No coaching changes for the 90th ranked offense?

[Elf]

 

I blame the coaches for not using Tommy's strengths. He is a great option QB which totally went to waste and he's good at bullet passes with few reads. So, of course, they have him make a bunch of reads or throw touch passes. Biggest waste of talent I can remember at DONU.

He would not have held up the whole year (he didn't anyway). The what are we stuck with? Fife running the option

 

That's a valid point.

 

Another thing to consider is this, do you stay with the old offense for the sake of one player, or do you switch gears and teach everyone the new offense? I think there can be pros/cons to both.

 

I personally think it's best for the long term health of the program to make the necessary changes immediately and take whatever lumps come that with the decision.

[ColoradoHusk]

 

 

 

 

#TommyandRyker no excuses after this year. They have their QB's now. You just settle your buns down.

Their freshman or transfer QB.

 

I'm willing to give them two years.

Me too. I think you missed my point, honey.

Two years for what?

2 more years, sweetie.

[Husker Psycho]

 

 

 

 

Kudos Riley for some change. Most of us seem to be happy that Banker is gone but what about the coaches of the offense which ranked 90th in total O and 73rd in scoring O?

I guarantee you Nebraska does not have the 90th offensive talent in the country!

 

IMO Langsdorf and Cavanaugh really need to go but offense is Riley's baby and he won't change it.

 

Subjectively, I can't ever get excited about his dinky-dunk west coast scheme (and Langsdorf's love for screen and swing passes) which is the total opposite of the Husker Power identity I know and love.

You may want to follow another team for a couple years then. Or increase your alcohol consumption. A lot.

HAHA , hence my profile pic! I'm guessing a poor year next year then hopefully we can get rid of Eichorst, Riley & co and get back towards being Nebraska.

Rooting for us to lose huh?

 

Nope, said "guessing" a poor year.

Yes, rooting for a new AD, scheme, and some coaches.

 

 

I'm guessing...

 

More EXCUSES

 

Ugh...

[SouthLincoln Husker]

Lets see - no offensive line depth with injuries and a running QB that is in a passing offense. Recruiting has shown the upgrades, no need to make changes, but 2017 better show improvement.

[84HuskerLaw]

Considering we havent really run Rileys or Langsdorf's offense yet, id say give them some more time. We also didnt start a QB that could run their offense. I was also hearing rumors all year that several OL were redshirted that could have been starting. It seems like the offensive staff was saving all of its chips for the 2017 season, when they will have a QB that has the ability to run their offense.

Question: do most on this board feel we were running Banker's defense as such or were we playing something a little different until he had 'his players' in place? Just curious what opinions may be? I don't recall any discussion or comments coming out suggesting we were not but just to be fair to players and coaches alike, were we fully installed in the Riley/Banker defense as they would have ideally preferred?

 

Presumably we were running the Riley & Company special teams game - obviously not so ideal in my view? I would say that most any coach could have found a way to fully install and implement his 'system' whatever that may be in the areas of special teams assuming you have a good punter and kicker on the roster. Nobody seriously has issues with Drew Brown (he has performed pretty well - give him a B+ surely). Punting was an "F" by most anyone's standards. This in turn hurt the defense by poor field position which put undue pressure on them on far too many possessions, and consequently the offense was often starting from a hole.

 

In the end, there are plenty of areas on the team where big jumps can be made with some 'fixes' arguably. Caleb punted much better in the bowl game for example. This bodes well for next fall in my opinion. We must get a big jump in return yardage and find a way to block a couple and make some more big plays in the special teams generally. Those are game changers and can turn momentum and turn an ugly loss into a 'lucky' win. Those really help. Arguably we have the talent to make these improvements without a big change in roster so 2017 can yield real improvement without working miracles.

[LAblackshirt]

 

Considering we havent really run Rileys or Langsdorf's offense yet, id say give them some more time. We also didnt start a QB that could run their offense. I was also hearing rumors all year that several OL were redshirted that could have been starting. It seems like the offensive staff was saving all of its chips for the 2017 season, when they will have a QB that has the ability to run their offense.

Question: do most on this board feel we were running Banker's defense as such or were we playing something a little different until he had 'his players' in place? Just curious what opinions may be? I don't recall any discussion or comments coming out suggesting we were not but just to be fair to players and coaches alike, were we fully installed in the Riley/Banker defense as they would have ideally preferred?

 

Presumably we were running the Riley & Company special teams game - obviously not so ideal in my view? I would say that most any coach could have found a way to fully install and implement his 'system' whatever that may be in the areas of special teams assuming you have a good punter and kicker on the roster. Nobody seriously has issues with Drew Brown (he has performed pretty well - give him a B+ surely). Punting was an "F" by most anyone's standards. This in turn hurt the defense by poor field position which put undue pressure on them on far too many possessions, and consequently the offense was often starting from a hole.

 

In the end, there are plenty of areas on the team where big jumps can be made with some 'fixes' arguably. Caleb punted much better in the bowl game for example. This bodes well for next fall in my opinion. We must get a big jump in return yardage and find a way to block a couple and make some more big plays in the special teams generally. Those are game changers and can turn momentum and turn an ugly loss into a 'lucky' win. Those really help. Arguably we have the talent to make these improvements without a big change in roster so 2017 can yield real improvement without working miracles.

 

 

I think we ran Banker's system right away honestly. Defense is a little easier to make changes too, personnel differences aren't as great from Bankers new scheme to what Pelini had. Riley's offensive scheme is much different than what Pelini ran, especially for the QB position which is obviously the most important on the field. An offense with the wrong RB personnel can get by, WR too. An offense who's QB is not a good fit for that system is never good. I encourage anyone to find me an example that contradicts that. That's why our offense was so bad this year and why we couldn't really run Riley's offense. Riley tried to run it with Tommy (why not? he has excellent arm strength) but we all saw that TA just could pull it off.

 

This year was an attempt to find a middle ground on offense with Armstrong and it obviously didn't work out too well. People are quick to blame Langs and Riley for that, but I don't see how that makes sense. Tommy has shown briefly in the past he came make some pretty great throws, it wasn't unreasonable for them to assume he would continue to progress. Unfortunately he did not. Why didn't they pull the Red Shirt? Could honestly be a million reasons, from POB not being ready, to worrying about it hurting team morale. Since we aren't in the locker room we don't get to know. To assume they didn't pull the red-shirt because they don't know how to coach is a pretty big assumption in my opinion.

[C N Red]

One thing im fairly sure of about next year is our punter will actually be doing most of the punting instead of Tommy Armpunt.

[MichiganDad3]

 

 

You can still have a run-centric and powerful offense out of different formations (like shotgun vs I). Auburn is a good example of that.

 

Bottom line, Nebraska should not have the 90th ranked offense no matter who is at QB.

Really??? Because if I'm a defense and I know the QB I'm playing against doesn't make good decisions and isn't a strong passer, I might favor the run heavily... Bottom line, Tommy could not throw like a QB should be able to, teams knew this and keyed their defensive schemes around it. And shouldn't have an offense ranked 90th no matter who we have at QB is the most idiotic thing I've read on these forums (congratulations on that). Could have put Drew Brown at QB and had a better offense than we had last year by your logic.

 

 

So you think Nebraska's talent is 90th in the country?

If the QB was sooooo bad, then why not use one of the other QB's? Plenty of true freshman QBs have done very well in college football lately. Do you think all of our QBs are 90th or worse in the country? Osborne won with Matt Turman for goodness sakes.

Do you think any defenses ever stacked against our run, ever? Or do so now against any rush heavy teams?

 

Spot on. There is no excuse for offensive performance this poor.

[Moiraine]

One thing im fairly sure of about next year is our punter will actually be doing most of the punting instead of Tommy Armpunt.

 

Ya. Hopefully having a QB who knows when to throw the ball out of bounds or checkdown to a RB will make up for lack of scrambling ability.

[LAblackshirt]

 

 

 

You can still have a run-centric and powerful offense out of different formations (like shotgun vs I). Auburn is a good example of that.

 

Bottom line, Nebraska should not have the 90th ranked offense no matter who is at QB.

Really??? Because if I'm a defense and I know the QB I'm playing against doesn't make good decisions and isn't a strong passer, I might favor the run heavily... Bottom line, Tommy could not throw like a QB should be able to, teams knew this and keyed their defensive schemes around it. And shouldn't have an offense ranked 90th no matter who we have at QB is the most idiotic thing I've read on these forums (congratulations on that). Could have put Drew Brown at QB and had a better offense than we had last year by your logic.

 

 

So you think Nebraska's talent is 90th in the country?

If the QB was sooooo bad, then why not use one of the other QB's? Plenty of true freshman QBs have done very well in college football lately. Do you think all of our QBs are 90th or worse in the country? Osborne won with Matt Turman for goodness sakes.

Do you think any defenses ever stacked against our run, ever? Or do so now against any rush heavy teams?

 

Spot on. There is no excuse for offensive performance this poor.

 

 

There really is. We finished 78th in scoring offense (not that it's that different) and we played 2 top 5 scoring defenses, 3 top 15 scoring defenses, and 5 top 25 scoring defenses. We had a quarterback ranked as the worst in the conference (the B1G was not even a good QB conference) in passing by Pro Football Focus and that was before his worst games. We ran a vanilla offense this year to help Armstrong which of course makes it easier to stop. Look I get why many people blame Riley for our offensive struggles, there is really no one else better suited for it. I just believe the circumstances prevented him from having a fair chance of a good offense.

[RedDenver]

 

 

 

You can still have a run-centric and powerful offense out of different formations (like shotgun vs I). Auburn is a good example of that.

 

Bottom line, Nebraska should not have the 90th ranked offense no matter who is at QB.

Really??? Because if I'm a defense and I know the QB I'm playing against doesn't make good decisions and isn't a strong passer, I might favor the run heavily... Bottom line, Tommy could not throw like a QB should be able to, teams knew this and keyed their defensive schemes around it. And shouldn't have an offense ranked 90th no matter who we have at QB is the most idiotic thing I've read on these forums (congratulations on that). Could have put Drew Brown at QB and had a better offense than we had last year by your logic.

 

 

So you think Nebraska's talent is 90th in the country?

If the QB was sooooo bad, then why not use one of the other QB's? Plenty of true freshman QBs have done very well in college football lately. Do you think all of our QBs are 90th or worse in the country? Osborne won with Matt Turman for goodness sakes.

Do you think any defenses ever stacked against our run, ever? Or do so now against any rush heavy teams?

 

Spot on. There is no excuse for offensive performance this poor.

 

The many injuries? Does anyone think our offense was still top 90 in talent with so many players hurt? The choice of Fyfe or hurt TA alone made our offense almost non-existent.

[GBRFAN]

Look at the 4 teams in the NFL play-offs and their QB's - it is obvious which position carries the team. We don't need any new offensive coaches we need a QB that fits the mold. Could the staff have done better the past two years with the running athletic QB ? sure could have - however, let's see if they can now overachieve with their guy.

[suh_fan93]

Look at the 4 teams in the NFL play-offs and their QB's - it is obvious which position carries the team. We don't need any new offensive coaches we need a QB that fits the mold. Could the staff have done better the past two years with the running athletic QB ? sure could have - however, let's see if they can now overachieve with their guy.

 

QB is hugely important but it takes much more than just having an 'awesome QB'.

[Hunter94]

well, assuming POB or Lee can play well enough, they sure have targets now, Stanley Morgan and DPE have experience, Lindsey. Keyshawn and McQuitty are 4 star true freshmen..........let them play!

we ought to be throwing the ball 60% of the time.

[Hunter94]

well, assuming POB or Lee can play well enough, they sure have targets now, Stanley Morgan and DPE have experience, Lindsey. Keyshawn and McQuitty are 4 star true freshmen..........let them play!

we should be throwing 60% of the time.