McKewon: Are We Overestimating Our Ability to Run the Ball

[True2tRA]

.

What team in the country just runs the ball? No team can just run the ball. This is such a bullsh#t argument. He acts as if he is influencing the coaches to pass the ball a bit.

Beck has already said he wants balance. Beck has already shown he is committed to the passing game, even with a qB that left much to be desired in that aspect, we passed.

We will pass the ball to back defenses off our run game just like every other team in the entire freaking history of football. I don't get this debate at all. Why are we acting as if we have no passing game now. Why do we have to get creative to back them off of us? It's called a passing game. We will have one obviously. Play action pass. Its been a part of the game for years. Or to hell with play action, let's sling it all over. We tried it with Taylor. Do we really believe Tommy is less capable in the passing game than Taylor was? If so, y'all are on some of that good sh#t.

We have more passing game now, you all just don't know it yet. We will run, and we will pass. But Nebraska at this point, all circumstances accounted for, should be a run first team until forced otherwise. If someone forces us to throw 35-40 times a game, we have shown the willingness to do so. We did it with Taylor Martinez, why wouldnt we with Armstrong.

MSU and Georgia didn't stop Abdullah. Nobody on the schedule this year scares me out if the run game and they shouldn't ever scare Beck away from it. He abandoned it too quickly sometimes. Still, if we are forced to pass, we pass.

He acts as if he foreshadowing or predicting. the coaches have already told us. They've already said they want balance. I think Beck has demonstrated as much. You set up the pass, with the run, you set up the run with the pass. We have a senior Heisman candidate at RB, so let's start with him and go from there.

Armstrong is gonna light it up when we need him and this is all going to go away,

 

[Mierin]

Do we really believe Tommy is less capable in the passing game than Taylor was? If so, y'all are on some of that good sh#t.

It's too soon to know, but people who think he's less capable than Martinez are not "high."

Martinez made 59.2% of his passes and a 10-7 TD-INT ratio during his freshman year.

Armstrong made 51.9% of his passes and a 9-8 TD-INT ratio during his freshman year.

It can be argued that Martinez got high percentages vs cupcakes, and Armstrong didn't play against as many cupcakes because he wasn't starting in the earlier games.

Anyhow, I don't care if Armstrong isn't as good of a thrower if the team is in the top 50 for turnover margin.

 

[True2tRA]

Do we really believe Tommy is less capable in the passing game than Taylor was? If so, y'all are on some of that good sh#t.

It's too soon to know, but people who think he's less capable than Martinez are not "high."

Martinez made 59.2% of his passes and a 10-7 TD-INT ratio during his freshman year.

Armstrong made 51.9% of his passes and a 9-8 TD-INT ratio during his freshman year.

It can be argued that Martinez got high percentages vs cupcakes, and Armstrong didn't play against as many cupcakes because he wasn't starting in the earlier games.

Anyhow, I don't care if Armstrong isn't as good of a thrower if the team is in the top 50 for turnover margin.

I agree.

But people need to stop acting like we can't have both.

 

[The King]

Didn't really read the article, but lets see if I can counter most of his points:

what

Didn't read the entire article, read peoples comments above me that I would assume were related to the points made by the author and countered them.

what

 

[The King]

Do we really believe Tommy is less capable in the passing game than Taylor was? If so, y'all are on some of that good sh#t.

It's too soon to know, but people who think he's less capable than Martinez are not "high."

Martinez made 59.2% of his passes and a 10-7 TD-INT ratio during his freshman year.

Armstrong made 51.9% of his passes and a 9-8 TD-INT ratio during his freshman year.

It can be argued that Martinez got high percentages vs cupcakes, and Armstrong didn't play against as many cupcakes because he wasn't starting in the earlier games.

Anyhow, I don't care if Armstrong isn't as good of a thrower if the team is in the top 50 for turnover margin.

I agree.

But people need to stop acting like we can't have both.

I'd be surprised if Tommy wasn't at least a little more accurate considering his knee is 95-100% instead of 75% or so.

 

[True2tRA]

Do we really believe Tommy is less capable in the passing game than Taylor was? If so, y'all are on some of that good sh#t.

It's too soon to know, but people who think he's less capable than Martinez are not "high."

Martinez made 59.2% of his passes and a 10-7 TD-INT ratio during his freshman year.

Armstrong made 51.9% of his passes and a 9-8 TD-INT ratio during his freshman year.

It can be argued that Martinez got high percentages vs cupcakes, and Armstrong didn't play against as many cupcakes because he wasn't starting in the earlier games.

Anyhow, I don't care if Armstrong isn't as good of a thrower if the team is in the top 50 for turnover margin.

I agree.

But people need to stop acting like we can't have both.

I'd be surprised if Tommy wasn't at least a little more accurate considering his knee is 95-100% instead of 75% or so.

...the fact that he's not a freshman and he's now actually played and practiced with his WR's, .....that usually helps.

Martinez's freshman season and Tommy's shouldn't really be compared. It's an unfair comparison.

Timing and familiarity with the offense, with his WR's, and with the speed of the game is all huge, HUGE for a QB. Now if he improves on reading a defense and making the correct audibles, I would expect a huge increase in production and a large decrease in turnovers.

 

[tschu]

Didn't really read the article, but lets see if I can counter most of his points:

what

Didn't read the entire article, read peoples comments above me that I would assume were related to the points made by the author and countered them.

what

Seems like reading the article would be a prerequisite, but guess not

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Saw a response to Sam on Twitter, was in the car and didn't have a chance to save it. Anyway, they pointed out that if you counted sacks as pass attempts (which they do in NFL but for some reason college has always counted them as runs), we were actually a few yards better per carry over the season and about 1 for the 8 games he specifically targeted.

This one?

Retweeted by Samuel McKewon

Brandon Vogel @brandonlvogel · 5h
@swmckewonowh Count sacks as pass plays, which they are, & NU's YPC was 3.7% better than average for all of 2013.

then wouldn't you want to go back and count all the rest of the teams sacks as pass plays - so ultimately we end up back in the same position? We were top 30ish in sacks allowed if I remember right, so it might actually get worse.

Not every sack is a 5 yard loss for every team.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Offensive Coordinator has to take some heat here. This is bad. It has been bad. We need to become a more balanced attack to keep defenses on their heels. We need better schemes against top strong opponents.

1) I think we are going for balance.

2) Maybe not better schemes, but better...execution?

 

[knapplc]

All Sam is trying to say here, I think, is we can't *just* run the ball. He's explaining why Beck will have to be creative, why we'll need to throw or option or do other things to set up our run game.

Except the injuries are the elephant in the room, and Sam doesn't address that at all. Aside from a cursory mention of Martinez' injury, Sam says nothing about the loss of key components of that offensive line throughout the season. We lost the best O Lineman on our team during the stretch Sam wants to bemoan, and he doesn't even mention the guy by name. That's where the analysis falls short.

Because the guys we got coming back my not be household names, they may not be pre-season All-American candidates, but they actually got quite a bit of experience last year. And saying that we can't hang our hat on that running game, when we had a 1,600-yard rusher despite a patchwork offensive line and no QB rush threat, leaves out too much of the variables we faced last year (and will see this year) to make a compelling argument.

If we remain healthy across the line, and if Ameer remains healthy, he'll get another 1,500 yards easily, and that's not even presuming Armstrong begins to terrify opponents like Martinez did. Even if Tommy is just OK, but the line stays healthy and Ameer doesn't run out of gas, we'll be fine.

Sam is saying Husker Fan is putting too much stock into one game (Sparty). The fact is, Sam is putting far too little stock into almost every single other factor. All things considered, I'll hang my hat on Ameer, not on Sam's stats.

 

[True2tRA]

Ameer Abdullah will end his career as No. 2 on the all time career rushing list behind Mike Rozier and ahead of Ahman Green.

Any discussion of our run game not being up to par needs to cease.

 

[Rocketsocks]

Do they even keep track of pancake blocks anymore? They need to do that.

 

[RedDenver]

Ameer Abdullah will end his career as No. 2 on the all time career rushing list behind Mike Rozier and ahead of Ahman Green.

Any discussion of our run game not being up to par needs to cease.

I don't think anyone is saying the running game won't be good. The question is, "How good?" Sam's article is saying that it won't be so good that we'll just run over everyone and rarely need to pass - or at least that's what I took from it.

UCLA was the only good team we played early, and I don't remember us even coming close to man-handing them up front. And that was before any OL were hurt (I think Spencer was the first during the Purdue game). Does anyone really think we'll have the kind of talent at OL to be able to run over the better teams on the schedule?

 

[True2tRA]

Ameer Abdullah will end his career as No. 2 on the all time career rushing list behind Mike Rozier and ahead of Ahman Green.

Any discussion of our run game not being up to par needs to cease.

I don't think anyone is saying the running game won't be good. The question is, "How good?" Sam's article is saying that it won't be so good that we'll just run over everyone and rarely need to pass - or at least that's what I took from it.
UCLA was the only good team we played early, and I don't remember us even coming close to man-handing them up front. And that was before any OL were hurt (I think Spencer was the first during the Purdue game). Does anyone really think we'll have the kind of talent at OL to be able to run over the better teams on the schedule?

You might be right, but then I guess i don't get the rocket science behind this or the need to write a full article about it. Isn't this the most no brainer thing ever? Not to be too all over the guys writing because I think he does a fine job, but this article you're telling me is basically saying this: Nebraska can run the ball pretty well, but sometimes they will have to pass.

No kidding. Hmm....

Again, I've said this before but I hate the percentage discussion if run/pass. It's about being effective when you pass. If Nebraska runs the ball 40 times, and throws the ball 10 times, but each of those ten times is a completion and effectively moves the chains, it will make the defense have to be honest. The main thing for me right now is that all evidence supports Nebraska at least being committed to the run game first and building it's passing attack off the run.

 

[Glendower]

I think one of the biggest issues with our offense is lack of identity. What is the one thing you do well? You need 5 yards, what is the play that almost always gets it? We haven't really had that under Beck. You just keep hearing that we want to be multiple. Multiple. Jack of all trades, master of none.

See I think McKewon's excellent analysis suggests the exact opposite. The dominant teams, which presumably have this offensive "identity" we crave, are efficient at both running and passing the ball. When it's 3rd and 5 they don't have one play that almost always gets it. They have a few to choose from, because every defense has film of every game. Their offensive success isn't from creating an identity, unless that identity is good athletes who are mentally prepared and able to execute a diverse play selection. The Top 10 is full of teams who are master of all trades. That's where excellence comes from.

I think we have a promising offense and should have a solid running game. McKewon's point seems to be that memories of Nebraska's impressive running attack are pretty selective, and dreams of just ramming Abdullah down the opponent's throat might be misguided.

THANK YOU! I am so sick of this non-specific language that almost seems to suggest some kind of magical thinking. That if the team had "identity" then everything would be fine... or even better. I have never heard a good explanation of what "identity" means in this context or exactly how having it would make things better. It seems, at best, to be a stand in for "consistency," but even that is a little vague. It has become one of those words that is said and repeated enough that it garners and air of substance, but it really doesn't actually even begin to suggest what should be done. (Imagine that if you were at work and your boss came in and said that unless you developed an identity you'd be fired.)

Besides, the way the huskers played for the last several years IS part of their identity. Being inconsistent, having constantly shifting strengths and weaknesses, and so on can be a part of an identity. The idea that they don't have one at all is absurd from the start. They just don't have an identity that people would like them to have.