B1G Rushing Comparison

[Mavric]

So if I read this right, we were basically in the second-tier of the conference as far as how often we ran the ball - Illinois and Minnesota ran more often, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Northwestern and us all ran basically as often.  But we were second only to Ohio State in how much success we had running the ball.

 

That seems to be a pretty good combination.  If we can get our passing game in gear, it would seem that our offense could take a good step forward.

 

Really just our downfield game, imo, as our completion percentage was really good which would indicate we can complete passes efficiently but we need to be able to stretch and spread out the defense more and get some big plays.

 

[RedDenver]

2 hours ago, Mavric said:

So if I read this right, we were basically in the second-tier of the conference as far as how often we ran the ball - Illinois and Minnesota ran more often, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Northwestern and us all ran basically as often.  But we were second only to Ohio State in how much success we had running the ball.

 

That seems to be a pretty good combination.  If we can get our passing game in gear, it would seem that our offense could take a good step forward.

 

Really just our downfield game, imo, as our completion percentage was really good which would indicate we can complete passes efficiently but we need to be able to stretch and spread out the defense more and get some big plays.

 

I'm trying to extrapolate from the data: So Purdue (!) and Michigan should have run the ball more and Northwestern (and maybe Minnesota, Illinois, and/or Wisconsin) should have run the ball less?

 

I guess it's also dependent on the success rate of the passing game of each team as well.

[Mavric]

32 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

I'm trying to extrapolate from the data: So Purdue (!) and Michigan should have run the ball more and Northwestern (and maybe Minnesota, Illinois, and/or Wisconsin) should have run the ball less?

 

I guess it's also dependent on the success rate of the passing game of each team as well.

 

Definitely depends on your passing game as well.  

 

I would say you're right on Purdue and Michigan as I doubt their passing games were so much better as to offset that.  Purdue was #16 in the country in yards per game but #70 in yards per attempt so that seems to agree.

 

Northwestern was just bad at offense as they were #100 in passing yards per attempt.  Ball control probably fit them well.  But just judging by that chart it would seem running a bit less would have been warranted.  Minnesota Illinois and Wisconsin were probably about right as they were much closer to Ohio Stat's success rate than any of the bottom three.

[Dr. Strangelove]

10 hours ago, Mavric said:

So if I read this right, we were basically in the second-tier of the conference as far as how often we ran the ball - Illinois and Minnesota ran more often, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Northwestern and us all ran basically as often.  But we were second only to Ohio State in how much success we had running the ball.

 

That seems to be a pretty good combination.  If we can get our passing game in gear, it would seem that our offense could take a good step forward.

 

Really just our downfield game, imo, as our completion percentage was really good which would indicate we can complete passes efficiently but we need to be able to stretch and spread out the defense more and get some big plays.

 

The thing about our running game isn't the success rate, it's who is running the ball. 

 

Nebraska runs our QBs very successfully, but I think we need to get some success out of our RBs.

 

Our passing game has issues. Hopefully a more dynamic rushing attack featuring RBs opens up the pass game. 

[NoLongerN]

6 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

The thing about our running game isn't the success rate, it's who is running the ball. 

 

Nebraska runs our QBs very successfully, but I think we need to get some success out of our RBs.

 

Our passing game has issues. Hopefully a more dynamic rushing attack featuring RBs opens up the pass game. 

 

Yes, one would need to compare OSU verses us in rushing and see how many yards come from RB verses QB.  My guess is that we have far more production at RB from QB than OSU.  Thus, that statistic isn't telling to the full story.  We need more yards from the real RB position .... and then more production in the passing game.

[Mavric]

1 hour ago, BigRedN said:

 

Yes, one would need to compare OSU verses us in rushing and see how many yards come from RB verses QB.  My guess is that we have far more production at RB from QB than OSU.  Thus, that statistic isn't telling to the full story.  We need more yards from the real RB position .... and then more production in the passing game.

 

Last year Martinez had 91 carries in 7 games (13.0 per game).  521 yards (5.7 ypa), 7 TDs.

 

Justin Fields had 81 carries in 8 games (10.1 per game). 383 yards (4.7 ypa), 5 TDs.

[Dr. Strangelove]

3 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Last year Martinez had 91 carries in 7 games (13.0 per game).  521 yards (5.7 ypa), 7 TDs.

 

Justin Fields had 81 carries in 8 games (10.1 per game). 383 yards (4.7 ypa), 5 TDs.

I was curious, so I checked something out. I wanted to see what percentage of yards came from the QB position.

 

Nebraska: 1855 rushing yards total

A. Martinez: 521 yards (28%)

C. McCaffrey: 364 yards (19.6%)

 

Nebraska QBs accounted for 47.6% of our rushing yards. 

 

Ohio State rushed for 2098 yards, 383 (18.3%) coming from Justin Fields. The bulk of their rushing yards came from RBs Trey Sermon (870 yards) and Master Teague (514 yards).

 

To put it another way, Nebraska was 2.5 times as reliant on getting rushing yards from their QBs. This does not include carries from our slot receiver, who promptly transferred in part because he did not like having so many carries. Nebraska must find a way to develop a run game that uses RBs.

[J-MAGIC]

17 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I was curious, so I checked something out. I wanted to see what percentage of yards came from the QB position.

 

Nebraska: 1855 rushing yards total

A. Martinez: 521 yards (28%)

C. McCaffrey: 364 yards (19.6%)

 

Nebraska QBs accounted for 47.6% of our rushing yards. 

 

Ohio State rushed for 2098 yards, 383 (18.3%) coming from Justin Fields. The bulk of their rushing yards came from RBs Trey Sermon (870 yards) and Master Teague (514 yards).

 

To put it another way, Nebraska was 2.5 times as reliant on getting rushing yards from their QBs. This does not include carries from our slot receiver, who promptly transferred in part because he did not like having so many carries. Nebraska must find a way to develop a run game that uses RBs.

 

I mean, the production still counts the same whether it comes from a QB or a RB. I would like our running backs to be able to handle more of the bulk to avoid QB injuries and fumbles, and because generally when you're dependent on a QB spread run game it's hard to move the ball in the red zone where the field shrinks. But Frost is very good at QB run game stuff and we should continue to use it a lot. We just need to develop some things outside of it (like a downfield passing game to get people out of the box).

[Dr. Strangelove]

12 minutes ago, J-MAGIC said:

 

I mean, the production still counts the same whether it comes from a QB or a RB. I would like our running backs to be able to handle more of the bulk to avoid QB injuries and fumbles, and because generally when you're dependent on a QB spread run game it's hard to move the ball in the red zone where the field shrinks. But Frost is very good at QB run game stuff and we should continue to use it a lot. We just need to develop some things outside of it (like a downfield passing game to get people out of the box).

Right, I agree. Getting yards from your QB works fine, but the reality is that it is not a good way to run an offense for an entire season. Injuries are almost certainly going to plague the most important position group on the team. 

[Mavric]

1 hour ago, J-MAGIC said:

I mean, the production still counts the same whether it comes from a QB or a RB. I would like our running backs to be able to handle more of the bulk to avoid QB injuries and fumbles, and because generally when you're dependent on a QB spread run game it's hard to move the ball in the red zone where the field shrinks. But Frost is very good at QB run game stuff and we should continue to use it a lot. We just need to develop some things outside of it (like a downfield passing game to get people out of the box).

 

Exactly.  Where the rushing is coming from is a different argument.  I don't think anyone would say that we are fine with what we have been getting from our RBs.

 

But the point is we run the ball a significant amount and are pretty efficient doing that.  I don't think that everyone has that perception of our running game (or our offensive line) but that is what the statistics show.

[J-MAGIC]

21 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Exactly.  Where the rushing is coming from is a different argument.  I don't think anyone would say that we are fine with what we have been getting from our RBs.

 

But the point is we run the ball a significant amount and are pretty efficient doing that.  I don't think that everyone has that perception of our running game (or our offensive line) but that is what the statistics show.

 

I think our RBs aside from Ozigbo and Mo Wash have left a lot of yards on the field and we need to (and can) get a lot better production from them. I think we should still use the QB as runners a decent amount because they're good runners, we have a coach who is good at coming up with ways to run them, and it's an inefficiency we can exploit against better teams, but I'd be a lot more comfortable if it were in the 8-10 carry a game range with an emphasis on getting down before contact than some of what we saw last year. Despite what some of our fans believe Frost is extremely good at scheming up the run game dating back to UCF so this isn't super surprising to me, even despite the numbers we saw in the box last year.

[Mavric]

Just now, J-MAGIC said:

I think our RBs aside from Ozigbo and Mo Wash have left a lot of yards on the field and we need to (and can) get a lot better production from them. I think we should still use the QB as runners a decent amount because they're good runners, we have a coach who is good at coming up with ways to run them, and it's an inefficiency we can exploit against better teams, but I'd be a lot more comfortable if it were in the 8-10 carry a game range with an emphasis on getting down before contact than some of what we saw last year. Despite what some of our fans believe Frost is extremely good at scheming up the run game dating back to UCF so this isn't super surprising to me, even despite the numbers we saw in the box last year.

 

Maybe I just have my head in the sand but I really think the only explanation for our lack of production from the RB spot is just plain old bad luck.  

 

Frost inherited Ozigbo but really nothing else to work with.  So he had a LOT of ground to make up to get the players we need.  He's actually recruited the position fairly well but a lot of craziness has kept it from showing. 

 

In 2019, we had a decent one-two punch in Mills and Washington.  I'm not a huge fan of Mills but he was a solid complimentary back.  Washington was an incredible talent but he was always dinged up and then turned into a head case.  He was a difference-maker when he was out there but didn't have the mindset.

 

Last year we just couldn't keep anyone healthily long enough to really get them going.  The injury bug bit pretty much everyone in the room to some extent.  You can say we could have done this or that differently but it just seems extremely unlikely that one position group has that many things go wrong.

 

So now we're left with a bunch of question marks.  I have no idea who the best one will be but I really think about any of them could be a good option if they can just stay in the mix.  So I'm not particularly worried about that room, even though we don't know who is going to be out there on the first snap.  I think with six options we can surely find a couple to get the job done.

[BigRedBuster]

11 minutes ago, J-MAGIC said:

 

I think our RBs aside from Ozigbo and Mo Wash have left a lot of yards on the field and we need to (and can) get a lot better production from them. I think we should still use the QB as runners a decent amount because they're good runners, we have a coach who is good at coming up with ways to run them, and it's an inefficiency we can exploit against better teams, but I'd be a lot more comfortable if it were in the 8-10 carry a game range with an emphasis on getting down before contact than some of what we saw last year. Despite what some of our fans believe Frost is extremely good at scheming up the run game dating back to UCF so this isn't super surprising to me, even despite the numbers we saw in the box last year.

Interestingly, last year 2AM ran the ball 13 times per game.  In 1995, QBs ran it 11.9 times per game.  Not much difference.

 

Now, I agree with you that I would prefer it to be in the 8-10 range because we are throwing the ball more and the RBs need to be much more involved in the run game.

[J-MAGIC]

8 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Maybe I just have my head in the sand but I really think the only explanation for our lack of production from the RB spot is just plain old bad luck.  

 

Frost inherited Ozigbo but really nothing else to work with.  So he had a LOT of ground to make up to get the players we need.  He's actually recruited the position fairly well but a lot of craziness has kept it from showing. 

 

In 2019, we had a decent one-two punch in Mills and Washington.  I'm not a huge fan of Mills but he was a solid complimentary back.  Washington was an incredible talent but he was always dinged up and then turned into a head case.  He was a difference-maker when he was out there but didn't have the mindset.

 

Last year we just couldn't keep anyone healthily long enough to really get them going.  The injury bug bit pretty much everyone in the room to some extent.  You can say we could have done this or that differently but it just seems extremely unlikely that one position group has that many things go wrong.

 

So now we're left with a bunch of question marks.  I have no idea who the best one will be but I really think about any of them could be a good option if they can just stay in the mix.  So I'm not particularly worried about that room, even though we don't know who is going to be out there on the first snap.  I think with six options we can surely find a couple to get the job done.

 

IDK Mills was a power back who never broke tackles and went down on first contact. He had decent vision and was good at taking the yards that were given to him by blocking or scheme, but he wasn't really creating any new yardage through his own skill like good backs do. I think he was the best option we had and seemed like a good dude but I am hopeful Stepp or one of the freshman hits and we can get better production.

[RedDenver]

25 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Maybe I just have my head in the sand but I really think the only explanation for our lack of production from the RB spot is just plain old bad luck.  

 

Frost inherited Ozigbo but really nothing else to work with.  So he had a LOT of ground to make up to get the players we need.  He's actually recruited the position fairly well but a lot of craziness has kept it from showing. 

 

In 2019, we had a decent one-two punch in Mills and Washington.  I'm not a huge fan of Mills but he was a solid complimentary back.  Washington was an incredible talent but he was always dinged up and then turned into a head case.  He was a difference-maker when he was out there but didn't have the mindset.

 

Last year we just couldn't keep anyone healthily long enough to really get them going.  The injury bug bit pretty much everyone in the room to some extent.  You can say we could have done this or that differently but it just seems extremely unlikely that one position group has that many things go wrong.

 

So now we're left with a bunch of question marks.  I have no idea who the best one will be but I really think about any of them could be a good option if they can just stay in the mix.  So I'm not particularly worried about that room, even though we don't know who is going to be out there on the first snap.  I think with six options we can surely find a couple to get the job done.

I agree, good analysis. I'm also not concerned about which RB is out there as I think the OL creating holes is the bigger issue for us for some years now. I thought we were better last year and am hopeful we'll get better again this year even though we're pretty young on the OL.