Does this team even care???

[cm husker]

I'm not trying to put him (cm husker) down. I'm trying to look at his arguments.

 

A mobile QB gives you things a non-mobile QB doesn't. But until we have an amazing offensive line - And that's not happening any time soon - I want a throw-first guy. I think it gives us the best chance on offense given the fact that Bryant and Ozigbo are dynamic runners that can do plenty from just taking handoffs & tosses.

Most people in football think the way to cover for an average OL is to put a QB on the move.

 

The fact you want an immobile QB behind what you say isn't a great OL is very odd

[Nebfanatic]

So have we found out if the team cares or not yet?

I think we decided they do

[Nebfanatic]

 

I'm not trying to put him (cm husker) down. I'm trying to look at his arguments.

 

A mobile QB gives you things a non-mobile QB doesn't. But until we have an amazing offensive line - And that's not happening any time soon - I want a throw-first guy. I think it gives us the best chance on offense given the fact that Bryant and Ozigbo are dynamic runners that can do plenty from just taking handoffs & tosses.

Most people in football think the way to cover for an average OL is to put a QB on the move.

 

The fact you want an immobile QB behind what you say isn't a great OL is very odd

I think that is in combination with a quick hitting pass game

[cm husker]

You guys expect more from Armstrong than you'd get from 95% of college football players.

[Undone]

Tommy would probably do much better in a different system, but he misses those throws no matter what offense he is running because he is inconsistent with his mechanics and that is nearly impossible to change.

 

Yes, another great point. You're not going to do what you need to do throwing the ball, even if you're only throwing it 15 times per game, if your mechanics are off.

 

Eight straight seasons of quarterbacks with very bad mechanics. And I'm trying to phrase that generously.

[Landlord]

You guys expect more from Armstrong than you'd get from 95% of college football players.

 

 

This is false.

[Undone]

 

I'm not trying to put him (cm husker) down. I'm trying to look at his arguments.

 

A mobile QB gives you things a non-mobile QB doesn't. But until we have an amazing offensive line - And that's not happening any time soon - I want a throw-first guy. I think it gives us the best chance on offense given the fact that Bryant and Ozigbo are dynamic runners that can do plenty from just taking handoffs & tosses.

Most people in football think the way to cover for an average OL is to put a QB on the move.

 

The fact you want an immobile QB behind what you say isn't a great OL is very odd

 

 

We really put a lot of points on the board against Wisconsin's incredibly stout run defense with Armstrong, didn't we?

 

No, we didn't. We managed to get 17 points on the board because their quarterback threw it to us two times to put us back in the game.

[commando]

So have we found out if the team cares or not yet?

the team doesn't matter. the only thing that matters is making a point during the pissing contests. the team is just a backdrop for those contests.

[RunMickeyRun02]

Forgive me if someone said this already, but the team seems tied directly to their unquestioned leader: Tommy. When he's unconscious or maybe not 100% the teams confidence just goes through the floor.

 

Yah we beat Maryland without him, but Maryland...

 

If I'm on the team and it appears the only way we can win is with Tommy's arm and limited mobility, yeah, I might lack some confidence/fire too.

[Undone]

In my opinion, a couple of key misalignment and/or bad angles on defense sent us into Blowout Mode.

 

I don't think it had anything to do with not caring. The team knew we were still in the hunt for a spot in Indy on Friday afternoon. No doubt Riley made that clear.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

I'm not trying to put him (cm husker) down. I'm trying to look at his arguments.

 

A mobile QB gives you things a non-mobile QB doesn't. But until we have an amazing offensive line - And that's not happening any time soon - I want a throw-first guy. I think it gives us the best chance on offense given the fact that Bryant and Ozigbo are dynamic runners that can do plenty from just taking handoffs & tosses.

Most people in football think the way to cover for an average OL is to put a QB on the move.

 

The fact you want an immobile QB behind what you say isn't a great OL is very odd

We really put a lot of points on the board against Wisconsin's incredibly stout run defense with Armstrong, didn't we?

 

No, we didn't. We managed to get 17 points on the board because their quarterback threw it to us two times to put us back in the game.

And your solution is to get more QBs like the wisky kid.

[84HuskerLaw]

You guys expect more from Armstrong than you'd get from 95% of college football players.

Yes, this is very much true in my view. 95% of college football players CANNOTplay quarterback and maybe 10% of those who play QB play it well enough to put Nebraska back in the elites of the game. We want to recruit, train and play the best of the best of the best. That is how you win at the highest level.

 

We want the best dam QB in the game if possible. Certainly we need one of the ten best QBs who can pass like Tom Brady and run like Michael Vick. We've never had such a player yet but we should be ever looking. Until then, we need to recruit about 4 'good' QBs who are excellent passers that run much better than R. Fyfe. If we are stuck with a mediocre (or worse) offensive line, then we better have a QB who can REALLY throw and can atleast buy time to keep the sacks from killing us. The problem with QBs like Armstrong and Martinez before him is that our opponents simply made the wise strategic decision to minimize their pass coverage defense and attack our running game and limit the QB runs.

 

Most defensive coaches will state that the best way to scheme defensively is "to make the offense one-dimentional" and therefore predictable. In a majority of those cases, the goal will be to 'stop the run first' and make them pass. If the opponent decides (rightly so in the case of Armstrong and Martinez for example) that our offense is more dangerous if our offense is successfully running the ball and they more greatly fear Armstrong/Martinez and Nebraska running the ball than passing it The defense is created to stifle our runs and take their chances with some pass completions. This has been the case as we have won many more games when we have been successful running it over passing it. This is because, in part at least, in my view - rush yards are worth twice as much as pass yards in general. You will win more games running for 400 yards than passing for 400 yards 'on average'

 

The pass first QB proponents want a QB that can make the defense pay for overplaying the run. If so, then the run game will work. BUT without a strong offensive line, the run game will go nowhere unless we can pull them back with pass success.

[Undone]

And your solution is to get more QBs like the wisky kid.

 

Not like him (them, actually) in the sense of their talent/ability level, but pocket passers, yes. And I say this given the fact that I think that Bryant and Ozigbo are more talented than their running backs (seriously), and because I think that our returning/up-and-coming receivers are more talented than Wisconsin's receiver group.

 

You know what though? That's what's going to happen. No matter how much anybody complains or makes arguments that it might be a bad idea, next year's offense will not look anything like what we've had the last few seasons.

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

You guys expect more from Armstrong than you'd get from 95% of college football players.

Yes, this is very much true in my view. 95% of college football players CANNOTplay quarterback and maybe 10% of those who play QB play it well enough to put Nebraska back in the elites of the game. We want to recruit, train and play the best of the best of the best. That is how you win at the highest level.

 

We want the best dam QB in the game if possible. Certainly we need one of the ten best QBs who can pass like Tom Brady and run like Michael Vick. We've never had such a player yet but we should be ever looking. Until then, we need to recruit about 4 'good' QBs who are excellent passers that run much better than R. Fyfe. If we are stuck with a mediocre (or worse) offensive line, then we better have a QB who can REALLY throw and can atleast buy time to keep the sacks from killing us. The problem with QBs like Armstrong and Martinez before him is that our opponents simply made the wise strategic decision to minimize their pass coverage defense and attack our running game and limit the QB runs.

 

Most defensive coaches will state that the best way to scheme defensively is "to make the offense one-dimentional" and therefore predictable. In a majority of those cases, the goal will be to 'stop the run first' and make them pass. If the opponent decides (rightly so in the case of Armstrong and Martinez for example) that our offense is more dangerous if our offense is successfully running the ball and they more greatly fear Armstrong/Martinez and Nebraska running the ball than passing it The defense is created to stifle our runs and take their chances with some pass completions. This has been the case as we have won many more games when we have been successful running it over passing it. This is because, in part at least, in my view - rush yards are worth twice as much as pass yards in general. You will win more games running for 400 yards than passing for 400 yards 'on average'

 

The pass first QB proponents want a QB that can make the defense pay for overplaying the run. If so, then the run game will work. BUT without a strong offensive line, the run game will go nowhere unless we can pull them back with pass success.

bingo on most of this. I'm sure we will go after the Tom Brady Mike Vick combo guy if he appears but I'd much rather have Tom Brady than Micheal Vick

[Count 'Bility]

Ok. So im a DC gameplanning for Nebraska. Here we go.

 

I watch 50 hours of film and chart tendancies, personnel, formations, plays, abilities and matchups.

 

From this i take that

1) The quarterback cant consistently throw good bubble screens. So my linebacker to the multi receiver side does not play as far outside and is now avail for the c gap in the run game.

 

2) the quarterback cannot consistently throw accurately into tight man/man windows. So I no longer have to use safeties up in bracket/double coverage down the field. They are free to fit against the run first, and play any quick outside passes.

3)the qb routinely misreads and locks on to guys presnap and oftne misses guys running free or sitting down underneath-whether it be with errant throws or simply not seeing them. So my backers are free to play run first against any RPO situation.

4)the qb is a good runner, but again, I dont have to worry about his passing ability so my safeties are free to spy and fit the run first and drop back under in coverage second while corners/nickels play over

5) The qb is happy footed in the pocket. while hes is very athletic and mobile, he shows now tendancy on film to move within the pocket and stay on his progressions. So my pressure plan is to stay in the lanes and keep in the pocket and throw under diress.

 

Now. All these observations are obviously not a deal where it's like that 100% of the time. But defense in football isnt about being able to stop everything all the time. it's all about tendancies and abilities. So why the hell would i put any attention whatsoever on receivers down the field or the bubble game when i know with 100% certaintly that youre not gonna move the ball up and down the field that way anyway. yeah, youll hit one or two a game. or youll get a bubble here and there. But you know what? Now its' the next play and youre still 50 yards from the endzone.

 

This offense and it's lack of consistently solid qb play in the pass game, and lack of oline play was greatly exposed against the only 3 good-great defenses on the schedule. And against the much lesser ones it was just enough. It just is what it is.