Langsdorf Mulling Options for 2016 Offense
- Thread starter Mavric
- Start date
Would agree more with this. The receivers are known commodities. Our receiving corps is getting recognition and the RB's are not. No one, IMO, from the RB's has separated himself from the rest. There is tons of potential from them, but not the same type of "results" the receivers have shown.
I do think that Langs realizes we need to make teams fear the passing game. Without the threat of an air attack, teams will continue to do what they have done for years. Stack the box, stuff the run and let us shoot ourselves in the foot with the passing attack. TA has beaten teams through the air, mostly on the deep ball. Unfortunately, many of these contributed to the INT's. We need to find a way to not make our passing game boom or bust, TD or INT.
I like the idea of PA. IMO, that is where TA is his best. Mobile, option to run and gets our receivers in single coverage as the safety will crash down with our propensity to run. TA starts checking down more (safer passes IMO) that should also open up the passing game to what should be more favorable routes.
I like the fact that Langs is mentioning how many threats we have on offense. If TA can cut the INT's and our RB's (or RB) can become the beast we need, it should be an extremely potent attack.
Redux
Assistant Coach
Or he just listed of the receiving corp because it's harder getting them the ball than the guys that get handed the ball or the guy that gets the ball snapped to him.
We know they want to pass more moving forward, hardly a revelation.
84HuskerLaw
All-Conference
Unfortunately the ideal game plan is to have a ball control, grind em out run game, much like the bowl game vs. UCLA with about double the passing mixed in there to score about 3 more TDS. You want about 300 rushing and 200 passing yards 'ideally' but we are really, talent wise, I think more suited to 300 pass and 200 run. That is OK but our time of possession will drop considerably. This in turn will give our opponents more time to work against the defense.
In many ways we have the potential to be rather explosive on offense, scoring in around 6 or 8 plays, instead of 12 or 14. Of course, many would argue that scoring quickly and often and running up 50 plus a game is 'the ideal'. But, really winning about 42 to 7 is about as ideal as it can be. The less you let the opponent hold the ball and run plays, the less chance you have to lose as of course if your opponent doesn't score, you can't lose.
We have an excellent (maybe 'great' by Husker standards) squadron of receivers in the "air force". We have a good platoon of soldiers in the army. You can score many points from the air but to win the war you must take ground and control and that is done at the line of scrimmage and in the backfield. The question is how best can we take advantage of our QB's skills (his biggest and best attribute by far is athleticism as a physically gifted player with great quickness, speed, arm and length strength, determination, toughness and loads of valuable experience. Frankly, Tommy Armstrong has all the makings of a GREAT quarterback that needs to do two basic things better as a quarterback consistently - choose the right receiver by making the right reads of coverages and coverage AND improving his footwork when in the pocket. He really handles the ball well and makes few errors in handoffs, pitches, fumbles, etc. Practice, maturity, confidence, study and better instruction from his coaches.
There is every reason to believe a great group of experienced, quick, fairly sure handed receivers at every conceivable position coupled with a strong armed, 4 year battle tested QB in the second full year of the offensive system should be amongst the best in the country!
We know Ozigbo and Newby have solid ball carrier abilities and can be a good 'one-two' punch and from reports Wilbon is maybe the best all purpose combination of the other two. We have shown a willingness to run any of our backs in any down and distance and play type situation and reports say all are capable as receivers and able blockers, size and technique wise. We always seem to plug in another tough stalky built fullback that will pop a few surpises up the middle. Jano certainly showed that and I think Riley and Co will want to find more opportunities for the "big boppers" as indicated by Armstrong's citing of more FB passing work.
I think we should have the best offense the Huskers have fielded in many years PROVIDED the O linemen do their part. We saw the strength and power (the push) starting to emerge in the bowl game. There is every reason to expect the overall strength of these guys should be improved with a year of Boyd Epley training them. Yes, we replace some starters but our seconds and thirds were pretty much on a par with the starters in my view. They should be better with age, maturity and development.
The defense has the potential but may need to rely on the offense to outscore people in the first month or so but I expect our back 7 to be quite good. We may be smaller but quicker and maybe able to pass rush better and get to the QB more. We could be susceptible to power runs but maybe we avoid that early on and get better by the time we hit the meat of the Big Ten schedule.
In many ways we have the potential to be rather explosive on offense, scoring in around 6 or 8 plays, instead of 12 or 14. Of course, many would argue that scoring quickly and often and running up 50 plus a game is 'the ideal'. But, really winning about 42 to 7 is about as ideal as it can be. The less you let the opponent hold the ball and run plays, the less chance you have to lose as of course if your opponent doesn't score, you can't lose.
We have an excellent (maybe 'great' by Husker standards) squadron of receivers in the "air force". We have a good platoon of soldiers in the army. You can score many points from the air but to win the war you must take ground and control and that is done at the line of scrimmage and in the backfield. The question is how best can we take advantage of our QB's skills (his biggest and best attribute by far is athleticism as a physically gifted player with great quickness, speed, arm and length strength, determination, toughness and loads of valuable experience. Frankly, Tommy Armstrong has all the makings of a GREAT quarterback that needs to do two basic things better as a quarterback consistently - choose the right receiver by making the right reads of coverages and coverage AND improving his footwork when in the pocket. He really handles the ball well and makes few errors in handoffs, pitches, fumbles, etc. Practice, maturity, confidence, study and better instruction from his coaches.
There is every reason to believe a great group of experienced, quick, fairly sure handed receivers at every conceivable position coupled with a strong armed, 4 year battle tested QB in the second full year of the offensive system should be amongst the best in the country!
We know Ozigbo and Newby have solid ball carrier abilities and can be a good 'one-two' punch and from reports Wilbon is maybe the best all purpose combination of the other two. We have shown a willingness to run any of our backs in any down and distance and play type situation and reports say all are capable as receivers and able blockers, size and technique wise. We always seem to plug in another tough stalky built fullback that will pop a few surpises up the middle. Jano certainly showed that and I think Riley and Co will want to find more opportunities for the "big boppers" as indicated by Armstrong's citing of more FB passing work.
I think we should have the best offense the Huskers have fielded in many years PROVIDED the O linemen do their part. We saw the strength and power (the push) starting to emerge in the bowl game. There is every reason to expect the overall strength of these guys should be improved with a year of Boyd Epley training them. Yes, we replace some starters but our seconds and thirds were pretty much on a par with the starters in my view. They should be better with age, maturity and development.
The defense has the potential but may need to rely on the offense to outscore people in the first month or so but I expect our back 7 to be quite good. We may be smaller but quicker and maybe able to pass rush better and get to the QB more. We could be susceptible to power runs but maybe we avoid that early on and get better by the time we hit the meat of the Big Ten schedule.
Redux
Assistant Coach
Not all teams are as terrible at stopping the run....most teams aren't as bad as 2015 UCLA.
Treand3
All-Conference
I think they'll be suspect this year too, but they indeed were terrible.
Last edited by a moderator:
GSG
Assistant Coach
Every game should start out with the UCLA gameplan. Force the other team to stop the running game. Then you can bust them with play action passes. Maybe if we had stuck with it versus Purdue we wouldn't be talking about it being one of the worst losses in school history.
huKSer
All-American
+1 for the analysis
+1 for discovering paragraphs
Its amazing to see 84HuskerLaw growing up right in front of us
