Jump to content


Tangent Thread - Run the Damn Ball!!!


Recommended Posts

How people are defending an offense that went 3-9, and has averaged 23 points per game vs FBS teams over 4 years is beyond me.

 

I mean, the numbers literally speak for themselves. 

 

And then to point out how much more we ran against iowa than we passed as though it means something?

 

It means our running scheme is deficient. We aren't running the right scheme with the right players. We aren't blocking the right way. Outside zone is a bad idea against Wisconsin and other good B1G teams. 

 

We don't do anything significantly different than most other teams in the league, and around the nation. We aren't different enough to be a problem to prepare for. Defensively, the trend nationally is and has been to build defenses to stop offensive schemes like ours.  And it's working. 

 

Bielema said himself that if they stopped AM, they stopped us, and he was right. Why not have the QB as a threat, but also 3 other guys, any one of which could get the ball, so defenses can't key on one guy?

 

A year from now when we're sitting home AGAIN at 5-7 or worse, is this STILL going to be the party line, that we need to throw the ball and have 'balance?' 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

@Jeremy I think none of us are happy with the team's results the past 4 years under Frost, but the ills of Nebraska isn't only due the offensive scheme. I think the offense has shown good results at times, and many of the reasons for the 3-9 record in 2021 are outside the offensive scheme.

 

I do agree that the RB run game needs to improve.  The results under Frost have been unacceptable, and that's why Held and Austin were fired. I disagree that NU should try to run the ball more, even when the results aren't there.  That's like ramming your head into a wall over and over again.  I disagree that the only thing holding NU back as a team is to shift to an offense that runs 70-80% of the time, like it was done in the 80s and 90s.  You know, it worked so well then, it should be run now.

 

Part of me thinks you even know that, but you just like to argue it because you know it will never happen, so you can just sit there and make your posts arguing about something you know will never happen. It's like me saying "my life would be so much happier if I had millions of dollars and married to a supermodel wife".  I know that will never happen, so I don't make those types of statements. 

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
25 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

How people are defending an offense that went 3-9, and has averaged 23 points per game vs FBS teams over 4 years is beyond me.

 

I mean, the numbers literally speak for themselves. 

 

 

 

Did it occur to you that the 100 teams that had a better record than Nebraska did so without switching to a power option offense? 

 

Some football purists claim that most teams run a "defense" and "special teams" as well as an offense, and many believe these can affect outcomes as well. 

 

The numbers say a lot of things.

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Did it occur to you that the 100 teams that had a better record than Nebraska did so without switching to a power option offense? 

 

Some football purists claim that most teams run a "defense" and "special teams" as well as an offense, and many believe these can affect outcomes as well. 

 

The numbers say a lot of things.

I can't disagree with the special teams argument.  We were just abysmal in every aspect there. 

 

That being said, 23 points per game is a BIG reason we're 3-9. It's just not enough. Not even close.

  • Thanks 1
  • Oh Yeah! 1
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

I can't disagree with the special teams argument.  We were just abysmal in every aspect there. 

 

That being said, 23 points per game is a BIG reason we're 3-9. It's just not enough. Not even close.

I don't disagree that 23 PPG is not a great measure and NU needs to do better. However, the defense and special teams aren't doing a good job of creating points and short fields for the offense. Would that be magically fixed by a drastically different offensive scheme other than just because you say so?

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

23 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

@Jeremy I think none of us are happy with the team's results the past 4 years under Frost, but the ills of Nebraska isn't only due the offensive scheme. I think the offense has shown good results at times, and many of the reasons for the 3-9 record in 2021 are outside the offensive scheme.

 

I do agree that the RB run game needs to improve.  The results under Frost have been unacceptable, and that's why Held and Austin were fired. I disagree that NU should try to run the ball more, even when the results aren't there.  That's like ramming your head into a wall over and over again.  I disagree that the only thing holding NU back as a team is to shift to an offense that runs 70-80% of the time, like it was done in the 80s and 90s.  You know, it worked so well then, it should be run now.

 

Part of me thinks you even know that, but you just like to argue it because you know it will never happen, so you can just sit there and make your posts arguing about something you know will never happen. It's like me saying "my life would be so much happier if I had millions of dollars and married to a supermodel wife".  I know that will never happen, so I don't make those types of statements. 

No, I'm arguing because we're gonna go 5-7 again,  and I HATE that I'm going to be right about that. What's never going to happen is Nebraska being successful doing what everyone else is doing. 

 

We can actually run the ball like we did in the past for a few reasons: 

 

1)The rules against holding are more lax than in the glory years. Iowa and Wisconsin get away with blatant holding nearly every play. No reason we couldn't adopt their 'techniques.'

 

2)With the spread being so en vogue, defenses are going with less down-linemen, more smaller, speedier guys. With more linemen/tight ends, we can shove the smaller guys around. 

 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

No, I'm arguing because we're gonna go 5-7 again,  and I HATE that I'm going to be right about that. What's never going to happen is Nebraska being successful doing what everyone else is doing. 

 

We can actually run the ball like we did in the past for a few reasons: 

 

1)The rules against holding are more lax than in the glory years. Iowa and Wisconsin get away with blatant holding nearly every play. No reason we couldn't adopt their 'techniques.'

 

2)With the spread being so en vogue, defenses are going with less down-linemen, more smaller, speedier guys. With more linemen/tight ends, we can shove the smaller guys around. 

 

This is going to be my last response to you because it just keeps going in circles and it's dumb. Big Ten defenses aren't going smaller, they are staying big while trying to find more speed. Shoving them around just because we "want to" doesn't automatically work.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
1 minute ago, ColoradoHusk said:

I don't disagree that 23 PPG is not a great measure and NU needs to do better. However, the defense and special teams aren't doing a good job of creating points and short fields for the offense. Would that be magically fixed by a drastically different offensive scheme other than just because you say so?

Wasn't the defense the best part of our team? 

 

Maybe if we had sustained, clock-chewing, defensive-will-battering drives, we could help THEM out? Keep them fresh?

 

It's not magic. It's dedication to being bigger and stronger than the defense. We've done it before, there's no reason we can't again. 

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
1 hour ago, ColoradoHusk said:

@84HuskerLaw chunk plays are the best way to consistently move the ball down the field and score points. What you want isn't sustainable long-term. It's great to have one or two times a game, but it won't be good enough against the better teams on your schedule. Opposing defenses want to limit big plays and force teams into long possessions, because the offense will eventually make a mistake and be forced to kick (punt or FG attempt is a victory for the defense).

 

Let's look at the Nebraska-Wisconsin game of 2021. You would think that Wisconsin would be the team with long, sustained drives leading to points. However, Wisconsin scored 2 of it's offensive plays with long TD runs (chunk plays) and a kickoff return (chunk play). NU was the team which had nearly twice as many plays, 50 more yards, and good TD success rate in the red zone (4 out of 6 trips).  That was against one of the best scoring defenses in the country. So, tell me how the offensive scheme for NU was the reason for that loss?

A kick return is a big play but is not an offensive chunk play.  
Neb played pretty good defense, not great by any means, in ‘21.  Good enough to win 8 or even 9 games vs a very above average difficulty schedule.  Wisconsin wants to have an offense much like the one I am suggesting for Neb. Nowhere have I ever said you don’t take long TD passes if they are available.  You do but you don’t make a living on big plays, chunk plays or punt.  
Yes, most defenses try prevent big plays and force teams to sustain drives by in effect making short yardage gains easier - somewhat anyway.  Slow the run, get down and distance advantages and get the QB.  Most defenses want to make then offenses more predictable so defending is easier.  Chin mostly does this as well.  At times, we seemed to get em in third and throw situations but failed to cover or get to the QB quick enough.  I don’t have stats to cite but my sense is our red zone defense was fairly stout (good enough to force FGs a lot anyway).  
we needed more takeaways certainly.  Those come from being aggressive and risk taking which is tough when your offense not scoring enough often enough and tends to have short time of possessions so opponents get more.  
 

Nobody says building a strong running offense is easy or simple.  It is not but neither is building a top 5 air raid scoring machine.  History is old news to the pass the ballers I know.  But if you look at the winningest programs of all time upto today, I’m sure the vast majority did it with powerful run based offense.  Michigan. Ohio State. Nebraska. Oklahoma. Texas. Alabama.  USC, GA, Army, Notre Dame.  Penn St.  Pitt.  Auburn.  
 

Rules have been twisted on holding and so on to favor passing somewhat. But even Callaghan’s West Coast offense had a good dose of run game built into it.  Pelini had some run game emphasis.  Riley didn’t do much well but he had both pass and run designed.    It’s hard to run the ball from a mostly passing alignment.  The few option type plays we did run worked fairly well considering we don’t perfect execution and have no FB option to even fake or lead with.  

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, ColoradoHusk said:

This is going to be my last response to you because it just keeps going in circles and it's dumb. Big Ten defenses aren't going smaller, they are staying big while trying to find more speed. Shoving them around just because we "want to" doesn't automatically work.

Strange how other teams shove us around, and it's just a fact of life. Braelon Allen, anyone? Goodson?

 

But I say that we could do the same, and it's just completely out of the realm of possibility?

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

I want to run the ball.  That's obvious.  I like the Whip hire, but it's just not my style.  If we win, that's great. Regardless of pass guy, run guy or 50/50 guy, somethings needs to changes.  We are in year four and had the worst record in Frost's tenure with his own admitted "most talented team".  Four losing seasons.  Now the record for most one score losses in a single season.  For me, a team where the RB is a 1000 yard rusher is a start.  Same with not having the QB the leading rusher for 3 out of 4 years IIRC.  Our O has been AM.  The DC's, stop AM and win the game.  That's proven true season after season and game in and game out.  I'd prefer a QB who can run a few designed runs per games, but not a run first QB.  

 

I've beat the CC scheme to death, but McCall rushed 93 times. Averaging 7/game.  Unsure if this included scrambles.  And this in a perceived "triple option" offense.  WR over 1000 yards.  TE over 900.  RB over 1000 yrds, 2 over 500 yards....  McCall passed for almost 3000.  McCall at CC, roughly 60 throws less, but also over 2800 yards (AM above 2800).  Yes, lesser competition, but that O spread the ball around.  WR, TE, RB, QB (put less than AM).  McCall distributed the ball to his playmakers.  Something Whip is alleged to do very well. Maybe we see a merger of Frost and Whip and it starts to look like something CC runs.  

 

BUT then you get into the other issues, OL, ST, receivers not running correct routes, Joseph's comments about not practicing, penalties, lack of development etc.....Where do we start?  ST is probably the easiest. Average at best and we would have gone bowling every year IMO.  

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
16 minutes ago, lo country said:

I want to run the ball.  That's obvious.  I like the Whip hire, but it's just not my style.  If we win, that's great. Regardless of pass guy, run guy or 50/50 guy, somethings needs to changes.  We are in year four and had the worst record in Frost's tenure with his own admitted "most talented team".  Four losing seasons.  Now the record for most one score losses in a single season.  For me, a team where the RB is a 1000 yard rusher is a start.  Same with not having the QB the leading rusher for 3 out of 4 years IIRC.  Our O has been AM.  The DC's, stop AM and win the game.  That's proven true season after season and game in and game out.  I'd prefer a QB who can run a few designed runs per games, but not a run first QB.  

 

I've beat the CC scheme to death, but McCall rushed 93 times. Averaging 7/game.  Unsure if this included scrambles.  And this in a perceived "triple option" offense.  WR over 1000 yards.  TE over 900.  RB over 1000 yrds, 2 over 500 yards....  McCall passed for almost 3000.  McCall at CC, roughly 60 throws less, but also over 2800 yards (AM above 2800).  Yes, lesser competition, but that O spread the ball around.  WR, TE, RB, QB (put less than AM).  McCall distributed the ball to his playmakers.  Something Whip is alleged to do very well. Maybe we see a merger of Frost and Whip and it starts to look like something CC runs.  

 

BUT then you get into the other issues, OL, ST, receivers not running correct routes, Joseph's comments about not practicing, penalties, lack of development etc.....Where do we start?  ST is probably the easiest. Average at best and we would have gone bowling every year IMO.  

I would love to see something like what CC runs. It's different, unique, and the B1G wouldn't be used to it.

 

What I'm afraid we're going to get with Whipple is a lot of drop-backs, incompletes, 3rd and longs, sacks, picks, and punts. Yay.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Jeremy said:

I would love to see something like what CC runs. It's different, unique, and the B1G wouldn't be used to it.

 

What I'm afraid we're going to get with Whipple is a lot of drop-backs, incompletes, 3rd and longs, sacks, picks, and punts. Yay.

I think it's a great scheme.  Uses multiple weapons.  Maybe he runs what UGA did against UM.  Short quick passes to take away that UM pass rush.  Play calls that actually countered the D.  I am hoping Whip is smart enough to adjust the play calling to protect/assist and under performing OL.  Something Frost never seemed to do.

 

I'm with you in next year I see 5-7 as the ceiling.  I don't see this "easy" schedule some are.  The OOC games yes, but it's still the B1G.  We lose a lot on D which won't help.  Will possibly have a new QB that hasn't worked with the team at all, new center, scheme, coaching methods etc....I do not think this make or break for Frost though.  I think we see him in 2023 regardless of record.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
11 minutes ago, Cigarman said:

Over half of those (24) were by the qu

 

arterback 

But they're still runs. The point for the run the ball people, is that we do run the ball an overwhelming majority of the time. Scheme and run/pass ratio are not the problem. It's development and coaching, as it has been for a long time.

 

The run the ball crowd also wants to cherry pick stats for their narrative; and ignore the context of recruiting, transfers, and what was inherited. Frost started with nothing, we now have the talent, and conditioning to compete with anyone, but lack the coaching/development.

  • Plus1 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment

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...