RUN THE BALL!!!

[cm husker]

Usually you're more productive when you devote more practice reps to something. With a finite amount of practice time available, that means you won't spend as much time on other aspects of the offense. It follows that your play calling should reflect what you rep in practice. If we want to be more efficient, then almost by definition, we need to run the ball more than we ran last year. Unless we have Sanders, Rozier or Dickerson on the roster, and I missed it.

I wonder how he expects to be more proficient running the ball if he's not going to run it more in games. It also appears that not much was learned from the breakdown of success when running versus throwing it around the yard.

 

[Mavric]

That is not a huge difference that is all of a sudden going to make us a championship team.

Now, do that and not turn the ball over constantly and we would have a pretty dang good offense. Couple that with a great defense and...now we're talking.

No, it's not a large difference.

But it's pretty interesting considering how many people try to claim that we don't have a good enough offensive line or an elite RB to be able to run the ball.

 

[BigRedBuster]

That is not a huge difference that is all of a sudden going to make us a championship team.

Now, do that and not turn the ball over constantly and we would have a pretty dang good offense. Couple that with a great defense and...now we're talking.

No, it's not a large difference.

But it's pretty interesting considering how many people try to claim that we don't have a good enough offensive line or an elite RB to be able to run the ball.

Very true.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Nebraska also ran the ball better last year than Wisconsin, Michigan, Penn State, and Minnesota, and just a tick less yards rushing than Michigan State with a better per carry ave. Nebraska passed the ball effectively if not always efficiently. Our highest offensive category in the Big 10 was #2 in third down conversion, suggesting the play calling was not all that hideous.

We were, however, dead last in turnover margin and near the bottom in penalties.

That's probably the best place to look for improvement.

 

[BigRedBuster]

Guy....

I still just can't get over the fact that you pointed out Alabama (in the NC game) called a pass play on 3rd and short.

Oh the horror!!!!

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Guy....

I still just can't get over the fact that you pointed out Alabama (in the NC game) called a pass play on 3rd and short.

Oh the horror!!!!

And they did it late in the fourth quarter! When they were ahead! And needing to burn the clock!

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

So let me ask you this Guy. If you could choose between Osborne and Riley to coach the team next year who would you take? I also disagree with your statement on elite teams. Alabama was not a elite passing team this year. Nebraska never had a elite passing game in 93 to 97.

Tom is nearly 80 and I don't think he could handle the daily grind.

I have no idea how you define "elite" in terms of passing. Alabama threw the ball 30 times a game with a 67% completion average, 22 touchdowns and 8 interceptions. They ran 42/30 run/pass split, and averaged more yards passing than running. On a third and one in the fourth quarter of the national championship game where they were ahead, Alabama called a pass play to seal the game.

They passed to set up the run. They ran to set up the pass. They had an elite defense.

Alabama is the definition of an elite team. They ran essentially the same play calling scheme that some folks on here deride as "balanced" or "multiple" but executed it with better talent, fewer mistakes and the kind of defense Nebraska can't rely on.

If you'd like us to run the ball more, fine, but you don't need to make these kind of stretches trying to prove that good teams don't pass.

Nebraska cannot and will not beat the Alabama's of the world by imitating them.
And yes, Bama had a nice offensive run in the playoffs. But overall, they were pedestrian offensively throughout the season, despite having arguably the most talent in the nation.

So just to summarize, Nebraska could and would beat the Alabama's of the world by returning to a power option offensive filled with less talented players.

And that's our only hope right now, correct?

That's an odd way of framing it.

No kidding.

 

[Lyons in the Sea of Red.]

Bama also has an NFL defense. That will wyork.

 

[cm husker]

So let me ask you this Guy. If you could choose between Osborne and Riley to coach the team next year who would you take? I also disagree with your statement on elite teams. Alabama was not a elite passing team this year. Nebraska never had a elite passing game in 93 to 97.

Tom is nearly 80 and I don't think he could handle the daily grind.

I have no idea how you define "elite" in terms of passing. Alabama threw the ball 30 times a game with a 67% completion average, 22 touchdowns and 8 interceptions. They ran 42/30 run/pass split, and averaged more yards passing than running. On a third and one in the fourth quarter of the national championship game where they were ahead, Alabama called a pass play to seal the game.

They passed to set up the run. They ran to set up the pass. They had an elite defense.

Alabama is the definition of an elite team. They ran essentially the same play calling scheme that some folks on here deride as "balanced" or "multiple" but executed it with better talent, fewer mistakes and the kind of defense Nebraska can't rely on.

If you'd like us to run the ball more, fine, but you don't need to make these kind of stretches trying to prove that good teams don't pass.

Nebraska cannot and will not beat the Alabama's of the world by imitating them.
And yes, Bama had a nice offensive run in the playoffs. But overall, they were pedestrian offensively throughout the season, despite having arguably the most talent in the nation.

So just to summarize, Nebraska could and would beat the Alabama's of the world by returning to a power option offensive filled with less talented players.

And that's our only hope right now, correct?

That's an odd way of framing it.

No kidding.

Yeah, it's usually referred to as a straw man. And in some cases even a troll (if intentionally misreading and misstating a position). Makes me wonder why you'd use those tactics.

The biggest straw man of them all is the notion that those of us who want a return to 70%+ running hate the forward pass. Nothing could be further from the truth. If I had to choose, I'd rather NU move to 70-30 pass to run then aim for 50-50 or whatever the goal is now (I suspect, based on history and recent comments, if Coach Riley had his druthers, he'd be a 60-40 pass to run guy).

"Balance" is way overrated in the college game. And the pro game, for that matter.

 

[Mavric]

Guy....

I still just can't get over the fact that you pointed out Alabama (in the NC game) called a pass play on 3rd and short.

Oh the horror!!!!

And they did it late in the fourth quarter! When they were ahead! And needing to burn the clock!

And it didn't work for them either.

So unless your point is that Lane Kiffin is the gold standard of offensive coordinators and can't be questioned....

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Guy....

I still just can't get over the fact that you pointed out Alabama (in the NC game) called a pass play on 3rd and short.

Oh the horror!!!!

And they did it late in the fourth quarter! When they were ahead! And needing to burn the clock!

And it didn't work for them either.

So unless your point is that Lane Kiffin is the gold standard of offensive coordinators and can't be questioned....

Uhm.....did you watch that game?

I hate Lane Kiffin by the way, but a strategic pass on third and one is occasionally utilized by virtually every offensive coordinator on earth.

As with every play call, it's brilliant when it works, not so much when it doesn't.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

So let me ask you this Guy. If you could choose between Osborne and Riley to coach the team next year who would you take? I also disagree with your statement on elite teams. Alabama was not a elite passing team this year. Nebraska never had a elite passing game in 93 to 97.

Tom is nearly 80 and I don't think he could handle the daily grind.

I have no idea how you define "elite" in terms of passing. Alabama threw the ball 30 times a game with a 67% completion average, 22 touchdowns and 8 interceptions. They ran 42/30 run/pass split, and averaged more yards passing than running. On a third and one in the fourth quarter of the national championship game where they were ahead, Alabama called a pass play to seal the game.

They passed to set up the run. They ran to set up the pass. They had an elite defense.

Alabama is the definition of an elite team. They ran essentially the same play calling scheme that some folks on here deride as "balanced" or "multiple" but executed it with better talent, fewer mistakes and the kind of defense Nebraska can't rely on.

If you'd like us to run the ball more, fine, but you don't need to make these kind of stretches trying to prove that good teams don't pass.

Nebraska cannot and will not beat the Alabama's of the world by imitating them.
And yes, Bama had a nice offensive run in the playoffs. But overall, they were pedestrian offensively throughout the season, despite having arguably the most talent in the nation.

So just to summarize, Nebraska could and would beat the Alabama's of the world by returning to a power option offensive filled with less talented players.

And that's our only hope right now, correct?

That's an odd way of framing it.

No kidding.

Yeah, it's usually referred to as a straw man. And in some cases even a troll (if intentionally misreading and misstating a position). Makes me wonder why you'd use those tactics.

The biggest straw man of them all is the notion that those of us who want a return to 70%+ running hate the forward pass. Nothing could be further from the truth. If I had to choose, I'd rather NU move to 70-30 pass to run then aim for 50-50 or whatever the goal is now (I suspect, based on history and recent comments, if Coach Riley had his druthers, he'd be a 60-40 pass to run guy).

"Balance" is way overrated in the college game. And the pro game, for that matter.

See I think you're misrepresenting yourself here.

You have clearly outlined in multiple posts over several months that Nebraska cannot be expected to compete with elite teams in terms of recruiting. You've said the only recourse would be an offensive scheme that doesn't require the specific talents associated with passing the ball, and that a return to an Osborne-like offense would let us hide that deficiency by recruiting scheme-specific players that we have to presume are less desirable to other teams.

It's not the worst argument in the world, but there are plenty of holes in it, along with your own strawman, Mr. Balance.

So just own it. But don't pretend you'd rather see Nebraska pass 70% of the time just to get away from the dreaded balance.

btw...Alabama's (and most other successful team's) offensive scheme of running and passing the ball in a fluctuating mix that adjusts to each game and opponent is simply called "college football"

It's not hard to comprehend or execute, but it always looks better when done with good athletes across the board.

Like every scheme.

 

[Mavric]

Yes, I did watch the game.

I'm not saying you should never throw the ball on third and short. I'll leave it to other people to try to take an argument to a ridiculous extreme. A playbook is a tool. It's up to the coaches to use that tool in the most efficient way possible for the team that they have.

But there's also a difference in the plays you can/should call when you have a QB who completes 67% of his passes and has a 2.6:1 TD/INT ratio versus having a QB who completes 55% of his passes and has a 1.3:1 ratio.

 

[cm husker]

So let me ask you this Guy. If you could choose between Osborne and Riley to coach the team next year who would you take? I also disagree with your statement on elite teams. Alabama was not a elite passing team this year. Nebraska never had a elite passing game in 93 to 97.

Tom is nearly 80 and I don't think he could handle the daily grind.

I have no idea how you define "elite" in terms of passing. Alabama threw the ball 30 times a game with a 67% completion average, 22 touchdowns and 8 interceptions. They ran 42/30 run/pass split, and averaged more yards passing than running. On a third and one in the fourth quarter of the national championship game where they were ahead, Alabama called a pass play to seal the game.

They passed to set up the run. They ran to set up the pass. They had an elite defense.

Alabama is the definition of an elite team. They ran essentially the same play calling scheme that some folks on here deride as "balanced" or "multiple" but executed it with better talent, fewer mistakes and the kind of defense Nebraska can't rely on.

If you'd like us to run the ball more, fine, but you don't need to make these kind of stretches trying to prove that good teams don't pass.

Nebraska cannot and will not beat the Alabama's of the world by imitating them.
And yes, Bama had a nice offensive run in the playoffs. But overall, they were pedestrian offensively throughout the season, despite having arguably the most talent in the nation.

So just to summarize, Nebraska could and would beat the Alabama's of the world by returning to a power option offensive filled with less talented players.

And that's our only hope right now, correct?

That's an odd way of framing it.

No kidding.

Yeah, it's usually referred to as a straw man. And in some cases even a troll (if intentionally misreading and misstating a position). Makes me wonder why you'd use those tactics.

The biggest straw man of them all is the notion that those of us who want a return to 70%+ running hate the forward pass. Nothing could be further from the truth. If I had to choose, I'd rather NU move to 70-30 pass to run then aim for 50-50 or whatever the goal is now (I suspect, based on history and recent comments, if Coach Riley had his druthers, he'd be a 60-40 pass to run guy).

"Balance" is way overrated in the college game. And the pro game, for that matter.

See I think you're misrepresenting yourself here.

You have clearly outlined in multiple posts over several months that Nebraska cannot be expected to compete with elite teams in terms of recruiting. You've said the only recourse would be an offensive scheme that doesn't require the specific talents associated with passing the ball, and that a return to an Osborne-like offense would let us hide that deficiency by recruiting scheme-specific players that we have to presume are less desirable to other teams.

It's not the worst argument in the world, but there are plenty of holes in it, along with your own strawman, Mr. Balance.

So just own it. But don't pretend you'd rather see Nebraska pass 70% of the time just to get away from the dreaded balance.

btw...Alabama's (and most other successful team's) offensive scheme of running and passing the ball in a fluctuating mix that adjusts to each game and opponent is simply called "college football"

It's not hard to comprehend or execute, but it always looks better when done with good athletes across the board.

Like every scheme.

Let me break it down for you (again):

I believe that a "unbalanced" offense is more likely to succeed in CFB for numerous reasons, and I think they tend to wring more production out of "average" talent than a "balanced attack" does (whether that unbalanced system is run heavy or Mike Leach pass heavy).

So, that's premise #1: Unbalanced is better, as long as you are efficient in the less represented portion of your offense. I could explain again, if you want, but to sum up, because of practice time limitations, the complexity of "perfecting" two modes of offensive attack and turnover in the CFB personnel, I think CFB players do better in "simpler" systems. And yes, I know that TO's offensive system was not "simple" in terms of variations on the principles (such as in the run blocking game), but he has consistently said that his system is "simpler" because it's based on building out core principles that are perfected and then expanded on over the course of a year regardless of opponent, rather than altered in significant ways week to week based on scouting reports (as you mentioned is the nature of "CFB balanced offense"...which are, by and large, pretty mediocre when you don't have Alabama talent (and sometimes even mediocre when you do)). TO's system was much less matchup driven, so by its very nature, it requires less alternations based on what an opponent presents. That's why it's easier to teach and learn at the CFB level. And thus was born the simplistic statement that "they knew what we were going to do and we did it anyway."

Premise #2 is: given an option between an unbalanced rushing attack versus an unbalanced passing attack, for Nebraska, I'd always choose the unbalanced rushing attack. Generally, I'd choose that no matter what, because I think (like TO has explained), a rushing attack provides all sorts of other advantages than just the obvious ones. But, if I were in the SEC or Texas, I can see going with a pass heavy attack that stresses defenses in its own way. I just don't think Lincoln, NE and many of our conference opponent locations are suitable for a pass heavy attack.

 

[BRV920]

Spot on CM. +1