What Did We Learn?.....Purdue

Just now checking into this thread. Haven't read through any of it.

I'd just say that continue to see really bad tackling. Our kicker had one of the best tackles of the night and I'm barely even exaggerating that.

 
I learned that in down times, watching Nebraska play Purdue can make for a pretty entertaining night.  This Purdue team isn't good but they have shown to be a pretty salty opponent this season.  Wisconsin struggled to beat them...  Congrats to the boys- 2 more to go for bowl eligibility.  GBR  

 
huskerfan74 said:
I learned the following:

(1) Mike Riley is insignificant. I believe that the team will actually do better if he was not standing along the sideline chewing gum, looking clueless every time we get a penalty against us, and have a defeated posture throughout the game.

(2) Where the hell was Hoppes the past two years?

(3) We can’t run the ball to save our lives.

(4) It has been centuries since our last trick play.

(5) It has been centuries since we last blocked a punt.

(6) Our Play calling is BORINGLY PREDICTABLE.

(7) Northwestern is going to destroy us.

(8) Penn State is going to annihilate us and erase us from FBS records.

(9) Mike Riley and his coaches continue to rob Nebraska blind. 

(10) Eichorst was a deeply delusional human being who probably thought aliens told him to hire Riley because they saw the future.

(11) I enjoyed our last win of the season. It was brutally fun. I hated and liked myself at the same time for having hope we can beat Purdone.

(12) Stop with the “what did we learn” topic. The answer is always: Nothing we do not already know. Mike Riley is a real coach as the Geco in the Geico commercials is a real talking Geco.
Click to expand...
#2  He is a transfer. #2A Why has he not been a target more often.

 
Mavric said:
All that sounds well and good. But you continue to put too much stock in what Riley says, especially since he's not the one calling the plays.  Watching what Langs was actually doing with his scheme/play calling is much more informative.

You are mistaking the difference between "more efficient" and "more running plays."

We've only really been blown out in two games.  So I don't think being behind is near as much of the reason as simplay having an ineffective rushing attack.
Click to expand...
this^

 
Mavric said:
All that sounds well and good. But you continue to put too much stock in what Riley says, especially since he's not the one calling the plays.  Watching what Langs was actually doing with his scheme/play calling is much more informative.

You are mistaking the difference between "more efficient" and "more running plays."

We've only really been blown out in two games.  So I don't think being behind is near as much of the reason as simplay having an ineffective rushing attack.
Click to expand...


Well if you can remember back to Nebraska's 7 - 0 start a year ago, the Huskers were going into the fourth quarter with small leads and Langsdorf generally kept the ball on the ground and protected the win. I don't think he forgot this lesson. Nebraska just ran up against teams with better offenses and defenses, and we simply aren't good enough to run the ball down anyone's throat. Oregon would be the third blowout you're forgetting, and the mad second-half comeback not only skewed the passing numbers, it almost worked. 

No argument that our running game is ineffective. It's glaringly ineffective. But on this particular message board, where pro-style QBs are equated with statues and the term "pass-happy" gets a tad exaggerated, I feel obliged to defend the view that a good passing QB can be the running game's best friend. It's not happening here, but it happens on most of the teams we want to be, and for the coaches we want to poach.  

This last Saturday was pretty nutty around the NCAA. Michigan State & Northwestern were averaging 3.0 a carry or less, so they jacked it up in the air 107 times between them. Iowa State only got 53 yards on 33 carries, so they used 35 passes to knock of TCU. Miami had 59 yards on 32 carries and threw it 41 times in a pretty crappy game that still kept them at #8. Meanwhile Georgia only threw the ball 7 times in a total rout of Florida, and Oregon only threw it 13 times. Other Top 10 teams were more balanced - including Penn State and Ohio State. Those numbers could totally flip the next week. For some reason the words "multiple" and "take what the defense gives you" got to be dirty around here, but it's where we need to be. 

There are so many different ways Nebraska needs to be better. 

 
Mavric said:
:dunno
Click to expand...


Against Wisconsin we jumped out to a 10 point deficit, and spent the entire fourth quarter knowing our defense was unable to stop Wisconsin on the way to a 21 point loss. So it was pretty hard to make a case for more rushing attempts from the late third quarter on.

And when the going was easier against teams like Illinois and Rutgers, Nebraska had run/pass splits of 38/24 and 47/26 respectively. We had a 38/24 run/pass split against No. Illinois, too. 38/32 against Arky State.

It's not like Langsdorf (or Beck, or Watson) suddenly abandon the running game. It's that good defenses always shut down the running game first, and dare you to win with the QBs arm.  If the QB can keep a secondary honest, it opens the holes back up for the running game. 

Getting 40 yards  on 27 carries against a crappy run defense like Purdue?

I got nothing. 

 
Bradley is our best bet at a consistent running game, so we better hope the injury mentioned today isn't bad. I love Ozigbo, but we can't block the opponent's big guys and he can't consistently get to the edge. I'm trying not to read too much into a few carries, but Bradley has the most functional athleticism of the healthy backs. I guess Wilbon is pretty athletic too, but he's just really tentative.

Lee has dramatically improved, but our complete lack of creativity holds the offense back. I don't know if it's predictable playcalling or what, but we make DBs look good - they're all over the receivers most of the time. Lee can put it where the receivers have a chance, but there a lot of our throws are into coverage.

I don't know what the deal is with our o-line, but it has to get better and I don't see that happening. Overall Gates/Foster/Farmer are solid, but there are way too many mistakes for a relatively experienced group. At this point a full reshuffling is not going to happen, but (injuries taken into account) honestly I'd try:

LT - Jaimes - Better fit than Gates

LG - Foster

C - Raridon? Wasn't he practicing at C? Just not Conrad, C is not his position.

RG - Wilson - Don't know why he disappeared. Farniok may be better at G than T, but the only positive for an OL with a club on his hand is it makes holding difficult.

RT - Gates/Conrad - Gates has been mostly fine, and at least here Lee won't get blindsided when he whiffs. I though Conrad was decent at T last year if the holding/misses continue from Gates.

 
Wilson is probably redshirting and Conrad is terrible.  Reminds me of my daughters high school soccer team.  If they have good technique, there the best players we have.  There is just more too it, like strength, speed & a mean streak.

 
Back
Top