us from running the ball. How many times have we heard the nation's best coaches repeat the basic fundamental football truisms: Make your opponent stop the run first. and You must stop them from running the ball and make them one dimentional. If you force them to throw, you know what they are going to do much more often and they become predictable. We must first establish the run. While some may say you open up the run game by being successful throwing but in general this is the rebuttal offered up by a team that has trouble running the ball period.

 

Amen. We will also give up a bunch of yards and points if we have an average time of possession (per possession) of something like 1 minute and 10 seconds.

 

We will likely have the nation's number one punter and he will be the team's MVP. Kind of reminds me of a couple seasons under Solich where our punter became a national CFB household name and a fan favorite. When we punt more than twice a half, we are not doing very well offensively in my view.

 

We need to make teams stop us from running the ball. How many times have we heard the nation's best coaches repeat the basic fundamental football truisms: Make your opponent stop the run first. and You must stop them from running the ball and make them one dimentional. If you force them to throw, you know what they are going to do much more often and they become predictable. We must first establish the run. While some may say you open up the run game by being successful throwing but in general this is the rebuttal offered up by a team that has trouble running the ball period.

[SportsPicksBlog]

 

 

We will go 3-9 and waste a ton of talent if we throw it 70% of the time.

Amen. We will also give up a bunch of yards and points if we have an average time of possession (per possession) of something like 1 minute and 10 seconds. We will likely have the nation's number one punter and he will be the team's MVP. Kind of reminds me of a couple seasons under Solich where our punter became a national CFB household name and a fan favorite. When we punt more than twice a half, we are not doing very well offensively in my view. We need to make teams stop us from running the ball. How many times have we heard the nation's best coaches repeat the basic fundamental football truisms: Make your opponent stop the run first. and You must stop them from running the ball and make them one dimentional. If you force them to throw, you know what they are going to do much more often and they become predictable. We must first establish the run. While some may say you open up the run game by being successful throwing but in general this is the rebuttal offered up by a team that has trouble running the ball period.

 

Amen. We will also give up a bunch of yards and points if we have an average time of possession (per possession) of something like 1 minute and 10 seconds.

 

We will likely have the nation's number one punter and he will be the team's MVP. Kind of reminds me of a couple seasons under Solich where our punter became a national CFB household name and a fan favorite. When we punt more than twice a half, we are not doing very well offensively in my view.

 

We need to make teams stop us from running the ball. How many times have we heard the nation's best coaches repeat the basic fundamental football truisms: Make your opponent stop the run first. and You must stop them from running the ball and make them one dimentional. If you force them to throw, you know what they are going to do much more often and they become predictable. We must first establish the run. While some may say you open up the run game by being successful throwing but in general this is the rebuttal offered up by a team that has trouble running the ball period.

 

 

If you're looking for a balanced offensive attack this year, you fellows are in for a world of disappointment. The perfect storm of very good receivers, a weak group of RB's, and a coaching staff that is looking to show proof-of-concept as it relates to their offensive system will make this year's Nebraska team resemble Texas Tech or Purdue. As a side note, if TA can capitalize on this "perfect storm" he may find himself on an NFL roster next year.

[Red Five]

 

We will go 3-9 and waste a ton of talent if we throw it 70% of the time.

 

 

we also wont' throw it 70% of the time

 

 

Yup. One team in CFB threw the ball more than 60% of the time last year (Wash St at 73.5%).

 

https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/stat/passing-play-pct?date=2016-01-11

[BigRedBuster]

So, why are we even discussing what would happen if we throw the ball 70% of the time?

[cm husker]

 

We will go 3-9 and waste a ton of talent if we throw it 70% of the time.

 

 

we also wont' throw it 70% of the time

 

 

Of course not.

[Husker Psycho]

If you're looking for a balanced offensive attack this year, you fellows are in for a world of disappointment. The perfect storm of very good receivers, a weak group of RB's, and a coaching staff that is looking to show proof-of-concept as it relates to their offensive system will make this year's Nebraska team resemble Texas Tech or Purdue. As a side note, if TA can capitalize on this "perfect storm" he may find himself on an NFL roster next year.

 

 

I cant say if you're wrong or if your right... the season is close so we'll just have to see.

 

However with that said...

 

If our coaching staff decides this year to run a certain offense in order to "show proof of concept" then they better hope it leads to victories because if it doesn't then there is going to be hell to pay.

 

We went through something similar to that last year. There is very little tolerance for that this year. These coaches have admitted that they attempt to "outsmart" opposing coaches... it's part of what they think they're good at. That explains the unexplainable play calling on third and short last year. They were simply attempting to outsmart the opposing team by running plays they thought no one would expect in that situation. They were attempting to "show proof of concept" as to their supposed ability to outsmart opposing coaches. Well, we all know how that turned out.

 

We'll know soon enough what type of offense we'll run this year. Whatever it is, I hope it is fundamentally sound football. Last year, too often, it wasn't that.

[GBRFAN]

Are you referring to the staff before last year? Several coaches from around the Big Ten made that comment 2 years ago about Beck and company.

[BRV920]

He's talking about Riley and Langsdorf. Think that was pretty clear.

[Mavric]

 

 

 

This is Nebraska. People will be banging that drum until the cows come home. Any OC worth his salt should be looking at this offense and trying to think of ways to get the ball into the hands of Carter, Reilly, Morgan, Westerkamp, etc.

Flowchart:

Did NU win a Natty?

Yes: Passing was OK I guess.

No: Run the Damn Ball!

I did like the UCLA blueprint. I liked the Michigan State game, too, though. I'm excited to see what Langs has in store this year.

 

 

Michigan State game through the first drive of the fourth quarter: 32 runs, 24 passes - 57% rushing

 

I'd be just fine with that game plan as well. I don't think it was all that much different from the UCLA game plan. MSU was #11 in the country against the run while UCLA was #98 so we ended up passing more against MSU but we actually tried to run the ball against MSU and had pretty good success at it.

 

Pretty sure that was one of the highest rushing games MSU gave up all year. So it also kind of shoots down the notion that we could only run against bad rush defenses.

 

 

And Nebraska was still down 31-26 at that point, soooooooo........

 

 

So we were in a position to win a game that basically no one expected us to win against a Top 5 team.

 

Which is a significant improvement over losing to terrible teams because we insisted on throwing the ball too often.

[BRV920]

You nailed it Mavric.

[Landlord]

 

If you're looking for a balanced offensive attack this year, you fellows are in for a world of disappointment. The perfect storm of very good receivers, a weak group of RB's, and a coaching staff that is looking to show proof-of-concept as it relates to their offensive system will make this year's Nebraska team resemble Texas Tech or Purdue. As a side note, if TA can capitalize on this "perfect storm" he may find himself on an NFL roster next year.

 

 

I cant say if you're wrong or if your right... the season is close so we'll just have to see.

 

However with that said...

 

If our coaching staff decides this year to run a certain offense in order to "show proof of concept" then they better hope it leads to victories because if it doesn't then there is going to be hell to pay.

 

We went through something similar to that last year. There is very little tolerance for that this year. These coaches have admitted that they attempt to "outsmart" opposing coaches... it's part of what they think they're good at. That explains the unexplainable play calling on third and short last year. They were simply attempting to outsmart the opposing team by running plays they thought no one would expect in that situation. They were attempting to "show proof of concept" as to their supposed ability to outsmart opposing coaches. Well, we all know how that turned out.

 

We'll know soon enough what type of offense we'll run this year. Whatever it is, I hope it is fundamentally sound football. Last year, too often, it wasn't that.

 

 

 

 

Is this one of those things where you take something short and off the cuff like, "we got too cute" and create this massive, complex and nuanced narrative where the coaches admitted to a perpetual weakness, which manifested in certain specific ways, and they better fix it or they'll get fired...stuff like that?

[Scratchtown]

 

 

If you're looking for a balanced offensive attack this year, you fellows are in for a world of disappointment. The perfect storm of very good receivers, a weak group of RB's, and a coaching staff that is looking to show proof-of-concept as it relates to their offensive system will make this year's Nebraska team resemble Texas Tech or Purdue. As a side note, if TA can capitalize on this "perfect storm" he may find himself on an NFL roster next year.

 

 

I cant say if you're wrong or if your right... the season is close so we'll just have to see.

 

However with that said...

 

If our coaching staff decides this year to run a certain offense in order to "show proof of concept" then they better hope it leads to victories because if it doesn't then there is going to be hell to pay.

 

We went through something similar to that last year. There is very little tolerance for that this year. These coaches have admitted that they attempt to "outsmart" opposing coaches... it's part of what they think they're good at. That explains the unexplainable play calling on third and short last year. They were simply attempting to outsmart the opposing team by running plays they thought no one would expect in that situation. They were attempting to "show proof of concept" as to their supposed ability to outsmart opposing coaches. Well, we all know how that turned out.

 

We'll know soon enough what type of offense we'll run this year. Whatever it is, I hope it is fundamentally sound football. Last year, too often, it wasn't that.

 

 

Is this one of those things where you take something short and off the cuff like, "we got too cute" and create this massive, complex and nuanced narrative where the coaches admitted to a perpetual weakness, which manifested in certain specific ways, and they better fix it or they'll get fired...stuff like that?

They won't get fired even with another 6-6 ish year. I think Eichorst would like to see what Riley can do with 4-5 years rather than just 2. Regardless of how the fanbase feels. I'm kind of interested in this "proof of concept".

 

I think a lot of coaches are that way. They want the stuff they run and want to run to work, and they are out to prove it. Many coaches like a certain style of football, and so these guys aren't going to just change the offense to tailor to TA for one year, only to change it back to what they actually want to run when POB and Gebbia are groomed.

 

Proof of concept is just them wanting to show that what they believe in will work. I'm not on board with it in year 2. Year 3, 4, 5? I see it working much better.