CBS: Four things Matt Rhule must do to get the Cornhuskers back to relevancy

brophog said:
Very much so. The spacing was way better on the offense, and we can do it in some interesting personal packages.

I'll go back to my favorite example from the game, Raiola's first TD to Bonner. 3x1 set, the single side is an inline TE. It was a receiver much of the day, but in this example it's a TE who along with the RB stay in for a 7 man protection. Bonner is in the 'big slot' about 2 gaps off the Tackle, and of course, two WR out side of him.

That big slot could be a TE/HBack/WR....whatever we're calling things in this offense....but we have several athletic big bodied 220 lb-ish guys that could play there. On that play, the defense has to defend the full width of the field because as we saw Raiola can make that long throw from the far hash, and yet it's effectively out of 12 personnel where you can still run the ball with mismatches in the blocking game. 

Haarberg a few drives later hits Barney on the go route using the same formation, except he's the single WR on the short side. He gets 1 on 1 because the defense rotated to Cover 1 to cover the 3 man side. Here's how that formation's ability to run the ball helps the passing game. On that play, the RB is aligned to the single receiver side in Shotgun, meaning the running strength is to that 3 man side, a big reason why the defense rotates that way. Barney is going to be a helluva WR, and this formation gives him the opportunity to use those remarkable talents of his.

The width was better, but the playcalling using that width was also so much better. Again, 3x1 set with the single on the short side, defense rotates wide to account for the strength and they throw a RB screen to that near side. Next play, same setup, seam route on the wide side where if that defender drops to cover it, there's a drag coming from across the field.

4 plays I listed, all some form of 3x1 to the wide side and all three stress the defense in different ways. All of those screens to slots, tight ends, hbacks, running backs, all of that stuff helps establish width and then with that width we hit Corner routes, Seam routes and Go routes.
Click to expand...
And, if the running strength is to the 3 WR side and the RB is lined up on the 1 WR side and you run a few running plays to the 3 WR side, there should be an opportunity for a quick pitch to the RB going to the 1 WR side, correct?

 
BigRedBuster said:
And, if the running strength is to the 3 WR side and the RB is lined up on the 1 WR side and you run a few running plays to the 3 WR side, there should be an opportunity for a quick pitch to the RB going to the 1 WR side, correct?
Click to expand...


Oh yeah. At least this spring, the QBs seem to have the freedom to make those calls at the LOS if they see something they like. I'm curious how much latitude they're given this fall, that may be more of a spring thing. All three of these QBs are pretty sharp, though.

Even if the coaches do reign that in a bit, they still get until 15 seconds on the play clock to talk on the headset so if they get up to the LOS and see that kind of opportunity they can check into it and toss it out there real quick.

The alignment on the long Barney TD is probably a good setup for what you describe. The LB is in the B gap, the CB is 8 yards off and the FS is playing deep center. The tackle can reach easily and the guard is uncovered. Very conceivable that a quick pitch there is running for a while.

 
Undone said:
I need a second watch this weekend, but I noticed that we seemed a little more committed to "spreading out" a bit on offense. We weren't, like, a spread offense. But formation-wise and what we did out of those formations I was really encouraged by what I saw.

My line of thinking: if we've brought in more talent at QB and WR, lining up in 22 man personnel is potentially a waste of your weapons. Now calling out 22 man personnel is a bit of an intentional overstatement as we really didn't run that much of it last year, but you know what I mean.    :)
Click to expand...


No more fullbacks???   :o

 
brophog said:
The spacing was way better on the offense, and we can do it in some interesting personal packages.
Click to expand...


I think I remember you saying that you expected this to happen coming into year 2.

Raiola's ability level is the lynchpin. We can talk all day about needing better blocking by the line but the more immediate need (outside of the horrendous turnovers & penalties which I will not stop harping on) is a QB that can hit guys as they're breaking open.

Dylan is that player. The team just needs to come together heading into fall camp to really want this thing.

 
brophog said:
Well this time last year I said the QB run game was just gonna be a nice little change of pace, so what the hell do I know. :lol:
Click to expand...


Yeah...I felt that from Sims' Georgia Tech film that he wouldn't be good throwing the ball. But I didn't have any idea he'd be as bad as he was and that Haarberg would also struggle so much in the passing game.

 
Undone said:
I felt that from Sims' Georgia Tech film that he wouldn't be good throwing the ball.
Click to expand...


What wasn't good about it. Dude was crazy accurate throwing to safeties. Every once in a while there would even be a receiver between him and the safety and he'd just arc that thing right over the top of him.

 
Back
Top