Tangent Thread - Run the Damn Ball!!!

[Guy Chamberlin]

On 12/28/2021 at 6:52 PM, Jeremy said:

I don't get why anyone would bash on the service academies, AT ALL. They literally can't really recruit, and EVERY team they play is miles more talented than they are. Yet, here they are, 2 of the 3 getting 9+ wins. Air Force ended up with 10 this year, with wins over Nevada and Boise State, both of which are loaded with talent. Navy is definitely struggling, but still somehow bested UCF, who has athletes all over the place. The point is that their offense does a lot to cancel out other teams' athletic talent. The proof literally is in the pudding.

 

As much as everyone is dragging him, Law is right. We aren't going to win unless we go back to a run-oriented offense, simple as that. We want to be B1G champs, right? Who do we have to beat to do that? Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Iowa. 

 

We can't out-recruit most of those teams, not even CLOSE. We aren't going to get more talented WR's, QB's, or RB's than them, the type of kids you HAVE to have to win running Whip's offense. We don't have, nor are we going to get a Kenny Picket. Just ain't gonna happen. I will concede that we do seem to have some pretty good receivers, but still, no one to throw to them, nor anyone to block for the guy to even TRY to throw to them. 

 

Ohio State gets the guys we would need to win. Stroud, Olave, Smith-Njigba, etc. We don't get them. Ohio State does. 

 

So why keep square-peg/round-holing this? Why keep trying to beat Ohio State, Penn State, and Michigan for recruits from Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan? Why not play our own game, get our own kind of guys for our own different kind of offense?

 

We would be unique, hard to prepare for, difficult to plan against. It would be the 'Nebraska Identity.' 'They run the ball, that is who they are.' Wouldn't that be great? Something for the team, the program, and the state to get behind. To go CRAZY for a FB bruising ahead for 5+ yards. To deliver some punishment to defenses instead of seeing QB after QB limp out of the game. To eat the clock, move the sticks, keep the defense fresh and off the field. While we can't get many 4 and 5 star guys, the talent we COULD get to run this stuff would be a definite step up from the guys that the service academies get. 

 

Plus, because we aren't wasting time and resources going after 4 and 5 star QB's and WR's, we could spend time and effort recruiting the kids that will really win games for us- the defense.

 

Law is right. Nebraska needs to be Nebraska again. Run the ball.

 

I don't get the part where Nebraska can recruit running athletes but not passing and catching athletes. As if the act of passing and catching is too complicated for us simple-minded prairie folk.

 

I also don't get the part where you announce your intention to run almost every play, and don't expect opposing defensive coordinators to make the fairly simple adjustment. 

 

There are a lot of ways to win without switching to an option offense, as evidenced by the many teams that are winning more than Nebraska. One way is to have a better defense. Another way is to have a better quarterback, offensive line and running backs running the exact same plays. They're pretty much the same guys you'd have to recruit for a successful option offense. 

[Jeremy]

1 minute ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

I don't get the part where Nebraska can recruit running athletes but not passing and catching athletes. As if the act of passing and catching is too complicated for us simple-minded prairie folk.

 

I also don't get the part where you announce your intention to run almost every play, and don't expect opposing defensive coordinators to make the fairly simple adjustment. 

 

There are a lot of ways to win without switching to an option offense, as evidenced by the many teams that are winning more than Nebraska. One way is to have a better defense. Another way is to have a better quarterback, offensive line and running backs running the exact same plays. They're pretty much the same guys you'd have to recruit for a successful option offense. 

We've tried the passing and catching off and on for two decades now. At some point, we gotta admit it just ain’t gonna work. We don't get the guy that can pass the ball well enough. Never have. Other schools might get that kid, but we don't. We don't get the linemen that could give that kid time anyway. I don't get why we wanna keep doing things that just haven't worked. 

 

Opposing defensive coordinators can make whatever adjustments they want, but Army and Air Force still end up with 9 and 10 wins somehow. We end up with 3. THREE. The proof is in the pudding. 

 

Besides, we might announce our intention to run the ball, but there’s always that threat of play action when they're creeping up and peeking in the backfield. Guys get pretty wide open when less people are covering them.

 

But we can't have that threat of play action until we've proven to be a threat running the ball. We have to DEDICATE ourselves to it. Simple plays that rely on focused effort and willpower instead of schemes that need 2 sentences to call or signal the play. Linemen don't get confused about who they block when it's straight ahead most of the time. 

 

It's a philosophical mindset of being patient with moderate rushing gains, steady and methodical. Not a 5/7 step drop, trying to out-scheme Jim Leonard's secondary for 4 seconds while defensive linemen are bearing down on whatever newb we have taking snaps; trying to make him read a defense when future draft picks are shaking our  stumbling tackles loose and coming to knock him out of the game. 

 

Instead of passive, back-pedal blocking, we take the fight TO THEM, push THEM back, and grind out yards in the proverbial cloud of dust. 

 

Other teams may throw their way to victory. That's great. We aren't other teams. We HAVE to run the ball.

 

 

[Mavric]

2 hours ago, lo country said:

Yep.  That 3-9 vs 9-4 record really showed them.....And actually 2.28 feet (almost 1 yard more/rush) Take away Fordham yardage (329) and how do we look? We also added another 427 against Northwestern.  Those 2 games can really skew our stats.  And if you are even remotely trying to say our passing game is anywhere near Bama in efficiency.....Bama 12th in red zone...NU 107...Our offense sucks where it counts.  In the W-L column.  

 

Pretty sure the difference between 4.84 yards and 4.41 yards is not 2.28 feet.

 

I understand you don't want to acknowledge stats that don't fit your narrative and start throwing them out.

 

We actually were pretty decent in scoring TDs.  We scored TDs 66% of the time.  Alabama scored TDs 70% of the time. If we were as efficient as Alabama in scoring TDs, we would have scored two more TDs this YEAR.  How much would that have changed things?  It was our kickers that killed the percentage to which you're referring, not our offense.

 

Not that any of that necessarily have anything to do with passing efficiency.  But you just keep trying to move the goal-posts whenever it suits.

[hskrfan4life]

35 minutes ago, Mavric said:

Pretty sure the difference between 4.84 yards and 4.41 yards is not 2.28 feet.

1.29 feet so the original poster was correct.

[desertshox]

26 minutes ago, hskrfan4life said:

1.29 feet so the original poster was correct.

 

Now we know the difference between 3-9 and 9-4 (think that's Wisconsin's record) is 1.29 ft per rush. Get those backs falling forward more and the team is golden.

 

BTW this might be sarcasm. I'll let you (as in the general sense not you specifically) decide.

[admo]

1 hour ago, Jeremy said:

but Army and Air Force

 

we might announce our intention to run the ball, but there’s always that threat of play action

 

We have to DEDICATE ourselves to it. Simple plays that rely on focused effort and willpower instead of schemes

We HAVE to run the ball.

 

 

So at halftime when Georgia was winning 24-3, apparently Michigan just needed to run the ball and simply impose their will?

 

Maybe sneak in a play action pass? 
 

Simple plays.  Willpower.  Run the ball.  Trailing by 21.  Be dedicated. 

 

That's so stupid

[84HuskerLaw]

36 minutes ago, admo said:

 

So at halftime when Georgia was winning 24-3, apparently Michigan just needed to run the ball and simply impose their will?

 

Maybe sneak in a play action pass? 
 

Simple plays.  Willpower.  Run the ball.  Trailing by 21.  Be dedicated. 

 

That's so stupid

So the game stats tell a bit different story in Mich v Ga.  GA won the game with the better run game and throwing half as many passes.  Mich didn’t run the ball as well and half enough.  Two ints and 16 incompletions highlight the Michigan air attack.   GA passed very effectively, arguably, because Mich couldn’t stop the run.  
 

Basically, Michigan tried to execute the Frost type offense and failed similarly. Just looking at the stats anyway.  

[admo]

On 12/30/2021 at 7:39 PM, 84HuskerLaw said:

I am 63 yrs young and started going to games in 1968.  So I’m into year 52 fyi.  Attended all but about 7 homes over the period 71 thru 2012.  About 1/3rd of the home games since as hard to get to them from NY last few years.  I have also attended many bowls over that time as well, including the Rose Bowl.  I talked my wife into going to that one as I correctly forecasted it would likely be Nebraska’s last major bowl for a long time.  I did NOT imagine it would be the rest of my life.  Sadly, after 20 long frustrating, disappointing and heartbreaking seasons, we may be further away from a return to relevancy now than the day before Devaney was hired.  My Dad, a Husker law grad too, actually bought he and my season tickets from Devaney right at my father’s office desk in my hometown.  Devaney, upon his hire, personally drove from town to town around the state to meet Nebraskans, solicit donors and sell tickets for the new and soon to be awesome Big Red.  Needless to say, those two south stadium seats (I later bought 2 more after graduation in 84) were in my family for 50 years (62 to 2012).  My brother’s boys got em after I came to NY.  
 

Of course I was a big NFL fan as a kid but once you’ve been to memorial stadium to see real football, nothing else compares.  Attended Chiefs, Steelers, Giants, Vikings, Rams games but only a few of each.  Pro ball is NOT nearly as exciting.  I have a close friend who is a Packers guy and travels to quite a few in Gr Bay yearly.  He has his own plane so it’s a bit easier.  
 

 

No lie, this is pretty amazing

[desertshox]

1 hour ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

So the game stats tell a bit different story in Mich v Ga.  GA won the game with the better run game and throwing half as many passes.  Mich didn’t run the ball as well and half enough.  Two ints and 16 incompletions highlight the Michigan air attack.   GA passed very effectively, arguably, because Mich couldn’t stop the run.  
 

Basically, Michigan tried to execute the Frost type offense and failed similarly. Just looking at the stats anyway.  

 

Just by looking at the stats doesn't tell you Georgia had the 3rd best rush defense coming into the game. Wonder if that played any part into UM's game plan. Naw opposing defenses just let you do whatever you want.

 

Reading some of these posts makes me think people don't realize there's another team on the field trying to keep you from doing certain things.

[ColoradoHusk]

3 hours ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

So the game stats tell a bit different story in Mich v Ga.  GA won the game with the better run game and throwing half as many passes.

Did you watch any of the game? If you did, you would have seen that UGA jumped ahead of Michigan in the first half by being way more aggressive in the passing game.  The ESPN announcer even said that Michigan's D struggles against passes to the RB, which NU exploited in their game this year.  Once ahead by 3 scores, UGA went to running the ball to bleed the clock.

 

Even if you didn't watch the game, the stats show that UGA attempted 32 passes while Michigan attempted 36 (while being forced to pass most of the 2nd half while behind). I guess they don't teach math in law school, because that's closer to being equal than it is to being half as much.  

[teachercd]

38 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Did you watch any of the game? If you did, you would have seen that UGA jumped ahead of Michigan in the first half by being way more aggressive in the passing game.  The ESPN announcer even said that Michigan's D struggles against passes to the RB, which NU exploited in their game this year.  Once ahead by 3 scores, UGA went to running the ball to bleed the clock.

 

Even if you didn't watch the game, the stats show that UGA attempted 32 passes while Michigan attempted 36 (while being forced to pass most of the 2nd half while behind). I guess they don't teach math in law school, because that's closer to being equal than it is to being half as much.  

The UGA QB had his most passing yards ever in a half in the first half.

 

Some people just hate stats!

 

Remember when Billy C would get sooooo many yards in garbage time and the freaks on the BRB site refused to admit there was a "garbage time"?

[Husker03]

Ya, Georgia took an insurmountable lead in the first half through the air.  They then moved more towards run, and, fwiw, scored FAR fewer points in the second half, when they were using the run game, than they did in the first. Run the damn ball guys needs to understand that the margins for error over the course of an entire game are far too thin with a ground focused attack. HAVE to be multidimensional in order to be competitive game in and game out.

[teachercd]

2 minutes ago, Husker03 said:

Ya, Georgia took an insurmountable lead in the first half through the air.  They then moved more towards run, and, fwiw, scored FAR fewer points in the second half, when they were using the run game, than they did in the first. Run the damn ball guys needs to understand that the margins for error over the course of an entire game are far too thin with a ground focused attack. HAVE to be multidimensional in order to be competitive game in and game out.

Yep...this is why teams like Iowa let crap teams stick around and it costs them games every single season. 

[lo country]

6 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

Pretty sure the difference between 4.84 yards and 4.41 yards is not 2.28 feet.

 

I understand you don't want to acknowledge stats that don't fit your narrative and start throwing them out.

 

We actually were pretty decent in scoring TDs.  We scored TDs 66% of the time.  Alabama scored TDs 70% of the time. If we were as efficient as Alabama in scoring TDs, we would have scored two more TDs this YEAR.  How much would that have changed things?  It was our kickers that killed the percentage to which you're referring, not our offense.

 

Not that any of that necessarily have anything to do with passing efficiency.  But you just keep trying to move the goal-posts whenever it suits.

 

5 hours ago, hskrfan4life said:

1.29 feet so the original poster was correct.

My bad on the math.  

I acknowledge that we are 3-9.  Fact.   Have never beat Wisky under Frost. Fact.   Our O is anemic in the red zone.  Fact.  Moving the goal posts? You are cherry picking stats to show we are close to Bama like prowess.  Please.  We need a complete overhaul on offense.  In four years we have beat two B1G teams with a winning record (one might have been 6-6) and IIRC both of those were in 2018......So keep throwing out stats to show we are "close" to Bama"..

 

So our new moral victories are how specific stats match up to winning programs.  Man, how far we have fallen....

[ColoradoHusk]

26 minutes ago, lo country said:

Our O is anemic in the red zone.  Fact. 

Yes, NU's red zone scoring % of 77.4% was very bad (107th) in the country.  I haven't been able to find the red zone TD percentage yet, but a big reason for that poor ranking is FG misses in the red zone.  Looking at the stats, NU missed 5 FG's under 39 yards.  If NU made 3 of them, NU's red zone ranking jumps to 75th at 83.0%.  If NU makes all 5 of those short FG's, NU"s red zone ranking jumps to 38th at 86.8%.  Throw in the fact that NU might have gone for a couple more FG attempts if they had a reliable kicker, and the red zone ranking could have improved even more.  In 2021, the red zone scoring woes were a special teams issue, not necessarily an offensive issue.

 

Finally, I looked at the red zone scoring rankings for some other Big Ten teams.  They are:

 

Ohio State - 5th - 92.6%

Michigan - 25th - 89.6% (boosted by 19 FG's)

Purdue - 48th - 86.0% (boosted by 22 FG's)

Michigan State - 50th - 85.4%

Minnesota - 64th - 84.0%

Penn State - 83rd - 82.1%

Wisconsin - 89th - 80.8% - only 1 more red zone score than NU all season

Iowa - 121st - 72.7% - that's with a great FG kicker and they only scored 18 red zone TD's all season!!!

 

So, looking at the offenses and the rankings, I would say the Ohio State has the most explosive and diverse offense, and it was one of the best in the country.  Purdue's offense is very similar to NU's, but was able to have a much higher red zone scoring percentage by a great FG kicker.  Wisconsin and Iowa seem to have an offense that many NU fans want, but their red zone offense isn't significantly better and even worse than NU's.  Finally, as a whole, the Big Ten's red zone rankings kinda suck.  That is due to having some great defenses in the country, but also due to having some boring and unimaginative offenses.