"Offensive" issues

Some HuskerBoarders:

"This offense won't work in the B1G."

"It's to reliant on big plays."

"We should be running smash-mouth football like Wisconsin."

/checks box scores against common opponents

Against Northwestern

Nebraska had 76 more yards and 3 more points

Nebraska played the first half without it's starting running back and the fourth quarter without their starting quarterback

Against Illinois

Nebraska had 254 more yards and 19 more points

Against Ohio State

Nebraska had 40 more yards and the same number of points

:dunno

 
Our offense had 514 yards, somehow.  That's really amazing since the offense has regressed to the point where they are down to some RPO's, designed QB runs and an occasional Stoll quick out.  It's obvious that Frost sees sloppy turnover and penalty prone players incapable of executing the playbook and has to play it safe.  Our tiny, slow WRs (one being a bobbler) aren't giving Frost many options.  Our soft OL leaves us with a hit or miss (mostly miss) running game.  With a few more talented players like Luke and Wandale surrounded by other players willing to give some effort, we might have a very good offense in 3 years.

 
I think that - graded on a curve of starting his backup QB and then his third string redshirt freshman playing half the game - this might have been Frost's best offensive game. He took a team that only managed 7 points in our previous game, prepared them for everything we'd need to be successful, and put up 31 points on the board. 

That's impressive.

Our defense f****** sucks hard. That's really all there is to it. So tired of all of the blaming of the Riley recruits who are clearly giving an effort out there. Their coaching blows, and the scheme they're asked to execute is nothing more than a Bob Diaco defense. 

 
We turn the ball over too much, have the dumbest penalties, and don't have enough talent to start every play 7 yards behind the line of scrimmage. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's my strategy moving forward..(2 weeks in the making lol)

OFFENSIVELY - I say we run the QB at least once every 4 downs.  Whether it be designed or scramble.  I'm not looking for the big play which is always nice, but we need the threat to open other running plays and passing.  I feel we should sell out to this for 2 years or so as I think this simple wrinkle would've probably won us a couple more games and we saw how effective the QB run was this last weekend.  Without doing that we are not strong enough in any area offensively to do what we want run/pass.  Yes this will put QBs at more risk but it seems this staff can spot talent in that area as for backups. After a couple years of selling out this I'd assume we would win 8-10 games and would give time to recruit and develop our lines and really all around.  Therefore wouldnt have to rely so much on having the QB be a RB essentially. 

DEFENSIVELY- will keep it short, I actually dont think were too far off.  We got outcoached this last game and out played vs Minny.  We simply have to blitz more often and not let opposing QBs look like Manning.  Eventually we will have a nice pass rusher.  Scheme wise I think were fine.

SP Teams - magic fairy dust until the nightmare is over!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
WyoHusker56 said:
I mean might as well add it onto the lumps we've already taken right? ha
Click to expand...
Agreed. I would rather suffer through some growing pains with a young guy like Benhart, who has great potential, than continually watch a guy fail because he is playing out of position and is over-matched. At least with Benhart there is a long term benefit from working through the hiccups....

 
Back
Top