Spring Practice - Running Backs

[zoogs]

The coaches saw a flash of light all of a sudden? The season ended less than 3 months ago. Davis needs to give this kid his carries

Well, yeah. The season ended recently, sure. More recently, spring practice started. Wilbon is not the only player reportedly making a move.

[Stumpy1]

 

 

Never said that....

 

Well...

 

Actually, you can pretty easily argue Wilbon isn't the best runner we have.

Actually you could easily counter this argument as you're assuming these coaches know how to property handle and coordinate a good/solid running game.

 

You kind of did, whether or not that was your intention, it could easily be interpreted that way.

 

 

Not sure what to say here...

 

Maybe admit you got SCHOOLED and that you will buy Enhance beer for a week and make him some tacos.

[suh_fan93]

 

 

 

Never said that....

 

Well...

 

Actually, you can pretty easily argue Wilbon isn't the best runner we have.

Actually you could easily counter this argument as you're assuming these coaches know how to property handle and coordinate a good/solid running game.

 

You kind of did, whether or not that was your intention, it could easily be interpreted that way.

 

 

Not sure what to say here...

 

Maybe admit you got SCHOOLED and that you will buy Enhance beer for a week and make him some tacos.

 

 

Hey! It's stumpy!!!

 

 

[Hunter94]

We have seen very little by comparison of Wilbon but he does have the quickness and elusive capability that is very desirable for ANY RB but don't short sell Bryant and Ozigbo. Both are more elusive than, I think, many realize. Ozigbo has shown exceptional power and that is very important when running inside as everybody seems to agree. Bryant might be the more 'all around' RB of the trio with good speed, decent power, etc.

 

It seems unlikely that any of the three will become the clear cut number one (bulk of the carries) RB and it will become a situational and 'match up' and game by game deal. The O line play, injuries, opponent's relative strengths and apparent weaknesses, game plans, etc. may well indicate one or another should get the work. For example, if the coaches feel we will be able to win the battle in the trenches and the power run game should be successful, I would expect Ozigbo would get the nod. But, against teams with an apparent strong defensive front and tough to run on, we will emphasize the passing and pass protection and outside swing passes to the RBs. That would likely favor Bryant/Wilbon.

 

I would also tend to think that Wilbon would have great potential as a punt and kick returner as well. If he has good hands, he ought to be able to do returns as well. While we have others with apparent kick return skills, it seems Wilbon is a fine athlete that we should be using to help the team. I always am disappointed to see great athletes with obvious football skills sitting on the sidelines because the circumstances, etc just don't quite fit to get them on the field. If a player has speed, quickness, etc, then he needs to be used somehow and some way. Many have commented that Nebraska in recent years has lacked 'talent' to compete with the better opponents. While this is certainly true, in my view, we can also say that we have failed to put our best on the field and or failed to utilize their best skills wisely.

 

I certainly believe the current and past coaches (mostly) are and were well aware of their players' abilities, but for any number of reasons (good or not so good) did not take advantage thereof. We can't afford to waste our limited talent or let it sit idly by while we struggle to win games Nebraska should not struggle to win.

DPE will prob be back for punts and KO's again......

[Stumpy1]

 

 

 

 

Never said that....

 

Well...

 

Actually, you can pretty easily argue Wilbon isn't the best runner we have.

Actually you could easily counter this argument as you're assuming these coaches know how to property handle and coordinate a good/solid running game.

 

You kind of did, whether or not that was your intention, it could easily be interpreted that way.

 

 

Not sure what to say here...

 

Maybe admit you got SCHOOLED and that you will buy Enhance beer for a week and make him some tacos.

 

 

Hey! It's stumpy!!!

 

 

 

Awesome...I'm good at winning prizes.

 

I won a prize for best picture colored in crayon in 3rd grade.

 

I won a prize for winning a spelling bee contest in 5th grade.

 

I won a prize for winning the contest of least likely to succeed after graduation in high school.

 

Now I won a prize for writing on a message board. My life is complete.

[suh_fan93]

 

 

 

 

 

Never said that....

 

Well...

 

Actually, you can pretty easily argue Wilbon isn't the best runner we have.

Actually you could easily counter this argument as you're assuming these coaches know how to property handle and coordinate a good/solid running game.

 

You kind of did, whether or not that was your intention, it could easily be interpreted that way.

 

 

Not sure what to say here...

 

Maybe admit you got SCHOOLED and that you will buy Enhance beer for a week and make him some tacos.

 

 

Hey! It's stumpy!!!

 

 

 

Awesome...I'm good at winning prizes.

 

I won a prize for best picture colored in crayon in 3rd grade.

 

I won a prize for winning a spelling bee contest in 5th grade.

 

I won a prize for winning the contest of least likely to succeed after graduation in high school.

 

Now I won a prize for writing on a message board. My life is complete.

 

 

Keep it going stumped one! You're on a roll!!!!

[Mavric]

[Mavric]

[Mavric]

Riley pretty much said Ozigbo is the #3 guy.

 

Which makes it all the more head-scratching why they kept force-feeding him the ball early last year even when it was pretty obvious that Newby was much more productive.

[Making Chimichangas]

 

 

 

 

we are about to become a throw it on 2nd and 3rd down, i can't see us running more than 40% of the time.

I support Mike Riley, but listening to what he says, about "protecting" the OL in terms of scheme: running screens, draws, and "being smart" about how they go about things...

 

To me, and maybe I am over-reacting/thinking, but yo your point, I think Nebraska is going to be become a soft, finesse, pass team--like under Callahan.

 

Like, I understand there are a lot of ways to win games, but if Mike Riley has any designs on actually winning the Big 10 or more, we're going to have to be physical, especially along the OL. And that means running the ball.

I guess "soft" is in the eye of the beholder. I think we'll tend to pass. But most of our running plays will be straight ahead which some will label as pounding it.

 

Of course, I'm far from convinced of the effectiveness of our running game. And I think we will throw a significant percentage of quick passes, which is probably what you're referring to.

 

I'm just waiting for "those passes are really part of the running game" to become an anthem.

No, if the ball leaves the QBs hand, and travels through the air, it's a pass. (Or a fumble...lol)

 

Straight ahead runs are fine. Isos between the #1 and 2 holes, need to be a staple of our offense. But we also need to run through the 3-9 holes also. We need to be able to run counters, traps, counter traps, etc

 

That's why I never really liked the "pro" or "weak" formations with the off-set FB. It is an automatic clue as to what's coming.

 

I dunno, maybe I should just give up hope that Tom Osborne's running game will sneak its way back into Nebraska's playbook. Not saying we should run the option, but the variety of running plays, ways to block those plays, personnel groupings, it made defending that running game nigh impossible in one week of practice.

 

Anyway, I'm hoping Riley is sincere in wanting to have a running game in the top 3 of the conference because the last two years we've failed at that miserably.

How is the FB a tell in far and near I sets? You like power, counter and traps but you don't like those formations? Off set FB you can run all sorts of power, counter, split zone, lead zone, isolated, wham and etc. FB can lead the play or be a replacer but he does not have to be a tell. Not sure if you know as much about run game as you think you do.

 

 

Okay so next time I talk about the running game, I'll make sure to drill down into, and include, every conceivable circumstance and variance. Pfff.

 

Most teams that run a strong formation with the FB off-set to the TE side, run plays are mostly (you guessed it) to (wait for it) the TE side.

 

I am well aware that having an off-set FB doesn't have to be a tell...duh...most times it is though.

[HuskermanMike]

[swmohusker]

 

 

 

 

 

we are about to become a throw it on 2nd and 3rd down, i can't see us running more than 40% of the time.

 

I support Mike Riley, but listening to what he says, about "protecting" the OL in terms of scheme: running screens, draws, and "being smart" about how they go about things...

 

To me, and maybe I am over-reacting/thinking, but yo your point, I think Nebraska is going to be become a soft, finesse, pass team--like under Callahan.

 

Like, I understand there are a lot of ways to win games, but if Mike Riley has any designs on actually winning the Big 10 or more, we're going to have to be physical, especially along the OL. And that means running the ball.

I guess "soft" is in the eye of the beholder. I think we'll tend to pass. But most of our running plays will be straight ahead which some will label as pounding it.

 

Of course, I'm far from convinced of the effectiveness of our running game. And I think we will throw a significant percentage of quick passes, which is probably what you're referring to.

 

I'm just waiting for "those passes are really part of the running game" to become an anthem.

No, if the ball leaves the QBs hand, and travels through the air, it's a pass. (Or a fumble...lol)

 

Straight ahead runs are fine. Isos between the #1 and 2 holes, need to be a staple of our offense. But we also need to run through the 3-9 holes also. We need to be able to run counters, traps, counter traps, etc

 

That's why I never really liked the "pro" or "weak" formations with the off-set FB. It is an automatic clue as to what's coming.

 

I dunno, maybe I should just give up hope that Tom Osborne's running game will sneak its way back into Nebraska's playbook. Not saying we should run the option, but the variety of running plays, ways to block those plays, personnel groupings, it made defending that running game nigh impossible in one week of practice.

 

Anyway, I'm hoping Riley is sincere in wanting to have a running game in the top 3 of the conference because the last two years we've failed at that miserably.

How is the FB a tell in far and near I sets? You like power, counter and traps but you don't like those formations? Off set FB you can run all sorts of power, counter, split zone, lead zone, isolated, wham and etc. FB can lead the play or be a replacer but he does not have to be a tell. Not sure if you know as much about run game as you think you do.

Okay so next time I talk about the running game, I'll make sure to drill down into, and include, every conceivable circumstance and variance. Pfff.

 

Most teams that run a strong formation with the FB off-set to the TE side, run plays are mostly (you guessed it) to (wait for it) the TE side.

 

I am well aware that having an off-set FB doesn't have to be a tell...duh...most times it is though.

Well if the FB was the tell then the LBS sure are wasting there time reading the OL to back flow. Just watch the FB and he will take you to the play, except when he doesnt...(wait for it).. here it comes. Then you are screwed.

[Nebfanatic]

swmohusker is correct here, no need for a rebuttal

 

The moment you think the FB is a tell is the moment you get a TD ran in on you on a counter play

[lo country]

swmohusker is correct here, no need for a rebuttal

 

The moment you think the FB is a tell is the moment you get a TD ran in on you on a counter play

I'd love to see counters and traps become the staple of our running game. Power football with some misdirection to watch aggressive D's "leaning" one way or the other. I just don't recall ever seeing misdirection the past 2 years. Possibly do the OL injuries and inability to kick out or pull.....I have no issue with a "pocket QB" so long as power running is our identity.

[Making Chimichangas]

 

 

 

 

 

 

we are about to become a throw it on 2nd and 3rd down, i can't see us running more than 40% of the time.

I support Mike Riley, but listening to what he says, about "protecting" the OL in terms of scheme: running screens, draws, and "being smart" about how they go about things...

 

To me, and maybe I am over-reacting/thinking, but yo your point, I think Nebraska is going to be become a soft, finesse, pass team--like under Callahan.

 

Like, I understand there are a lot of ways to win games, but if Mike Riley has any designs on actually winning the Big 10 or more, we're going to have to be physical, especially along the OL. And that means running the ball.

I guess "soft" is in the eye of the beholder. I think we'll tend to pass. But most of our running plays will be straight ahead which some will label as pounding it.

 

Of course, I'm far from convinced of the effectiveness of our running game. And I think we will throw a significant percentage of quick passes, which is probably what you're referring to.

 

I'm just waiting for "those passes are really part of the running game" to become an anthem.

No, if the ball leaves the QBs hand, and travels through the air, it's a pass. (Or a fumble...lol)

 

Straight ahead runs are fine. Isos between the #1 and 2 holes, need to be a staple of our offense. But we also need to run through the 3-9 holes also. We need to be able to run counters, traps, counter traps, etc

 

That's why I never really liked the "pro" or "weak" formations with the off-set FB. It is an automatic clue as to what's coming.

 

I dunno, maybe I should just give up hope that Tom Osborne's running game will sneak its way back into Nebraska's playbook. Not saying we should run the option, but the variety of running plays, ways to block those plays, personnel groupings, it made defending that running game nigh impossible in one week of practice.

 

Anyway, I'm hoping Riley is sincere in wanting to have a running game in the top 3 of the conference because the last two years we've failed at that miserably.

How is the FB a tell in far and near I sets? You like power, counter and traps but you don't like those formations? Off set FB you can run all sorts of power, counter, split zone, lead zone, isolated, wham and etc. FB can lead the play or be a replacer but he does not have to be a tell. Not sure if you know as much about run game as you think you do.

Okay so next time I talk about the running game, I'll make sure to drill down into, and include, every conceivable circumstance and variance. Pfff.

 

Most teams that run a strong formation with the FB off-set to the TE side, run plays are mostly (you guessed it) to (wait for it) the TE side.

 

I am well aware that having an off-set FB doesn't have to be a tell...duh...most times it is though.

Well if the FB was the tell then the LBS sure are wasting there time reading the OL to back flow. Just watch the FB and he will take you to the play, except when he doesnt...(wait for it).. here it comes. Then you are screwed.

 

 

1. You're talking about what coaches who know how to vary their running game actually do.

 

2. I'm talking about specifically what Mike Riley has actually done the last two years, do you see the difference?

 

Go back and re-watch all of Nebraska's running plays the last two years.

 

When the Husker are in 12 personnel (1 TE and 2 RBs) they more often than not have run to the TE side of the formation.

 

The usage of play-action off of an I-Formation, Weak/Strong Formation has been really rare the last two years.

 

I can't honestly recall Nebraska running ANY traps, counters, or mis-directions the last two years under Riley. That's not to say that none have been run, but I don't think so.

 

We've played teams like Purdue and Tennessee who have given up, on average, 250-300 yards rushing per game. Nebraska plays Tennessee and Purdue, and suddenly those two schools rush defense looks like Alabama's.

 

Or maybe it is merely coincidence that this season alone two of the statistically worst rushing defenses (Tennessee and Purdue) were able to literally stifle our running game to 80 yards or less in each game.

 

Moreover, in 2016 Nebraska averaged a paltry 169 yards rushing per game.

 

http://www.espn.com/college-football/team/stats/_/id/158/nebraska-cornhuskers

 

That's 2,199 total rushing yards divided by 13 total games.

 

169 yards rushing per game put us at 73rd nationally in rushing offense

 

http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/23/p2

 

Bottom line: Outside of a couple games against weaker competition, our running game has been dull, predictable, and has lacked ANY creativity--especially since Mike Riley arrived and how poorly we've run the ball shows statistically what I'm saying.