Newby vs. Ozigbo - who should start & who should see the most carries

[BRV920]

Except that games are won and lost in the trenches.

[GBRFAN]

Trenches are requried for both running and passing.

[QMany]

[The Dude]

We have done pretty well so far this year on the screen passes that we have called. Is it possilbe that by showing more runs up the middle the screen play is easier to setup?

Yeah I think we do a lot of stuff off our down hill run game. Play action looked pretty good on Saturday, other than the one big sack I remember. Tommy's fist TD was an outside run off a zone read look. Then there's all the WR sweep shenanigans.

[Undone]

We have done pretty well so far this year on the screen passes that we have called. Is it possilbe that by showing more runs up the middle the screen play is easier to setup?

 

Absolutely. When their ends and linebackers are quick to crash in is really when the screen play is so effective.

 

I expect both Newby and Ozigbo to have receptions on Saturday.

[Guy Chamberlin]

Screens looked a lot better this week, with good out-front blocking and Tommy looking the play off. But man....Tommy still need to learn how to deliver that short touch pass.

[Redux]

Could Tre Bryant be our silent commit?

[The Dude]

When's the appropriate time to get Bryant in on this?

 

Bryant: 12 att, 70 yds, 5.8 ypc, 1 td

Newby: 15 att, 76 yds, 5.1 ypc

Ozigbo, 32 att, 147 yds, 4.6 ypc, 3 tds

[Enhance]

When's the appropriate time to get Bryant in on this?

 

Bryant: 12 att, 70 yds, 5.8 ypc, 1 tds

Newby: 15 att, 76 yds, 5.1 ypc

Ozigbo, 32 att, 147 yds, 4.6 ypc, 3 tds

I don't think it's reasonable until they incorporate Bryant into the early parts of the game with meaningful carries. While he has looked good, I think every single one of his carries (or at least the vast majority) have come in the 4th quarter with the team up by at least three scores.

 

His contributions thus far can't be viewed through the same lens as the others.

[Enhance]

 

In regards to bolded part 1, "a lot" is subjective - sure. To me, running for 4 or more yards between the tackles is a good number even if it's against a defensive line you should be able to out-mustcle. Furthermore, correct me if I'm mistaken, but your comparison to the YPC nationally seems flawed. You're significantly shortening the sample size (using only runs between the tackles) and then comparing it to the national YPC average. That's not a very fair analysis and my assumption would be most teams look bad against the national YPC average if you only compare their runs between the tackles.

I realize that isn't really an apples to apples comparison. But when that is most of what we do, it isn't as far off as it may seem. My main point was to show that I don't think that's really having a lot of success. Yes, it isn't bad for running up the middle. But then people look at us only averaging 3.2 ypc and say we struggle to run the ball. Most of why we "struggle" is because we don't give ourselves very many chances for big running plays because the vast majority of our runs are right up the middle. We barley averaged 4 ypc against a defensive line that was completely overmatched. Against decent lines, it'll be 2 ypc (like it was against Northwestern last year) and people will say "we tried to run the ball but couldn't" which - I maintain - is most due to the types of run plays we are calling as opposed to our actual ability to run the ball if we had a more varied rushing attack.

 

If you want to use that analysis regarding middle rushes, I won't begrudge you. But, lets say myself and 1,000 people drive from Lincoln to Omaha every day for work and then back. Your comparison is kind of like comparing the average number of miles I drive in my car in the middle lane of the highway versus the average number of miles everybody drives their car in all three lanes of a highway. My average is going to look bad regardless. If you want to know how many miles I drive in the middle on average - great. Otherwise, pretty much everybody's average, when isolated, is going to look bad. That's all I'll say on it.

 

As far as the bolded is concerned, I again will say I think you make a good point that I can agree with. The run game lacked diversity Saturday. But, let me ask you this - do you believe Nebraska's offensive line played well against Wyoming last Saturday? Don't try to qualify your answer too much - just answer honestly.

[Count 'Bility]

Could Tre Bryant be our silent commit?

 

When's the appropriate time to get Bryant in on this?

 

Bryant: 12 att, 70 yds, 5.8 ypc, 1 tds

Newby: 15 att, 76 yds, 5.1 ypc

Ozigbo, 32 att, 147 yds, 4.6 ypc, 3 tds

It's comin guys. It's comin.

[BigRedBuster]

Bryant will have his time in the bright lights. I'm enjoying the work of Newby and Ozigbo. I think both are really good backs that Nebraska can be successful with.

[NUance]

Against the Ducks we see a 2 back set. Show something new. Confuse Hoke as there is now no back to "key" on. Just my thoughts.

 

Like this? (watch it to the end to see Hoke's expression. lol)

 

[Mavric]

 

 

In regards to bolded part 1, "a lot" is subjective - sure. To me, running for 4 or more yards between the tackles is a good number even if it's against a defensive line you should be able to out-mustcle. Furthermore, correct me if I'm mistaken, but your comparison to the YPC nationally seems flawed. You're significantly shortening the sample size (using only runs between the tackles) and then comparing it to the national YPC average. That's not a very fair analysis and my assumption would be most teams look bad against the national YPC average if you only compare their runs between the tackles.

I realize that isn't really an apples to apples comparison. But when that is most of what we do, it isn't as far off as it may seem. My main point was to show that I don't think that's really having a lot of success. Yes, it isn't bad for running up the middle. But then people look at us only averaging 3.2 ypc and say we struggle to run the ball. Most of why we "struggle" is because we don't give ourselves very many chances for big running plays because the vast majority of our runs are right up the middle. We barley averaged 4 ypc against a defensive line that was completely overmatched. Against decent lines, it'll be 2 ypc (like it was against Northwestern last year) and people will say "we tried to run the ball but couldn't" which - I maintain - is most due to the types of run plays we are calling as opposed to our actual ability to run the ball if we had a more varied rushing attack.

 

If you want to use that analysis regarding middle rushes, I won't begrudge you. But, lets say myself and 1,000 people drive from Lincoln to Omaha every day for work and then back. Your comparison is kind of like comparing the average number of miles I drive in my car in the middle lane of the highway versus the average number of miles everybody drives their car in all three lanes of a highway. My average is going to look bad regardless. If you want to know how many miles I drive in the middle on average - great. Otherwise, pretty much everybody's average, when isolated, is going to look bad. That's all I'll say on it.

 

As far as the bolded is concerned, I again will say I think you make a good point that I can agree with. The run game lacked diversity Saturday. But, let me ask you this - do you believe Nebraska's offensive line played well against Wyoming last Saturday? Don't try to qualify your answer too much - just answer honestly.

 

I don't think your analogy really works although if you drive in the middle lane 80% of the time .....

 

I was at the game but haven't had time to really go back and watch it to say if I thought they played well or not. I think you have to be playing pretty well to average four yards per carry straight up the middle because most of that would be the push the line is getting - it's not like we had backs were breaking free for 20 yard runs that upped the average. The couple outside play we did run didn't get as far but I don't know if those were the line's fault or not.

[GSG]

 

Against the Ducks we see a 2 back set. Show something new. Confuse Hoke as there is now no back to "key" on. Just my thoughts.

 

Like this? (watch it to the end to see Hoke's expression. lol)

 

 

 

That will be fine as long as they don't call this: