Logan Smothers to start v Iowa

[skers83]

21 minutes ago, theknife said:

WRONG, we want Jarrett Synek!

Actually had to look him up. Not up on recruiting as much as I thought I was.  

[skers83]

28 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

I figured you were joking, but I was also just curious if you were from Kearney, as well.

Northeast Nebraska. Did live in North Platte for a few years though.

[theknife]

30 minutes ago, skers83 said:

Actually had to look him up. Not up on recruiting as much as I thought I was.  

I had to look at the roster!

[All Hail Herbie]

31 minutes ago, gossamorharpy said:

Our system and futility has little to do with these 3 on top of the record books. The vast majority of progrums have seen most of their passing records set in the past decade simply due to how the sport is played these days vs. 20+ Years ago.

 

I don’t disagree we need to be more balanced across the board but, even if we were, said qbs would still be setting records with how much of an advantage offensive football has these days

My point was in reference to total offense, not passing offense.  Obviously, the QB has a sizable advantage in racking up passing statistics. 

 

The better question should be, fundamentally is this approach working for NU?  Are our backs, receivers and tight ends being used effectively?  Are we exposing our defense to more attrition through quick offensive possessions (including 3 and outs)? Are we limiting the ability of special teams to play a stronger role in games (field position, field goals, etc.)?  

 

While many may view spread offense as diverse, I could make the counterargument, based on this statistical data, that we are actually more one dimensional in our plan of attack.  If our Head Coach is to have any success, here or elsewhere, he needs to consider the push and pull of these dynamics on all areas of the game.  His micro-focus on offensive tactics is limiting the potential of the entire team.  

[gossamorharpy]

7 minutes ago, All Hail Herbie said:

My point was in reference to total offense, not passing offense.  Obviously, the QB has a sizable advantage in racking up passing statistics. 

 

The better question should be, fundamentally is this approach working for NU?  Are our backs, receivers and tight ends being used effectively?  Are we exposing our defense to more attrition through quick offensive possessions (including 3 and outs)? Are we limiting the ability of special teams to play a stronger role in games (field position, field goals, etc.)?  

 

While many may view spread offense as diverse, I could make the counterargument, based on this statistical data, that we are actually more one dimensional in our plan of attack.  If our Head Coach is to have any success, here or elsewhere, he needs to consider the push and pull of these dynamics on all areas of the game.  His micro-focus on offensive tactics is limiting the potential of the entire team.  

I have no issue with our system- what's broken with this team would be broken in any system. Fix the O line and special teams and we go from a 3-9 team to one probably sitting at 7-5, maybe 8-4. 

 

You can be a spread team and still have red zone packages to ensure you convert.  As it stands today, we're a spread team with a broke as hell offensive line that doesnt pass protect well and cant run block to save its life.  You address this and turn the 14-21 points we've consistently left on the table each game by not turning RZ possessions into 7 and we're winning.

 

I am more concerned about our punter/special teams leaving our defense out to dry more so than our offense.  Sure 3 and outs f'n suck, but this defense proved this year it can handle that- what it cant handle is our offense going 3 and out and out punter kicking it for all of 13 f'n yards giving the other team the ball back essentially where we left off.

 

TL/DR: Would I like to see more power run and possession? Sure, but I also don't think thats the only way we can be succesfull- All systems require a competent O line- we have been incompetent for close to 7 years now

[All Hail Herbie]

3 minutes ago, gossamorharpy said:

I have no issue with our system- what's broken with this team would be broken in any system. Fix the O line and special teams and we go from a 3-9 team to one probably sitting at 7-5, maybe 8-4. 

 

You can be a spread team and still have red zone packages to ensure you convert.  As it stands today, we're a spread team with a broke as hell offensive line that doesnt pass protect well and cant run block to save its life.  You address this and turn the 14-21 points we've consistently left on the table each game by not turning RZ possessions into 7 and we're winning.

 

I am more concerned about our punter/special teams leaving our defense out to dry more so than our offense.  Sure 3 and outs f'n suck, but this defense proved this year it can handle that- what it cant handle is our offense going 3 and out and out punter kicking it for all of 13 f'n yards giving the other team the ball back essentially where we left off.

 

TL/DR: Would I like to see more power run and possession? Sure, but I also don't think thats the only way we can be succesfull- All systems require a competent O line- we have been incompetent for close to 7 years now

To some extent we are talking past one another.  I am viewing things through a strategic lens, and you are viewing things at the personnel and tactical level.  A good example of a team re-visiting their fundamental approach to the game this season, and finding success, is Wisconsin. 

 

Early in the season, when they lost 3 out of their first 4, their offensive attack was more oriented around the QB and his skill in the passing game.  Case in point, their performance against Notre Dame.  Despite outgaining ND, 5 turnovers (including 4 interceptions and a QB fumble) shortened the field for the Irish (effectively removing special teams from the equation) and placing their solid defense in a difficult position.  Since September, Wisconsin has returned to a more diversified attack which includes both shotgun and conventional formations with better use of the backs and tight ends.

 

Power running is a component in making a course correction, but play action, bootlegs, tight-end screens, etc. diversify the offense while limiting risk of turnover or quick possessions.  Involve more skill position players while balancing the concerns of the defense and special teams units. 

 

Bottom line, I know our Head Coach and this sort of approach is not one he will ever adopt.  Everything is working well, right?

[BigRedBuster]

38 minutes ago, All Hail Herbie said:

My point was in reference to total offense, not passing offense.  Obviously, the QB has a sizable advantage in racking up passing statistics. 

 

The better question should be, fundamentally is this approach working for NU?  Are our backs, receivers and tight ends being used effectively?  Are we exposing our defense to more attrition through quick offensive possessions (including 3 and outs)? Are we limiting the ability of special teams to play a stronger role in games (field position, field goals, etc.)?  

 

While many may view spread offense as diverse, I could make the counterargument, based on this statistical data, that we are actually more one dimensional in our plan of attack.  If our Head Coach is to have any success, here or elsewhere, he needs to consider the push and pull of these dynamics on all areas of the game.  His micro-focus on offensive tactics is limiting the potential of the entire team.  

We are one dimensional because of our pathetic O line.  Not because of scheme.

[BigRedBuster]

3 minutes ago, All Hail Herbie said:

Power running is a component in making a course correction, but play action, bootlegs, tight-end screens, etc. diversify the offense while limiting risk of turnover or quick possessions.  Involve more skill position players while balancing the concerns of the defense and special teams units. 

Our WRs and TEs are very involved.  The one area that isn't involved enough is our RBs.  Fix the O line and RB coaching and that changes.

[Born N Bled Red]

2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

We are one dimensional because of our pathetic O line.  Not because of scheme.

 

Very much yes to this. Honestly it baffles me why we even try to run to the right. 

 

Also always wondered why we didn't try to run a screen right side.  Make the defenders think a little more before just blasting past Benhart at 100 mph.

[ZRod]

15 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Our WRs and TEs are very involved.  The one area that isn't involved enough is our RBs.  Fix the O line and RB coaching and that changes.

Think of how much hate Barney got back in the day, and now we would probably kill to have that "good" of an Online again... Damn.

[All Hail Herbie]

16 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

We are one dimensional because of our pathetic O line.  Not because of scheme.

When nearly 1/3 of your team's season rushing attempts come from the QB position (more than any of our running backs), it would seem to me that our approach is well out of balance.  Those attempts are in part by design (QB draw), in part improvisation (QB Scramble), or tuck (QB sack).  This is not a question of scheme, this is a question of offensive philosophy.  

 

Add to that his passing statistics, and it is very easy to understand how he could be the total offense leader in program history and yet we lose consistently.  It is a team sport, and Nebraska is playing offense with a team of 1.

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, All Hail Herbie said:

When nearly 1/3 of your team's season rushing attempts come from the QB position (more than any of our running backs), it would seem to me that our approach is well out of balance.  Those attempts are in part by design (QB draw), in part improvisation (QB Scramble), or tuck (QB sack).  This is not a question of scheme, this is a question of offensive philosophy.  

 

Add to that his passing statistics, and it is very easy to understand how he could be the total offense leader in program history and yet we lose consistently.  It is a team sport, and Nebraska is playing offense with a team of 1.

And, that would change with a good O line and RB play.

[All Hail Herbie]

20 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Our WRs and TEs are very involved.  The one area that isn't involved enough is our RBs.  Fix the O line and RB coaching and that changes.

In the conventional drop-back passing game, they are involved.  Again, this is the difference between scheme and philosophy.  Ideally, you have a good blend of run and pass using your skill position players.  

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

In actual fact, Nebraska has a multi-dimensional and highly successful offense, until it gets inside the Red Zone and/or needs to score on a final possession. 

 

Did you know the Nebraska offense is #2 in yards per play in the Big 10 and #18 in all of college football?  You can't do that with an inept offensive line or one-dimensional scheme. Something else is going on with this team, and it's mostly between their ears. 

[VectorVictor]

22 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Our WRs and TEs are very involved.  The one area that isn't involved enough is our RBs.  Fix the O line and RB coaching and that changes.

 

Agreed. The scheme is sound--the fact that we've had the numbers with it, in spite of a poor O-Line and mediocre RB play speaks to it. 

 

Getting an O-Line and RB coach that can find their arse with both hands would easily get us to six wins. And probably keep 1/3rd of the turnovers Martinez created from happening (as he wouldn't have to do everything himself).