We are in the top 20 for average yards per rush...

[Tulsa Tom]

We come in 19th with an average of 5.38 yards per carry.
We rank 90th in the number of rushing attempts per game.

We rank 69th in average yards per pass attempt.
We rank 33rd in number of passing attempts per game.

Maybe we should chew on that.

 

[Tulsa Tom]

I'm all in for this team. I think we can still win a lot of games if we understand who we are and play to our strengths.

 

[tstaup]

Agreed. Get more linemen pulling to the edge, Zo on the key sweep, Westy in seams, Jano banging it inside, Tommy on the option, DPE in the screen game.

Use creative formations and action to disguise those outcomes and you have a potent offense.

 

[headcard]

Good stuff TT. This staff really needs to evaluate who we are vs who we want to be. I think our early success passing the ball might have been the worst thing that could have happened to this O.

 

[TruHusker]

Agreed. Get more linemen pulling to the edge, Zo on the key sweep, Westy in seams, Jano banging it inside, Tommy on the option, DPE in the screen game.

Use creative formations and action to disguise those outcomes and you have a potent offense.

Too bad our coaches can't figure that out, it sounds pretty simple.

 

[Tuco Ramirez]

I think we should run more, but...
In the days of option football, we usually ranked pretty high in yards per pass. (Tommie Frazier's and Peyton Manning's don't look much different on a "per attempt" basis.) Texas Tech had pretty good averages for their running backs under Leach, if I recall. Playing your off suit can be effective in limited scenarios, but it doesn't necessarily translate to being able to do it when you need to, as we have seen with this team.
Also, if those averages are being led by Tommy, I don't necessarily want to see him getting a lot more carries per game, either designed or on the scramble. They add up and can make him less effective in other areas.

 

[Tulsa Tom]

1. I think you are wrong about our passing during our days of option football days. We may have ranked high in terms of averages per pass completed but not pass attempt. We just didn't complete enough...Frazier was lucky to get to 50%.

2. Our rushing averages are against defenses who are stacking the box. First, why wouldn't they dare us to pass since we have been horribly inefficient? Second, we know this is true because Tommy and our coaches keep talking about safeties moving up and leaving things open in the passing game. A team like Tech may have a higher rushing average because you can't blitz them so you might as well just sit back in coverage opening the running game...but that is not true of us.

3. Those averages are not led by Tommy. He is actually averaging less yards per carry this year than last year. Plus, last year he ran the ball 11 times a game...this year it is 7. In many ways he is dragging our average down since he averages a yard less per carry than the average of the rest of the team.

If you drill down in the numbers, it only makes sense to run the ball more.

 

[Hskerhd]

The proverbial "square peg, round hole " offense that we were told was not a concern going into the season has become a reality.

 

[Archie Graham]

We come in 19th with an average of 5.38 yards per carry.
We rank 90th in the number of rushing attempts per game.

We rank 69th in average yards per pass attempt.
We rank 33rd in number of passing attempts per game.

Maybe we should chew on that.

Question Tom. Should we be running more than we did against WI?

I'm interested to know your thoughts on this because as the game went on WI's backers and safeties played close and closer to the LOS. Teams are going to continue to do this given that Tommy is really struggling badly right now.

 

[Yossarian23]

1. I think you are wrong about our passing during our days of option football days. We may have ranked high in terms of averages per pass completed but not pass attempt. We just didn't complete enough...Frazier was lucky to get to 50%.

Tuco is right. Since the yards per completion is so much higher for Frazier (15.2) compared to Manning (13), their yards per attempt are much closer than one would expect out of Frazier (7.5) and Manning (8.1). Frazier's completions went 17% longer, while Manning's attempts were only 8% longer.

Interestingly, in Adjusted Yards per Attempt, their career averages are exactly the same. 8.3.

Manning Stats

Frazier Stats

 

[anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi]

Too bad our coaches can't figure that out, it sounds pretty simple.

Our lineman are not mobile. They are very slow, and a part of why the screen game to the backs really kind of sucks.

 

[St. Anger]

But by all means, let's keep passing.

 

[Tulsa Tom]

Tuco is right. Since the yards per completion is so much higher for Frazier (15.2) compared to Manning (13), their yards per attempt are much closer than one would expect out of Frazier (7.5) and Manning (8.1). Frazier's completions went 17% longer, while Manning's attempts were only 8% longer.

Interestingly, in Adjusted Yards per Attempt, their career averages are exactly the same. 8.3.

Manning Stats

Frazier Stats

Well, Tommy averages exactly what Frazier averaged in yards per pass (7.5) and most here recognize that it is not all that good.

 

[Yossarian23]

Well, Tommy averages exactly what Frazier averaged in yards per pass (7.5) and most here recognize that it is not all that good.

Wasn't talking about today. The comparison of yards per pass/attempt during our halcyon days to that of a more prolific pass offense, during roughly the same time period, was put out there. You incorrectly stated that yards per attempt would be much less in that comparison. I found stats to back up what Tuco originally asserted. I only quoted your #1, because that was the only part I was replying to...nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Tuco Ramirez]

Well, Tommy averages exactly what Frazier averaged in yards per pass (7.5) and most here recognize that it is not all that good.

I actually don't have much of an issue with his ypa, although per my calculation it's closer to 7.1 (1500 yards/210 attempts). I think 6-7 ypa is respectable. I do have issue with completion percentage. I'd rather see a higher completion percentage with a lower ypa, because that's not much different than a decent run game. If you pass half the time and half your passes aren't complete, you're going to get off schedule frequently and end a lot of drives without much yardage. But it seems like they really avoid the middle of the field, unless it's a screen.

And you are correct on opponents loading the box and Tommy not leading the ypcarry. Newby is pretty close to our combined. Points taken.

 

[Tulsa Tom]

Wasn't talking about today. The comparison of yards per pass/attempt during our halcyon days to that of a more prolific pass offense, during roughly the same time period, was put out there. You incorrectly stated that yards per attempt would be much less in that comparison. I found stats to back up what Tuco originally asserted. I only quoted your #1, because that was the only part I was replying to...nothing more, nothing less.

Sorry...but 7.5 and 8.1 are not close at all. 7.5 and 8.1 are over twenty spots different if you look at the charts today. (I don't have the charts from 1995 and 1997. There is no reason it would be that much different.) You saying those numbers are similar is like me saying our current rushing yards per carry average ranking of #19 is very similar to the #1 per carry average. If I said that I would be chided unendingly.

 

[Tulsa Tom]

With all of that said, I get Tuco's point. If you have an identity of run first you may have a high ypa average in the opposite area. This year you can see that with Army who is 4th in ypa when passing the ball and Texas Tech who is 6th in ypa when rushing the ball.

I just don't think we have an identity so I'm not sure that his point applies to us this year although it did in 1995.

p.s. Tuco on Tommy's stats I was looking at career stats like was done with Frazier and Manning. You are right for this year. Tommy simply hasn't done as well.

 

[Tulsa Tom]

I think the issue is what is the purpose of running or passing. I would argue that even an incompletion could be construed as beneficial when Tommie was playing Yes, it was great to get yards by completing passes but a few well-timed passes kept the defense off balance. I guess I'm making your point that passing yards per attempt wasn't a critical issue to the '95 team...certainly not as important as ypa in terms of rushing.

I don't think the same can be said of this year's team. We aren't running the ball just so we can pass it better. We are trying to get balance so our ypa's in both passing and rushing matter.

 

[jflores]

I think the issue is what is the purpose of running or passing. I would argue that even an incompletion could be construed as beneficial when Tommie was playing Yes, it was great to get yards by completing passes but a few well-timed passes kept the defense off balance. I guess I'm making your point that passing yards per attempt wasn't a critical issue to the '95 team...certainly not as important as ypa in terms of rushing.

I don't think the same can be said of this year's team. We aren't running the ball just so we can pass it better. We are trying to get balance so our ypa's in both passing and rushing matter.

I can't remember which former player said this, or it may have been multiple, but most coaches don't abandon a system that they have. They will "introduce alternate concepts" or "tailor it a little", but that usually doesn't indicate that a given coach is going to switch whole hog from a WCO balance type of offense to a run heavy spread offense.

Now if you look at just what's happening, you can see remarkable "symmetry" in what NU is doing. 216 rush attempts to 218 pass attempts. By luck or design, that's pretty darn even for even a staff who aspires to such symmetry.

If you break down the rush attempts, we basically have two primary ball carriers. Newby and Armstrong. Newby with 90 carries, Armstrong with 45. So you have a 2:1 ratio between a back and QB making things happen (by design or on a break down). Cross Janovich hover around 20 carries, and Ozigbo 12. The receivers are hovering around 10 carries each for those who get to carry the ball.

I think if you broke down the situation, whether its a anything goes down (1st and 10 or 2nd an 7), and charted the percentage vs 3rd and short, vs the percentage of "changeup" plays like fly sweep or gadget plays, you'd get a fairly good correlation to our carries chart.

So no, its obvious that Riley and Langsdorf aren't from the TO school of offense. But if you change offensive systems, and your QB is still the 2nd most rushed guy on the team, and his overall carries per game drop by 4 from "the good old days", I'd have a hard time saying that *by the numbers* you've pulled him way away from his groove too far. Now watching the game and ignoring the numbers its apparent we can make more hay running TA a little more. There's a lot that can be said about whether our run game is good or not, or whether we should use it more, but when you put pen to paper and look at the ratios of carries and what happening in games situationally, its too beautifully arithmetically structured to be random chaos.

 

[Archie Graham]

Question Tom. Should we be running more than we did against WI?

I'm interested to know your thoughts on this because as the game went on WI's backers and safeties played close and closer to the LOS. Teams are going to continue to do this given that Tommy is really struggling badly right now.

BUMP for @Tulsa Tom

 

[Hail King Merlin]

We come in 19th with an average of 5.38 yards per carry.
We rank 90th in the number of rushing attempts per game.

We rank 69th in average yards per pass attempt.
We rank 33rd in number of passing attempts per game.

Maybe we should chew on that.

Maybe you settle for Mediocre?

 

[Archie Graham]

The proverbial "square peg, round hole " offense that we were told was not a concern going into the season has become a reality.

Completely false. The coaching staff went heavy pass early in the year PRECISELY because they felt it would match our personnel better. That's what you want a staff to do.

I'm still trying to get an answer to whether people think we should run more than we did against WI. They started stacking the hell out of the box knowing that Tommy was struggling really badly to complete simple passes. So what do you do? Run more? What balance do people wish to see knowing that most teams are going to push linebackers and safeties forward.

 

[Hoosker Du]

Now if we were consistent enough to run the ball when we need to, we would be in decent shape. Our OLine and RBs don't give me confidence that we can.

 

[Tulsa Tom]

BUMP for @Tulsa Tom

In normal circumstances I liked the overall 2nd half ratio. However it was obvious as the game progressed that Tommy didn't have it. In the 2nd half he was 2-11 for sixteen yards. In that case you keep running it. We ended up averaging over six yards a carry in the 2nd half.

 

[jflores]

Completely false. The coaching staff went heavy pass early in the year PRECISELY because they felt it would match our personnel better. That's what you want a staff to do.

I'm still trying to get an answer to whether people think we should run more than we did against WI. They started stacking the hell out of the box knowing that Tommy was struggling really badly to complete simple passes. So what do you do? Run more? What balance do people wish to see knowing that most teams are going to push linebackers and safeties forward.

So what's funny about the situation is that for our opponents, people clearly have no problem advocating that running teams throw the ball because our pass defense is obviously terrible. It goes against their identity sure, but any idiot would throw when you cover like we do.

If teams stack the box against us and we throw, all hell breaks loose. We can't accept our own diagnosis.

Some of the ire is certainly earned, we do give up at times running the ball early when teams haven't quite clamped down on us. But even when we have a legit need to pass, people just complain we don't dive into line to at least give them a battering.

 

[Tuco Ramirez]

I agree with the lack of offensive identity, particularly in the run game. Maybe the bouncing around of the depth chart can be chalked up to the transition years and the coaches are still figuring out what they have in the toolbox. But there just seems to be a lack of rhythm. Look at the use of Janovich, for example. No touches for three games. Then we unleash the secret weapon against Southern Miss of all teams, but mostly as a change-up type play that quick hitting up the belly play to compliment our stretch plays. Nice, really. Then comes Illinois and he gets 11 carries (most carries for the team), some of which out of one back sets if I recall. Then pretty much nothing for the first half of Wisconsin, until he breaks out a nice old school fullback trap out the Maryland I near the end of the game. I get trying to be unpredictable, but this just darn right haphazard. What does Langs have faith in? Is there a run play were he has faith his team has an advantage at any given time? Does he have one?
Then there is the QB run game. Early in the season, we see a little option (don't know if it was really an option, or just a keeper all the way.) We see the read option. This last game it was just an overload to one side and see if Tommy can outrun the field.

 

[SnohomishRed]

I can't remember which former player said this, or it may have been multiple, but most coaches don't abandon a system that they have. They will "introduce alternate concepts" or "tailor it a little", but that usually doesn't indicate that a given coach is going to switch whole hog from a WCO balance type of offense to a run heavy spread offense.

Now if you look at just what's happening, you can see remarkable "symmetry" in what NU is doing. 216 rush attempts to 218 pass attempts. By luck or design, that's pretty darn even for even a staff who aspires to such symmetry.

If you break down the rush attempts, we basically have two primary ball carriers. Newby and Armstrong. Newby with 90 carries, Armstrong with 45. So you have a 2:1 ratio between a back and QB making things happen (by design or on a break down). Cross Janovich hover around 20 carries, and Ozigbo 12. The receivers are hovering around 10 carries each for those who get to carry the ball.

I think if you broke down the situation, whether its a anything goes down (1st and 10 or 2nd an 7), and charted the percentage vs 3rd and short, vs the percentage of "changeup" plays like fly sweep or gadget plays, you'd get a fairly good correlation to our carries chart.

So no, its obvious that Riley and Langsdorf aren't from the TO school of offense. But if you change offensive systems, and your QB is still the 2nd most rushed guy on the team, and his overall carries per game drop by 4 from "the good old days", I'd have a hard time saying that *by the numbers* you've pulled him way away from his groove too far. Now watching the game and ignoring the numbers its apparent we can make more hay running TA a little more. There's a lot that can be said about whether our run game is good or not, or whether we should use it more, but when you put pen to paper and look at the ratios of carries and what happening in games situationally, its too beautifully arithmetically structured to be random chaos.

But you say Riley and Langsdorf are not from the TO school of offense and will do what they have been comfortable doing - See this is what I do not get the good coaches do change they offenses and their defenses they continually evolve

TO did exactly that if you would have looked his earlier offenses they would have looked very similar balance wise to what we currently do. In fact I can remember it was always a point of prode that we were balanced. WhenTO changed the offense to run heavy is whne our offense really took off - it was not terrible before that. So the fact he was willing to make a change to something that was not broke showed guts, vision and the ability to be open minded. I wish these coaches would be as open minded just becuase something worked 10 years ago does not make it the right fit here and now

 

[timnsun]

But you say Riley and Langsdorf are not from the TO school of offense and will do what they have been comfortable doing - See this is what I do not get the good coaches do change they offenses and their defenses they continually evolve

TO did exactly that if you would have looked his earlier offenses they would have looked very similar balance wise to what we currently do. In fact I can remember it was always a point of prode that we were balanced. WhenTO changed the offense to run heavy is whne our offense really took off - it was not terrible before that. So the fact he was willing to make a change to something that was not broke showed guts, vision and the ability to be open minded. I wish these coaches would be as open minded just becuase something worked 10 years ago does not make it the right fit here and now

I hear what you're saying, but TO did it after many years in Nebraska. You're asking Riley to do it after 6 games. The more we struggle in the air, he may see the light. But 6 games really isn't fair to hold him to what TO learned after many years...

 

[Yossarian23]

Sorry...but 7.5 and 8.1 are not close at all. 7.5 and 8.1 are over twenty spots different if you look at the charts today. (I don't have the charts from 1995 and 1997. There is no reason it would be that much different.) You saying those numbers are similar is like me saying our current rushing yards per carry average ranking of #19 is very similar to the #1 per carry average. If I said that I would be chided unendingly.

If you said they were not close because the 8% difference between them is significant, I'd disagree but I would understand your logic for coming to that conclusion.

But you're taking two career numbers and wedging them into a season stat ranking, from a season that happened nearly twenty years later than the careers ended. I can find seasons (2008 and a few others in the late 2000's) that those two numbers are only 13-15 spots different, does that suddenly make the numbers more similar to you? Hopefully the answer is no, because cherry picking later years makes no sense.

Stat rankings can be misleading in general as well. We're at 19th with 5.4 yards per carry. That's not far behind #1 Baylor because we're 18 spots behind...it's far behind because it's 31% less than Baylor's 7.4 ypc.

#87 SMU has 4.0 ypc. Auburn is #59 at 4.4 ypc. By your logic of using stat rankings, there's a bigger gap between SMU and Auburn (28 spots) than between us and #1. But there's only 10% difference in their actual ypc. I'd say they're fairly similar...especially when compared to the difference between us and Baylor.

I'd argue that the stats say we're closer to Auburn (20% difference) than we are to Baylor, despite being 18 spots behind Baylor and 40 ahead of Auburn.

 

[Archie Graham]

In normal circumstances I liked the overall 2nd half ratio. However it was obvious as the game progressed that Tommy didn't have it. In the 2nd half he was 2-11 for sixteen yards. In that case you keep running it. We ended up averaging over six yards a carry in the 2nd half.

Thanks. What does that data look like without Jano's run?

 

[Tulsa Tom]

Thanks. What does that data look like without Jano's run?

Jano's run was a direct result of pulling the dbacks up...just like you were talking about. Once he broke the line there was no one left. Why would we exclude that?

 

[Archie Graham]

Jano's run was a direct result of pulling the dbacks up...just like you were talking about. Once he broke the line there was no one left. Why would we exclude that?

I'm fine with considering it; however, I also think one needs to consider averaged data without huge plays to see how we look in their absence. Same goes for Tommy's numbers without the big catch before half.

 

[Tuco Ramirez]

I think it also matters that it was one of the last ones that was run. If the coaches are looking at what is working, that particular play had little effect on their mindset. If the argument is that we were running well, but they insisted on throwing, that particular run isn't very compelling support for the argument. Tommie getting hot at the end of the first half probably was still in their head.

 

[Tulsa Tom]

Even if we play this game of taking away our biggest run we still averaged almost 4 yards per rush (3.91). That isn't great but still is OK. It's a lot better than trusting in a qb who is completing 37 percent of his passes and throwing for 88 yards over the course of a game for a gain of 3.25 yards per attempt.

 

[CC_Lemming]

Yet no one seems to see, or they just neglect entirely, that there is a direct correlation between running efficiency and keeping defenses honest by passing the ball.

The passing game was pretty darn good for 3 of our 6 games, and while I join those lamenting the offense's performance as of late, and TA's regression, I do not take the above rushing statistics to be indicative of our ability to run the ball absent the passing statistics.

 

[Archie Graham]

Even if we play this game of taking away our biggest run we still averaged almost 4 yards per rush (3.91). That isn't great but still is OK. It's a lot better than trusting in a qb who is completing 37 percent of his passes and throwing for 88 yards over the course of a game for a gain of 3.25 yards per attempt.

I don't really have a problem with your position but I think the coaches have to do what they can to maximize our current roster while concurrently installing their offense. That is going to require something out of Tommy's arm. It's unfortunate we don't have better raw talent at QB/RB this year. Hopefully POB comes in hungry because I'm more convinced than ever that he has a legit chance to win the job by conference play next year.

 

[Hoosker Du]

I don't know if anyone listened to Logan Larson on 1620, but he mentioned that we still don't get a push from the OLine on the interior runs. And when you have a starting RB that isn't the most decisive runner, that isn't the greatest combination. He does like our OLine's athleticism on the stretch plays.