Nebraska Season Preview
- Thread starter Suvey101885
- Start date
I'm not going to look it up; your the unrelenting critic; you do it please. What are the stats? Did they improve? I believe a WH writers article printed some numbers that showed a real improvement on D: is that consistent with your view?
Again I am not going to compare our current DC to a FIRED previous coach but here are the stats from last year and the national rank and no they are not good
- Total D #64
- Scoring D # 76
- Rush D #9 also among the least amount of Rushing attempts against them
- pass eff D - #78
- Fumble Recovered #113
- Int's #78
- Sacks #80
- Tackles for loss - #83
Not sure what last years numbers were but I would think they were better outside of Rush defense - but that defense stunk also why does it matter
Thanks; the article pushed the rushing D improvement. I think it matters; because painting with too broad a brush can be too negative and a bit deceptive. I should say here; that I enjoy your posts, and even here with a bit of urgency to your post, you are not attacking. A few thoughts:
- the secondary seemed to really be improving in their ball play towards the end of the year. I remember db's saying in interviews they felt they had really improved. I HAD NOTICED IT, thought Marvin was back to help out - hope it stays and improves. Top posters think db's will be good.
- The lb's were covered above; and it was a cluster coming into the season. Our lb coach is a terriffic recruiter, but I think an even better coach. I have a lot of confidence here; wasn't it nice to see players that could tackle again
- I feel the DL is a youth explosion; will be shockingly good - but we all know the DE position could also improve or really waver. The position coaches will scheme it and use role playing lb's as necessary.
- I drink too much RED Koolaide at times; so posts from you and others are good with balance. I have to admit after Coach Bill and his coaching with friends destruction; it keeps me leary of coach Banker also . He may now have three excellent position coaches; we had some good performances and clutch plays also last year - so excuses end here, or it will be obvious what the problems are.
- If I was the head coach; I would be going Ape-sh__ over these D stats. How do you go into a season without a goal of finishing in the top 10%; with top 20% ok with variables. Other than that, you should be striving; this is why there is a BLACKSHIRTS tradition. GBR
I agree. This argument is made on the offensive side of the ball too and has been a source of frustration for fans. There was a minimal attempt to "blend" scheme to the previous system or personnel. I have to believe that the coaching staff made that choice for the long term success of the program (I'm not saying they just flushed the first year intentionally).
My hope is, is that teaching their scheme/technique from day one instead of coming up with a hybrid system will pay dividens this year. We shall see..
2014 D stats
- Total D - #T44
- Scoring D - #T49
- Rush D - #80
- pass eff D - #4
- Fumble Recovered - #T118
- Int's - #T38
- Sacks - #T44
- Tackles for loss - #T18
I think the D did improve at the end of last year - but we still gave up a couple of long runs to Iowa that made the difference in that game and UCLA still had around 400 yards.Thanks; the article pushed the rushing D improvement. I think it matters; because painting with too broad a brush can be too negative and a bit deceptive. I should say here; that I enjoy your posts, and even here with a bit of urgency to your post, you are not attacking. A few thoughts:
- the secondary seemed to really be improving in their ball play towards the end of the year. I remember db's saying in interviews they felt they had really improved. I HAD NOTICED IT, thought Marvin was back to help out - hope it stays and improves. Top posters think db's will be good.
- The lb's were covered above; and it was a cluster coming into the season. Our lb coach is a terriffic recruiter, but I think an even better coach. I have a lot of confidence here; wasn't it nice to see players that could tackle again
- I feel the DL is a youth explosion; will be shockingly good - but we all know the DE position could also improve or really waver. The position coaches will scheme it and use role playing lb's as necessary.
- I drink too much RED Koolaide at times; so posts from you and others are good with balance. I have to admit after Coach Bill and his coaching with friends destruction; it keeps me leary of coach Banker also . He may now have three excellent position coaches; we had some good performances and clutch plays also last year - so excuses end here, or it will be obvious what the problems are.
- If I was the head coach; I would be going Ape-sh__ over these D stats. How do you go into a season without a goal of finishing in the top 10%; with top 20% ok with variables. Other than that, you should be striving; this is why there is a BLACKSHIRTS tradition. GBR
To win the Big10 we need to play defense like Wisconsin has/had under Aranda - we need to play disciplined aggressive defense we also need a defense that causes some turnovers. If the Defense cannot get to a higher level and fast then we could be third in the West in most years forget winning the Big10
Gerry's targeting calls in both the Iowa and UCLA games played apart in giving up some of those long runs.
I'm caustiously optimistic for this year. Parrella has his work cut out for him.
You are correct - Again - and as I stated I would be going Ape as a head coach. Who wants to work with people who don't target the top ten per cent in results : no one on this website. My goal is championships as a football coach; and Coach O targeted improvement in every phase of the game *( saying an off day in one area could be overcome by consistent excellence in others = more wins ). I see a couple position coaches who will never fall out side the top 20 % of coaches at their position in place now; maybe a couple of top ten. DL should move there, with a new goal setting coach also. ... As you show, the price of accepting too much less is not good- they are being paid to win championships, not be civil servants - so it is definitely a different standard. I am a fan, and fanatic at times, but believe it can take time and support : but as you imply, better be trying and then results...... Besides the targeting issues, D's can give up momentum after so many interceptions by their qb ( Imo we/he, gave Iowa the game on a silver platter )..Fans puking in background .
So, I just re-watched the UCLA game. That is supposed to be the "blueprint" going forward this season with TA as the quarterback. Here are some things I noticed:
1.) Running backs: We still had Imani Cross for that game, but the RB's were completely solid. We didn't seem to have a standout star ripping of crazy runs, like we did with Abdullah and Burkhead before him, but we were completely competent.
2.) TA, even when not passing a lot, still doesn't pass well. Frequently over-throws the ball (he has a really insanely strong arm, zing!), frequently makes dodgy passes, but is accurate enough about 50% of the time. Where he DID stand out though, was freaking designed runs. Wow. THAT is going to gash some defenses next year if they use it properly.
3.) O-Line. This was hilarious, watching our guys just completely impose themselves on UCLA's poor defensive line. After the game, one of the UCLA players was saying there was some jawing and shoving on their part simply because they were frustrated; they spent 4 quarters just getting manhandled. I feel great about our O-line going forward.
4.) D-line. They did great, but 4 of them are no longer here (Gangwish, McMullen, Valentine, Collins). These were big dudes and replacing them will not be easy, but I am cautiously optimistic about the ability of the young guys coming up.
5.) Linebackers. These guys performed very, very well because they were basically all back and healthy. We're solid at LB going into the year.
6.) DB's: I agree with all of the above posters. The DB's were terrible at the beginning of the year, and by the time they played this bowl game, they weren't GREAT, but they were good enough to have made a difference.
Having said all of that, recall that we only beat UCLA by 8 points and UCLA did not look like they even wanted to finish the game by the time the 4th quarter rolled around. In order to be the 8-4 or 9-3 team I think we should be next year, we are going to have to play like we did this game, but even better.
Cheers!
Except, Mike Riley said that was not a blueprint going forward, it was just a one off because it was just how they schemed to play UCLA. We should not expect that type of game plan going forward. (I think it should be a blueprint for this year with TA at the controls too)
True about Gangwish playing hard on every snap, but did our two NFL DT's do the same? Gangwish was out for 3-games (maybe we beat Miami with a healthy Gangwish) and when he was back he wasn't 100%.
So by not having 100% effort on every play by our two NFL DT's (or from at least one of them) and not having a healthy Gangwish the holes were even larger.
Good discussion though!
Considering that most announcers by the end of the season were referring to Nebraska's "questionable" offensive play calling, and considering how positively they responded to the UCLA game (oh, look, its classic Nebraska football, pounding the rock and pushing a defensive line around), I think not designing most of our games that way would be stupid. Use the tools we have (a mobile quarterback, a decent running game, FANTASTIC receivers that can be used in creative ways) instead of trying to force people to do things they aren't particularly good at.
A great example, from that game, is they kept saying that UCLA's quarterback, Rosen, is a phenomenal pocket passer (he is), but that he is terrible if you flush him out or design a play that requires him to run around. His accuracy and decision-making just plummet. Sure enough, every time we flushed him out or they designed a play for him to be on the move, it ended it either an incomplete pass or an interception for UCLA. Similarly, we shouldn't have TA passing more than 30-35 times per game. We just don't have that kind of quarterback, and shouldn't force him to do something he's just not great at. He's great at power running and short passes. He's awful at long ones or relying too heavily upon an air attack.
We will be designing our game plans on what the coaches say not what announcers say. As it should be.
You may have just joined the small crowd of idiots, trolls, and negativists.
Think your all right and its semantics. Coach may have meant its not going to be so TA centric as this game; the ball will be distributed more; and many more underhanded screens and basically forward lateral pass( run ) plays. Coach stresses line dominance and he wants to pound the rock ; but in such a way the D is spinning on its feet; wondering who is really carrying / receiving the ball; yes and chuck it deep on occasion.
Against UCLA, we had less than 20 pass attempts and more than 60 rush attempts. This is an unbalanced rushing attack, clearly what the coaching staff does not consider ideal. That is why the UCLA game plan will not be the blueprint.
In 2015 we saw a 52% run play percentage to a 48% pass play percentage [kind of funny based on the reactions of some on here, you'd think we never ran the ball]. In the UCLA game we saw a run/pass percentage of 77% run to 23% pass. It would be stupid for our coaching staff to make our offense that one-dimensional for an entire season. Navy, Army, GaTech have that type of ratio.
I would think in an attempt to maintain balance [consistent with coach Riley's comments] we might see a slight increase in running attempts, in particular the QB running game, but the passing game will remain a big part of the offense. My prediction for 2016 is closer to 55% run and 45% pass. That would have TA attempting around 32 passes per game on average.
I would think in an attempt to maintain balance [consistent with coach Riley's comments] we might see a slight increase in running attempts, in particular the QB running game, but the passing game will remain a big part of the offense. My prediction for 2016 is closer to 55% run and 45% pass. That would have TA attempting around 32 passes per game on average.
Last edited:
I guess it depends on how you interpret what he said, but context and timing are important too. He made some statements about that game afterwards, and I think he was even a bit surprised at how well we ran the ball and how efficient we were. It was as if Mike had found the magic formula that game, and the fans were very happy to hear him talk about all this running stuff and things were really nice last January as we basked in all that.
Then about a month later, he walked all that backwards saying he only meant that he wanted the run game to be more efficient. Which is fine, but I think some fans have this idea that what we saw last bowl game is what we will see in the future.
Mike starts talking about how he wants to improve the screen game and all this good stuff, which is fine, but to me, it doesn't fit TA at all. Tommy is great on long balls and outside stuff. They can certainly try him on shuttle passes, screen game stuff, laterals, etc, but I don't think it is an efficient use of practice time or personnel fit, but we will see what they decide to do this fall. Maybe they do focus more on those things TA does well. They still have time to adjust for it. Tommy didn't pass as much in the spring game, so sometimes I think it's ok to wait and see what actually happens vs what a coach says on any given week.
One thing is for certain, after that magic formula was present for all to see, you can bet the fans will point to that game if things don't go real well this season in the passing game.
I would love to run the ball 80% of the time and dominate like we did in the late 90s ..
but that UCLA defensive front 7 (decimated by injury) was as poor as we will see all year in a power 5 school
I wouldn't use that game as a template for the season
but that UCLA defensive front 7 (decimated by injury) was as poor as we will see all year in a power 5 school
I wouldn't use that game as a template for the season
Our WR group is Moore,Morgan,DPE,Reilly and Westerkamp every last one of these guys catches the ball really well. The position coach has these guys playing at a pretty high level. Our RB's also catch the ball well out of the backfield. If TA can be efficient you are correct this is the best part of our offense. However I do not think with TA as QB that is the smart approach. We have a defense that needs help and time to mature the last thing we need to do is put them behind the eight ball after int's or fail to sustain long drives.
Lets face it a pass centric offense with TA is going to result in turnovers and put our defense in a bad spot even though it is also probably the best way for us to score.
because of our defensive woes I would lean towards a more conservative approach and run the ball more even if that means we do not score as much,
I don't disagree. All I am saying is we should play to our strengths and go with what works. There is no point in trying to "pound the rock" if the running game just isn't there. We need a balanced attack for sure, but if TA can improve and not turn it over then I see our receivers as the strength of this offense.
sound thoughts and I agree - I think the offense will be fine lets hope the defense comes together
I think they will be a lot better than last year, and that the offense will be slightly better than last year. That alone should get us to an 8-4 record. Maybe even better than that.
You know what I do like about Banker? Guy is flat-out a straight shooter. He doesn't shy away from the spotlight when it hits the fan and he's humble when things go well. Either way, he ain't trying to hide anything. I'm definitely not sure if he's the guy for the job, because you honestly have to have "it" to be DC at this level and I'm not sure he does, but I repect the guy and he represents the program with integrity.
One only has to re-watch the Iowa game to see a nightmare example of your point of what doesn't fit TA's game. He was inept; whether something was bothering, there was no explaining it for a qb on the college level. The frustration is seeing it for a critical quarter in multiple games; with seemingly no backup. Does not passing much in the Spring game, shield him at that point?
Full disclosure ... I'm a Cornhusker fan living in Eugene, OR ... so I figured I might as well share my thoughts on Oregon. My family and I also own and operate an inn about a ten minute walk from the inn so I feel as though conversations with season ticket holders have exposed me to the zeitgeist of UofO fandom.
Anyway, here are my thoughts on Oregon as it pertains to the upcoming Nebraska-Oregon game (and series.)
Helfrich - I think there's some serious buyer's remorse going on here. The year before he bolted for Philly, Chip Kelley flirted with the TB job (I realize that makes the Bucs HC job sound like tuberculosis ... although that's likely fitting.) and it was reported in the local media that part of Chip's staying put was that he received a guarantee that Heflrich would be his eventual successor. AND I really don't think he's got the goods. Recruiting hasn't been as prolific, the offense while good isn't on the same level, and the defense (though admittedly it was never off the charts with Kelley,) has not played that same complimentary football kind of roll. I realize that Helfrich's first year was gangbusters, but I believe that was all Marcus. That dude was special.
QB - I think someone in this thread opined that it was surprising that Pelini couldn't leverage Suh into DT recruiting success. That's how Oregon fans feel about QB. You had Marriotta and Manziel (prior to transfer) at the same time and now you have to get EWU and Montana grad transfers to play QB. WTF!!! Prokop could be good but I believe if he is it will be in a dual threat type of way. We could be facing Taysum Hill light but that's a best case scenario and as opposed to the Pelini years I'm relatively at ease with a dual threat guy (not D. Watson but your average dual threat guy.)
Royce Freeman - SCARY!!!! Like think about modern horror movies and then think about the polar opposite of that ... and that's Royce. He's that scary. The 2017 RB draft class is the best in my lifetime (I'm 36) and he might be number 2. Delvin Cook is for sure number 1 IMO (I know that makes me a heretic,) but I think I might like Freeman more than Chubb or Fournette. 225lbs and just glides so effortlessly. Probably just a 4.5 guy, but he's just so agile for a bruiser and then he has that power when he needs it.
WR - OMG speed. Devon Allen just ran the second fasted 110 meter hurdle time of the year (won the Olympic trials) and he's on the football field arguably their third or fourth most dangerous WR. Stanford and Carrington are both studs.
I'm not going to pretend to know a lot about their OL. I know they lost at least two starters. Also, who knows about the defense. They were pretty bad and then they lost a top 10 pick and most of their starters. Hoke will be an improvement at DC, but I'd be shocked if they were plus on D.
I really think we can take this game. We're going to have to score some points, perhaps 30+, but so don't think this Oregon team is any better than last year. That still means that they're a likely top 15-20 team but at home I think we've got a real shot to pull off the upset.
Anyway, here are my thoughts on Oregon as it pertains to the upcoming Nebraska-Oregon game (and series.)
Helfrich - I think there's some serious buyer's remorse going on here. The year before he bolted for Philly, Chip Kelley flirted with the TB job (I realize that makes the Bucs HC job sound like tuberculosis ... although that's likely fitting.) and it was reported in the local media that part of Chip's staying put was that he received a guarantee that Heflrich would be his eventual successor. AND I really don't think he's got the goods. Recruiting hasn't been as prolific, the offense while good isn't on the same level, and the defense (though admittedly it was never off the charts with Kelley,) has not played that same complimentary football kind of roll. I realize that Helfrich's first year was gangbusters, but I believe that was all Marcus. That dude was special.
QB - I think someone in this thread opined that it was surprising that Pelini couldn't leverage Suh into DT recruiting success. That's how Oregon fans feel about QB. You had Marriotta and Manziel (prior to transfer) at the same time and now you have to get EWU and Montana grad transfers to play QB. WTF!!! Prokop could be good but I believe if he is it will be in a dual threat type of way. We could be facing Taysum Hill light but that's a best case scenario and as opposed to the Pelini years I'm relatively at ease with a dual threat guy (not D. Watson but your average dual threat guy.)
Royce Freeman - SCARY!!!! Like think about modern horror movies and then think about the polar opposite of that ... and that's Royce. He's that scary. The 2017 RB draft class is the best in my lifetime (I'm 36) and he might be number 2. Delvin Cook is for sure number 1 IMO (I know that makes me a heretic,) but I think I might like Freeman more than Chubb or Fournette. 225lbs and just glides so effortlessly. Probably just a 4.5 guy, but he's just so agile for a bruiser and then he has that power when he needs it.
WR - OMG speed. Devon Allen just ran the second fasted 110 meter hurdle time of the year (won the Olympic trials) and he's on the football field arguably their third or fourth most dangerous WR. Stanford and Carrington are both studs.
I'm not going to pretend to know a lot about their OL. I know they lost at least two starters. Also, who knows about the defense. They were pretty bad and then they lost a top 10 pick and most of their starters. Hoke will be an improvement at DC, but I'd be shocked if they were plus on D.
I really think we can take this game. We're going to have to score some points, perhaps 30+, but so don't think this Oregon team is any better than last year. That still means that they're a likely top 15-20 team but at home I think we've got a real shot to pull off the upset.
I don't think the solution is to make him one dimensional, you still want him to throw long and to the sidelines, play action stuff, let your WR's adjust and make plays on the ball. I would avoid the dink and dunk, screens, and anything over the middle. That's when Tommy can make mistakes that can really hurt you. The prior staff I think utilized him this way, and yes the opposing DC's did figure that out. We had the middle wide open all day long, but we wouldn't run any routes there. So yeah, that is probably the best way to play him. The only real option is to put a pro style QB into the pro style system to get the best results, but we won't see that until next year, unless things just fall apart or an injury that forces a change at the position.
we better be able to run the ball and chew some clock with sustained drives ... with Oregon's offense the defense - particularly the def line where we have no depth - is going to be gassed and gashed if there are a lot of 3 and outs from our offense
You got that right. Oregon has studs all over the field on offense. Freeman at RB is likely the best RB you will see all year. Brown is a downfield threat at TE. Between Carrington, Nelson, Allen and Stanford that is a deep, big and fast WR group. Speed all over the field.
NUs offense will need to get into the 30s unless Oregons new transfer QB is just garbage.
