Can Spartans stop Huskers run game?

[Jason Sitoke]

No, only Tim Beck can if he decides to take the ball out of Ameer's hands like he did against MacNeese State. This is a good test to see if we're going to stick with the identity we established the last two games, or if it was just fool's gold.

That's not what happened. Abdullah got 17 rushes for 54 yards. McNeese St. decided to dedicate all resources to stopping Ameer. The only mistake that was made by Beck, and was compounded by Armstrong making some bad reads, was trying to force Ameer down their throats instead of taking what was there. MSU might do the same thing, and Beck needs to keep his eyes open and exploit what the Spartan D is giving up.

Thanks for proving my point. He needs far more than 17 carries against Michigan State, regardless of what they're doing on defense. A stacked box isn't a good excuse to completely abandon the run game. It can be neutralized. Tim Beck just called a sh#t sandwich of a game and took Ameer out of the equation when he didn't need to.

Huh? So if we gave him 25 carries....at some point it was going to just start working because.......?

Beck has had his share of poorly called games, and this game had it's share of questionable moments....but failing to involve Ameer was not one of them.

 

[The Dude]

No, only Tim Beck can if he decides to take the ball out of Ameer's hands like he did against MacNeese State. This is a good test to see if we're going to stick with the identity we established the last two games, or if it was just fool's gold.

That's not what happened. Abdullah got 17 rushes for 54 yards. McNeese St. decided to dedicate all resources to stopping Ameer. The only mistake that was made by Beck, and was compounded by Armstrong making some bad reads, was trying to force Ameer down their throats instead of taking what was there. MSU might do the same thing, and Beck needs to keep his eyes open and exploit what the Spartan D is giving up.

Thanks for proving my point. He needs far more than 17 carries against Michigan State, regardless of what they're doing on defense. A stacked box isn't a good excuse to completely abandon the run game. It can be neutralized. Tim Beck just called a sh#t sandwich of a game and took Ameer out of the equation when he didn't need to.

Huh? So if we gave him 25 carries....at some point it was going to just start working because.......?

Because we have more running plays than he dialed up in that game.

 

[Jason Sitoke]

No, only Tim Beck can if he decides to take the ball out of Ameer's hands like he did against MacNeese State. This is a good test to see if we're going to stick with the identity we established the last two games, or if it was just fool's gold.

That's not what happened. Abdullah got 17 rushes for 54 yards. McNeese St. decided to dedicate all resources to stopping Ameer. The only mistake that was made by Beck, and was compounded by Armstrong making some bad reads, was trying to force Ameer down their throats instead of taking what was there. MSU might do the same thing, and Beck needs to keep his eyes open and exploit what the Spartan D is giving up.

Thanks for proving my point. He needs far more than 17 carries against Michigan State, regardless of what they're doing on defense. A stacked box isn't a good excuse to completely abandon the run game. It can be neutralized. Tim Beck just called a sh#t sandwich of a game and took Ameer out of the equation when he didn't need to.

Huh? So if we gave him 25 carries....at some point it was going to just start working because.......?

Because we have more running plays than he dialed up in that game.

Ok, but what specifically would you have liked to have seen called?

Personally, I think Armstrong made some bad reads on the option plays, and I would've liked to have seen some waggles or boot action with everyone keying on #8.....but I felt handing the ball off to Ameer and expecting him to navigate 8-9 guys was a little unfair.

 

[BigRedBuster]

Because we have more running plays than he dialed up in that game.

Ok, but what specifically would you have liked to have seen called?

Personally, I think Armstrong made some bad reads on the option plays, and I would've liked to have seen some waggles or boot action with everyone keying on #8.....but I felt handing the ball off to Ameer and expecting him to navigate 8-9 guys was a little unfair.

Actually, I think the biggest problem in that game was that the pass plays we did call were 30 yards down field instead of the intermediate routes that we saw against Fresno State. Yes, down field passes are good and they can work. However, late in the game when you need a score, you don't need to throw 3 straight bombs. Pass the ball 10-15 yards and move the chains. It seems they realized that and the passing game was different against Fresno. That then opened up the running game.

 

[Mavric]

Thanks for proving my point. He needs far more than 17 carries against Michigan State, regardless of what they're doing on defense. A stacked box isn't a good excuse to completely abandon the run game. It can be neutralized. Tim Beck just called a sh#t sandwich of a game and took Ameer out of the equation when he didn't need to.

Why would you keep doing something that is gaining three yards per play when your other options are gaining 7 and 8 yards per play?
And saying we totally abandoned the running game is laughable, even for hyperbole.

I didn't say to do what wasn't working. I said a stacked box can be neutralized (but we didn't even try), and Tim Beck called a sh#t sandwich of a game. How many carries did he get in the 2nd half?

You're contradicting youself. Running AA wasn't working - he was averaging 3.2 ypc. Then you ask why he wasn't getting more carries. That is exactly asking him to do what wasn't working.

 

[MichiganDad3]

If McNeese State can stop the running game, Michigan State can stop the running game. It's a strategy and also a risk.

If Ameer Abdullah gets 15 carries and keeps getting stuffed in the first half, ala McNeese State, do you want Tim Beck to keep doing the same thing in the second half?

I want to see us running the ball in the fourth quarter because it's working and because we're winning, but I expect to see multiple weapons used.

This is a big game for Ameer Abdullah, but it's also a huge stage for Tommy Armstrong. His desire to create his own big play can be an asset or a liability, and probably both. But I don't think he'll let a repeat of last year happen.

This is why I almost expect TA to get more rushing yards than AA. TA may have a career day running the ball if Sparty puts too much emphasis on AA.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

We ask Tim Beck to stick with what's working. The passing game is working better than the running game. So we demand Tim Beck stick with the running game.

Clear?

Honestly, a few more second half carries for Abdullah wouldn't have hurt against McNeese State, but abandoning the running game was not the problem.

And if I recall, a pass to Abdullah solved everything.

Interesting game, McNeese State. But maybe we should move on.

 

[admo]

That's not what happened. Abdullah got 17 rushes for 54 yards. McNeese St. decided to dedicate all resources to stopping Ameer. The only mistake that was made by Beck, and was compounded by Armstrong making some bad reads, was trying to force Ameer down their throats instead of taking what was there. MSU might do the same thing, and Beck needs to keep his eyes open and exploit what the Spartan D is giving up.

Thanks for proving my point. He needs far more than 17 carries against Michigan State, regardless of what they're doing on defense. A stacked box isn't a good excuse to completely abandon the run game. It can be neutralized. Tim Beck just called a sh#t sandwich of a game and took Ameer out of the equation when he didn't need to.

Huh? So if we gave him 25 carries....at some point it was going to just start working because.......?

Because we have more running plays than he dialed up in that game.

Ok, but what specifically would you have liked to have seen called?

Personally, I think Armstrong made some bad reads on the option plays, and I would've liked to have seen some waggles or boot action with everyone keying on #8.....but I felt handing the ball off to Ameer and expecting him to navigate 8-9 guys was a little unfair.

I don't want to go down the McNeese road again. There were some bad passes, questionable decisions, catchable passes that were not caught, and we only ran 64 plays. Yes there were some bad reads, but some of those were actually designed qb keeps. I remember Davison saying that specifically during the game. It was game two, we weren't sharp, the effort wasn't the best, and some of the play calling was questionable. Yet we survived. I think at that point in time we were still trying to figure some things out about our team, specifically our young QB.

 

[Jason Sitoke]

We ask Tim Beck to stick with what's working. The passing game is working better than the running game. So we demand Tim Beck stick with the running game.

Clear?

Honestly, a few more second half carries for Abdullah wouldn't have hurt against McNeese State, but abandoning the running game was not the problem.

And if I recall, a pass to Abdullah solved everything.

Interesting game, McNeese State. But maybe we should move on.

Not trying to necessarily become a revisionist here, but I think many of us have conveyed what I would consider fair criticism of our coaches and players. I don't believe the criticism here of Beck is fair, and while he might have deserved second guess work, throwing out the tired old 'we abandoned the run game' adage at every turn isn't very useful.

We are a fan forum, which means we're allowed our fair share of bitching, whining, and moaning at the coaching staff, but I think this forum is a bit more sophisticated than most that I've seen....and thusly, assertions should be challenged if they don't seem to hold water.

 

[dave]

So, back to the topic of Michigan State stopping the run game.... (You guys should go talk McNeese on another thread, I recall several of them...)

I was looking at 2014 stats this morning and saw that Michigan State's defense has seen the likes of:

#40 Rushing Offense - Oregon

#74 Rushing Offense - Wyoming

#99 Rushing Offense - Eastern Michigan

FCS team worse than McNeese State - Jacksonville State

--------------

NOW, in efforts to not have a log in my own eye, our awesome rushing offense hasn't exactly played the best rushing defenses either, but I thought it interesting, nonetheless. (#119 Fl At, FCS McNeese, #123 Fresno, #65 Miami, #122 Illini) ... addition - ouch, that was worse than I thought it was going to be. However, how much of Nebraska running all over those teams makes their stats drop?

 

[The Dude]

Ok, but what specifically would you have liked to have seen called?

Personally, I think Armstrong made some bad reads on the option plays, and I would've liked to have seen some waggles or boot action with everyone keying on #8.....but I felt handing the ball off to Ameer and expecting him to navigate 8-9 guys was a little unfair.

The Annexation of Puerto Rico -or- toss sweeps w/ pulling guards. I agree the basic inside/outside zone stuff wasn't working well.

 

[The Dude]

Thanks for proving my point. He needs far more than 17 carries against Michigan State, regardless of what they're doing on defense. A stacked box isn't a good excuse to completely abandon the run game. It can be neutralized. Tim Beck just called a sh#t sandwich of a game and took Ameer out of the equation when he didn't need to.

Why would you keep doing something that is gaining three yards per play when your other options are gaining 7 and 8 yards per play?
And saying we totally abandoned the running game is laughable, even for hyperbole.

I didn't say to do what wasn't working. I said a stacked box can be neutralized (but we didn't even try), and Tim Beck called a sh#t sandwich of a game. How many carries did he get in the 2nd half?

You're contradicting youself. Running AA wasn't working - he was averaging 3.2 ypc. Then you ask why he wasn't getting more carries. That is exactly asking him to do what wasn't working.

Nah. I think we're on different wavelengths here.

 

[Jason Sitoke]

So, back to the topic of Michigan State stopping the run game.... (You guys should go talk McNeese on another thread, I recall several of them...)

I was looking at 2014 stats this morning and saw that Michigan State's defense has seen the likes of:

#40 Rushing Offense - Miami

#74 Rushing Offense - Wyoming

#99 Rushing Offense - Eastern Michigan

FCS team worse than McNeese State - Jacksonville State

--------------

NOW, in efforts to not have a log in my own eye, our awesome rushing offense hasn't exactly played the best rushing defenses either, but I thought it interesting, nonetheless. (#119 Fl At, FCS McNeese, #123 Fresno, #65 Miami, #122 Illini) ... addition - ouch, that was worse than I thought it was going to be. However, how much of Nebraska running all over those teams makes their stats drop?

I don't believe MSU has played Miami. They did play Oregon.

 

[HUSKER FREAK]

Against McNeese St. Our Oline was the problem and it was more because of the scheme and unwillingness to change to pick everyone up. It will be interesting for sure. I worry more about Cross in bad weather than Ameer. AA is very disciplined this year even more so than last year. Cross is much much better than last year as well, but he fail to cover up the ball ALOT and I am surprised he hasn't fumbled more. I think we will get our yards on the ground against them, and we will have to pass well also. But, I agree It will be up to the Defense to win this game. We have to be disciplined and quick to getting that first step to be able to stop them.

 

[dave]

I don't believe MSU has played Miami. They did play Oregon.

Whoops. Right, typo. #40 was Oregon. Post edited.