They were determined to pound the rock and for the most part stayed with it. It was an area of weakness (run D) in UCLA and they capitalized on it. Thought DL called an excellent game plan with only a few puzzling calls along the way. Would certainly give him a B +. I think on the 13th game of the yr they may have finally figured out the type of offense that will work at Lincoln. Now the biggest issue for them: Can they recruit? For me, the jury is still deliberating on that one. C'mon coaches - capitalize on the big W and reel them in.
Coaches deserve a lot of credit for their game plan
- Thread starter ssmill777
- Start date
IF you take a test and you get a 94% or better you get an A. He clearly did better than 94% on his play calls. In fact, I'll give him the extra credit for the bonus question for sticking with his game plan after we got down for an extra 3 pts which puts him in the A+ range.
Yep. When the score went to 21-7, I thought for sure the running attack would go right out the window. He proved me wrong on that.
Added bonus with a healthy TA and really no worries of him getting injured(as that was our last game.) If the coaches decide TA is our man next year I hope they continue to use his legs more. I think they will be more willing to do so next year knowing POB should be ready to go if TA goes down.
The biggest thing I like about this coaching staff is that they are not tone deaf to fan sentiment.
Callahan said, "it's too complicated for you to understand". Bo said, "you never played the game". Riley says, "that's a good question, we want to run the ball effectively" and then he went out and did it. I dunno that we will be able to do it next year against B1G defenses built to stop the run like we did against a Pac12 defense built to stop Oregon's spread with their smaller quicker O line, but we'll see.
That's great if they want to load the box. We have plenty of medium range routes just ready to exploit a crowding defense. Tommy showed what this offense can achieve when you play with control.
I'm also giving a lot of credit to both the coaches and players for keeping it together, staying focused and staying motivated when a lot of teams could have folded or blamed one another. Kudos to all of them.
Yes the staff deserves major props for this game. I wish they would have adapted this game plan earlier in the season and stuck to it. If they did we would not be 6- 7.
If IFs and BUTs were candies and nuts we would have all had a Merry Christmas.....It is really hard to say for sure now many more wins we would have had but I don't doubt that it probably would have been at least one or two more. HIndsight is 20/20 and UCLA's defense really dictated that this is what we needed to do. Passing the ball 30+ times against these guys and their speed would have been suicide.
I don't know if this would of worked earlier in the season? And Tommy making great reads and throws moved the chains and allowed Lags to call more running plays. If Tommy throws it deep and it's an incomplete on 2 and 7 you now face 3 and 7 and you can't run effectively. He didn't throw one pass up for grabs in this game!
If you remember the first quarter of the Iowa game we ran right at Iowa too. And for that matter we ran right at Michigan State also. The difference was Tommy playing within the offense and moving the chains. And that allowed Langs to pound the ball again and again.
When you run 62 Times and pass 19 there is little margin for error as opposed to the travesty of playcalling at Illinois. Hopefully DL has learned this.
That the coaches got the kids to stay positive at the end of the year with weeks before the bowl and the record they had,is unbelievable.
You mean like the designed run that our quarterback decided to throw and stop the clock and costing us the win???
You right rrt. Hopefully Langs quits calling the bombs away deep passes with your eyes closed. Those designed plays really suck.
The obvious has been stated several times - running the ball was a thing of beauty. But what I noticed was the reduction of the 40 yard passes. When we did have to pass, they seemed to be relatively high percentage routes that gave Tommy a chance to complete a good ball. Honestly, I think the days of running 62 times are limited. Yes, when playing against an overmatched front 7, you'd do it all day, but that's not always possible against different teams. Ideally, a run/pass of 60/40, or 55/45 would be ideal. It's how and when you select each that makes the offense tough to stop.
Or one of the other 35+ too many passes that day.
I swear i want to pull my hair out sometimes...
These high percentage routes have always been there. And picking up the easy thrown first down allows you to pound the ball with a new set of downs. The pass/run ratio was a direct result of moving the chains on those 19 pass attempts.
A
A designed run is a FB trap, qb sneak, IB iso where the runner has ball security. That call against Illinois was pathetic, and that is being kind. 96 percent of junior high coaches would have called a better play.
The most telling stat is the receptions per completion long...
Brandon Reilly 3- 14
Jordan Westerkamp 2- 28
Ethan Carter 2- 24
Stanley Morgan 2- 22
Devine Ozigbo 1- 15
Alonzo Morre 1- 13
Terrell Newby 1- 1
Medium range completions that moved the chains. You want to point out what allowed us to pound the ball!!!! There you go.
Brandon Reilly 3- 14
Jordan Westerkamp 2- 28
Ethan Carter 2- 24
Stanley Morgan 2- 22
Devine Ozigbo 1- 15
Alonzo Morre 1- 13
Terrell Newby 1- 1
Medium range completions that moved the chains. You want to point out what allowed us to pound the ball!!!! There you go.
I watched the game the second time last night, really considering where we were at, you couldn't of asked for a better bowl outcome. winning vs ucla, armstrong played smart, everyone on offense got plays. end the season on a winning note is allways good. good outing all the way around.
And it shows how important it is when the coaches buy in to what the players are good at.
Tommy's legs really hurt the Bruins. Not that Big "O" wasn't running hard, Cross too for that matter, but Tommy ran the zone read very well Sat. If that TA showed up each game, we'd be tough for anyone to beat. His numbers would have been even more impressive if Reilly hadn't dropped that long pass (right in his hands), and Westy dropped one on a slant that would have been a big play too!
Yeh, the passing game totally set up the run, and that was the only reason NU ran the ball successfully. If nobody on the face of the Earth believes you about that, just add some more exclamation points - that will do the trick.
Just because you couldn't even being to understand the nuances of football does mean you get to make ignorant comments. The run set up the medium passing game which allowed us to continue moving the chains even when they overloaded the box. A medium passing game that has been open all year long for that matter. I bet you were one of those idiot fans who cried when Osborne ran to the short side??? Being stupid isn't a way to go through life.
Exactly the fans trying to put that one on TA is funny - heck the RB thought it was a pass - So Langdorf calls a run/pass but then tells TA do not pass but forgets to tell anyone else - stupid play and cost us the game
The playcalling in this game was much better - but you could still tell Langsdorf was fighting his instincts to pass. He also needs to get a little better feel for some of the aspects of a good running team. For example I love they put the FB dive play back in but they really run it way to much to be effective. They should save this play for the 4th quarter, when they really need it and not over use it or it will not be as effective.
I am hopeful the coaches have made some adjustments and this was not a one time thing
Last edited:
Rover what kept the chains moving was a commitment to run the ball especially on 1st down. In this game NU only passed on 1st and 10 twice and ran it 36 times. Compare that to the Illinois game where it was over 50% pass on first down and almost always on 1st or 2nd down was there a pass.
We kept the chains moving because we were in manageable third downs due to running the ball on first down
only problem. Yes I'm as impressed as any one about the win. Only positive things can come from winning. But for posters to say we have found our offense I think isn't necessarily true. It's what worked for this game. And maybe even most of next season. But are these coaches really going to change their way of thinking long term? I think they will continue to recruit for their system and eventually things will look a little different. But I'm glad to see the adjustment in philosophy with the current talent. And who knows POB can run some. So maybe the QB run game will stay a staple in this offense after TA leaves.GBR.
Our best rushing game is the same game Tommy didn't throw even one pass up for grabs. He didn't throw one interception and threw controlled passes under 30 yards??? How some refuse to see the correlation must explain their support for Mr. Pelini even at the end???
TA had plenty to do with that loss. The FB dive play was very effective, even before the 4th quarter.
It was the best rushing game because they rushed it over 60 times! They did not quit running after two plays.
And with that poor play calling, we were still in a position to win the game. It's not too much to ask a 3-year starter, and expect him to execute something so simple, to run the ball. It's not the play call I prefer but it still has to be executed. Just like against UCLA, calls were made and players executed them.
A moving the chains offense requires few penalties, disciplined assignment football on the Oline, ball security, and good QB decision making. Forget about just this year, we haven't had a lot of those things consistently for several years.
Should have been coached better. Telling someone to do something and coaching them to do it are completely different things. If he can't learn how to do it, don't expect him to or put someone else in that can. It all comes back to the coach.
Run. The. Ball. Tommy. Pretty difficult set of instructions there.
Keep pointing the finger though, blotard.
I do agree that watching us run the ball like that was awesome. But we also won the turnover battle 2-1. How many games did we lose this year where we lost the turnovers, and they cost us big time? Without looking it up I'm pretty sure it was most of our losses.
It's not that simple. How much emphasis did he put on it? Was it repeated? There's a lot of things a quarterback has to think about on every play, and it's not the easiest to hear every word when wearing a helmet and fans yelling. Did they go over that situation in practice? How does he know if it was an instruction or a recommendation? There are a lot of different factors and it all comes back to the coaches. You don't TELL someone to do something and expect them to do it perfectly. You COACH someone to do it if you want the desired result to actually happen.
