Offensive Line, 4th Quarter

B

Born N Bled Red

All-Conference
I was reading this article, and it got me thinking. Bo, for all the issues (Please don't turn this into a pro- Bo, anti-Bo thread like so many others) could close out a close game with the running game. His teams always seemed to be able to burn up a fourth quarter when we had a lead with a steady dose of Ameer, Rex, or Roy. I know those three backs were amazing, but the offensive line had to have something left in the tank to make it happen.

In this article, Hank says he should have put Stoltenberg in earlier last week, because he was fresh and could give us an extra something. This is directly in contrast with what Cavanaugh does with the o-line. So my question, is the lack of rotation on the offensive line, which Beck and Pelini employed and Cavanaugh does not, the reason we can't run out the clock with the running game? Is it talent? Or the coordinator just not trusting the run game?

If you ask me, having a fresh-ish O-line in the fourth makes sense, and would be a huge advantage, but would require considerable rotation, which may stunt group cohesiveness.

 
Playing every snap is too much for the OL. An equal rotation isn't needed, but at least give the 2nd string a couple of series. We also need to build depth for next year or in case of injury. I also agree that it would help in the 4th quarter.

 
Our line was good late in games under Bo. I think it's pretty flexible stretching trying to say otherwise. Remember 2012 Penn State? We ran that little power toss play like 27 times.

I don't understand Cavanaugh's philosophy, at least not throughout the course of an entire season, but I'm sure there is some kind of reason for it. Maybe he'll start changing things now that we're getting into the meat of the season - seems like the best benefit of keeping all your starters on the line in all the time is chemistry, which I understand, but how much extra chemistry is going to be developed after 7 games than there was after 4?

 
MichiganDad3 said:
Playing every snap is too much for the OL. An equal rotation isn't needed, but at least give the 2nd string a couple of series. We also need to build depth for next year or in case of injury. I also agree that it would help in the 4th quarter.
Click to expand...
I didn't want to criticize Coach Cav for this, but looking at the philosophy, it just doesn't make any sense.

1) Starters aren't getting any rest during games, and that could lead to fatigue and/or injury

2) Backups aren't getting any in-game snaps, so they are less prepared if there is an injury to a 1st stringer

3) Backups aren't allowed to prove themselves in games, so there is no pressure for the starters, as long as they are doing good enough in practice

4) What is the need to carry 16 scholarship linemen if only 5 are going to play during a game?

 
MichiganDad3 said:
Playing every snap is too much for the OL. An equal rotation isn't needed, but at least give the 2nd string a couple of series. We also need to build depth for next year or in case of injury. I also agree that it would help in the 4th quarter.
Click to expand...
I see what you are saying and I would like to see the back ups get a series or 2 in a game in the second quarter or so. But, didn't our offense go on about a 6 minute drive at the end of the game that ended in a blocked FG basically leaving S. Miss with very little time left?

It is a philosophy that actually most offensive line coaches share that they go with the best five. It is not uncommon at all. We are as Nebraska fans used to seeing some rotating especially when we were playing an inferior opponent from back in the Tenepor/Young days of coaching. But with that said even they weren't rotating 0-linemen when the game was close.

Playing D-line is actually more taxing than 0-line. It is more attacking so it does require more rotation plus they don't work as much as a team so timing is not as crucial.

I am not saying you have to like what he is doing with our O-line I am just stating why he is doing it.

I am actually amazed that at least one of them hasn't gotten dinged a little and been out at least a series. Knock on Wood

 
I don't think there's enough evidence to support a conclusion right now.

As far as our running game goes in general, I think the RBs are limiting it more than the OL. Too many openings are being missed.

 
Yeah, I'm usually in favor of substituting liberally on both O-line and D-line. But maybe Cavanaugh doesn't have the luxury of being able to sub as much as Barney and Garrison did last year. Last year's O-line was heavy with seniors and juniors. It's a less experienced group this year. Only Alex Lewis and former walk-on Dylan Utter were starters last year. But Cavanaugh did play Stoltenburg in the South 'Bama game--the only game we've had that hasn't been close.

 
Teams will always attempt to slow down the running game and force Tommy (or Taylor, Kellogg, Zach Lee) to beat them throwing. It's a crap shoot for them. Sometimes they frustrate the running game, and other times we just had more talent to move the ball far enough, again and again. Which tells me that the talent and skill in the Husker running game is not up to preferred standard. That's lineman and back(s) together. I think it's a reach to think the lineman are gassed as a reason.

Run game is just not good enough yet to beat a stacked or attacking run defense. Hopefully we will get there soon.

 
This is so dumb. If NFL lineman can go 16-20 games without rotating, 12 games shouldn't be inconceivable.

 
OL rotation is uncommon in the NFL, though it may become a new trend. Is it common in college football?

Perhaps if the available players made it a necessity, and perhaps if the OL does poorly they'll consider it. Seemed to be doing OK in the 4th quarter in that Miami heat, though.

 
The Dude said:
This is so dumb. If NFL lineman can go 16-20 games without rotating, 12 games shouldn't be inconceivable.
Click to expand...
Yup. It's a stupid topic we fans have dug deep to b!^@h about because some of you b!^@h about everything. I've watched football on every level for a long time and this is how it is done almost everywhere. If Pelini and staff did do a lot of rotating, you'd think we fans would not want to see it anymore considering all the inconsistency we've seen up front.

You don't constantly rotate offensive linemen. Maybe a guy needs to tap for a few plays, but that should be it. Maybe Cav thinks these guys need to get their asses in shape a little bit. I've seen a few of our guys around here lately who don't look like football players, they look like professional eaters.

I'd say the offensive line is looking like they are coming together a little bit and actually having some spots in games where they look very good. The run blocking is still a bit of a work in progress but this pass blocking seems far better than it has been in awhile.

So if it's going better, and the players themselves aren't bitching about it, then maybe we ought to stop? Just a thought.

 
zoogs said:
OL rotation is uncommon in the NFL, though it may become a new trend. Is it common in college football?

Perhaps if the available players made it a necessity, and perhaps if the OL does poorly they'll consider it. Seemed to be doing OK in the 4th quarter in that Miami heat, though.
Click to expand...
OL rotation is uncommon in the NFL because NFL teams generally carry only 7 or 8 o-linemen on their 45 man game roster.

In college, there are probably twice as many o-linemen suited up on a given gameday (yes, it is fewer for road games).

 
I'd be curious to know how much Pelini and his staff actually rotated linemen anyways. Was it really that much?

 
True2tRA said:
The Dude said:
This is so dumb. If NFL lineman can go 16-20 games without rotating, 12 games shouldn't be inconceivable.
Click to expand...
Yup. It's a stupid topic we fans have dug deep to b!^@h about because some of you b!^@h about everything. I've watched football on every level for a long time and this is how it is done almost everywhere. If Pelini and staff did do a lot of rotating, you'd think we fans would not want to see it anymore considering all the inconsistency we've seen up front.

You don't constantly rotate offensive linemen. Maybe a guy needs to tap for a few plays, but that should be it. Maybe Cav thinks these guys need to get their asses in shape a little bit. I've seen a few of our guys around here lately who don't look like football players, they look like professional eaters.

I'd say the offensive line is looking like they are coming together a little bit and actually having some spots in games where they look very good. The run blocking is still a bit of a work in progress but this pass blocking seems far better than it has been in awhile.

So if it's going better, and the players themselves aren't bitching about it, then maybe we ought to stop? Just a thought.
Click to expand...
I am sure the starters are happy with it, because they aren't the ones sitting on the bench. Yes, the backups could "work harder" to get the starting job and then they get to play, but to me the luxury of a college roster allows for more rotations and breathers for the #1 guys.

 
"Breathers"? They blocking half the game and sitting on the bench the other half. It's not like they're out there running routes.

This is so dumb.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top