AR Husker Fan,I fail to see your point. I guess we can agree to disagree.
I don't think they should go to a 2-back system for the Nich. State game, I think they should keep it 4 backs because Nich. State is such a lightweight that they can all benefit from the experience and the team will still come out with a nice win. You mention injury and that certainly is a risk - but that's why they all rotated in fall camp and why they are rotating here at the beginning of the season. Game experience and live reps give them the foundation to build from that they can tap throughout the year if needed.
Which doesn’t do much good if, through the rest of the schedule, you don’t give them reps and then suddenly call on them to carry the ball in a pressure situation. Reps in practice are fine, but it can’t begin to simulate the speed or power of the game.
You also mention that when there are 2 backs used that the coaches tend to call plays that utilize their strengths. I CERTAINLY HOPE SO! It would be a shame to call plays that only utilize their weaknesses. Kinda hard to win those games!! Also, when you are rotating 4 backs, I would like to think that the coaches are still trying to put players in the right positions to utilize their strengths. This really just points to my overall underlying feeling and that is that I don't think that all 4 running backs are equal. The stats don't reveal that, the fumble totals don't reveal that. The number of broken tackles don't reveal that.
Actually, what I said is that if you are using two backs, the coaches tend to concentrate on the plays that those backs run best
rather than running the play that they think has the best chance for success. That is, rather than going with the best play and then sticking in the player that runs it best, you limit yourself. With four backs, all of whom have their strengths, you can pick based on play and not on player, rather than the other way around. It’s a way to utilize all of the playbook rather than some of it.
An example – when Herian was out, almost no plays were called for the tight end. Given the players we had at that position, we had to run plays based on their strengths – which didn’t include, apparently, the ability to get open or catch the pass. Rather than calling a play that wen to the tight end, we had to use them only as blockers - meaning that we lost part of the playbook. We now have more options, which allow us to call plays that utilize the tight end. In other words, the coaches don’t have to limit the playbook; they can call any play, and then stick in the best player that has the best chance of making the play work.
I just hope it doesn't take a heartbreaking loss to realize that the coaches should focus on more than keeping everyone happy with a 4-man rotation. Would hate to see another goal line series of plays that end in a fumble that cost us the game and then someone states the obvious, "Well, the coaches should have used our short yardage specialist there instead of trying to ensure that someone got a certain number of carries during a game."
I hope we don’t have a heartbreaking loss because we limit the carries to two backs, and both get injured at critical points. Suddenly, we have to stick in a back that hasn’t gotten any game reps in five games. He can’t take the handoff cleanly, he doesn’t tuck it away, he doesn’t adjust to the blocking, he fumbles, he fails to pick up the blitz, he doesn’t run the correct route out of the backfield as the hot receiver – a million things can go wrong, all because that back didn’t get the game reps to keep him sharp.
I understand you want to see Glenn get more reps - more power to him; I think he's a helluva back. But I'm more concerned with what's best for the team. And long term, having all four is better than having just two.
:woo 
