Speculation: Langsdorf to the Edmonton Eskimos

[BigRedBuster]

Hey...yaaa....let's get rid of a coach that is one of the main reasons why a very good QB recruit is coming next year.

Great idea......just brilliant.

In all fairness, I think there is more than the ability to recruit POTENTIALLY great player(s) to be considered.

yeah.....recruiting a player that fits his system....the same system that very closely had the same production as the 4 playoff teams even though he had a QB that didn't fit.

There a lot of brilliance in this thread.

No need to take a passive aggressive tone with your brilliance comments. Its obvious you have your mind made up and there are no other points be considered, so we can leave it at that.

LOL....I'm the one with my mind made up? That's funny.

 

[JJ Husker]

I think Langsdorf is a good QB coach/position coach. But, from what I saw this year, his OC capabilities are severely lacking and not real desirable. If the choices are he stays and calls the plays/offense or he leaves, I would rather see him leave. The play calling and type of offense he (and Riley) want to run does not appear to be anything we should want long term. Lots of people have speculated that we could've won 3 or 4 more games if TA had played better, and I would agree with that but, I would also say we could've won 3 or 4 more games if Riley and Langs had sent in more sensible plays at critical times. When your OC is in charge of sending in the plays and he is afraid to run the ball on 2nd & 1 or 3rd &1, in a 4 down situation, then personally he can't leave soon enough for my tastes.

 

[VectorVictor]

I think Langsdorf is a good QB coach/position coach. But, from what I saw this year, his OC capabilities are severely lacking and not real desirable. If the choices are he stays and calls the plays/offense or he leaves, I would rather see him leave. The play calling and type of offense he (and Riley) want to run does not appear to be anything we should want long term. Lots of people have speculated that we could've won 3 or 4 more games if TA had played better, and I would agree with that but, I would also say we could've won 3 or 4 more games if Riley and Langs had sent in more sensible plays at critical times. When your OC is in charge of sending in the plays and he is afraid to run the ball on 2nd & 1 or 3rd &1, in a 4 down situation, then personally he can't leave soon enough for my tastes.

The only thing I'd add to this is that Langsdorf knew what he had with Tommy coming in--there's two years of tape on the man under center at DoNU. If you can't call plays that accentuate the positive and align with Tommy's strengths, then you're just as much at fault, if not more so, than the QB on the field that didn't make the play.

But yeah, JJ is dead on, and I know many of us have said similar things in game threads, and if Langsdorf stays on as a QB coach, we could roll up Special Teams to someone else--it's not like having a specialized Special Teams coach paid dividends this season...

 

[VectorVictor]

Hey...yaaa....let's get rid of a coach that is one of the main reasons why a very good QB recruit is coming next year.

Great idea......just brilliant.

Based on how this season went, I think POB could be the answer to all of our passing game problems.

Which is probably why Langsdorf will have POB run QB Sneaks/Flops/Bootlegs and the Triple Option next year. Because Langsdorf tailors his play-calling to the resources around him, yo.

This made me laugh. Thank you Vector

Glad to be of assistance.

 

[Stumpy1]

Why is everyone against running a pro style offense here? What are the complaints you have against it? Just curious what people have.

I for one would like to see a pro style offense here for the long haul. Look at the top teams year in and year out and a majority of them run a pro style offense, whether it be run heavy or pass heavy or balanced. It also attracts better high school players that want to make it to the next level.

 

[roadrat]

Problem with Langsdorf and his NFL offense is 3rd & 2 is almost a passing down in the NFL. It should not be in college.

 

[adc7236]

Why is everyone against running a pro style offense here? What are the complaints you have against it? Just curious what people have.

I for one would like to see a pro style offense here for the long haul. Look at the top teams year in and year out and a majority of them run a pro style offense, whether it be run heavy or pass heavy or balanced. It also attracts better high school players that want to make it to the next level.

I don't think people are objecting to a pro style offense. I think there is frustration that the coaches are not tailoring the offense to the skill sets of their players, specifically our starting QB. They are trying fit a square peg in a round hole and it is costing us some games. Eventually Riley and staff may get the players to fit their system, but that is the future and we are dealing with the present.

 

[Hedley Lamarr]

Why is everyone against running a pro style offense here? What are the complaints you have against it? Just curious what people have.

I for one would like to see a pro style offense here for the long haul. Look at the top teams year in and year out and a majority of them run a pro style offense, whether it be run heavy or pass heavy or balanced. It also attracts better high school players that want to make it to the next level.

I don't think people are objecting to a pro style offense. I think there is frustration that the coaches are not tailoring the offense to the skill sets of their players, specifically our starting QB. They are trying fit a square peg in a round hole and it is costing us some games. Eventually Riley and staff may get the players to fit their system, but that is the future and we are dealing with the present.

So you've ran a system for decades and should just dump it for short term success? We played many young players and unfortunately you are typically going to have some sort of setback when transitioning.

 

[NebraskaHarry]

Why is everyone against running a pro style offense here? What are the complaints you have against it? Just curious what people have.

I for one would like to see a pro style offense here for the long haul. Look at the top teams year in and year out and a majority of them run a pro style offense, whether it be run heavy or pass heavy or balanced. It also attracts better high school players that want to make it to the next level.

I don't think people are objecting to a pro style offense. I think there is frustration that the coaches are not tailoring the offense to the skill sets of their players, specifically our starting QB. They are trying fit a square peg in a round hole and it is costing us some games. Eventually Riley and staff may get the players to fit their system, but that is the future and we are dealing with the present.

So you've ran a system for decades and should just dump it for short term success? We played many young players and unfortunately you are typically going to have some sort of setback when transitioning.

Why not?

 

[TonyStalloni]

Why is everyone against running a pro style offense here? What are the complaints you have against it? Just curious what people have.

I for one would like to see a pro style offense here for the long haul. Look at the top teams year in and year out and a majority of them run a pro style offense, whether it be run heavy or pass heavy or balanced. It also attracts better high school players that want to make it to the next level.

I don't think people are objecting to a pro style offense. I think there is frustration that the coaches are not tailoring the offense to the skill sets of their players, specifically our starting QB. They are trying fit a square peg in a round hole and it is costing us some games. Eventually Riley and staff may get the players to fit their system, but that is the future and we are dealing with the present.

I think if I hear the phrase "square peg in a round hole" one more time I'll throw up. Tommy did a decent job vs BYU (outside of the 2nd qtr) and fairly well the next game. I think with what the coaches were seeing in practice and the first few games they thought Tommy had turned the corner, then he inexplicably resumed his old habits. After that he would have a terrible half then play a good quarter or have a terrible first three quarters and explode in the fourth. His on again off again persona makes it hard for coaches to call plays. I'm not saying DL called perfect games. There were some head scratchers for sure. I'm saying the offensive failures had more to do with poor O line play, running backs hitting the wrong hole or dancing too much, DB's who wouldn't or couldn't figure out the defense (and put more pressure on our O) and QB's who too often went for the 50/50 ball rather than check down to a safer throw.

 

[adc7236]

I can agree with much of what your saying, just not all. I believe in todays win now, instant gratification climate that has transpired over the years, a new coach would be wise to temporarily adjust certain aspects of his style while in transition. In Tommy's case, there is enough film and time with him to realize he runs hot and cold and has always showed a pattern of bad decisions when passing the ball. I think our coaching staff could do a better job of looking at what Tommy does well on a CONSISTENT basis, and try to build from there. I am not suggesting we run the ball more in every game, but simply tailor things a bit more to Tommy's strengths and the strength of the team. What are high completion percentage passes for Tommy? Does he do better in the pocket or on the run. Short pass, medium or long? Has the running back stable been used to fullest potential? If I am not rotating guys on my line, do I REALLY have the best players there?

In closing.....square peg, round hole. LOL.

 

[adc7236]

Why is everyone against running a pro style offense here? What are the complaints you have against it? Just curious what people have.

I for one would like to see a pro style offense here for the long haul. Look at the top teams year in and year out and a majority of them run a pro style offense, whether it be run heavy or pass heavy or balanced. It also attracts better high school players that want to make it to the next level.

I don't think people are objecting to a pro style offense. I think there is frustration that the coaches are not tailoring the offense to the skill sets of their players, specifically our starting QB. They are trying fit a square peg in a round hole and it is costing us some games. Eventually Riley and staff may get the players to fit their system, but that is the future and we are dealing with the present.

So you've ran a system for decades and should just dump it for short term success? We played many young players and unfortunately you are typically going to have some sort of setback when transitioning.

Not suggesting dumping the system at all. I bolded a few things for you, and no where does it say or suggest dumping his system. To simplify, I am talking about a smoother transition.

 

[lo country]

I think Langsdorf is a good QB coach/position coach. But, from what I saw this year, his OC capabilities are severely lacking and not real desirable. If the choices are he stays and calls the plays/offense or he leaves, I would rather see him leave. The play calling and type of offense he (and Riley) want to run does not appear to be anything we should want long term. Lots of people have speculated that we could've won 3 or 4 more games if TA had played better, and I would agree with that but, I would also say we could've won 3 or 4 more games if Riley and Langs had sent in more sensible plays at critical times. When your OC is in charge of sending in the plays and he is afraid to run the ball on 2nd & 1 or 3rd &1, in a 4 down situation, then personally he can't leave soon enough for my tastes.

The only thing I'd add to this is that Langsdorf knew what he had with Tommy coming in--there's two years of tape on the man under center at DoNU. If you can't call plays that accentuate the positive and align with Tommy's strengths, then you're just as much at fault, if not more so, than the QB on the field that didn't make the play.

But yeah, JJ is dead on, and I know many of us have said similar things in game threads, and if Langsdorf stays on as a QB coach, we could roll up Special Teams to someone else--it's not like having a specialized Special Teams coach paid dividends this season...

I would agree with both. Langs calls the plays. If there is a deep fade route option in the passing tree, don't call that play.....

He hasn't proven enough in one year that it makes a difference to me at all. Williams and Bray, IMO, impressed the most and would hurt significantly more of they were lured away. Langs, not so much.

 

[BigRedBuster]

I can agree with much of what your saying, just not all. I believe in todays win now, instant gratification climate that has transpired over the years, a new coach would be wise to temporarily adjust certain aspects of his style while in transition. In Tommy's case, there is enough film and time with him to realize he runs hot and cold and has always showed a pattern of bad decisions when passing the ball. I think our coaching staff could do a better job of looking at what Tommy does well on a CONSISTENT basis, and try to build from there. I am not suggesting we run the ball more in every game, but simply tailor things a bit more to Tommy's strengths and the strength of the team. What are high completion percentage passes for Tommy? Does he do better in the pocket or on the run. Short pass, medium or long? Has the running back stable been used to fullest potential? If I am not rotating guys on my line, do I REALLY have the best players there?

In closing.....square peg, round hole. LOL.

Question,

Why do Husker fans want to be like that?

 

[adc7236]

I can agree with much of what your saying, just not all. I believe in todays win now, instant gratification climate that has transpired over the years, a new coach would be wise to temporarily adjust certain aspects of his style while in transition. In Tommy's case, there is enough film and time with him to realize he runs hot and cold and has always showed a pattern of bad decisions when passing the ball. I think our coaching staff could do a better job of looking at what Tommy does well on a CONSISTENT basis, and try to build from there. I am not suggesting we run the ball more in every game, but simply tailor things a bit more to Tommy's strengths and the strength of the team. What are high completion percentage passes for Tommy? Does he do better in the pocket or on the run. Short pass, medium or long? Has the running back stable been used to fullest potential? If I am not rotating guys on my line, do I REALLY have the best players there?

In closing.....square peg, round hole. LOL.

Question,

Why do Husker fans want to be like that?

I do not necessarily think this is inclusive to just Husker fans. I think we are seeing it all across college football. A few examples to make my point; coaches are given only a handful of years these days to achieve some sort of measurable success or they are fired. Schools are ponying up record $$$ amounts to find the latest hot coach to meet their desires of achievement. In the case of Nebraska fans, many of us are emotionally invested in our team and we long for the glory days. We miss the days when Nebraska was feared, always went to a top bowl game and was highly ranked. It been just under two decades now since that level of success, and husker fans have grown impatient and fear slipping deeper into mediocrity. I think the one thing we can all agree on as Husker fans is that want success for our team.......but we all define success differently, and sometimes have opposing views on how to get there and the time it should take.