Do we lack a home run threat?

lo country said:
Watching the game, the announcers continually talk about how our drives were solid, but they came in short runs or passes and were not ripping off huge yards. Continued to wonder if it was by design or the lack of deep threat guys. Never really thought about it until they harped on it. They said we appear to be predicated on the RB getting some blocks or the receivers getting some other guys blocking down field.

IMO, it appeared to be by design. I think TA has the arm to crank one deep and receivers in Moore, Morgan and Reilly who have the speed to go deep. Newby flashed some stuff that shows he could take it to the house. I think we have the players and play calling, but haven't shown in yet.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
We have one, he'll be back by week 6-8

 
Certainly with DPE being out a special part of the offense has been sidelined. There are others with speed, but remember how new this entire system, leadership, and culture is for this team. The new coaching staff is laying down a foundation and will build from there. A focus on running the ball, high percentage pass completions, blocking and Armstrong finding rhythm with his receivers needs to happen and all of this will take some time.

During our best years, the home run threat was a tailback running 50 yards down the field. I long for those days. The deep pass will come, if needed, but don't stress that we are not long bomb, pass first, team.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
True2tRA said:
NO! NO! NO! NO!

I was telling the announcer, through my television screen, to just shut the hell up.

Anybody watching Nebraska the last few years knows that we have lived off the threat of the home run. We've done nothing the last three years but feed the rock to Ameer, and then "scare" everybody with the deep ball, just to back them off so we could feed it to Ameer some more.

To hell with living like that.

If there's on thing, as a Husker fan, I've wanted to see the last few years, more than anything in the world, it was Nebraska stringing together long drives. Multiple plays, time chewing, successful marches down the field. Not a chance in hell I'll have some dumbass announcer tell me that stringing together long drives is a bad thing.

I realize this is So. Alabama, but if we can string these kind of drives together, take some pressure off our defense, then we are going to find the promised land.

Seriously, to hell with what that announcer was saying. It was one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. You don't EVER complain about an offense that strings together drives. When we want to hit the home run, we will. Alonzo Moore, Jordan Westerkamp, Brandon Reilly, and Tommy Armstrong will make sure of that.
Click to expand...
Exactly right. I couldn't understand why the announcers were saying this stuff.

 
teachercd said:
So they do have big plays and a lot of them...
Click to expand...
We have alot of chunk plays (10-15 yards) but very few over 20. Like Mason was saying, it definitely is partially due to scheme. We don't take deep shots, and we don't have the big hitter running plays, so we'll need to get consistent drives.

 
I think Reilly missing all that time in camp has him a little behind at this point. His timing seems a little off on some of his routes. I think he will end up being a home run hitter as the season progresses, given his hammies hold up.

Then there's that DPE fella.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
lo country said:
True2tRA said:
NO! NO! NO! NO!

I was telling the announcer, through my television screen, to just shut the hell up.

Anybody watching Nebraska the last few years knows that we have lived off the threat of the home run. We've done nothing the last three years but feed the rock to Ameer, and then "scare" everybody with the deep ball, just to back them off so we could feed it to Ameer some more.

To hell with living like that.

If there's on thing, as a Husker fan, I've wanted to see the last few years, more than anything in the world, it was Nebraska stringing together long drives. Multiple plays, time chewing, successful marches down the field. Not a chance in hell I'll have some dumbass announcer tell me that stringing together long drives is a bad thing.

I realize this is So. Alabama, but if we can string these kind of drives together, take some pressure off our defense, then we are going to find the promised land.

Seriously, to hell with what that announcer was saying. It was one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. You don't EVER complain about an offense that strings together drives. When we want to hit the home run, we will. Alonzo Moore, Jordan Westerkamp, Brandon Reilly, and Tommy Armstrong will make sure of that.
Click to expand...
You hit the nail on the head. With Beck, we were big or bust. No in between. Personally, I prefer a grinding drive that eats clock and keeps their O off the field.
Agree with the other posters. I think it was by design as we could go yard if needed, but the approach was working.

I would also like to think that Riley and his experience maybe actually use games like this to experiment a little to see what works and doesn't in real games. Something I would never credit the previous staff with.
Click to expand...
Good points. I think the reliance on big play hurt with field position a lot. So many 3 and outs the last few seasons where it would have been helpful to the defense if we had kept posession longer. Although the odds of driving the field may be less with more plays per drive I think the odds of flipping field position goes up and our TOP goes up. Also, because we have a lot of 10+ yard plays I don't get the feeling that the drive will stall if one play loses yardage or there is a penalty. Other than Riley mentioning the need for big plays, I'm not concerned. We just needto be efficient in the red zone and get enough push from the offensive line to convert the 3rd and 1,2.
 
I don't think last year's team was "reliant" on big plays. We just had Big Play makers. We also had more sustained drives than some people remember.

Every rushing play is designed to get the RB through the front line. When he breaks it for 50 yards, it's a home run. You would ALWAYS prefer the player to break the big play, because it saves you all those extra plays where something could go wrong. It's the same thing with a lot of those mid-range passes. Hit a guy in stride and suddenly it's a big play. Looks like we have a lot of receivers who can do that. Brandon Reiley looks great in open space. I don't mind if we try a few less bombs, but I bet we have plenty of those, too. If Westerkamp's catches don't always measure up as deep yards, they still look like big plays to me.

Long way of saying I don't know what the announcers were talking about, other than the need to fill up air time.

 
I think any of our RBs or WRs with the ball in their hands given a bit of open field are a homerun threat. Long drives are good. Offense on the field, defense resting or getting whiteboard instruction is good. I'd worry more about our short field punch, needing 3yds and then getting 3 yds, than suggestions from the announcer's booth.

 
So. Alabama had plenty of big plays and few points to show for them.

So there's always that.

The Red Zone remains the real test.

Actually, I think everything we want comes from having a better offensive line.

 
True2tRA said:
NO! NO! NO! NO!

I was telling the announcer, through my television screen, to just shut the hell up.

Anybody watching Nebraska the last few years knows that we have lived off the threat of the home run. We've done nothing the last three years but feed the rock to Ameer, and then "scare" everybody with the deep ball, just to back them off so we could feed it to Ameer some more.

To hell with living like that.

If there's on thing, as a Husker fan, I've wanted to see the last few years, more than anything in the world, it was Nebraska stringing together long drives. Multiple plays, time chewing, successful marches down the field. Not a chance in hell I'll have some dumbass announcer tell me that stringing together long drives is a bad thing.

I realize this is So. Alabama, but if we can string these kind of drives together, take some pressure off our defense, then we are going to find the promised land.

Seriously, to hell with what that announcer was saying. It was one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. You don't EVER complain about an offense that strings together drives. When we want to hit the home run, we will. Alonzo Moore, Jordan Westerkamp, Brandon Reilly, and Tommy Armstrong will make sure of that.
Click to expand...
Great post and I agree. That bugged me too when the commentator was lamenting our absence of big plays. IIRC though, didn't Glen Mason disagree with him?

I like big plays. I think everybody likes big plays. But you have to have a foundation of solid plays leading to sustained drives. We relied on big plays so much in the past because we couldn't sustain drives.

We didn't have a bunch more big playmakers last year, we just relied more on the big play. Kenny Bell and Ameer Abdullah were both great, but I think Kenny can be mostly replaced with other recievers stepping up. Abdullah frequently made something out of nothing. You don't just "replace" the school's all-time leading yards leader.

It may not be as sexy, but Nebraska will be much more successful this year sustaining drives than relying on big plays.

Defense! That's where I really want to see the big plays: sacks, TFLs and turnovers. And so far, Nate Gerry has stepped up in that department again this year.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
In defense of the announcers, they have to say something because it's their job.

In regard to a home run threat.........when you draw them up to the line to guard the run, pass, or whatever, it's that much easier to play action to the home run pass.

If they're talking about a home run threat in the running game, our backs are as much home run threats as they are short gain runners.

I'm okay with Armstrong occasionally stepping back and heaving a long bomb like Jammal Lord, but I don't want it to be a habit. You see how much more accurate and effective he is when he stays within his means.

 
Back
Top