Landlord
Banned
I love Coach Brown, but a position coach getting or deserving anywhere close to that amount of money is about 10x more absurd than the criticisms of Beck or the idea that he's overpaid.
Chatelain: It's a running battle with playcaller Tim Beck
- Thread starter Abdullah the Butcher
- Start date
I love Coach Brown, but a position coach getting or deserving anywhere close to that amount of money is about 10x more absurd than the criticisms of Beck or the idea that he's overpaid.
jsneb83
New member
I haven't been able to go back and re-watch the game yet, but it looked like Bell got pushed out of bounds (is there no illegal contact in college football anymore?) right as TA was winding up/releasing it. It was a timing route and Bell was his primary receiver so he threw it to where he was supposed to be, but Kenny wasn't there because he got two-hand shivered out of bounds.
Mavric
Yoda
There never has been illegal contact in college football. Only pass inference which can be called with the ball in the air.
I'd have to watch again but I'm pretty sure the receiver was well out of bounds before TA threw it.
Undone
New member
It's hilarious that you can't see the irony in this and his comment after reading through most of this thread.
Also, has it occurred to you that possibly Beck is trying to tune up the passing game after seeing the atrocity that was our offensive line against Michigan State? Maybe he feels the way we actually win in Madison and Indy is to work on the passing game as much as we can, seeing the way Michigan State stonewalled Abdullah.
But I'm sure someone will chime in and claim that Beck went away from the run too much in that game, and that we could have won if we just would have handed it off 50 times to Ameer.
Scratchtown
New member
That is when you get predictable my friend. The concept of Run Run Pass in a 3 down series...
Scratchtown
New member
I only read a few replies (stopped half way through Knapps first post).
My frustration with Beck is not that he decides to pass on down that make him "unpredictable", it's the TYPE of pass that makes me scratch my head. I understand the concept of keeping defenses/coordinators off balance and all. However, if you are ripping a team by running the ball. Then you need to Play Action off of it, there is no need to ever drop straight back to pass unless its a two minute drill or you are Texas Tech of old.
Obviously it's more complicated than that but I was merely making a point that I sometimes don't think everyone on here (there are some) gets how difficult it is to call plays, in a chess game scenario. Fatigue factor of lineman, other players, player personnel, etc...
It's not as simple as "Run it till they stop it, then change". Beck ain't a genius, neither am I, but it's a VERY VERY difficult job. One that he is much more capable of doing than any of us, at the moment.
My frustration with Beck is not that he decides to pass on down that make him "unpredictable", it's the TYPE of pass that makes me scratch my head. I understand the concept of keeping defenses/coordinators off balance and all. However, if you are ripping a team by running the ball. Then you need to Play Action off of it, there is no need to ever drop straight back to pass unless its a two minute drill or you are Texas Tech of old.
Obviously it's more complicated than that but I was merely making a point that I sometimes don't think everyone on here (there are some) gets how difficult it is to call plays, in a chess game scenario. Fatigue factor of lineman, other players, player personnel, etc...
It's not as simple as "Run it till they stop it, then change". Beck ain't a genius, neither am I, but it's a VERY VERY difficult job. One that he is much more capable of doing than any of us, at the moment.
Savage Husker
New member
I believe chatelain reads every husker forum and writes articles based on what trends he sees from given material week to week.
There is little to nothing he writes that hasn't been brought up on message boards. Good for clicks and comments, awful at original thoughts.
There is little to nothing he writes that hasn't been brought up on message boards. Good for clicks and comments, awful at original thoughts.
Guy Chamberlin
Active member
There are a lot of plays I'd like to see, because in my mind they are always executed perfectly and catch the defense with their pants down. I'm pretty brilliant that way.
But I'm not running the offense. Tim Beck is. And as a Nebraska fan I'm enjoying the hell out of it.
I often hesitate to come on HuskerBoard after solid wins, because it seems like I've watched a completely different game than half of my Husker brethren. Right now, this Nebraska offense is running as well as it has in decades. Even better than many of the Osborne teams we mythologize without checking the actual stats. It's actually mind-boggling that some people think the OC operating one of the Top 5 rushing offenses in the country, whose playcalling has enabled Ameer Abdullah to be perhaps the most prolific rusher in Nebraska history, for some reason refuses to give the ball to Abdullah enough.
That we also average 200 yards a game passing while running the ball so well.....is one of the main reasons we're running the ball so well.
Keep in mind that Tim Beck doesn't call for three incomplete passes in a row. He calls a pass play. If it's successful, the next play might be a running play. Or if the defense lines up expecting that, maybe not. He's right a lot of the time, but if he calls one series with three incomplete passes, people on here go apesh#t.
There are several examples, including two important series in the Miami game, where Beck called for three consecutive rushes to Abdullah and he failed to get the crucial first down both times. Where was the outcry? Why is that any different?
When you also have offensive weapons like Jordan Westerkamp and Kenny Bell, and they're averaging 17 yards a catch, that also becomes part of "staying with what works."
I'm also waiting for this offense to light up a ranked team in a big game, but until then I'm enjoying games like Rutgers and Illinois and Northwestern in the same way I've enjoyed 42-24 Nebraska victories for the past 50 years.
No idea why you'd crap on Tim Beck at a point like this.
But I'm not running the offense. Tim Beck is. And as a Nebraska fan I'm enjoying the hell out of it.
I often hesitate to come on HuskerBoard after solid wins, because it seems like I've watched a completely different game than half of my Husker brethren. Right now, this Nebraska offense is running as well as it has in decades. Even better than many of the Osborne teams we mythologize without checking the actual stats. It's actually mind-boggling that some people think the OC operating one of the Top 5 rushing offenses in the country, whose playcalling has enabled Ameer Abdullah to be perhaps the most prolific rusher in Nebraska history, for some reason refuses to give the ball to Abdullah enough.
That we also average 200 yards a game passing while running the ball so well.....is one of the main reasons we're running the ball so well.
Keep in mind that Tim Beck doesn't call for three incomplete passes in a row. He calls a pass play. If it's successful, the next play might be a running play. Or if the defense lines up expecting that, maybe not. He's right a lot of the time, but if he calls one series with three incomplete passes, people on here go apesh#t.
There are several examples, including two important series in the Miami game, where Beck called for three consecutive rushes to Abdullah and he failed to get the crucial first down both times. Where was the outcry? Why is that any different?
When you also have offensive weapons like Jordan Westerkamp and Kenny Bell, and they're averaging 17 yards a catch, that also becomes part of "staying with what works."
I'm also waiting for this offense to light up a ranked team in a big game, but until then I'm enjoying games like Rutgers and Illinois and Northwestern in the same way I've enjoyed 42-24 Nebraska victories for the past 50 years.
No idea why you'd crap on Tim Beck at a point like this.
I'm with you Guy. I have said it before it is the guys that were 12-16 years old in 1993 that have a hard time with what they see on the field now. Dirk in a column not to far back actually said he was one of those guys. Personally I just think Dirk likes to be controversial. He likes to stir the pot and right now he is having a hard time doing it.
jsneb83
New member
Well then I blame Rutgers for their "illegal tactics" (where's that Washington fan when you need him
But anyway thanks for the clarification, and now I don't have to go back and check. +1
Mavric
Yoda
Link
Here's the first play. I looks like we got two guys open short. From the way Beck talks, I think Cotton was the primary look as a LB got "under him" early but then he came open and Westerkamp was also open but TA double-clutched then threw long and over DPE.
I've not hear them talk about "playing" before but it seems like TA can "play" one side of the field or the other which helps explain a lot about what we've seen in previous games. We never get to see what Beck liked better about the boundary side but Moore was plenty open but TA threw off his back foot and the ball sailed over his head. We missed on two five yard completions that would have changed the series quite a bit and Moore also might have been able to get some extra yards on a good throw.
The third down play was the INT that has been discussed.
Last edited by a moderator:
Count 'Bility
Banned
I liked the play action on first down. It fits us to a T. We playaction passes on the first play on 3 of our first 4 drives. That thing about play action on first down, is that tends to be an effective tool in both instances of your running game working and not working.
The thing that gets me a little, and I'll admit, Beck seemed to be better at on Saturday thiat I didnt care to admit, but he was pretty iffy earlier this year on and last year, is that if the play action on first down fails and we're into 2nd and ten, he seems to have a tendancy to hit the panic button so to speak, and come back with another drop back pass. And when that fails, which on second and ten, the defense is probably thinking pass anyway, we're at a very tough 3rd and ten. To me anyway, it just seems much more logical to use a run-something we're really solid at-on that second and ten, get 4 or 5, and get us into a manageable 3rd down where we can use the full arsenal. This is what happened on this possession in question here.
The thing that gets me a little, and I'll admit, Beck seemed to be better at on Saturday thiat I didnt care to admit, but he was pretty iffy earlier this year on and last year, is that if the play action on first down fails and we're into 2nd and ten, he seems to have a tendancy to hit the panic button so to speak, and come back with another drop back pass. And when that fails, which on second and ten, the defense is probably thinking pass anyway, we're at a very tough 3rd and ten. To me anyway, it just seems much more logical to use a run-something we're really solid at-on that second and ten, get 4 or 5, and get us into a manageable 3rd down where we can use the full arsenal. This is what happened on this possession in question here.
JTrain
New member
One of the biggest reasons (aside from human nature) that these discussions about Beck (or anyone with playcalling duties, in just about any sport) never go anywhere is that just about any playcall can be shown to have reasons behind it, and if executed perfectly can be successful.
Someone defending Beck (or any coordinator) can go back and look at every failed play and show there to have been reasons for the call, and show where certain players made certain errors that prevented its success. Now, if a play was called that involved the quarterback spinning around three times, doing the Macarena and then hurling the ball backwards through his own goalposts, then we could all probably agree the call was bad, for there was no conceivable reasons for it. But that's never the case. There are always reasons for why a given play is called. And almost any call can be successful if executed at a very high level.
The critic of Beck will counter that perhaps the reasons were not good reasons. Perhaps there were better reasons for alternate calls. Perhaps a better coordinator would be better aware of the strengths and weaknesses of his personnel. But this is no knockdown argument. There is no time machine available to go back and try a different call. All the critic can do is say that it seems likely that other options would have fared better, and point to previous plays in support of this.
The stalemate continues.
Someone defending Beck (or any coordinator) can go back and look at every failed play and show there to have been reasons for the call, and show where certain players made certain errors that prevented its success. Now, if a play was called that involved the quarterback spinning around three times, doing the Macarena and then hurling the ball backwards through his own goalposts, then we could all probably agree the call was bad, for there was no conceivable reasons for it. But that's never the case. There are always reasons for why a given play is called. And almost any call can be successful if executed at a very high level.
The critic of Beck will counter that perhaps the reasons were not good reasons. Perhaps there were better reasons for alternate calls. Perhaps a better coordinator would be better aware of the strengths and weaknesses of his personnel. But this is no knockdown argument. There is no time machine available to go back and try a different call. All the critic can do is say that it seems likely that other options would have fared better, and point to previous plays in support of this.
The stalemate continues.
Last edited by a moderator: