Chatelain: It's a running battle with playcaller Tim Beck

[Count 'Bility]

Ameer is a great RB, probably the best in the nation. That doesn't mean he should touch the ball 100% of the time. Even the best RB in the nation can't have a good day if all 11 guys on defense know that he's going to get the ball every time.

Our offense has to keep the defense honest, and we have the ability to with receivers like Kenny Bell, Jordan Westerkamp, and DPE. The only way you keep them honest is by throwing the ball their way.

Every offensive coordinator in the country gives their respective fan base "what the hell are you doing?" moments. Beck is not the exception, but rather the rule. Sometimes it comes down to executing the play. When things go right, the players get all the credit. When things go wrong, it's the offensive coordinator's fault.

You could say, "if we can't execute those plays, why call them?" It's not that simple. Maybe we have executed those plays in the past or in practice, but came up empty during the game. How is the OC supposed to predict the future?

Few words I've rarely heard from our fans, "Excellent play call."

These are very good points.

I think execution is one big thing a lot of people forget, especially. For example, Chatelain mentioned that on the drive after Abdullah ripped off his second 50-yard run, we passed three straight times and it resulted in an interception. The first pass was a play-action. I don't think that's a bad play call. Abdullah just ripped them twice for big gainers, so, let's do a play action because the defense may be expecting us to run again.

The problem, of course, is it fell incomplete. 2nd and 10. Run or pass? Running will likely get you at least a couple of yards, so you're still in 3rd and 5 or 3rd and long. Passing could net you a big gain or get you to third and manageable, depending on the play call. We passed, it fell incomplete. Now, it's 3rd and Long. A must-pass situation that ended poorly.

All of that could have been avoided had the play-action worked. I still like that idea, but I may have run on second down instead of trying to pass. Offenses are a definite balance of match-ups, playcalling and execution, but again, I do think people really over look the execution part sometimes.

Certainly.

I think what may get to a majority of Husker fans the most is the idea that Abdullah is almost a sure gain of at least 3 yards whereas a pass from TA risks 0 or worse, an INT. So it might be an issue of probability. Do you take the almost assured 3 yards? Or do you risk an INT or an incomplete for a bigger play?

I'd say 3rd and 7 isn't much different than 3rd and 10.

3rd down efficiency by the way, Nebraska ranks 19th in the nation, converting nearly half of their 108 3rd down plays.

But it's nice to gripe about something. A loss to Michigan State doesn't quite have the staying power as an "inconsistent" offensive coordinator.

I think the main deal is, you go 3 straight plays without giving your superstar the ball.

We've gone 3 straight plays where he does get the ball. Do they offset?

I dont know. Youre the math analyst of the board.

Im just sayin that that could very well be where some of the angst comes from.

The main thing is that in two games already this year that follow previous trends (loss on the big stage, and what coulda/maybe should been a loss to far inferior opponent), the offense has been a massive failure. That's all I'm lookin at. That's why I find myself being overly critical of it. What's gonna happen when we go up to Madison? What'll happen when we face Michigan St again, or a more talented Ohio St? I just havent seen anything yet against stellar competition (Miami aside, and that's very debateable as to whether theyre stellar) to suggest we're really that good.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

I dont know. Youre the math analyst of the board.

Im just sayin that that could very well be where some of the angst comes from.

The main thing is that in two games already this year that follow previous trends (loss on the big stage, and what coulda/maybe should been a loss to far inferior opponent), the offense has been a massive failure. That's all I'm lookin at. That's why I find myself being overly critical of it. What's gonna happen when we go up to Madison? What'll happen when we face Michigan St again, or a more talented Ohio St? I just havent seen anything yet against stellar competition (Miami aside, and that's very debateable as to whether theyre stellar) to suggest we're really that good.

If we score a TD on that last drive against Michigan State, would your opinion be any different?

 

[Count 'Bility]

I dont know. Youre the math analyst of the board.

Im just sayin that that could very well be where some of the angst comes from.

The main thing is that in two games already this year that follow previous trends (loss on the big stage, and what coulda/maybe should been a loss to far inferior opponent), the offense has been a massive failure. That's all I'm lookin at. That's why I find myself being overly critical of it. What's gonna happen when we go up to Madison? What'll happen when we face Michigan St again, or a more talented Ohio St? I just havent seen anything yet against stellar competition (Miami aside, and that's very debateable as to whether theyre stellar) to suggest we're really that good.

If we score a TD on that last drive against Michigan State, would your opinion be any different?

I'd a been giddy like a little girl on her birthday cuz we won. But it wouldnt take away from the fact that we clearly didnt come ready to play in that game. Why does THAT continue to happen? The oline was flat. We couldnt execute some basics of football. It was straight up ugly for 3 quarters, again. But yeah, i credit them for staying in and almost stealing it. And this is why it's almost a blessing we didnt win, cuz all that I just mentioned would just be forgotten, rather then being discussed that there still some psychological issues with this team when it comes to a big stage with something to prove.

 

[QMany]

The main thing is that in two games already this year that follow previous trends (loss on the big stage, and what coulda/maybe should been a loss to far inferior opponent), the offense has been a massive failure. That's all I'm lookin at.

Interestingly enough, in those two games, Ameer was stuffed.

 

[Mavric]

#StickWithWhatWorks


Jon Nyatawa ‏@JonNyatawa 28m28 minutes ago
OC Tim Beck: #Huskers scored 3 TDs on the same running play (3 different formations) vs Rutgers. Essentially had 3 run calls in the 2nd half

What exactly is Nyatawa trying to say here? That we ran the ball only three times in the second half?

That having thrown two touchdown passes, we should also try to throw more touchdown passes?

That it was wrong to give the bulk of carries to Cross and Newby in a game already decided?

That we ran basically the same three plays over and over again in the second half. They just looked different because the were out of different formations. We scored three TDs on the same play, it just looks different from the outside.

I think he's pointing out that our offense looks like we're doing a lot of different things because of all the different formations we use but we actually have a few base plays that we run all the time.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Ameer is a great RB, probably the best in the nation. That doesn't mean he should touch the ball 100% of the time. Even the best RB in the nation can't have a good day if all 11 guys on defense know that he's going to get the ball every time.

Our offense has to keep the defense honest, and we have the ability to with receivers like Kenny Bell, Jordan Westerkamp, and DPE. The only way you keep them honest is by throwing the ball their way.

Every offensive coordinator in the country gives their respective fan base "what the hell are you doing?" moments. Beck is not the exception, but rather the rule. Sometimes it comes down to executing the play. When things go right, the players get all the credit. When things go wrong, it's the offensive coordinator's fault.

You could say, "if we can't execute those plays, why call them?" It's not that simple. Maybe we have executed those plays in the past or in practice, but came up empty during the game. How is the OC supposed to predict the future?

Few words I've rarely heard from our fans, "Excellent play call."

These are very good points.

I think execution is one big thing a lot of people forget, especially. For example, Chatelain mentioned that on the drive after Abdullah ripped off his second 50-yard run, we passed three straight times and it resulted in an interception. The first pass was a play-action. I don't think that's a bad play call. Abdullah just ripped them twice for big gainers, so, let's do a play action because the defense may be expecting us to run again.

The problem, of course, is it fell incomplete. 2nd and 10. Run or pass? Running will likely get you at least a couple of yards, so you're still in 3rd and 5 or 3rd and long. Passing could net you a big gain or get you to third and manageable, depending on the play call. We passed, it fell incomplete. Now, it's 3rd and Long. A must-pass situation that ended poorly.

All of that could have been avoided had the play-action worked. I still like that idea, but I may have run on second down instead of trying to pass. Offenses are a definite balance of match-ups, playcalling and execution, but again, I do think people really over look the execution part sometimes.

Certainly.

I think what may get to a majority of Husker fans the most is the idea that Abdullah is almost a sure gain of at least 3 yards whereas a pass from TA risks 0 or worse, an INT. So it might be an issue of probability. Do you take the almost assured 3 yards? Or do you risk an INT or an incomplete for a bigger play?

That's what people fear, but the statistics are pretty clear: we average 8.0 yards per pass play and 6.2 yards per rushing play, and have the same number of fumbles as we do interceptions while rushing the ball at a 5:3 ratio over passing.

Phrasing the situation as an "assured" 3 yards versus the risk of an INT or incompletion shows an irrational bias. Like many NCAA teams and virtually every NFL team, there's a high percentage pass to get the 3 or 4 yards needed for a first down. Each pass isn't a big play risk, nor is it "getting cute." It's just an integral part of the game of football.

Again, we've had multiple series where Tim Beck ran the ball three consecutive times to Abdullah, who failed to get the first down. No one suggests we should abandon Abdullah and the run at that point. And if we have one series a game with three incomplete passes, it should be graded on the same level.

And if we basically dominated the game, scored 41 points and won going away on a record setting day for both rushers and receivers, it's really odd to fixate on that series where we threw three passes.

 

[zoogs]

I think anyone who has watched Nebraska this year would agree that there's nothing assured about a 3 yard gain. If we could guarantee staying on schedule just by running the ball and get to 3rd & 4 or less every time, we'd do it. There are no guarantees. Abdullah's exceptional playmaking ability do not prevent him from being stuffed at the line twice in a row, and certainly things wouldn't be helped if we telegraphed our tendencies even more.

 

[HUSKER FREAK]

I think that I would like to see more series with passing and rushing together to mix it up more than just one or the other. Although when we are grinding the clock and being productive on the ground we need to use it as we have. I don't think Beck has done a bad job it just seems that way sometimes because he goes all pass or all run a lot of the times except third and long when rushing, which isn't fooling anybody.

 

[Mavric]

We also threw three straight passes on both the first two possessions of the second half. I wonder why no one is talking about those?

 

[Count 'Bility]

We also threw three straight passes on both the first two possessions of the second half. I wonder why no one is talking about those?

Because they worked and we scored. Duh.

Yeah, i know. Im not very good at this negative pessy crap. I gettin back on the koolaid train.

 

[QMany]

I gettin back on the koolaid train.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Ameer is a great RB, probably the best in the nation. That doesn't mean he should touch the ball 100% of the time. Even the best RB in the nation can't have a good day if all 11 guys on defense know that he's going to get the ball every time.

Our offense has to keep the defense honest, and we have the ability to with receivers like Kenny Bell, Jordan Westerkamp, and DPE. The only way you keep them honest is by throwing the ball their way.

Every offensive coordinator in the country gives their respective fan base "what the hell are you doing?" moments. Beck is not the exception, but rather the rule. Sometimes it comes down to executing the play. When things go right, the players get all the credit. When things go wrong, it's the offensive coordinator's fault.

You could say, "if we can't execute those plays, why call them?" It's not that simple. Maybe we have executed those plays in the past or in practice, but came up empty during the game. How is the OC supposed to predict the future?

Few words I've rarely heard from our fans, "Excellent play call."

These are very good points.

I think execution is one big thing a lot of people forget, especially. For example, Chatelain mentioned that on the drive after Abdullah ripped off his second 50-yard run, we passed three straight times and it resulted in an interception. The first pass was a play-action. I don't think that's a bad play call. Abdullah just ripped them twice for big gainers, so, let's do a play action because the defense may be expecting us to run again.

The problem, of course, is it fell incomplete. 2nd and 10. Run or pass? Running will likely get you at least a couple of yards, so you're still in 3rd and 5 or 3rd and long. Passing could net you a big gain or get you to third and manageable, depending on the play call. We passed, it fell incomplete. Now, it's 3rd and Long. A must-pass situation that ended poorly.

All of that could have been avoided had the play-action worked. I still like that idea, but I may have run on second down instead of trying to pass. Offenses are a definite balance of match-ups, playcalling and execution, but again, I do think people really over look the execution part sometimes.

Certainly.

I think what may get to a majority of Husker fans the most is the idea that Abdullah is almost a sure gain of at least 3 yards whereas a pass from TA risks 0 or worse, an INT. So it might be an issue of probability. Do you take the almost assured 3 yards? Or do you risk an INT or an incomplete for a bigger play?

That's what people fear, but the statistics are pretty clear: we average 8.0 yards per pass play and 6.2 yards per rushing play, and have the same number of fumbles as we do interceptions while rushing the ball at a 5:3 ratio over passing.

Phrasing the situation as an "assured" 3 yards versus the risk of an INT or incompletion shows an irrational bias. Like many NCAA teams and virtually every NFL team, there's a high percentage pass to get the 3 or 4 yards needed for a first down. Each pass isn't a big play risk, nor is it "getting cute." It's just an integral part of the game of football.

Again, we've had multiple series where Tim Beck ran the ball three consecutive times to Abdullah, who failed to get the first down. No one suggests we should abandon Abdullah and the run at that point. And if we have one series a game with three incomplete passes, it should be graded on the same level.

And if we basically dominated the game, scored 41 points and won going away on a record setting day for both rushers and receivers, it's really odd to fixate on that series where we threw three passes.

I'm trying to get at the mindset of Husker fans, who think that running with Ameer is an assured 3 yards. I completely agree that Ameer isn't an automatic 3 yards, but I think that is what some people here think.

 

[Hayseed]

The article seems like a cheap shot to me, which is typical of Dirk;....always trying to get a rise. Somehow he thinks some great strategery should have overcome that weak effort by the Jimmys and Joes who basically got the same plays they've gotten all season but couldn't execute against a defense that did it's job.

If you want to blame the coaches, blame them for not gameplanning around the best players on the offense.......which would include Ameer (tried that), Pierson-El (didn't try that), and Westercamp (half-hearted try). I'd say Bell but he appears to be terminally injured and we just have to be happy with whatever he's able to do.

Once again, it has a heck of a lot more to do with the Jimmys and the Joes than the Timmys and the Bos.

 

[walksalone]

How about Beck's dumb a$$, sticking to what works, instead of trying to be the smartest guy in the room...

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

How about Beck's dumb a$$, sticking to what works, instead of trying to be the smartest guy in the room...

You really haven't bothered to read this thread, have you?