Chatelain: Pin this loss squarely on Mike Riley and Danny Langsdorf

The last 3 paragraphs pretty much tell me we are in too deep. Knowing what we know now, he may be almost as stubborn as Bo when it comes to taking advice.

 
coaching, coaching, coaching............common sense, game management, clock management.........football 101, we got f'd when Eichorist picked Riley.

 
In late February, Riley had lunch with Tom Osborne at Misty’s. Wisely, the new coach asked the Nebraska icon for a few bits of advice. They talked Blackshirts. They talked recruiting. And then they talked offense.

“He thought it was important that a team run the ball,” Riley told The World-Herald later. “If you’re a team that has to count on throwing 60 times per game, some games might be difficult.”

Riley chuckled. “That’s what he said. And I get that.”

Saturday, in a game Nebraska had no business losing, Riley didn’t get that. Not for the first 59 minutes. And certainly not on the one play that mattered most.
Click to expand...
 
I haven't posted anything on this board since the game. I was more disappointed after this loss than any in a long time.

Having coached a lot o football in my life, I know how games can get out of hand and sometimes you just can't stop the bleeding. That is why I have a different view of blow out games than most.

As I did my fall bush trimming yesterday and listened to my I pad I thought about this game. I am disappointed because I expected more from these coaches in a situation like this. Up until this point I have been fairly impressed with the offense and the play calling of Langsdorf, but Saturday was as bad a called game as I have ever seen. TA was 10-31 in the game. That is 30%. I know they want to throw the ball but how many drops and overthrows do you have to have before you decide it is not working for the day.

Most don't remember but TO had a few away games in Ames or Columbia or Stillwater where for what ever reason the weather sucks and we aren't clicking on all cylinders. So we hunker down and play field position run the ball and get out of the game with a 20-10 or 13-0 win. Sometimes you have to change what you want to do in a game.

I coached class A freshman football for 15 years in a row sometimes we had great QB that could throw the ball and receivers that could catch the ball. My HC liked to mix it up and sometimes in a game he would become a little too enamored by throwing the ball. Myself or the other assistant would usually after too many poorly thrown balls or drops would turn to him and say "Run the f'ing Ball". We would then start running the ball again.

Before the last drive of the game Nebraska did not run the ball 3x in a row in the whole game. That is terrible coaching in game conditions like this. The wind is a steady 20 mph, a cross wind and light rain. Your QB is struggling to throw the ball the whole game, why do you continue to throw the ball that much? Why doesn't Mike Riley say "Run the f'ing Ball" before the last drive of the game?

This brings us to the 3rd and 7. I know what the plan was and what was suppose to transpire, but why do you complicate things? Why do you not just hand the ball off to Janovich or Ozigbo or just run a QB sneak. I know they told TA to run the ball, but the play is most likely usually designed as a run pass option. In the heat of the game the repetition of practice kicked in and he tries to make a throw.

This loss is completely on Mike Riley and Danny Langsdorf. The defense actually played pretty well most of the day. They lost the game because they couldn't stop doing what they wanted to do.

I think Riley was in shock after the game, watch the PC. He really is at a loss for words. I hope he slept very little on Saturday night and on Sunday said to his staff "Man I blew that badly" "That loss is completely on me". I hope he learns this is not acceptable.

I am just really disappointed. I am not mad. I am just really disappointed at how bad the coaches blew that game.

For once I completely agree with Dirk

 
NUinID said:
I haven't posted anything on this board since the game. I was more disappointed after this loss than any in a long time.

Having coached a lot o football in my life, I know how games can get out of hand and sometimes you just can't stop the bleeding. That is why I have a different view of blow out games than most.

As I did my fall bush trimming yesterday and listened to my I pad I thought about this game. I am disappointed because I expected more from these coaches in a situation like this. Up until this point I have been fairly impressed with the offense and the play calling of Langsdorf, but Saturday was as bad a called game as I have ever seen. TA was 10-31 in the game. That is 30%. I know they want to throw the ball but how many drops and overthrows do you have to have before you decide it is not working for the day.

Most don't remember but TO had a few away games in Ames or Columbia or Stillwater where for what ever reason the weather sucks and we aren't clicking on all cylinders. So we hunker down and play field position run the ball and get out of the game with a 20-10 or 13-0 win. Sometimes you have to change what you want to do in a game.

I coached class A freshman football for 15 years in a row sometimes we had great QB that could throw the ball and receivers that could catch the ball. My HC liked to mix it up and sometimes in a game he would become a little too enamored by throwing the ball. Myself or the other assistant would usually after too many poorly thrown balls or drops would turn to him and say "Run the f'ing Ball". We would then start running the ball again.

Before the last drive of the game Nebraska did not run the ball 3x in a row in the whole game. That is terrible coaching in game conditions like this. The wind is a steady 20 mph, a cross wind and light rain. Your QB is struggling to throw the ball the whole game, why do you continue to throw the ball that much? Why doesn't Mike Riley say "Run the f'ing Ball" before the last drive of the game?

This brings us to the 3rd and 7. I know what the plan was and what was suppose to transpire, but why do you complicate things? Why do you not just hand the ball off to Janovich or Ozigbo or just run a QB sneak. I know they told TA to run the ball, but the play is most likely usually designed as a run pass option. In the heat of the game the repetition of practice kicked in and he tries to make a throw.

This loss is completely on Mike Riley and Danny Langsdorf. The defense actually played pretty well most of the day. They lost the game because they couldn't stop doing what they wanted to do.

I think Riley was in shock after the game, watch the PC. He really is at a loss for words. I hope he slept very little on Saturday night and on Sunday said to his staff "Man I blew that badly" "That loss is completely on me". I hope he learns this is not acceptable.

I am just really disappointed. I am not mad. I am just really disappointed at how bad the coaches blew that game.

For once I completely agree with Dirk
Click to expand...
Didn't rad the article, but great post man. Echoed my thoughts. Couldn't have said anything better myself. Really just super disappointed that everyone and their mother could see them forcing the pass with horrible results and yet the actual staff couldn't get away from it.

+1 all day, my man.

 
wW1dH66.gif


 
NUinID said:
I haven't posted anything on this board since the game. I was more disappointed after this loss than any in a long time.

Having coached a lot o football in my life, I know how games can get out of hand and sometimes you just can't stop the bleeding. That is why I have a different view of blow out games than most.

As I did my fall bush trimming yesterday and listened to my I pad I thought about this game. I am disappointed because I expected more from these coaches in a situation like this. Up until this point I have been fairly impressed with the offense and the play calling of Langsdorf, but Saturday was as bad a called game as I have ever seen. TA was 10-31 in the game. That is 30%. I know they want to throw the ball but how many drops and overthrows do you have to have before you decide it is not working for the day.

Most don't remember but TO had a few away games in Ames or Columbia or Stillwater where for what ever reason the weather sucks and we aren't clicking on all cylinders. So we hunker down and play field position run the ball and get out of the game with a 20-10 or 13-0 win. Sometimes you have to change what you want to do in a game.

I coached class A freshman football for 15 years in a row sometimes we had great QB that could throw the ball and receivers that could catch the ball. My HC liked to mix it up and sometimes in a game he would become a little too enamored by throwing the ball. Myself or the other assistant would usually after too many poorly thrown balls or drops would turn to him and say "Run the f'ing Ball". We would then start running the ball again.

Before the last drive of the game Nebraska did not run the ball 3x in a row in the whole game. That is terrible coaching in game conditions like this. The wind is a steady 20 mph, a cross wind and light rain. Your QB is struggling to throw the ball the whole game, why do you continue to throw the ball that much? Why doesn't Mike Riley say "Run the f'ing Ball" before the last drive of the game?

This brings us to the 3rd and 7. I know what the plan was and what was suppose to transpire, but why do you complicate things? Why do you not just hand the ball off to Janovich or Ozigbo or just run a QB sneak. I know they told TA to run the ball, but the play is most likely usually designed as a run pass option. In the heat of the game the repetition of practice kicked in and he tries to make a throw.

This loss is completely on Mike Riley and Danny Langsdorf. The defense actually played pretty well most of the day. They lost the game because they couldn't stop doing what they wanted to do.

I think Riley was in shock after the game, watch the PC. He really is at a loss for words. I hope he slept very little on Saturday night and on Sunday said to his staff "Man I blew that badly" "That loss is completely on me". I hope he learns this is not acceptable.

I am just really disappointed. I am not mad. I am just really disappointed at how bad the coaches blew that game.

For once I completely agree with Dirk
Click to expand...
+1 very well said. The whole game was frustrating, watching the coaching staff make it as difficult as possible for us to win. And what you said about the 3rd and 7 play is what I and many others think as well, why complicate it? Going back and watching the play you can literally see the panic in Tommy's eyes when the defender gets in his face. So when a quarterback panics like that, he makes and ill-advised decision and throws it. People want to pin that on Tommy, but there was no reason at all to put him in that position in the first place. Hand it off to a running back, or have Tommy just simply kneel it and there's no risk of a panic throw like that. If the running back happens to fumble it, oh well you can't blame the coaches for that it was the right call. Just mind boggling, and if play calling like this continues it's going to be a very short tenure for Riley and the staff

 
Even if their quarterback ignored instructions on the critical third down, it still comes back to them. Part of the coaches’ job is to teach situational football. Make Armstrong understand that an incompletion is NOT an option. It’s the latest in a string of hard lessons.
Click to expand...
I agree with Chatelain on this point. (First time I've every typed THAT sentence. lol) I suspect Langsdorf understood the importance of not throwing a pass. And I'll bet he thought Tommy was on the same page. But clearly that wasn't the case. Some of that is on Tommy. But much of it is on Langsdorf. He should have made it a point to let Tommy know that under no circumstances was he to throw the ball. That it'd be better to take a 10 yard loss than to stop the clock. But whatever the process was, the message was not understood. And it cost us a win.

Even so, it's easy to evaluate this after the fact. Who knew that Illinois would march 73 yards down the field and score after a full 59 minutes without a decent touchdown drive?

 
NUance said:
Even if their quarterback ignored instructions on the critical third down, it still comes back to them. Part of the coaches’ job is to teach situational football. Make Armstrong understand that an incompletion is NOT an option. It’s the latest in a string of hard lessons.
Click to expand...
I agree with Chatelain on this point. (First time I've every typed THAT sentence. lol) I suspect Langsdorf understood the importance of not throwing a pass. And I'll bet he thought Tommy was on the same page. But clearly that wasn't the case. Some of that is on Tommy. But much of it is on Langsdorf. He should have made it a point to let Tommy know that under no circumstances was he to throw the ball. That it'd be better to take a 10 yard loss than to stop the clock. But whatever the process was, the message was not understood. And it cost us a win.

Even so, it's easy to evaluate this after the fact. Who knew that Illinois would march 73 yards down the field and score after a full 59 minutes without a decent touchdown drive?
Click to expand...
Knowing this team, I think everyone did, it's what we've grown accustomed to. I remember as soon as that ball hit the ground on 3rd down, I looked over to my girlfriend and said, "We are going to lose this freaking game"

 
This game reminds me so much of 2004 ISU. A coaching staff trying to force the pass when it's obvious that the run can win the game. I just absolutely don't understand why coaching staffs do that. It totally baffles my mind. We have RBs gaining good yardage on a day when it is going to be extremely difficult to pass the ball because of the weather. And, I'm saying that not based on the 3rd and 7 that everyone wants to talk about. This is a game plan issue the entire game.

Hopefully the staff had those same questions on themselves yesterday.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
i am sure by now Riley and Langs know they lost this game.......every arm chair fan would have called a running play to the back....as poor as Tommie was throwing, as a coach, you make damn sure you take the ball out of his hands on this play, so something like this doesn't happen......going forward, because going backwards is useless, i will be watching for any other definitively, stupid calls by Riley and his staff.......we sure as hell didn't bring him in here to not exhibit football common sense.

 
I'd like to know if it was Riley or Langs that called that play initially. Obviously Riley had to sign off on it either way...

Basically, I kind of feel like we got big-timed. Sure feels like Lang thought he could bring his big boy Giants coaching pants and draw up the perfect play for a first down against Podunk nobody Illinois, and it backfired.

 
Back
Top