Spring Practice - Offensive Line

[spurs1990]

 

 

 

I think people are missing a big issue here as far as the o-line and development. I can't say I'm sold on Cav as a coach but I will cut him some slack because of the world of football these days. I'ld venture to say 90% of HS teams these days play some sort of spread, zone read offense. This isn't exactly the tough nose style of blocking evertone wants from our O-line. Simply put most of the blocking is turn to your right or left and if someone comes across your face use there momentum to block them. In some cases just let the guy go and move to the next level. So unless these kids already have some sort of meaN streak they aren't really learning it in these finesse offenses. I've read everyone say Riley runs a finess offense but it still calls for one on one blocking and at time drive blocking. Cav was essentially teaching these guys a new language. Even the older guys because even cotton didn't have those guys drive blocking guys 10 yards down the field like they were road graters. Eveyone just needs to calm down and let the season get underway before they start throwing people under the bus

doesn't sem to bother wisconsin, michigan and about 40 other schools around the country, more excuses.

Wisconsin only rushes for 203 yards a game. I don't exactly think that is lighting the rushing world on fire. I also think both of their top 2 backs are better than ours.

150 ypg the year before

[dvdcrr]

DVD is either a troll or he needs to change his name to VHS.

I'll take 400 yds rushing on VHS over 169 yds on DVR. Hell 169 yds wasnt even a good day for Calvin Jones.

See whats hard for guys like us, is to see how far the program has fallen, and then you have guys who defend it. Like being a crappy version of 1994 Penn St. is something to aspire to. No thanks. That Never was the Nebraska way. At least not when we were playing like Champions.

[Melby]

I understand people are impatient with our line, I am. But Cav didnt really have the type of players setup and prepared when he got the job. I think he has done well with what he has (several 150+ rushing games with walkons). He made the smart move to redshirt as many players as he could last year in a effort to bolster the next 2-3 years. Look, lines arent made in a year or two, like you can with LB's, WR's, etc. Its not uncommon for for a lot of positions to have a younger player starting..... but OL isnt one of them. Hell, even in the 90s we werent starting freshman. You had to be all american caliber to start here under their junior year. On top of lack of talent at some positions, these guys were not developed and trained like they should have been (you can thank Cotton, and Bo's lack of priority on strength and conditioning). We are seeing the same effect on the DL.

 

IMO, it takes 3-4 years to setup a OL group. I am willing to give him another 2 years as long as we see some improvement year to year. Coach Davis, on the other hand, should be the one people are concerned about.

[Nebfanatic]

I understand people are impatient with our line, I am. But Cav didnt really have the type of players setup and prepared when he got the job. I think he has done well with what he has (several 150+ rushing games with walkons). He made the smart move to redshirt as many players as he could last year in a effort to bolster the next 2-3 years. Look, lines arent made in a year or two, like you can with LB's, WR's, etc. Its not uncommon for for a lot of positions to have a younger player starting..... but OL isnt one of them. Hell, even in the 90s we werent starting freshman. You had to be all american caliber to start here under their junior year. On top of lack of talent at some positions, these guys were not developed and trained like they should have been (you can thank Cotton, and Bo's lack of priority on strength and conditioning). We are seeing the same effect on the DL.

 

IMO, it takes 3-4 years to setup a OL group. I am willing to give him another 2 years as long as we see some improvement year to year. Coach Davis, on the other hand, should be the one people are concerned about.

Bingo!!

[RedDenver]

IMO, it takes 3-4 years to setup a OL group.

This

[Enhance]

Nick Gates isn't a tough all conference caliber player? Tanner Farmer? We have the guys to make a jump.

Roughly 15 years of hearing this same thing has made me a bit numb to this type of statement. We've had youth, potential and guys 'waiting to make the jump' on the offensive line several times in recent years. We've had sporadic and inconsistent success.

 

When did Nebraska last have an All-American offensive linemen? 2001.

 

We've had a grand total of two offensive linemen make first team all conference in the last 10 years (none since 2012).

 

I'm hopeful we'll see something different in 2017, but that doesn't mean I have to be optimistic about it.

[Enhance]

 

Nick Gates isn't a tough all conference caliber player? Tanner Farmer? We have the guys to make a jump. Last year the line played well at times. Look I understand there is concern but shouldn't there be a little optimism as well? This group, personell wise is in a better position than last year and that can't be argued. Doesn't that give anyone besides me any hope?

Been trying to push that for about two days. Don't waste your time.

My interpretation of your topic contributions thus far is you want people to be more optimistic about the offensive line, which is a fine thing to want, but it can't be forced on people. We've had several seasons in the last 10-15 years where we went in with varying levels of potential, only to see expectations (generally speaking) be unmet.

 

I'm hopeful this changes in 2017, but I'm not optimistic it will.

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

 

Nick Gates isn't a tough all conference caliber player? Tanner Farmer? We have the guys to make a jump. Last year the line played well at times. Look I understand there is concern but shouldn't there be a little optimism as well? This group, personell wise is in a better position than last year and that can't be argued. Doesn't that give anyone besides me any hope?

Been trying to push that for about two days. Don't waste your time.

My interpretation of your topic contributions thus far is you want people to be more optimistic about the offensive line, which is a fine thing to want, but it can't be forced on people. We've had several seasons in the last 10-15 years where we went in with varying levels of potential, only to see expectations (generally speaking) be unmet.

 

I'm hopeful this changes in 2017, but I'm not optimistic it will.

But I think the point I'm trying to make is we will be better than we were a year ago, something that I think I have legitimate reason to be optimistic about considering we were pretty bad at times a year ago and we are adding more than we are subtracting. To me that equals a jump and I don't think it's niave to believe that. Will we get to where we need to be? I don't know, but I doubt it. Will we improve a measurable amount over last year? The answer to me is an emphatic yes.

[84HuskerLaw]

I was hopeful and optimistic (I admit I usually am that way about Husker football before a season begins) going into last fall. That first 7 games we had a bunch of hiccups and spits and starts but we were in fact winning and there remained some limited hope for additional improvement as the season finished. Sadly it did NOT happen that way. I would tend to say our O line play was better in '15 than in '16 but on a scale of 1 to 10 ( with 1 being a bottom ten ranked team with one or two wins a year and 10 being the '83 and 94 through 1999 Husker O lines basically), we are playing in the 4 - 5 range. That is at best a 7-7 season in most years. In fact, we managed to win 9 games but I give little credit to the line for any. We had enough extra elsewhere to pull out the extra couple wins. We NEED to see a top twenty caliber line THIS fall and top 12 in 2018.

 

Maybe this is unfair to expect and demand this kind of improvement from Riley and staff in just 3 seasons but, on the other hand, we ARE Nebraska and by golly we are 'linemen' U and the pipeline is still one of the best in the country and that ought to open more recruiting doors than it has for a number of years. This area of Nebraska football is the most critical area where we MUST have a big jump.

 

The tough part of evaluating progress for us fans and even maybe for the coaches is to assess the potential for the O line, we can only compare to our D line and obviously it is in rebuild and remake mode as well. So a great domination by the O line does not mean we are getting better because we don't know about the potential of our D line. And vice versa. We won't know until the first of October in all liklihood but if we don't dominate the 'easy' games in September, 2017 it will likely be another .500 year for us. And that assumes exceptionally good QB and skill position play and outstanding LB and secondary as well.

 

IF our lines gel and become much much better than past several years, we have a chance to win 10 or more games. If not, making another Farmer in the Dell bowl is going to be a challenge.

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

DVD is either a troll or he needs to change his name to VHS.

I'll take 400 yds rushing on VHS over 169 yds on DVR. Hell 169 yds wasnt even a good day for Calvin Jones.

See whats hard for guys like us, is to see how far the program has fallen, and then you have guys who defend it. Like being a crappy version of 1994 Penn St. is something to aspire to. No thanks. That Never was the Nebraska way. At least not when we were playing like Champions.

 

 

The only thing I'm defending is the fact that the dominant teams in college football tend to have smashmouth running games, finesse passing games, and shutdown defenses. They don't feel obliged to choose one over the other.

 

This notion that Nebraska can return to greatness simply by calling 80% running plays like the good ol' days is nostalgia, not strategy.

 

There isn't a football coach -- including Mike Riley -- who won't keep running the ball for 400 yards a game if the defense lets him. But better teams don't allow you to run all over them -- which was true in Osborne's time, too. If you look back at Osborne's 25 years as HC, the scheme worked best with a shytload of talent on both sides of the ball.

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

 

DVD is either a troll or he needs to change his name to VHS.

I'll take 400 yds rushing on VHS over 169 yds on DVR. Hell 169 yds wasnt even a good day for Calvin Jones.

See whats hard for guys like us, is to see how far the program has fallen, and then you have guys who defend it. Like being a crappy version of 1994 Penn St. is something to aspire to. No thanks. That Never was the Nebraska way. At least not when we were playing like Champions.

The only thing I'm defending is the fact that the dominant teams in college football tend to have smashmouth running games, finesse passing games, and shutdown defenses. They don't feel obliged to choose one over the other.

 

This notion that Nebraska can return to greatness simply by calling 80% running plays like the good ol' days is nostalgia, not strategy.

 

There isn't a football coach -- including Mike Riley -- who won't keep running the ball for 400 yards a game if the defense lets him. But better teams don't allow you to run all over them -- which was true in Osborne's time, too. If you look back at Osborne's 25 years as HC, the scheme worked best with a shytload of talent on both sides of the ball.

So it appears the key is talent, not scheme. Most schemes with any merit will be successful if you have great players to run it

[Guy Chamberlin]

Yeah. But it's not that schemes aren't important. They are. It's just that offensive schemes tend to announce themselves, and defensive coordinators tend to plan against them.

 

Schemes that allow you to adapt in-game have an obvious advantage, and the merit of great players is equally obvious.

 

Great coaches can get great results from less-heralded players in schemes tailored to their strengths. You'll find a few inspirational stories like that every year, but they're pretty rare and generally not at the championship level.

[marko polo]

 

Again terrible reasons to predict a poor season on the ground this year. Riley said we aren't a passing offense, since you are so caught up on his quotes. This year is not last year. Since we will never agree I'm willing to put my reputation on the line, are you?

 

You're pretty sure of yourself which is a good thing for you. Also one's overall performance being an indicator of next year's performance isn't what I'd call 'terrible reasoning'.

 

You're assuming a noticeable increase in performance from a group that already under performed last year. It's as simple as that...

 

This exactly!!!!!Even if we are a little bit better that is still pathetic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[spurs1990]

Quick! Someone give Cav an extension in the euphoria of Bookie commiting!

[Making Chimichangas]

 

 

DVD is either a troll or he needs to change his name to VHS.

I'll take 400 yds rushing on VHS over 169 yds on DVR. Hell 169 yds wasnt even a good day for Calvin Jones.

See whats hard for guys like us, is to see how far the program has fallen, and then you have guys who defend it. Like being a crappy version of 1994 Penn St. is something to aspire to. No thanks. That Never was the Nebraska way. At least not when we were playing like Champions.

 

 

The only thing I'm defending is the fact that the dominant teams in college football tend to have smashmouth running games, finesse passing games, and shutdown defenses. They don't feel obliged to choose one over the other.

 

This notion that Nebraska can return to greatness simply by calling 80% running plays like the good ol' days is nostalgia, not strategy.

 

There isn't a football coach -- including Mike Riley -- who won't keep running the ball for 400 yards a game if the defense lets him. But better teams don't allow you to run all over them -- which was true in Osborne's time, too. If you look back at Osborne's 25 years as HC, the scheme worked best with a shytload of talent on both sides of the ball.

 

Can you please drop the crazy, strawman argument that those of us who favor a physical, hard-nose, smashmouth style of offense where running the ball is the focus...

 

That we want Riley to be 80% run...and to call running plays up the middle without regard to what the defensive front is, or is doing? Thank you.

 

As I have stated in another thread, Riley's issue (despite his claims) is he simply doesn't believe in the running game. Now he can prove me wrong, but given Langsdorf's play-calling (and by extension Riley's) the past two years, we're only going to throw the ball more, not less, with the QBs we have now. I mean we actually have an OC in Langsdorf who said in quote to the media that he didn't think he could call the same running play twice in row.

 

Listen, I want Mike Riley to be successful. I want him to bring Nebraska back into the elite of college football. I'm just not convinced or believe he can do it with the weak sauce style of offense we've seen the last two years.

 

That's not to say we can't, offensively in terms of stats, resemble Clemson and get the job done, I'd just prefer to statistically, be closer to Ohio State in terms run versus pass in the year they won the national title.

 

What that means is, Riley and Langsdorf have to figure out how to incorporate mis-directions, counters, using lineman that can pull and trap, etc. Nebraska desperately needs variety in the running game. And why can't Riley have Wilbon and Bryant in the backfield at the same time? Why is it always a 1 back or 1 RB and a FB?

 

Like I said, I want Riley to win and there are lots of ways to do it. But if you're going to play the odds...Running the ball, playing tenacious defense, and being solid to great in the kicking game is a pretty good way to go about running a football team--at any level.