Langsdorf
- Thread starter Pennsyhusker
- Start date
The opinion section was directed at you, as in it's your opinion. So, I was asking you for why you think DL is top notch, but you have only responded to part of my question with tearing down the prior OC's.
I thought you had some meaning behind it. Maybe it was just a punk post, the kind where a person says, "This guy is great, and all the others suck".. if so, my apologies for taking that post seriously.
The only punk posts I see are coming from you. I responded to your silly claim that our previous OC's were hired by great football minds, and are all therefore great OC's, by pointing out that all took a step back and none are doing it today. Sorry that those facts make you so upset. And I think that DL does a great job utilizing his players and is creative in both the running and passing game. Sorry that opinion upsets you.
There are times I question his play calling. There are times I question other teams play calling. No offensive coordinator is perfect. I wouldn't have called the play where Morgan jr scored but he did.. I am sure others on here wouldn't have called plays he did, but they worked..
If you complain about plays that you dont agree with then you should man up when a play works that you didnt want him to call.. Not all plays are going to work for whatever reason.. blah
Play calls matter. It mattered when they continuously called passes against Purdue last year to give the game away.
I see. I think most people understand that the offense was down due to injuries. You however, defended the OC, well rather not just defended him, but attempted to elevate him, while also tearing down the past. I was just curious why. That's where I was coming from. It's not personal or anything, I just wanted to know where you were coming from that you felt you had to do that. I see some people criticize him, but I didn't think it was that bad, or bad enough to warrant your approach, so that is what got my attention.
Of course play calls matter in that context. The point being made was that when you have a lot of injuries to key players, even good play calls can look bad. I'm pretty sure no one here is saying last year's Purdue game was a well called game... but we aren't talking about that game. Your complaint is this game.
I thought we should have tried to run the ball more as well on those short yardage plays, but it was also clear that Indiana was selling out to stop the run, so you adjust your play calling accordingly. We certainly wouldn't want to credit Indiana for making things difficult on a bunch of our back up players...
Oh yeah I totally agree with you. If you go back and watch that play though, Nebraska had two guys blocking one guy on the outside so I'm thinking they had the option open to break it outside if it was there. However like you said, I'm not sure it was possible because of the blitzing LB. I'm sure it will be covered in film study this week.
I can still remember a play from 40 years ago where I broke a tackle on our own 5 yard line and spun around and all I had was a safety five yards in front of me. What did I do? I put my head down and knocked him on his ass...and I went down with him. Stupid. I had 20 yards of sideline to work with and a 5 yard run at him. I ran track against him so I know I could have out run him but instead I did what I was used to doing. I would have had a 90+ yard TD run and instead I got a 15 yard gain. I had 5 yards to make up my mind and I still did the wrong thing. Bryant had about 5 feet maybe and a tenth or two of a second.
If they don't let Tre play some big boy football, how is he ever supposed to be ready? This was a good game for them to go out there and get the fear put into them by a "lesser" team. They got to have their egos clipped and still get a W.
But maybe that is exactly why you go with your experienced back in that critical situation rather than the true freshman. But it sounds as if, based on some comments in this thread, that Newby had taken himself out of the game prior to that play. And with Ozigbo hurt Bryant was just the next man up. I want Bryant to get experience too, but I have to think Langsdorf would have had Newby in instead in that situation had he been able to.
My point is that on a 3rd or 4th and 1 you are going balls to the walls and if they get penetration it happens too fast for even an experienced back. On 3rd and 1 you don't want somebody prancing around in the backfield. Their D made a play. Sh## happens and I doubt it mattered which RB was in the game.
I have to laugh about this post because in watching the OSU Wisconsin game I was shocked that OSU threw that fade route in the end zone on 3rd and 2 or 3 in OT. It resulted in a great catch for a td. If that play doesn't work OSU has 4th and 3 and now it gets really interesting. My point is, I didn't like that call at all, I thought it was extremely risky--but in this case it worked. All OC's call plays that they shouldn't have and many times they don't work and I'll say to myself wow that was not a good call. You are absolutely correct--no OC is perfect and neither are any of us.
The jury is still out on Langsdorf calling plays. He did a poor job last year, but has done a much better job this year. The Indiana was his worst called game of the year, but you will see how good of a play caller he is in the next couple years when he has his type of Qb.
I suspect the fumbles have gotten into Tre's head a bit ... he was often running like a fullback with both hands shielding the ball .. he'll get it figured out
So please give me some specific examples of his poor play calling. Don't just say he had a third and 3 and didn't run it. I want to know what the defensive alignment was, what set we were in, what was the play call and did Tommy audible out of it, what adjustments did the O line miss, what blocks were totally missed and where were the communication break downs. When you tell me all of this and can explain EXACTLY why a call is bad, I will listen. Until then it is just a bunch of no it all, arm chair QB wanna be's who think they could outsmart some of the best minds in college football every Saturday when they can't tell a 4-3 from a 3-4.
It looked like the linebackers were finally clicking. They were crashing the line, getting off blocks, not over pursuing. They finally began to look like what their rating suggest they should be. I hope they continue to build off this because against OSU and Wisconsin the linebacker play will win or lose the game.
I don't know why this is such a difficult concept. A coach cannot make calls based on all of the variables of who is in the game. He doesn't say, oh crap, I have Trey in there so I better run a wham route but shoot, my best slot just came out, so no I will go with a seam route for my TE but darn, I have the third string guy in because of injuries or the best one is to only call plays you know for 100% certainty your QB can complete them every time.
You have a matter of seconds to signal in the formation and play call. Then you have to get players in and out, give the QB time to read the D and make adjustments, then the O line is making blocking adjustments and you have to snap the ball on time. Spend some time on a sideline and it is like pure chaos from play to play with everything that is going on. Pick a good high school game and ask if you can be in the locker room and on the sideline, that will give you a small sample of what is going on.
Oh and I didn't talk about what the D is doing such as stunting, moving around, subbing different packages, etc. I think it was the Illinois game when we went for it on 4th and 1 and we just got it - I could be wrong about which game but I remember seeing the replay. The call was good and it looked like a sure fire winner for a first down but a backer read the play took a beautiful angle and made contact sooner than expected - in other words he made a heck of an individual play and there was no way to account for him. Turns out we made the 1st by inches even though everything was executed well on the O and just slightly less successful on the D.
Go back and watch earlier in the game. I think Tre was the short yardage back. I THINK it was early in the second quarter when we were pinned down inside the 5 i think Tre came in and got a carry.
Im sure Reggie Davis has his reasoning for liking Tre better in short yardage situations. as good as Newby has been and as physical as he has played power would still not be considered a strength of his. I get it myself but I can see why people would question it.
holla
FWIW Tre was in as the 3rd down back and got us a first down earlier in the game, in fact he has come in on third down a few times this year. I dont know what the bitching is about, its third and one not third and long. If you are a runningback of D1 skill you should be able to get that run half of the time minimum, he just so happened to not get it. To me with the way Indiana D was plugging the middle all day and most of our success coming off the edge we should have went to the edge with a lead blocker. But what do I know.
Also @headcard Cotton is OC at UNLV, not Power 5 but he actually got a promo from Nebraska.
Also @headcard Cotton is OC at UNLV, not Power 5 but he actually got a promo from Nebraska.
When the O-line doesn't do it's job, the OC's job is like taking a knife to a gun fight...
True Barney is OC at UNLV now, I was referring to when he left here as Franks OC and went to ISU as OC (a step down) and then a HS. But you are right he is actually doing the job now.
Last edited:
Barney is making $212k at UNLV, that's roughly $46k less than he made at Nebraska. I understand how you say an "OC" may seem like a "promo from Nebraska" but I'm not sure many people would agree with you.
Position coach, with the additional titles Barney had at Nebraska, is more prestigious than an OC position at UNLV.
If Bryant tries to bust it outside and doesn't get it, he gets slaughtered on here for not running it up the middle.
Amen to that. A lot of "ifs" that look pretty simple to the average joe sitting at home.
My complaint is ALL the games and that Langsdorf is NOT the best play caller we have had in some time.
Just be patient, it's fairly likely NU will eventually lose a game or two this year, then you can make a 1,000 posts telling everyone how smart you are for not liking Langsdorf. But until then, he's called the plays good enough to get us to 6-0 and likely 7-0 (which no other OC has done in a while), so your gonna have to lump it.
The shortest route from A to B is usually the best in short yardage situations. Obviously not a guarantee but a run up the middle is usually worth a yard just as a QB sneak is usually enough to pick up a first with inches to go.
If you're really talking about all the games, then I don't have a clue what you've been watching this year. Sooo many people who were on the fence about DL have been very pleased with this year's playcalling... just read the boards. It's all there.
Just not from you. You see something the rest of us don't see.
So who in recent memory was better than DL, and why? You obviously have an eye for OC coaching, tell us who we should be thankful we had as OC, at least for a time?
http://www.foxsports.com/college-fo...ohio-state-buckeyes-tom-herman-qb-guru-043015
As for Herman, he credits long-time Mike Riley assistant Danny Langsdorf, the current Nebraska OC/QB coach, for sharing his insight with him.
"He was a young coach when I was playing at Cal Lutheran, and I knew [Langsdorf] well enough where I could really pick his brain after he spoke at a clinic at Oregon State on drills," Herman said. "I liked a lot of his drills. And I'll never forget he said, 'Always, always, always make your drills simulate what you're going to see in the game.'
"No offense to [QB guru] George [Whitfield], but you don't see brooms in the game. So, if a kid is having trouble flushing to his right, do everything you can the next week to simulate the scenario that caused him to have problems so you can get it right. Who cares about the cones and the bags? If it simulates to what the kid is feeling on a Saturday, then you've got a good drill."
As for Herman, he credits long-time Mike Riley assistant Danny Langsdorf, the current Nebraska OC/QB coach, for sharing his insight with him.
"He was a young coach when I was playing at Cal Lutheran, and I knew [Langsdorf] well enough where I could really pick his brain after he spoke at a clinic at Oregon State on drills," Herman said. "I liked a lot of his drills. And I'll never forget he said, 'Always, always, always make your drills simulate what you're going to see in the game.'
"No offense to [QB guru] George [Whitfield], but you don't see brooms in the game. So, if a kid is having trouble flushing to his right, do everything you can the next week to simulate the scenario that caused him to have problems so you can get it right. Who cares about the cones and the bags? If it simulates to what the kid is feeling on a Saturday, then you've got a good drill."
I had no problem with Norvell, but it is hard to tell how much of the gameplan was his and how heavily HCBC was involved. Offense wasn't the problem then, and it is conceivable they could both still be here if Cally was willing to find another DC. I don't think Watson was as good as Langs is now, but it is hard to determine how good he could have been since Bo didn't like his style of offense, meddled in it, and really didn't give him a lot of support (ironic). As far as Beck goes, OCTB played checkers, Langsdorf plays chess.
Tre trucks people in practice. Tough to tackle and that is why he's in on short yardage with Oz dinged up.
So basically you are going to piss and moan forever about some calls you didn't like last year?
WE are six games into the year coming off a game where Indiana? held us to 360 yards ( yes I realize their defense is better) but it was still not a good game. Last year was filled with questionable late calls and some bad game plans - So yes I would say it is safe to say the jury is still out on Langsdorf. I do think his calls are better this year and I like the way they have committed to the run so far but yes last year is relevant
I somewhat agree that last year is relevant, but it shouldn't be the sole factor in judging how good he is... Just as some are maybe giving too much weight to most of this year, others are giving too much weight to last year.
It's clear by husker fiend's posts that he is not a DL fan and never will be. Not a single post in this thread giving credit to DL for anything, and his primary proof is Purdue last year.
Clearly DL is much better this year but not in fiend's eyes. Why can't he give credit where credit is due?
This is exactly my point, how long can you bitch and moan about Purdue last year? I know run the ball guy was upset with how many times we threw it, but were also behind big all game. I think way too much was made over DL's struggles last year, we moved the ball well and put up points in a transition year. This year, he knows his personnel better and we have been able to drastically reduce the TO's that have plagued us for a decade. Those end of game miscommunications tend to happen in a transition year, which is why most people will tell you years two and three are far better gauges to judge a new staff. Why remain fixated on the early part of last year (when we showed great growth after the Purdue game) and ignore all the positive things happening in Lincoln? It's like going to a free kegger and complaining that the beers too cold.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Another apparent terror attack in front of Trump Hotel in Vegas…
- Latest: Nebraska Squid
-
