junior4949
New member
I know exactly when Turman played. The point was the 95' team was so dominating that it didn't matter who played QB. Turman was on the 95' team, and he could have led us to a NC.
What did we learn-Wyoming edition
- Thread starter JJ Husker
- Start date
Count 'Bility
Banned
i gottscha. just going along with the fun of the thread where everyone is nitpicking every little detail everyone says.
junior4949
New member
This is where the power running guys are coming from. A lot of our success and failure as a team now heavily rests on Armstrong. The power running game guys would like to see an offense where you take a lot of that pressure off of the QB like we did in the 90's and like Bama does now. Unfortunately, it isn't quite that easy. I doubt we ever get the OL like Bama gets and like what we were producing in-state back then. We don't have to run just a certain offense to be successful. We just have to get the best guys we can get and run an offense with a purpose or identity if you will.
admo
New member
Ok just going to throw this out there...
A lot of our success and failure as a team now and in recent years, heavily rests on athletic-style quarterbacks (Armstrong, TMartinez), a JUCO (ZLee), a gutsy-gambler (Ganz), a transfer (Keller), another JUCO (ZTaylor), and a Joe Dailey. Plus a few walkons in the mix.
And there have been some great running backs to help but in a lesser role.
Or something kinda like that.
Count 'Bility
Banned
i already covered that. 9 wins yo
Jeremy
New member
I'll admit, I'm a Run the Ball Guy. But, as much as I love the option/power run-option, it's becoming increasingly clear that won't ever happen at UNL again, unless we went hard after Johnson or Calhoun; very low probability. Even the Golden Boy Scott Frost wouldn't bring the Ozbone back to Lincoln were he hired - his offense would be very Oregon-ish, and maybe that wouldn't be so horrible.
Michigan State is pro-style? Eh, maybe. They're pro style in the way the 49ers were under Harbaugh; definitely run-first, downhill stuff. I would agree that if we were to emulate anyone, Michigan State wouldn't be a bad choice - They love their ISOs, pitches, fly sweeps, and good play-action.They love bigger backs that hit gaps hard and break tackles - I think all of us can appreciate that. So, if Riley is trending more in that direction, more power to him. I would have faith that that kind of plan, at least offensively, could bring the Big Red back into National Title Discussion.
Michigan State is pro-style? Eh, maybe. They're pro style in the way the 49ers were under Harbaugh; definitely run-first, downhill stuff. I would agree that if we were to emulate anyone, Michigan State wouldn't be a bad choice - They love their ISOs, pitches, fly sweeps, and good play-action.They love bigger backs that hit gaps hard and break tackles - I think all of us can appreciate that. So, if Riley is trending more in that direction, more power to him. I would have faith that that kind of plan, at least offensively, could bring the Big Red back into National Title Discussion.
Last edited by a moderator:
Landlord
Banned
Not sure, but most metrics that I've seen rank Navy's coach as being among the top "overachievers" in terms of talent and expected wins. Mavric had a post on it a while back.
http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2016/7/15/12200790/second-order-wins-college-football-pat-fitzgerald-kevin-wilson
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2016/7/18/12211730/ncaa-football-coaches-overrated-underrated
What would be interesting would be to analyze the % of coaches in the 90th percentile who run a mobile-QB based system versus the % who run a more traditional pro-style QB based system. Conversely, I wonder where they numbers fall in the bottom 10th percentile.
As for whether this is relevant to what we learned watching the Wyoming game, I think it actually is because what we learned after our first two games is that we want to try to be all things at all times - personally, I don't see that producing much consistency in the long term.