Logan Smothers to start v Iowa

BigRedBuster said:
And, if we had a good O line and RB play, we would be calling more RB runs.  This probably would be taking away more from called pass plays.  Which....would automatically cut down on QB runs since there would be fewer scrambles/sacks.

Yep, this is philosophy and scheme.  

When your O line sucks and your RBs can't be dominating runners, you have to change your philosophy and scheme to account for that.  Which, causes more passing plays to be called...which causes more scrambles and sacks.....because.......your O line sucks.
Click to expand...
Based on this assessment then, the argument is that we are simply playing to our personnel strength as an offense, drop-back passing.  Our personnel are simply incapable of establishing a ground game for a TE, WR, or RB to run the ball.  

The problem with that argument is that we are currently 12th in the conference with 27 sacks allowed this season.  Evidently, we are no better at pass blocking than we are at run blocking.

Point being, if your personnel are lacking, you have to be creative in your approach.  Utilize misdirection or employ a fullback or an extra tight end on some plays in order to gain leverage and break a run or two.  A ground game of any sort serves as a better foundation for success.  

While I know we are maximizing everything right now, it might not hurt for a team suffering from 5 consecutive losing seasons to look at a different approach. 

 
All Hail Herbie said:
Based on this assessment then, the argument is that we are simply playing to our personnel strength as an offense, drop-back passing.  Our personnel are simply incapable of establishing a ground game for a TE, WR, or RB to run the ball.  

The problem with that argument is that we are currently 12th in the conference with 27 sacks allowed this season.  Evidently, we are no better at pass blocking than we are at run blocking.

Point being, if your personnel are lacking, you have to be creative in your approach.  Utilize misdirection or employ a fullback or an extra tight end on some plays in order to gain leverage and break a run or two.  A ground game of any sort serves as a better foundation for success.  

While I know we are maximizing everything right now, it might not hurt for a team suffering from 5 consecutive losing seasons to look at a different approach. 
Click to expand...
You do realize that the line needs to be involved with both running and passing....good.

But, a pass gets the ball past the LOS so they don't have to open up a hole.

 
All Hail Herbie said:
Based on this assessment then, the argument is that we are simply playing to our personnel strength as an offense, drop-back passing.  Our personnel are simply incapable of establishing a ground game for a TE, WR, or RB to run the ball.  

The problem with that argument is that we are currently 12th in the conference with 27 sacks allowed this season.  Evidently, we are no better at pass blocking than we are at run blocking.

Point being, if your personnel are lacking, you have to be creative in your approach.  Utilize misdirection or employ a fullback or an extra tight end on some plays in order to gain leverage and break a run or two.  A ground game of any sort serves as a better foundation for success.  

While I know we are maximizing everything right now, it might not hurt for a team suffering from 5 consecutive losing seasons to look at a different approach. 
Click to expand...
We run quite a bit of 12 personnel actually. And against Wisconsin I think I saw more max protect than ever. The tOSU game saw a lot of max protect too with TEs chipping or blocking and RBs staying home as well.

 
All Hail Herbie said:
Based on this assessment then, the argument is that we are simply playing to our personnel strength as an offense, drop-back passing.  Our personnel are simply incapable of establishing a ground game for a TE, WR, or RB to run the ball.  

The problem with that argument is that we are currently 12th in the conference with 27 sacks allowed this season.  Evidently, we are no better at pass blocking than we are at run blocking.

Point being, if your personnel are lacking, you have to be creative in your approach.  Utilize misdirection or employ a fullback or an extra tight end on some plays in order to gain leverage and break a run or two.  A ground game of any sort serves as a better foundation for success.  

While I know we are maximizing everything right now, it might not hurt for a team suffering from 5 consecutive losing seasons to look at a different approach. 
Click to expand...
Ron Brown has coached some great RBs…. Let him call the plays when Frost runs out of ideas in the red zone.

 
JJ Husker said:
Well, if you bury him a few times, he starts thinking more about self preservation and less about his job.  It severely shortens the amount of time he is willing to expend reading the defense. I’d sure start with pressure on a noob.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I can see that as the hope but when you give QB's 1 on 1 coverage it makes things really easy.

 
teachercd said:
Yeah, I can see that as the hope but when you give QB's 1 on 1 coverage it makes things really easy.
Click to expand...
If I were Iowa, I would sit back in coverage, see if Smothers can find the right spot in the zone, and see if their front 4 can get pressure on NU's porous offensive line. Then bring more guys or a zone blitz in random times in the game.

If I were Nebraska, I would try to use a lot of play action passes on first and second down to try and loosen up those LB's. Then attack with some QB run game.  Frost has said that Haarberg could play some, so I wonder if he will be the "passing QB" with Smothers being the "running QB". 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ColoradoHusk said:
If I were Iowa, I would sit back in coverage, see if Smothers can find the right spot in the zone, and see if their front 4 can get pressure on NU's porous offensive line. Then bring more guys or a zone blitz in random times in the game.

If I were Nebraska, I would try to use a lot of play action passes on first and second down to try and loosen up those LB's. Then attack with some QB run game.  Frost has said that Haarberg could play some, so I wonder if he will be the "passing QB" with Smothers being the "running QB". 
Click to expand...
Option and wildcat 

 
ColoradoHusk said:
If I were Iowa, I would sit back in coverage, see if Smothers can find the right spot in the zone, and see if their front 4 can get pressure on NU's porous offensive line. Then bring more guys or a zone blitz in random times in the game.

If I were Nebraska, I would try to use a lot of play action passes on first and second down to try and loosen up those LB's. Then attack with some QB run game.  Frost has said that Haarberg could play some, so I wonder if he will be the "passing QB" with Smothers being the "running QB". 
Click to expand...


Comish said:
Option and wildcat 
Click to expand...
Seems that he can drop balls in there to receivers pretty nice watching him. Doesn't throw with a lot of velocity from what I've seen. Makes decisions fairly quick, is fast and has a good deal of elusiveness. He'd better protect the ball. What I viewed concerns me some there the way he carries it sometimes. Utilize the tall tight ends and other taller targets to avoid snags. Use a fair amount of quick short and intermediate passing. Mix in some misdirection with the play action and option. Tempo!

 
ColoradoHusk said:
If I were Iowa, I would sit back in coverage, see if Smothers can find the right spot in the zone, and see if their front 4 can get pressure on NU's porous offensive line. Then bring more guys or a zone blitz in random times in the game.

If I were Nebraska, I would try to use a lot of play action passes on first and second down to try and loosen up those LB's. Then attack with some QB run game.  Frost has said that Haarberg could play some, so I wonder if he will be the "passing QB" with Smothers being the "running QB". 
Click to expand...
That's a great point. Why bother to blitz when 3 or 4 get pressure most of the time anyway.

 
Back
Top