Riley Shelf Life

[Landlord]

I give Ameer a ton of credit. He fought for nearly every yard. Rarely did he streak up the field untouched.

I agree that we seemed to stink it up quite a bit against the best competition, and Ameer's wiggle is a huge part of it, but I really remember this differently. All of his big runs that I can remember, especially against Rutgers, Illinois, Northwestern and Iowa (just the ones I can visually remember in my head) he wasn't touched at all until 7-10 yards downfield - tried to find video but none of the ones on youtube just show the plays one after the other for breakdown purposes they're all spruced up to be highlights.

I think it's both. He had a ton of runs, much like Rex, where he somehow got something out of nothing, but he also had a ton where he either just ran really fast or had good space to start with and made people miss in the second level.

 

[Saunders]

Personally I think our offensive line over the last 4 years was only below average in pass protection. I think they were pretty damn good as run blockers, better than average, by the actual definition.

That's fine, we disagree.
We're talking about a group that couldn't seem to quit the false starts at some of the worst times.

We're talking about an offensive line that couldn't even get the snap of the ball right for part of the season last year.

Aside from being physically dominated by the better opponents we faced, there was a constant display of confusion and missed assignments.

We even had a guy fall over on himself.

You call it whatever you want, but I call the offensive line below average. If it wasn't for the All-American running behind them, I think it wouldn't even be debatable.

I give Ameer a ton of credit. He fought for nearly every yard. Rarely did he streak up the field untouched.

Much like Bo Pelini, the offensive line has a resume' mostly built upon dominating lesser foes.

(by the way, I don't entirely blame the players. Aside from what I think was a lack of commitment in the weight room, which is their own fault, I blame the rest on a lack of focus on technical aspects of the position, and a confusing, poorly coached zone blocking scheme. Considering Garrison and Cotton's coaching and playing history, I wouldn't think that style would be in their wheel house.)

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaaol

According to their adjusted rankings for 2014 (taking into account the opponent, and garbage time) only ten teams had better O-line "rankings" than Nebraska.

Even accounting for other adjustments, that's nowhere near the "below average" that people seem to latch on to. So, it leads to one of two conclusions. Either the O-line wasn't as bad as some people say, or Tim Beck worked miracles with a bad O-line.

Which is it?

 

[The Dude]

By Pipeline standards, the offensive line has been far below average for over a decade.

 

[Saunders]

By Pipeline standards, the offensive line has been far below average for over a decade.

In comparison to the mid 90's run? Absolutely. But our O-line the list 4-5 years is much better than it was from, say 2002-2009. Is it loaded right now? No way. But we also don't have the S&C advantage (not to mention overall talent advantage) we did for 20-30 years in the Big 8.

I like what I've seen out of Coach Cav, so I'm hoping his tenacity along with some improved S&C ( and recruiting) will pay dividends over the next few years.

 

[BigRedBuster]

I remember reading an article during the season talking about how Ameer was leading (or close to the top) in the country for yards before contact. That doesn't happen with as bad of O line as people claim we have had the last couple of years.

Did we go through a period where our line was worse? DEFINITELY. But, it has gotten better and last year the penalties were even cut back. They still had a couple games like the MSU game that left me banging my head. But, overall, we have seen improvement.

I am very excited about Coach Cav. I think he has good talent to work with on our line.

One thing that some fans harp on is the fact that Ameer had to dodge defenders in his face in the back field. That was the scheme more times than not. In a zone read, one defender is not blocked (most of the time). It is up to the QB and RB to make that guy miss. From there, the O line is supposed to have a numbers advantage.

Also, our O line (and many around the country) are taught to block way differently than what they were in the 80s and most of the 90s. Rules changes are a big part and changes in offenses are another in making that change.

That said, is our O line where it needs to be? No there is room for improvement. But, for many, the O line has become the scape goat when they don't know what else to complain about.

And, I must say, if anyone his thinking we are someday going to see our O line demolish teams like they did in the 80s.....you will be very disappointed. Nebraska doesn't have that strength advantage anymore and we never will again. Not because ours sucks. But, because others have risen to our level.

 

[NUance]

By Pipeline standards, the offensive line has been far below average for over a decade.

Has any team fielded a good offensive line, by comparison to the Pipeline? Those are some pretty lofty standards.

 

[Hedley Lamarr]

We haven't had a "bad" OL. We have had an inconsistent OL.

 

[The Dude]

By Pipeline standards, the offensive line has been far below average for over a decade.

Has any team fielded a good offensive line, by comparison to the Pipeline? Those are some pretty lofty standards.

Indeed, and the standards should be that high. If we can't make a strong case for having the best offensive line in the country, I don't want to hear about how good it is.
If Wisconsin can be in that conversation most years, there's no reason we can't be.

 

[NUance]

By Pipeline standards, the offensive line has been far below average for over a decade.

Has any team fielded a good offensive line, by comparison to the Pipeline? Those are some pretty lofty standards.

Indeed, and the standards should be that high. If we can't make a strong case for having the best offensive line in the country, I don't want to hear about how good it is.
If Wisconsin can be in that conversation most years, there's no reason we can't be.

Yup. Can't say I disagree.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

inconsistent.

That's the word.

 

[Enhance]

We haven't had a "bad" OL. We have had an inconsistent OL.

Inconsistent, to me, means average.

 

[True2tRA]

By Pipeline standards, the offensive line has been far below average for over a decade.

Has any team fielded a good offensive line, by comparison to the Pipeline? Those are some pretty lofty standards.

Indeed, and the standards should be that high. If we can't make a strong case for having the best offensive line in the country, I don't want to hear about how good it is.If Wisconsin can be in that conversation most years, there's no reason we can't be.

Freaking spot on.

 

[Mavric]

By Pipeline standards, the offensive line has been far below average for over a decade.

Has any team fielded a good offensive line, by comparison to the Pipeline? Those are some pretty lofty standards.

Indeed, and the standards should be that high. If we can't make a strong case for having the best offensive line in the country, I don't want to hear about how good it is.
If Wisconsin can be in that conversation most years, there's no reason we can't be.

I don't disagree. But we were one spot AHEAD of Wisconsin in that stats that saunders linked to. We were also light years ahead of Stanford, who is often mentioned as a group that we should emulate.

I think we tend to remember the bad more than the good, especially when we don't like the overall results. It's possible and - based on the statistics - extremely probably that other teams are more "inconsistent" than we are. We just don't follow them as closely so we don't notice.

 

[True2tRA]

Guys, we have 9/10 wins a year worth of "good stats". I don't know that stats tell the entire story of the football progam we've watched over the last seven years.

 

[Mavric]

Guys, we have 9/10 wins a year worth of "good stats". I don't know that stats tell the entire story of the football progam we've watched over the last seven years.

Stats don't tell the whole story. But I doubt many people have watched enough of other teams to say we're significantly better or worse than anyone else. It's easy to say our line is bad, our linebackers are bad, our tackling is bad, or completion percentage is bad, etc., etc., etc. But the only way you can really compare to other teams is to look at the stats. Imperfect? Yes. Pretty good and the best method there is? Also yes.