Jump to content

Your 2021 Nebraska Cornhuskers


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Manning already back in Lincoln, even though the team doesn't have to report back until the 16th.

If you take some of the group out of the whole, there are then less of that group.  Thanks for the update.

285 yards per game would have been #3 in the country.  But that's evidence of how bad we were to you?   It was 146 against a PSU team that finished 4-5 and almost always recruits Top 10 tale

Posted Images

13 minutes ago, Mavric said:

bUt wE nEEd tO RuN tHe BaLl mORe!!!

 

 

How much of that is from designed QB runs? Take that out and I bet they are below 48%

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
5 minutes ago, Decked said:

How much of that is from designed QB runs? Take that out and I bet they are below 48%

 

If you take some of the group out of the whole, there are then less of that group.  Thanks for the update.

  • Plus1 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
10 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

If you take some of the group out of the whole, there are then less of that group.  Thanks for the update.

No need to be a smart a$$. Nebraska was towards the top of the country in designed QB runs this year.  Because the offense sucked donkey dong. 

  • Thanks 5
  • Haha 1
Link to post

31 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

If you take some of the group out of the whole, there are then less of that group.  Thanks for the update.

We rushed for approx 1660 yards in 2020.  Take away the QB runs and we are at 775.  Take away Wan'dale and we were down to 535 yards by RB's....That's not a "run heavy" O. That's the kind of O capable of winning 4-5 games a year.  Sadly, with no RB returning with more than 24 touches (Scott 24 for 62 yards for 2.6 a carry) I do not expect much better. And it's an O that has gotten worse each year.  We lost JD, but had Wan'dale.  We just lost Wan'dale.  What do we have now?

 

AM-521

Mills-396

Luke- 364

Wan'dale-240

 

I'm hoping we get old quick on O.  D gonna have to do their thing.

 

 

  • Plus1 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
9 hours ago, lo country said:

We rushed for approx 1660 yards in 2020.  Take away the QB runs and we are at 775.  Take away Wan'dale and we were down to 535 yards by RB's....That's not a "run heavy" O. That's the kind of O capable of winning 4-5 games a year.  Sadly, with no RB returning with more than 24 touches (Scott 24 for 62 yards for 2.6 a carry) I do not expect much better. And it's an O that has gotten worse each year.  We lost JD, but had Wan'dale.  We just lost Wan'dale.  What do we have now?

 

AM-521

Mills-396

Luke- 364

Wan'dale-240

 

I'm hoping we get old quick on O.  D gonna have to do their thing.

 

 

I never really understand the, “we don’t know what we have, so we must not have anything” comments I see so often.  
 

We won 4 games last year.  It’s not like Wandale was so good we won 9.  I’m confident someone will eventually step up at both WR and RB.  

  • Plus1 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
6 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I never really understand the, “we don’t know what we have, so we must not have anything” comments I see so often.  
 

We won 4 games last year.  It’s not like Wandale was so good we won 9.  I’m confident someone will eventually step up at both WR and RB.  

Too my  "what do we have now" is a honest question IMO.  We have Levi returning with 13 catches and Scott with 24 carries at RB.  That's not a whole lot of production to base the future or the offense around.  Throw in our back up QB who has never taken a snap in a game (Martinez hasn't played a complete season yet) and Ihave no real idea where the production on O will come from. Part of the problem last year, again IMO, was that without the QB runs and Wan'dale we really lacked an offensive identity.  I really didn't think losing JD would be "that bad".  I was wrong.  However, as a lot have said, perhaps having a guy gone that Frost doesn't feel compelled to manufacture touches will really benefit the O.... 

 

 I agree with the bolded.  I just didn't think in year 4 we would still be so inexperienced at RB and WR. The potential is their for sure.  The production isn't.  I do think that Frost underestimated the B1G and its part of the reason we are seeing bigger guys across the board.  Of course it also takes a while to recruit, develop and get these new guys ready to play.

 

Really hoping this is the year things click and we really start to see what we can/will be. It might not translate into wins, but hoping it passes the eyeball test.  End of the day, I am 100% sure no one wants to right this ship more than Frost.  

Link to post
18 minutes ago, lo country said:

Too my  "what do we have now" is a honest question IMO.  We have Levi returning with 13 catches and Scott with 24 carries at RB.  That's not a whole lot of production to base the future or the offense around.  Throw in our back up QB who has never taken a snap in a game (Martinez hasn't played a complete season yet) and Ihave no real idea where the production on O will come from. Part of the problem last year, again IMO, was that without the QB runs and Wan'dale we really lacked an offensive identity.  I really didn't think losing JD would be "that bad".  I was wrong.  However, as a lot have said, perhaps having a guy gone that Frost doesn't feel compelled to manufacture touches will really benefit the O.... 

 

 I agree with the bolded.  I just didn't think in year 4 we would still be so inexperienced at RB and WR. The potential is their for sure.  The production isn't.  I do think that Frost underestimated the B1G and its part of the reason we are seeing bigger guys across the board.  Of course it also takes a while to recruit, develop and get these new guys ready to play.

 

Really hoping this is the year things click and we really start to see what we can/will be. It might not translate into wins, but hoping it passes the eyeball test.  End of the day, I am 100% sure no one wants to right this ship more than Frost.  

The good news is RB is the easiest position on the field to come in and make and immediate impact, so lack of experience there doesn't bother me near as much as lack of talent would. Do we have talent there? No idea. But if we do, that position much less of a liability.


WR a different animal. It is dismal when looking there. On paper we look to have more talent there, but nobody can argue that experience isn't king at that position, and we are far short in that department. I don't expect anything earth shattering there this year.

 

If AM can come out improved at his position and one or two of the RB live up to good, not great, but good we could be a decent team. I think we could optimistically hope our WR core comes out as serviceable and average. Our O-line should be good this year.  TE's should be good, and a huge upgrade to what we've had for the past 10 years and I would hope we would utilize the hell out of them. Our D should be above average, missing a pass rusher so can't hope for greatness there. I anticipate special teams as average, but better than poor.

 

Overall I see a 7 out of 10 team, which is better than the 5 out of 10 I've seen the past 4 years. I don't anticipate a season that we all will be super proud of, but I do anticipate a season that allows us to not be completely miserable. Ringing endorsement, I know.

 

  • Plus1 1
Link to post
32 minutes ago, Husker03 said:

The good news is RB is the easiest position on the field to come in and make and immediate impact, so lack of experience there doesn't bother me near as much as lack of talent would. Do we have talent there? No idea. But if we do, that position much less of a liability.


WR a different animal. It is dismal when looking there. On paper we look to have more talent there, but nobody can argue that experience isn't king at that position, and we are far short in that department. I don't expect anything earth shattering there this year.

 

If AM can come out improved at his position and one or two of the RB live up to good, not great, but good we could be a decent team. I think we could optimistically hope our WR core comes out as serviceable and average. Our O-line should be good this year.  TE's should be good, and a huge upgrade to what we've had for the past 10 years and I would hope we would utilize the hell out of them. Our D should be above average, missing a pass rusher so can't hope for greatness there. I anticipate special teams as average, but better than poor.

 

Overall I see a 7 out of 10 team, which is better than the 5 out of 10 I've seen the past 4 years. I don't anticipate a season that we all will be super proud of, but I do anticipate a season that allows us to not be completely miserable. Ringing endorsement, I know.

 

I think that's a good assessment of where we are at.  And what needs to happen on the O side to be better than the past 3 years.  

 

To the bolded, a lot have mentioned playing with the guys we have, not what we want.  I'm really hoping we run a lot of 12/13 personnel to not just have more blocking and "weight up front", but to also try and create some mismatches, drop one back as an HB, use more in short yardage/goal line etc...This could be the best group of TE's we have had in years.  Hoping we use them. Lean on them until the rest of the O catches up.  Bring out something special for OU.

  • Plus1 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post

23 hours ago, lo country said:

We rushed for approx 1660 yards in 2020.  Take away the QB runs and we are at 775.  Take away Wan'dale and we were down to 535 yards by RB's....That's not a "run heavy" O. That's the kind of O capable of winning 4-5 games a year.  Sadly, with no RB returning with more than 24 touches (Scott 24 for 62 yards for 2.6 a carry) I do not expect much better. And it's an O that has gotten worse each year.  We lost JD, but had Wan'dale.  We just lost Wan'dale.  What do we have now?

 

AM-521

Mills-396

Luke- 364

Wan'dale-240

 

I'm hoping we get old quick on O.  D gonna have to do their thing.

 

 

 

I get what you are driving, but It feels like you are conflating issues.  NU runs zone read option.  To a large extent, the D dictates who carries the ball.  Arbitrarily taking away QB runs doesn't equate to them running the ball less & Wandale was running the ball from the RB position.  Dismissing or discounting his runs would be like doing the same when Adrian Killins ran the ball at UCF.  

 

I'll acknowledge NU ran switch zone or bash concepts far more frequently than say OSU, plays where you anticipate the read to lead to the QB running the ball, but w/o getting technical, I believe that reflected a lack of confidence in the O-line balanced w/a desire to still run the ball.  RB play needs to improve, but good teams run those plays looking to cash in.  Running those plays at the frequency NU did last year, says far more about the O-line than the RB's to me, & my ?'s around the running game this year are still far more dependent on the O-line than the RB's.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
2 hours ago, Lightfighter214 said:

Not sure how someone watched our offense the last couple of years and didn't come to the conclusion that is was mess.

 

How many of these runs by Martinez were straight scrambles because he can't read a defense and just took off running?

 

Game by game stats tell an even bigger picture, we rushed for 285 yards against illinios, 200+ against at the time winless psu, and not to mention the -2 yards against purdue.

 

But somehow, someway this is Riley's fault.

That was Purdue's rushing total, Nebraska had 111.  We also only rushed for 146 against PSU, and they outgained us 501 to 298 but somehow we won still.  Your stats are 33% correct.

  • Plus1 4
Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.






×
×
  • Create New...