Offensive Line and the Offense

[cm husker]

The OP does a good job explaining what many have been saying for awhile now to those who don't get it, many morons need to read this thread. To add on to the Op's remarks about not dropping this at Langsdorfs feet I agree completely. Langsdorf has even said that the more complex Run plays have been shelved due to the issues and injuries on the O-Line.

The bare bones offense we see this year is the result of all these injuries. The future is bright for us at this spot. But we will have to wait another year or two before we see it all come together.

But, there was an opportunity to say "let's try to fix this year and play the young guys" during the bye week. Instead, Riley and Cav tried to gamble and use walk-ons.

I understand that Riley is trying to play the long game, but I wish he would also focus on this year, because there was a strong opportunity to win at least the division. I understand the talent and depth was lacking when Riley took over, but I am sick of the talk of "wait another year or two".

Has he said or intimated that? Because my sense is that Cav is starting who he thinks gives NU the best chance to win. The w/o's are further along right now - probably mainly based on pass pro, which is the most important factor for playtime with this staff when referring to the OL and running backs.

If it is really a "long game" approach, I think it's crazy and unfair to not play players that could help this team win now. Unless a player isn't ready to play or has specifically requested to redshirt (highly unlikely), they should be playing if they give the Huskers the best chance to be successful.

 

[cm husker]

I would bet that CM was one of us (I say us, cuz i was too) that wanted to give the real meh 2013 season a mulligan for Bo cuz of all the injuries. Funny how he dont wanna go there for this groups. so frickin double standard. Year 6 vs year 2.

As I've written numerous times, I'm not calling for Riley's head, even after the OSU game. I've even said that a 9-3 season would be solid - I'll go back and try to find the exact language since I'm sure people will call me out on whether I'm recalling my quotes precisely. 10-2 would be above expectations. Hell, I think 10-2 could even gets us into the CCG considering how awful Wisconsin is offensively. And that would be great.

But, injuries don't justify the OSU outcome. And it's fair to question our performance against weaker teams, even in wins, from earlier this season.

And more than anything I'm sick and tired of people claiming that it's all about bad talent. NU does not have bad talent. No one was claiming that the talent was awful prior to this season. Injuries happen every year. This roster is not so thin that it shouldn't have been able to absorb some injuries. It's like last year when people tried to invent a narrative that NU was less talented than Purdue. Come the f#*k on. Same with the notion that we are so bad this year that 62-3 is on the players and not really on the coaches.

It's the Callahan excuses at the expense of our players all over again.

If NU finishes this season 9-3, I'll be good with that accomplishment. If they

By the way, similarly to your post, if you were one of the many who blamed bad S&C for injuries under Pelini, are you and those people now blaming the new S&C for all of the soft tissue injuries? Or would you blame Cav for failing to substitute, which puts a kid in a more likely fatigued position and susceptible to injury?

I blamed the S&C under Pelini cuz it was a f'ing joke. Not because of the injuries. Injuries happen. Part of the game. I did partake in discussions about the possibility cuz is just seemed like we were suffering more than others. But never really knew what to think about it.

If Ohio st was gonna handle us anyway (which most expected just now, and before the season), then yeah, injuries can make it a lot worse.

i dont recall folks saying we were less talented than Purdue. If so, that's pretty bad for anyone to say. Certainly wasnt me. All I ever said was most of our guys didnt give a flying f#*k that day, with about 3 1/2 hours of tape to back it up.

A Shanle tweeted about it. Much like the misinformation being circulated this week after OSU, there were convoluted analyses that said that on game day, we were less talented than Purdue. It was ultimately proved to be bull - kind of like when people point out that, per the ratings, there was less of a gap between OSU and NU than NU and Wisconsin.

 

[Count 'Bility]

The OP does a good job explaining what many have been saying for awhile now to those who don't get it, many morons need to read this thread. To add on to the Op's remarks about not dropping this at Langsdorfs feet I agree completely. Langsdorf has even said that the more complex Run plays have been shelved due to the issues and injuries on the O-Line.

The bare bones offense we see this year is the result of all these injuries. The future is bright for us at this spot. But we will have to wait another year or two before we see it all come together.

But, there was an opportunity to say "let's try to fix this year and play the young guys" during the bye week. Instead, Riley and Cav tried to gamble and use walk-ons.

I understand that Riley is trying to play the long game, but I wish he would also focus on this year, because there was a strong opportunity to win at least the division. I understand the talent and depth was lacking when Riley took over, but I am sick of the talk of "wait another year or two".

Has he said or intimated that? Because my sense is that Cav is starting who he thinks gives NU the best chance to win. The w/o's are further along right now - probably mainly based on pass pro, which is the most important factor for playtime with this staff when referring to the OL and running backs.

If it is really a "long game" approach, I think it's crazy and unfair to not play players that could help this team win now. Unless a player isn't ready to play or has specifically requested to redshirt (highly unlikely), they should be playing if they give the Huskers the best chance to be successful.

Ok. so all day youve just been assuming the redshirted players are good enought. "we have the talent, why isnt Cav playing them". Now, youre saying if the walkons are farther along and are playing cuz they give us the best chance to win. That is fine. But if it is the case, then theyre not good enought to compete with Ohio St. We can grind it out on Purdue, Illinois, NW etc. Compete with Wisconsin but not Ohio St. So be it.

The best case for the long term is to redshirt the players, like the qb position, so they can further develop mentally and physically and get that extra year out of them. That's the long game being referred to.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

The OP does a good job explaining what many have been saying for awhile now to those who don't get it, many morons need to read this thread. To add on to the Op's remarks about not dropping this at Langsdorfs feet I agree completely. Langsdorf has even said that the more complex Run plays have been shelved due to the issues and injuries on the O-Line.

The bare bones offense we see this year is the result of all these injuries. The future is bright for us at this spot. But we will have to wait another year or two before we see it all come together.

But, there was an opportunity to say "let's try to fix this year and play the young guys" during the bye week. Instead, Riley and Cav tried to gamble and use walk-ons.

I understand that Riley is trying to play the long game, but I wish he would also focus on this year, because there was a strong opportunity to win at least the division. I understand the talent and depth was lacking when Riley took over, but I am sick of the talk of "wait another year or two".

Has he said or intimated that? Because my sense is that Cav is starting who he thinks gives NU the best chance to win. The w/o's are further along right now - probably mainly based on pass pro, which is the most important factor for playtime with this staff when referring to the OL and running backs.

If it is really a "long game" approach, I think it's crazy and unfair to not play players that could help this team win now. Unless a player isn't ready to play or has specifically requested to redshirt (highly unlikely), they should be playing if they give the Huskers the best chance to be successful.

They came out and pretty much said they were going to do everything possible, except for play the group of true freshman linemen this year. They tried to go with the walk-ons when the starters got hurt and the younger scholarship guys "aren't ready" (which Cav deserves criticism).

Sam McKewon flat out asked Riley today in his PC if he now thinks he should have gone with some freshman linemen after the injuries hit a few weeks ago. Riley didn't give a direct answer either way, but it sounds like he has been thinking about it, and if they did it incorrectly this year.

Sometimes I think that Riley and his staff think about how they did things at Oregon State, and that's how it should be done at NU. They need to rethink this philosophy.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

The OP does a good job explaining what many have been saying for awhile now to those who don't get it, many morons need to read this thread. To add on to the Op's remarks about not dropping this at Langsdorfs feet I agree completely. Langsdorf has even said that the more complex Run plays have been shelved due to the issues and injuries on the O-Line.

The bare bones offense we see this year is the result of all these injuries. The future is bright for us at this spot. But we will have to wait another year or two before we see it all come together.

But, there was an opportunity to say "let's try to fix this year and play the young guys" during the bye week. Instead, Riley and Cav tried to gamble and use walk-ons.

I understand that Riley is trying to play the long game, but I wish he would also focus on this year, because there was a strong opportunity to win at least the division. I understand the talent and depth was lacking when Riley took over, but I am sick of the talk of "wait another year or two".

Has he said or intimated that? Because my sense is that Cav is starting who he thinks gives NU the best chance to win. The w/o's are further along right now - probably mainly based on pass pro, which is the most important factor for playtime with this staff when referring to the OL and running backs.

If it is really a "long game" approach, I think it's crazy and unfair to not play players that could help this team win now. Unless a player isn't ready to play or has specifically requested to redshirt (highly unlikely), they should be playing if they give the Huskers the best chance to be successful.

Ok. so all day youve just been assuming the redshirted players are good enought. "we have the talent, why isnt Cav playing them". Now, youre saying if the walkons are farther along and are playing cuz they give us the best chance to win. That is fine. But if it is the case, then theyre not good enought to compete with Ohio St. We can grind it out on Purdue, Illinois, NW etc. Compete with Wisconsin but not Ohio St. So be it.

The best case for the long term is to redshirt the players, like the qb position, so they can further develop mentally and physically and get that extra year out of them. That's the long game being referred to.

The problem I have with the "long-game" is that Riley and his staff should think "yeah, these guys may miss out on an awesome extra year, but we should be able to have that replacement ready through recruiting and development". They had to take 3-4 years to develop those guys at Oregon State. It shouldn't need to take that long with talent being recruited to NU.

 

[cm husker]

You don't take a long view on redshirting if it's deteremintal to this year's team. It's unfair to the current seniors and smacks of a "one game, one season" attitude that doesn't hold up in CFB.

Billy, I don't know why they won't play OL. I would hope it's because they think the starters give them the best chance to win. If that's not the case, that's a problem. I'm giving Cav the benefit of the doubt that the walkons are the best option - and at least in two cases, that wouldn't surprise me.

That's different from questioning why other non-freshman scholarship players aren't getting time.

 

[Count 'Bility]

But we're talking about true freshman offensive lineman. There's a reason theres only been one true freshman offensive lineman start at Nebraska like ever. It's a really hard position to come in and play right away. Yes, even up against walkons that have been here multiple years already.

 

[cm husker]

The OP does a good job explaining what many have been saying for awhile now to those who don't get it, many morons need to read this thread. To add on to the Op's remarks about not dropping this at Langsdorfs feet I agree completely. Langsdorf has even said that the more complex Run plays have been shelved due to the issues and injuries on the O-Line.

The bare bones offense we see this year is the result of all these injuries. The future is bright for us at this spot. But we will have to wait another year or two before we see it all come together.

But, there was an opportunity to say "let's try to fix this year and play the young guys" during the bye week. Instead, Riley and Cav tried to gamble and use walk-ons.
I understand that Riley is trying to play the long game, but I wish he would also focus on this year, because there was a strong opportunity to win at least the division. I understand the talent and depth was lacking when Riley took over, but I am sick of the talk of "wait another year or two".

Has he said or intimated that? Because my sense is that Cav is starting who he thinks gives NU the best chance to win. The w/o's are further along right now - probably mainly based on pass pro, which is the most important factor for playtime with this staff when referring to the OL and running backs.

If it is really a "long game" approach, I think it's crazy and unfair to not play players that could help this team win now. Unless a player isn't ready to play or has specifically requested to redshirt (highly unlikely), they should be playing if they give the Huskers the best chance to be successful.

They came out and pretty much said they were going to do everything possible, except for play the group of true freshman linemen this year. They tried to go with the walk-ons when the starters got hurt and the younger scholarship guys "aren't ready" (which Cav deserves criticism).
Sam McKewon flat out asked Riley today in his PC if he now thinks he should have gone with some freshman linemen after the injuries hit a few weeks ago. Riley didn't give a direct answer either way, but it sounds like he has been thinking about it, and if they did it incorrectly this year.

Sometimes I think that Riley and his staff think about how they did things at Oregon State, and that's how it should be done at NU. They need to rethink this philosophy.

Thanks for the summary. I haven't had a chance hear those interviews.

 

[Count 'Bility]

You don't take a long view on redshirting if it's deteremintal to this year's team. It's unfair to the current seniors and smacks of a "one game, one season" attitude that doesn't hold up in CFB.

Billy, I don't know why they won't play OL. I would hope it's because they think the starters give them the best chance to win. If that's not the case, that's a problem. I'm giving Cav the benefit of the doubt that the walkons are the best option - and at least in two cases, that wouldn't surprise me.

That's different from questioning why other non-freshman scholarship players aren't getting time.

sure you can. It's called ROSTER MANAGEMENT. Of course it's not fair. Nothing in life is

I know as a Bo guy, you have no sense of the concept of roster management.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

But we're talking about true freshman offensive lineman. There's a reason theres only been one true freshman offensive lineman start at Nebraska like ever. It's a really hard position to come in and play right away. Yes, even up against walkons that have been here multiple years already.

I understand that offensive linemen are in a different situation, but I don't see an issue with a true freshman offensive lineman being asked to provide depth and be a backup. It's not going to kill their development that much. In all honesty, I think people would be more understanding of true freshmen o-linemen making mistakes over a walk-on who has no long-term future with the team. Everyone keeps on saying it wasn't Riley's and Cav's fault with the lack of depth he inherited, but they're not coming up with a good solution for that lack of depth.

 

[cm husker]

But we're talking about true freshman offensive lineman. There's a reason theres only been one true freshman offensive lineman start at Nebraska like ever. It's a really hard position to come in and play right away. Yes, even up against walkons that have been here multiple years already.

That's a different disussion.

The allegation has been that we have a high school jv line. If true, at least one OL frosh should help.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

You don't take a long view on redshirting if it's deteremintal to this year's team. It's unfair to the current seniors and smacks of a "one game, one season" attitude that doesn't hold up in CFB.

Billy, I don't know why they won't play OL. I would hope it's because they think the starters give them the best chance to win. If that's not the case, that's a problem. I'm giving Cav the benefit of the doubt that the walkons are the best option - and at least in two cases, that wouldn't surprise me.

That's different from questioning why other non-freshman scholarship players aren't getting time.

sure you can. It's called ROSTER MANAGEMENT. Of course it's not fair. Nothing in life is

I know as a Bo guy, you have no sense of the concept of roster management.

Yeah, but part of roster management is also playing a guy who may not be 100% ready. If the coach is good at roster management, he should be able to recruit and develop more linemen for 3-4 years down the road.

 

[cm husker]

You don't take a long view on redshirting if it's deteremintal to this year's team. It's unfair to the current seniors and smacks of a "one game, one season" attitude that doesn't hold up in CFB.

Billy, I don't know why they won't play OL. I would hope it's because they think the starters give them the best chance to win. If that's not the case, that's a problem. I'm giving Cav the benefit of the doubt that the walkons are the best option - and at least in two cases, that wouldn't surprise me.

That's different from questioning why other non-freshman scholarship players aren't getting time.

sure you can. It's called ROSTER MANAGEMENT. Of course it's not fair. Nothing in life is
I know as a Bo guy, you have no sense of the concept of roster management.

Explain how redshirting OL freshman helps roster management when the claim is that the current roster is too thin. Or are you claiming we won't continue recruiting OL and will need these guys in 5 years?

 

[Mavric]

Our DL recruiting this year is hugely better than what we've done in recent years. The Davis twins are great, but the rest of the recruiting has been lack luster for awhile. Our OL has 2 tFR who could've started this year. We have good depth at RB and WR sticking around, we're good at LB and our secondary will still be stacked even without Gerry. We also have reason to be optimistic at QB.

This was the rough year and we've done well with what we have.

Yeah, I don't really think this is accurate at all. Not that we have the greatest DL ever. But we've done pretty well recently. We just put two DTs into the NFL last year. A DE the year before that. Maurice will probably get a look. And the Davis twin appear to be on the same track. Conversely we didn't recruit any DTs last year and the two DEs we took were in the lowere half of the class rating-wise. This year Watts is more highly-rated but the other three DL we currently have are all lower-rated. Perhaps they will out-perform their rating but there is absolutely nothing to suggest that it's gotten better.