Spring Practice - Offensive Line

[Toe]

Checking CFBStats, in their records for the last nine seasons, there hasn't been more than five teams averaging more than 300 rushing yards per game in any year. In 2008, there were zero teams that reached that mark. The teams that usually top that list are pretty much what you'd expect: Army, Navy, Air Force, and Georgia Tech. Last season, Auburn was the only team with a top 10 rushing offense to finish the season ranked in the AP top 25.

 

400 rushing yards per game ain't happening. 250/game is a more realistic target, which would yield a top ten rushing rank most years.

 

Recent national champions and their ranks in passing and rushing offense:

2016: Clemson, #71 rushing, #7 passing
2015: Alabama, #32 rushing, #62 passing
2014: Ohio State, #9 rushing, #52 passing
2013: Florida State, #28 rushing, #14 passing
2012: Alabama, #16 rushing, #76 passing
2011: Alabama, #16 rushing, #69 passing
2010: Auburn, #5 rushing, #66 passing
2009: Alabama, #12 rushing, #92 passing
2008: Florida, #10 rushing, #61 passing

So certainly, recent national champions have tended to have stronger rushing attacks. Only two of the last nine champs have finished with higher passing ranks than rushing, while the other seven didn't even finish in the top fifty for passing offense.

Recent Big Ten champions and their ranks in passing and rushing offense:

2016: Penn State, #66 rushing (#7 B1G), #36 passing (#3 B1G)
2015: Michigan State, #94 rushing (#9 B1G), #55 passing (#6 B1G)
2014: Ohio State, #9 rushing (#2 B1G), #52 passing (#3 B1G)
2013: Michigan State, #59 rushing (#8 B1G), #84 passing (#7 B1G)
2012: Wisconsin, #13 rushing (#4 B1G), #115 passing (#12 B1G)
2011: Wisconsin, #11 rushing (#1 B1G), #61 passing (#4 B1G)

Here it's a little more even. Two teams with a higher passing rank, three with a higher rushing rank, and one split (higher national rushing rank and higher passing B1G rank).

[spurs1990]

I feel like at this point dvdcrr has to just be stirring the pot. It's very clearly irrational to aim for 400 rushing yards per game and solely rely on the option or wishbone (another poster brought that up I think). Congrats dvdcrr for accomplishing your goal of riling everyone up. At least I hope that was your goal and not actually your true assessment of what needs to happen...

[dvdcrr]

"It's nice seeing Ga Tech, Navy and Army on top of the polls and offensive statistics every year since they run the best offense ever created, oh wait..."

 

I'm sorry,...did you just compare the Paul Johnson Georgia Tech offense to the Tom Osborne NU offense?

[dvdcrr]

I feel like at this point dvdcrr has to just be stirring the pot. It's very clearly irrational to aim for 400 rushing yards per game and solely rely on the option or wishbone (another poster brought that up I think). Congrats dvdcrr for accomplishing your goal of riling everyone up. At least I hope that was your goal and not actually your true assessment of what needs to happen...

Absolutely, I believe what I am saying. Conversely, could you please explain to me how you think 169 yds rushing, and a total offense ranking of 90th is the way to go for Nebraska football? Personally I am more riled up by that than I am about the guy who put 5 NC banners on the wall.

[Huskerchussetts]

Bring back the wing-t, no one has seen it in so long they won't know how to stop it...to have a better rushing attack you need better blocking and runners not systems. All those national champ teams listed above and at Nebraska had some talented blockers and running backs. Pretty sure every Alabama national championship team had multiple 1st round running backs in the back field. So it wouldn't matter if we run power I, triple option, double wing if the talent isn't there to open a hole and finish a run. I'm hoping this group of lineman match their potential and start opening holes... 400 rushing yards a game gtfo. College football is about passing game because NFL is about passing game. You don't build a feeder system to not feed you the talent you want. End rant GBR

[Nebfanatic]

 

I feel like at this point dvdcrr has to just be stirring the pot. It's very clearly irrational to aim for 400 rushing yards per game and solely rely on the option or wishbone (another poster brought that up I think). Congrats dvdcrr for accomplishing your goal of riling everyone up. At least I hope that was your goal and not actually your true assessment of what needs to happen...

Absolutely, I believe what I am saying. Conversely, could you please explain to me how you think 169 yds rushing, and a total offense ranking of 90th is the way to go for Nebraska football? Personally I am more riled up by that than I am about the guy who put 5 NC banners on the wall.

No one thinks 169 ypg is enough! Everyone is saying we need to improve our offensive performance. But is there a number between 170 and 400 that would be acceptable and even really good? Absolutely. You are being stubborn and ignoring facts.

[spurs1990]

 

 

I feel like at this point dvdcrr has to just be stirring the pot. It's very clearly irrational to aim for 400 rushing yards per game and solely rely on the option or wishbone (another poster brought that up I think). Congrats dvdcrr for accomplishing your goal of riling everyone up. At least I hope that was your goal and not actually your true assessment of what needs to happen...

Absolutely, I believe what I am saying. Conversely, could you please explain to me how you think 169 yds rushing, and a total offense ranking of 90th is the way to go for Nebraska football? Personally I am more riled up by that than I am about the guy who put 5 NC banners on the wall.

No one thinks 169 ypg is enough! Everyone is saying we need to improve our offensive performance. But is there a number between 170 and 400 that would be acceptable and even really good? Absolutely. You are being stubborn and ignoring facts.

 

Exactly. 90th is unacceptable but it certainly seems like you think the only plausible way to improve is in the rushing attack. That 90th is going to improve and hopefully it comes from both passing and rushing. My only gripe is your obscene number for rushing. No one is arguing the fact we need to get better offensively.

[Thanks_Tom RR]

HuskermanMike said: With the talent we have on the team. If we ran this offense, we would be held to 100 yards rushing and 25 yards passing against any of the top 5 teams in the nation. OSU, PSU and Wisconsin would stack the box and destroy our offensive line. Add in the fact that our wr group is super talented and yet you are not getting playmakers the ball. In short those offenses are a thing of the past and running the ball for 2 yard is not as good as a screen/ short pass for 5 yards, every yard matters in today's game.

 

​I don't think Nebraska's problem is talent along the OL. We've had three (on paper) very good OL classes, two of which, have redshirted. I think the talent is there.

 

I have a sneaking suspicion the weak OL we're seeing is a by-product of a pass first mentality. Running the ball requires a level of physicality, desire, and attitude that this team just doesn't seem to have. The OL just seems to be too passive.

 

Its still spring ball, and they have summer conditioning, and fall camp to bring the recipe together.

Hey MakingChimichangas, at the bottom right of every post, there is a quote feature.

[BigRedBuster]

 

Kewl the 95 huskers were awesome. But it's 20 years later dude, time to move on

 

 

And if this isn't clear enough. We should always strive for excellence. I want to see us win a CFP and that should always be our goal. Hopefully someday we will. But we will never ever........EVER rush for over 400 ypg in a season again. Those days are gone. Football has changed. It just won't happen, and I am sorry to be the one to break it to you.

This only thing that's changed about football is that we no longer have one of the greatest offensive minds in history as our coach.

 

You really seriously think this is the only thing that has changed in college football that is affecting us?

[dvdcrr]

 

 

I feel like at this point dvdcrr has to just be stirring the pot. It's very clearly irrational to aim for 400 rushing yards per game and solely rely on the option or wishbone (another poster brought that up I think). Congrats dvdcrr for accomplishing your goal of riling everyone up. At least I hope that was your goal and not actually your true assessment of what needs to happen...

Absolutely, I believe what I am saying. Conversely, could you please explain to me how you think 169 yds rushing, and a total offense ranking of 90th is the way to go for Nebraska football? Personally I am more riled up by that than I am about the guy who put 5 NC banners on the wall.

No one thinks 169 ypg is enough! Everyone is saying we need to improve our offensive performance. But is there a number between 170 and 400 that would be acceptable and even really good?

Yes, 399.

[dvdcrr]

 

 

 

I feel like at this point dvdcrr has to just be stirring the pot. It's very clearly irrational to aim for 400 rushing yards per game and solely rely on the option or wishbone (another poster brought that up I think). Congrats dvdcrr for accomplishing your goal of riling everyone up. At least I hope that was your goal and not actually your true assessment of what needs to happen...

 

Absolutely, I believe what I am saying. Conversely, could you please explain to me how you think 169 yds rushing, and a total offense ranking of 90th is the way to go for Nebraska football? Personally I am more riled up by that than I am about the guy who put 5 NC banners on the wall.

No one thinks 169 ypg is enough! Everyone is saying we need to improve our offensive performance. But is there a number between 170 and 400 that would be acceptable and even really good? Absolutely. You are being stubborn and ignoring facts.

My only gripe is your obscene number for rushing. No one is arguing the fact we need to get better offensively.

The Big Red "O" came up with that number, I didn't.

[mwj98]

I don't care who is out there as long as I never see play like I did from No. 66 over the years. That was flat out awful.

[Making Chimichangas]

Checking CFBStats, in their records for the last nine seasons, there hasn't been more than five teams averaging more than 300 rushing yards per game in any year. In 2008, there were zero teams that reached that mark. The teams that usually top that list are pretty much what you'd expect: Army, Navy, Air Force, and Georgia Tech. Last season, Auburn was the only team with a top 10 rushing offense to finish the season ranked in the AP top 25.

 

400 rushing yards per game ain't happening. 250/game is a more realistic target, which would yield a top ten rushing rank most years.

 

Recent national champions and their ranks in passing and rushing offense:

 

2016: Clemson, #71 rushing, #7 passing

2015: Alabama, #32 rushing, #62 passing

2014: Ohio State, #9 rushing, #52 passing

2013: Florida State, #28 rushing, #14 passing

2012: Alabama, #16 rushing, #76 passing

2011: Alabama, #16 rushing, #69 passing

2010: Auburn, #5 rushing, #66 passing

2009: Alabama, #12 rushing, #92 passing

2008: Florida, #10 rushing, #61 passing

 

So certainly, recent national champions have tended to have stronger rushing attacks. Only two of the last nine champs have finished with higher passing ranks than rushing, while the other seven didn't even finish in the top fifty for passing offense.

 

Recent Big Ten champions and their ranks in passing and rushing offense:

 

2016: Penn State, #66 rushing (#7 B1G), #36 passing (#3 B1G)

2015: Michigan State, #94 rushing (#9 B1G), #55 passing (#6 B1G)

2014: Ohio State, #9 rushing (#2 B1G), #52 passing (#3 B1G)

2013: Michigan State, #59 rushing (#8 B1G), #84 passing (#7 B1G)

2012: Wisconsin, #13 rushing (#4 B1G), #115 passing (#12 B1G)

2011: Wisconsin, #11 rushing (#1 B1G), #61 passing (#4 B1G)

 

Here it's a little more even. Two teams with a higher passing rank, three with a higher rushing rank, and one split (higher national rushing rank and higher passing B1G rank).

 

Those are some damn fine stats Toe, well done.

 

And, you can look back even further and see that the majority of teams that win national championships have better/stronger run games than they do passing games.

 

Of course there will exceptions some years: Florida State, Clemson, etc, but if you're playing probabilities and playing the odds, go with the run game instead of the pass. It's not a guarantee of success certainly, but the odds will be in your favor.

[TonyStalloni]

These stats tell me that national and conference championships are built on defense more than offense. An offense needs to have some balance and probably a few game changers and well above average O line and D line. Almost what we have been saying for the last 15 years!

[spurs1990]

These stats tell me that national and conference championships are built on defense more than offense. An offense needs to have some balance and probably a few game changers and well above average O line and D line. Almost what we have been saying for the last 15 years!

Unfortunately it's easier said than done