Offensive Line, 4th Quarter

[True2tRA]

I like the idea of getting ahead by enough points and then you can have a whole new crew come in and get some reps.

 

[wanderful]

I'm on board with starters playing every snap until garbage time. Toughen them up, get them in better shape, help them gel as a group.

What did TO do?

 

[84HuskerLaw]

My recollection is that Tenopir and company regularly liked to substitute and in the peak glory days, we freely substituted the first string line for the seconds, often for couple series in the first half of games. Even in times when things may or may not be under 'control'. There really should be some substitutions in order to develop a good chemistry among a groups of 7 or 8 or even 9 linemen. At any moment injuries happen. It is important to have back ups ready to be starters. Gambling that guys are going to make it through the season without a miss are simply foolish in my view. Additionally, we need to develop back ups for future years. One will never get valuable in game experience if they don't play. It would be great to give the seconds and thirds two or three series in the late 3rd and 4th quarters but we are virtually NEVER in control of the game sufficiently anymore to trust that they can get the job done. Once upon a time, we could do this. This is one of the primary contributors (besides poor recruiting) to the decline of Husker football from truly elite to above average status (failure to develop depth in the back ups and youngers guys). We don't want to be come like many teams that see graduation losses as so substantial that the program suffers roller coaster results of 10 wins followed by 5 or 6 wins followed by 8 or 9 wins and then 6 again.

 

[84HuskerLaw]

There is a major difference between college and NFL approaches to playing time for back ups. In the NFL, you truly expect to have linemen play for as long as 8 or 10 years. Obviously, in college, it typically takes 2 years of weight gain, strength and skill development to be D-1 calibler skill and size wise. That only leaves a couple seasons to major contribution and then graduation. Thus, the saying "reload vs. rebuild") in college. In the pros, many linemen go for careers. They are physically ready to play when they are drafted. It is not like they will need several years of development and coaching up to learn how. So comparing what the NFL does vs. college needs to be carefully differentiated.

 

[The Dude]

I don't believe it's the norm to rotate offensive lineman even in college football. The NFL example simply demonstrates that it's not necessary, even in a considerably longer season.

I also don't believe that they can be physically ready to play full games in high school and the NFL, but not in college. That idea just seems really silly. If they can go up against guys like JJ Watt and Ndamukong Suh week in and week out when they're in their early 30s, they can go up against college guys in their early 20s.

 

[Kernal]

I'm ok with keeping the starters in. I believe it will help the group function better as a unit and get the non-starters working harder to try to get a starting spot. It's a little bit different approach but let's face it, the method from the past few years of rotating lots of guys in didn't exactly reproduce the pipeline. There was a new criticism every week about the O-line. At least Cavanaugh is trying something different, and it's probably something he discussed with Tenopir.

 

[True2tRA]

I gotta imagine that the five guys behind this starting five are practicing together and getting pretty good as a group too. That can't be a bad thing.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

I gotta imagine that the five guys behind this starting five are practicing together and getting pretty good as a group too. That can't be a bad thing.

But if 1 or 2 starters get injured, they aren't going to replace the whole starting line.
I think most people are saying that there are worthy candidates to come in and play a few plays or a series, and give the starters a breather. Plus, watching from the sidelines is a good way for guys to observe the defense.

 

[HuskerNBigD]

I gotta imagine that the five guys behind this starting five are practicing together and getting pretty good as a group too. That can't be a bad thing.

But if 1 or 2 starters get injured, they aren't going to replace the whole starting line.I think most people are saying that there are worthy candidates to come in and play a few plays or a series, and give the starters a breather. Plus, watching from the sidelines is a good way for guys to observe the defense.

Have we really been in a position this year to let starters "rest", or sub out? Other than the USA game, not really. It's a great philosophy to let the 2nd string get mop up duty, but if we're fighting for a win most of the game - I want the best guys out there.

 

[huskerhill]

I gotta imagine that the five guys behind this starting five are practicing together and getting pretty good as a group too. That can't be a bad thing.

But if 1 or 2 starters get injured, they aren't going to replace the whole starting line.

I think most people are saying that there are worthy candidates to come in and play a few plays or a series, and give the starters a breather. Plus, watching from the sidelines is a good way for guys to observe the defense.

Based on what? Recruiting rankings? I am guessing the people at practice probably have a better idea of who is worthy of PT

 

[ColoradoHusk]

I gotta imagine that the five guys behind this starting five are practicing together and getting pretty good as a group too. That can't be a bad thing.

But if 1 or 2 starters get injured, they aren't going to replace the whole starting line.
I think most people are saying that there are worthy candidates to come in and play a few plays or a series, and give the starters a breather. Plus, watching from the sidelines is a good way for guys to observe the defense.

Based on what? Recruiting rankings? I am guessing the people at practice probably have a better idea of who is worthy of PT

I'm not basing my opinion on anything. I just find it odd that the coaches will rotate guys in at RB, WR, TE but not the o-line. Yes, those guys aren't doing the physical running that the skill positions are, but they are involved in "man to man" combat every play, which has to be tiring.
We heard a lot of good things about Foster in fall camp, but he can't sniff the field because Cav doesn't do any substitution.

 

[huskerhill]

I gotta imagine that the five guys behind this starting five are practicing together and getting pretty good as a group too. That can't be a bad thing.

But if 1 or 2 starters get injured, they aren't going to replace the whole starting line.
I think most people are saying that there are worthy candidates to come in and play a few plays or a series, and give the starters a breather. Plus, watching from the sidelines is a good way for guys to observe the defense.

Based on what? Recruiting rankings? I am guessing the people at practice probably have a better idea of who is worthy of PT

I'm not basing my opinion on anything. I just find it odd that the coaches will rotate guys in at RB, WR, TE but not the o-line. Yes, those guys aren't doing the physical running that the skill positions are, but they are involved in "man to man" combat every play, which has to be tiring.
We heard a lot of good things about Foster in fall camp, but he can't sniff the field because Cav doesn't do any substitution.

Should TA be subbed when he's winded? Have the safeties been a part of a regular rotation? I just don't get why Cav is being questioned and not other position coaches

 

[Hunter94]

if you want to develop depth, you gotta play your second string guys.......before they HAVE TO PLAY!

 

[ColoradoHusk]

I gotta imagine that the five guys behind this starting five are practicing together and getting pretty good as a group too. That can't be a bad thing.

But if 1 or 2 starters get injured, they aren't going to replace the whole starting line.
I think most people are saying that there are worthy candidates to come in and play a few plays or a series, and give the starters a breather. Plus, watching from the sidelines is a good way for guys to observe the defense.

Based on what? Recruiting rankings? I am guessing the people at practice probably have a better idea of who is worthy of PT

I'm not basing my opinion on anything. I just find it odd that the coaches will rotate guys in at RB, WR, TE but not the o-line. Yes, those guys aren't doing the physical running that the skill positions are, but they are involved in "man to man" combat every play, which has to be tiring.
We heard a lot of good things about Foster in fall camp, but he can't sniff the field because Cav doesn't do any substitution.

Should TA be subbed when he's winded? Have the safeties been a part of a regular rotation? I just don't get why Cav is being questioned and not other position coaches

Don't be stupid.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

Not subbing your offensive linemen is something NFL teams do out of necessity. Some colleges who can't recruit a lot of quality o-linemen will do that too. I would classify Oregon State under a college team that can't recruit a lot of quality o-linemen.

Cav needs to realize that he is at Nebraska, where they have the ability to bring in over 15 scholarship linemen. Throw in quality walk-ons and there should be quality depth across all the o-line positions. Rotating in backup linemen adds to the quality of depth, and would give the coaches game film to teach the backups.

Cav is hamstringing his own offensive line by only playing his top unit. It creates physical and mental fatigue, which can create penalties. Isn't NU worst in FBS in # of penalties? Oh yeah.