Does this team even care???

[Undone]

+1 all day, Count. Awesome post.

There's a reason we put up only 10 points against Iowa. And everything you listed factors into it.

I don't even want "mobile" or "not mobile" to be a part of the discussion. I don't care if next season we average 15 passes or less a game (actually, that would probably make me happy). I want a quarterback who throws the ball with good mechanics and makes reads.

 

What if we were to recruit the very best mobile QB recruit prospect in the country within the next 1-2 years? That would be like, beyond incredible. But the next quarterback we play has to be able to throw the ball well when he's asked to throw the ball.

[Count 'Bility]

Of all those deep balls against Iowa, which every one, our guy had a step or two on their guy. Even if we complete one and gain 30 yards, do you think Iowa panics and immediately scraps their plan and goes into a 2 deep cloud? No. If you want to beat this kind of stuff you have to hit the throws underneath to get them backers off the line. For all his athletic ability, on the open slant to Morgan, the pressure came in the middle, all he had to do was sidestep it, and step into his throw and Stanly turns it up for a 15-20 yard gain. Instead he falls back and throws an errant pass in a hurry off his back feet. This is just an example of the lack of fit. It just is. Great competitor. Great leader. Average QB. But at some point lack of execution of basic stuff cant be continously absolved just "cuz he plays hard". Competitiveness is beyond simply effort. Execution is a factor as well.

 

The interesting part in this case is that it can all be put on the qb. But it cant all be put on the OC/QB coach either. 1. you know damn well-it's common sense-that Tommy isnt being coached to do, or not do, some of the things he does/doesnt do. But where it goes the other way is the lack of fit and comfort for the qb as well.

[Nebfanatic]

Of all those deep balls against Iowa, which every one, our guy had a step or two on their guy. Even if we complete one and gain 30 yards, do you think Iowa panics and immediately scraps their plan and goes into a 2 deep cloud? No. If you want to beat this kind of stuff you have to hit the throws underneath to get them backers off the line. For all his athletic ability, on the open slant to Morgan, the pressure came in the middle, all he had to do was sidestep it, and step into his throw and Stanly turns it up for a 15-20 yard gain. Instead he falls back and throws an errant pass in a hurry off his back feet. This is just an example of the lack of fit. It just is. Great competitor. Great leader. Average QB. But at some point lack of execution of basic stuff cant be continously absolved just "cuz he plays hard". Competitiveness is beyond simply effort. Execution is a factor as well.

 

The interesting part in this case is that it can all be put on the qb. But it cant all be put on the OC/QB coach either. 1. you know damn well-it's common sense-that Tommy isnt being coached to do, or not do, some of the things he does/doesnt do. But where it goes the other way is the lack of fit and comfort for the qb as well.

yep Tommy needs to execute but maybe give him plays he executes better? That can be really hard to do if you are accustomed to a certain way if doing things and it can definitely handcuff the offense the the rail of a sinking ship, as we saw athe times this year.

[lo country]

Of all those deep balls against Iowa, which every one, our guy had a step or two on their guy. Even if we complete one and gain 30 yards, do you think Iowa panics and immediately scraps their plan and goes into a 2 deep cloud? No. If you want to beat this kind of stuff you have to hit the throws underneath to get them backers off the line. For all his athletic ability, on the open slant to Morgan, the pressure came in the middle, all he had to do was sidestep it, and step into his throw and Stanly turns it up for a 15-20 yard gain. Instead he falls back and throws an errant pass in a hurry off his back feet. This is just an example of the lack of fit. It just is. Great competitor. Great leader. Average QB. But at some point lack of execution of basic stuff cant be continously absolved just "cuz he plays hard". Competitiveness is beyond simply effort. Execution is a factor as well.

 

The interesting part in this case is that it can all be put on the qb. But it cant all be put on the OC/QB coach either. 1. you know damn well-it's common sense-that Tommy isnt being coached to do, or not do, some of the things he does/doesnt do. But where it goes the other way is the lack of fit and comfort for the qb as well.

And this is what I liked about the Maryland game. (Full disclosure it appeared in that game that Fyfe was a significantly more accurate QB in that he made "easy throws" and was able to throw so as to allow YAC). Langs dialed up a game plan to throw to the edges and boundaries to get their LB's out of the box and play sideline to sideline. Fyfe threw well (and often enough) that the front 7 had to cover it all....run game, edge, swing passes, screens etc......

 

As you mentioned above if you were DC, TA has locked on and failed to progress through his reads for 4 years...... Whisky really exploited his issues in the throw to a spot play. The deflected several passes. Through film they realized he throws to a spot on routes and truly doesn't see the field (or the LB sitting under the route).

 

I'm not a fan of Langs as he has, IMO, shown an inability to counter a more physical or a more athletic D. Of course better QB play i.e. one who can hit passing 101 routes...... an OL that can actually pull to run counters, misdirection etc....So he probably deserves another year to get a passing QB in to the system. (Same with Banker another year with DL improvement)

 

As far as the team caring, I look back to the fiasco that was our blowout loss to Wisky on the jet sweep. Earlier in the season, NU shut it down cold. In the B1G, too many guys went of script and tried to do it "their" way. Maybe film break down will show that against Iowa. Guys were playing the "scheme", that first long run, it broke down.....

[Count 'Bility]

 

Of all those deep balls against Iowa, which every one, our guy had a step or two on their guy. Even if we complete one and gain 30 yards, do you think Iowa panics and immediately scraps their plan and goes into a 2 deep cloud? No. If you want to beat this kind of stuff you have to hit the throws underneath to get them backers off the line. For all his athletic ability, on the open slant to Morgan, the pressure came in the middle, all he had to do was sidestep it, and step into his throw and Stanly turns it up for a 15-20 yard gain. Instead he falls back and throws an errant pass in a hurry off his back feet. This is just an example of the lack of fit. It just is. Great competitor. Great leader. Average QB. But at some point lack of execution of basic stuff cant be continously absolved just "cuz he plays hard". Competitiveness is beyond simply effort. Execution is a factor as well.

 

The interesting part in this case is that it can all be put on the qb. But it cant all be put on the OC/QB coach either. 1. you know damn well-it's common sense-that Tommy isnt being coached to do, or not do, some of the things he does/doesnt do. But where it goes the other way is the lack of fit and comfort for the qb as well.

yep Tommy needs to execute but maybe give him plays he executes better? That can be really hard to do if you are accustomed to a certain way if doing things and it can definitely handcuff the offense the the rail of a sinking ship, as we saw athe times this year.

 

This will be offensive, so im not gonna say "no offense", but it's the brutal honest truth. This is what the folks say who arent as football smart as others. And not necessarily pertaining to you. Just a generalization as we see this all the time. "Run tommy 30 times. Give him stuff he can handle". It's not as simple as "give him stuff he can execute better". This is the result of not being well rounded ENOUGH. When a defense can plan and play against you and know youre pretty much one dimensional, it's really hard. yeah, we could do things he's more comfortable with more often, but if those things are being keyed on to the point of very little success, whats the sweet spot that an OC can find? Do you keep ramming the square peg into the round hole? Or do you try the round peg that simply doesnt fit in the round hole?

[cm husker]

This is like 2004/2005/2006 all over again.

[Count 'Bility]

 

Of all those deep balls against Iowa, which every one, our guy had a step or two on their guy. Even if we complete one and gain 30 yards, do you think Iowa panics and immediately scraps their plan and goes into a 2 deep cloud? No. If you want to beat this kind of stuff you have to hit the throws underneath to get them backers off the line. For all his athletic ability, on the open slant to Morgan, the pressure came in the middle, all he had to do was sidestep it, and step into his throw and Stanly turns it up for a 15-20 yard gain. Instead he falls back and throws an errant pass in a hurry off his back feet. This is just an example of the lack of fit. It just is. Great competitor. Great leader. Average QB. But at some point lack of execution of basic stuff cant be continously absolved just "cuz he plays hard". Competitiveness is beyond simply effort. Execution is a factor as well.

 

The interesting part in this case is that it can all be put on the qb. But it cant all be put on the OC/QB coach either. 1. you know damn well-it's common sense-that Tommy isnt being coached to do, or not do, some of the things he does/doesnt do. But where it goes the other way is the lack of fit and comfort for the qb as well.

And this is what I liked about the Maryland game. (Full disclosure it appeared in that game that Fyfe was a significantly more accurate QB in that he made "easy throws" and was able to throw so as to allow YAC). Langs dialed up a game plan to throw to the edges and boundaries to get their LB's out of the box and play sideline to sideline. Fyfe threw well (and often enough) that the front 7 had to cover it all....run game, edge, swing passes, screens etc......

 

As you mentioned above if you were DC, TA has locked on and failed to progress through his reads for 4 years...... Whisky really exploited his issues in the throw to a spot play. The deflected several passes. Through film they realized he throws to a spot on routes and truly doesn't see the field (or the LB sitting under the route).

 

I'm not a fan of Langs as he has, IMO, shown an inability to counter a more physical or a more athletic D. Of course better QB play i.e. one who can hit passing 101 routes...... an OL that can actually pull to run counters, misdirection etc....So he probably deserves another year to get a passing QB in to the system. (Same with Banker another year with DL improvement)

 

As far as the team caring, I look back to the fiasco that was our blowout loss to Wisky on the jet sweep. Earlier in the season, NU shut it down cold. In the B1G, too many guys went of script and tried to do it "their" way. Maybe film break down will show that against Iowa. Guys were playing the "scheme", that first long run, it broke down.....

 

These things stand out to me. It's difficult for even the most genius of offensive minds to counter more physical and/or more athletic defenses. it's harder against really good defenses cuz theyre' really good, and usually better.

 

Instead of worrying about how we can do against better teams, what we have to do is take care of us and get better. So that the instances of facing such scenario is not as many. That we are at very worst even in most games.

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

 

Of all those deep balls against Iowa, which every one, our guy had a step or two on their guy. Even if we complete one and gain 30 yards, do you think Iowa panics and immediately scraps their plan and goes into a 2 deep cloud? No. If you want to beat this kind of stuff you have to hit the throws underneath to get them backers off the line. For all his athletic ability, on the open slant to Morgan, the pressure came in the middle, all he had to do was sidestep it, and step into his throw and Stanly turns it up for a 15-20 yard gain. Instead he falls back and throws an errant pass in a hurry off his back feet. This is just an example of the lack of fit. It just is. Great competitor. Great leader. Average QB. But at some point lack of execution of basic stuff cant be continously absolved just "cuz he plays hard". Competitiveness is beyond simply effort. Execution is a factor as well.

 

The interesting part in this case is that it can all be put on the qb. But it cant all be put on the OC/QB coach either. 1. you know damn well-it's common sense-that Tommy isnt being coached to do, or not do, some of the things he does/doesnt do. But where it goes the other way is the lack of fit and comfort for the qb as well.

yep Tommy needs to execute but maybe give him plays he executes better? That can be really hard to do if you are accustomed to a certain way if doing things and it can definitely handcuff the offense the the rail of a sinking ship, as we saw athe times this year.

This will be offensive, so im not gonna say "no offense", but it's the brutal honest truth. This is what the folks say who arent as football smart as others. And not necessarily pertaining to you. Just a generalization as we see this all the time. "Run tommy 30 times. Give him stuff he can handle". It's not as simple as "give him stuff he can execute better". This is the result of not being well rounded ENOUGH. When a defense can plan and play against you and know youre pretty much one dimensional, it's really hard. yeah, we could do things he's more comfortable with more often, but if those things are being keyed on to the point of very little success, whats the sweet spot that an OC can find? Do you keep ramming the square peg into the round hole? Or do you try the round peg that simply doesnt fit in the round hole?

doesn't hurt my feelings, I agree with you. In fact that's exactly what I was saying. If your QB can't execute a bunch of plays in your playbook it is going to make you very uncomfortable as a play caller and also it makes what you do very basic and easy to stop. That's why the first sentence was a question followed by an explanation that what people want Langs to do not only is difficult for Langs but makes the offense anemic

[Undone]

This is like 2004/2005/2006 all over again.

 

In the sense that in 2004 we had a transition quarterback that didn't fit the system, you're wrong there. We're out of the transition period on offense starting next season.

 

If Banker and the defensive players we're bringing to the table for next season do worse than what we saw this season, you might be right, but not for the reasons you have in your head.

[Count 'Bility]

 

 

 

Of all those deep balls against Iowa, which every one, our guy had a step or two on their guy. Even if we complete one and gain 30 yards, do you think Iowa panics and immediately scraps their plan and goes into a 2 deep cloud? No. If you want to beat this kind of stuff you have to hit the throws underneath to get them backers off the line. For all his athletic ability, on the open slant to Morgan, the pressure came in the middle, all he had to do was sidestep it, and step into his throw and Stanly turns it up for a 15-20 yard gain. Instead he falls back and throws an errant pass in a hurry off his back feet. This is just an example of the lack of fit. It just is. Great competitor. Great leader. Average QB. But at some point lack of execution of basic stuff cant be continously absolved just "cuz he plays hard". Competitiveness is beyond simply effort. Execution is a factor as well.

 

The interesting part in this case is that it can all be put on the qb. But it cant all be put on the OC/QB coach either. 1. you know damn well-it's common sense-that Tommy isnt being coached to do, or not do, some of the things he does/doesnt do. But where it goes the other way is the lack of fit and comfort for the qb as well.

yep Tommy needs to execute but maybe give him plays he executes better? That can be really hard to do if you are accustomed to a certain way if doing things and it can definitely handcuff the offense the the rail of a sinking ship, as we saw athe times this year.

This will be offensive, so im not gonna say "no offense", but it's the brutal honest truth. This is what the folks say who arent as football smart as others. And not necessarily pertaining to you. Just a generalization as we see this all the time. "Run tommy 30 times. Give him stuff he can handle". It's not as simple as "give him stuff he can execute better". This is the result of not being well rounded ENOUGH. When a defense can plan and play against you and know youre pretty much one dimensional, it's really hard. yeah, we could do things he's more comfortable with more often, but if those things are being keyed on to the point of very little success, whats the sweet spot that an OC can find? Do you keep ramming the square peg into the round hole? Or do you try the round peg that simply doesnt fit in the round hole?

doesn't hurt my feelings, I agree with you. In fact that's exactly what I was saying. If your QB can't execute a bunch of plays in your playbook it is going to make you very uncomfortable as a play caller and also it makes what you do very basic and easy to stop. That's why the first sentence was a question followed by an explanation that what people want Langs to do not only is difficult for Langs but makes the offense anemic

 

Jesus. I see it now. LOL.

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

 

 

 

Of all those deep balls against Iowa, which every one, our guy had a step or two on their guy. Even if we complete one and gain 30 yards, do you think Iowa panics and immediately scraps their plan and goes into a 2 deep cloud? No. If you want to beat this kind of stuff you have to hit the throws underneath to get them backers off the line. For all his athletic ability, on the open slant to Morgan, the pressure came in the middle, all he had to do was sidestep it, and step into his throw and Stanly turns it up for a 15-20 yard gain. Instead he falls back and throws an errant pass in a hurry off his back feet. This is just an example of the lack of fit. It just is. Great competitor. Great leader. Average QB. But at some point lack of execution of basic stuff cant be continously absolved just "cuz he plays hard". Competitiveness is beyond simply effort. Execution is a factor as well.

 

The interesting part in this case is that it can all be put on the qb. But it cant all be put on the OC/QB coach either. 1. you know damn well-it's common sense-that Tommy isnt being coached to do, or not do, some of the things he does/doesnt do. But where it goes the other way is the lack of fit and comfort for the qb as well.

yep Tommy needs to execute but maybe give him plays he executes better? That can be really hard to do if you are accustomed to a certain way if doing things and it can definitely handcuff the offense the the rail of a sinking ship, as we saw athe times this year.

This will be offensive, so im not gonna say "no offense", but it's the brutal honest truth. This is what the folks say who arent as football smart as others. And not necessarily pertaining to you. Just a generalization as we see this all the time. "Run tommy 30 times. Give him stuff he can handle". It's not as simple as "give him stuff he can execute better". This is the result of not being well rounded ENOUGH. When a defense can plan and play against you and know youre pretty much one dimensional, it's really hard. yeah, we could do things he's more comfortable with more often, but if those things are being keyed on to the point of very little success, whats the sweet spot that an OC can find? Do you keep ramming the square peg into the round hole? Or do you try the round peg that simply doesnt fit in the round hole?

doesn't hurt my feelings, I agree with you. In fact that's exactly what I was saying. If your QB can't execute a bunch of plays in your playbook it is going to make you very uncomfortable as a play caller and also it makes what you do very basic and easy to stop. That's why the first sentence was a question followed by an explanation that what people want Langs to do not only is difficult for Langs but makes the offense anemic

Jesus. I see it now. LOL.

yea I kinda used poor wording the first time around, my bad lol

[cm husker]

 

 

This is like 2004/2005/2006 all over again.

In the sense that in 2004 we had a transition quarterback that didn't fit the system, you're wrong there. We're out of the transition period on offense starting next season.

 

If Banker and the defensive players we're bringing to the table for next season do worse than what we saw this season, you might be right, but not for the reasons you have in your head.

In terms of player blaming and pinning hopes on recruiting saving everything.

[Undone]

ROFL

[cm husker]

ROFL

 

 

It's uncomfortable but true.

 

That and the similarities with '06 when we played few good offenses, but were blown off the field in a couple of games, including by an "OSU" - those results dismissed as "we don't have the players."

 

A lot of parallels - hopefully not the same destination.

[Nebfanatic]

I get the feeling CM wants to tie Riley to Callahan because he thinks they are the same person