The last time it was this clear

[corn train]

Cheer for Air Force or Tulane. Those are about the only schools that run the ball 75% of the time. You won't be so disappointed all the time.

Shockey Tulane is my second favorite skool right now

 

[oaknightshockey1]

I'm more of a Nebraska fan than you are. You've already seen what a high falootin and flashy pass pass pass attack will get you, and that's more losses, unless you have an awesome passing QB with a polished passing offense that's been playing together for some time, which wasn't the case. A true Nebraska fan would want more wins, but not you, evidently.

Also, there's absolutely no reason why your boy Riley kept trying to force TA to be a great passer.

First of all, we didn't throw the ball that much. We were in a few games where we had to come back and we had to throw. Even then, we ended the season almost 50/50. We actually ran the ball at a pretty high rate on first down. Unfortunately, we were not effective at running the ball, and that really limits your offense as a playcaller if you know that more often than not you are going to get 2 or less yards.

Additionally, Langsdorf's offense doesn't require a great passer. The receivers' routes are designed to get someone open, which they were very effective at. There's not much you can do when a QB constantly decides to throw to the receiver whose job it is to stretch the defense and who is not supposed to get the ball unless the D completely blows the coverage. Not having a competent backup really handcuffs the OC.

Just because you fancy yourself a traditionalist doesn't mean you're more of a fan than me. I was merely pointing out that if you want to watch a team run plays that we called back in the 90's, you have options since you are apparently miserable watching Nebraska. Never mind that Riley's run game philosophy is as close to TO's as we've had since Solich. It's amazing to see the "traditionalists" beg for a finesse run game like zone read. Meanwhile Riley is throwing out 21 personnel like the old days and people scream that we are running some sort of flashy offense.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

That might have gotten a little more in depth than was necessary for the intended audience

 

[oaknightshockey1]

Shockey Tulane is my second favorite skool right now

Bring on the option!

 

[Exorbitant]

First of all, we didn't throw the ball that much. We were in a few games where we had to come back and we had to throw. Even then, we ended the season almost 50/50. We actually ran the ball at a pretty high rate on first down. Unfortunately, we were not effective at running the ball, and that really limits your offense as a playcaller if you know that more often than not you are going to get 2 or less yards.

Additionally, Langsdorf's offense doesn't require a great passer. The receivers' routes are designed to get someone open, which they were very effective at. There's not much you can do when a QB constantly decides to throw to the receiver whose job it is to stretch the defense and who is not supposed to get the ball unless the D completely blows the coverage. Not having a competent backup really handcuffs the OC.

Just because you fancy yourself a traditionalist doesn't mean you're more of a fan than me. I was merely pointing out that if you want to watch a team run plays that we called back in the 90's, you have options since you are apparently miserable watching Nebraska. Never mind that Riley's run game philosophy is as close to TO's as we've had since Solich. It's amazing to see the "traditionalists" beg for a finesse run game like zone read. Meanwhile Riley is throwing out 21 personnel like the old days and people scream that we are running some sort of flashy offense.

You're wrong, there is something you can do if a QB isn't making good pass play decisions and passing erratically, and that's to not have him pass 40 to 50 times per game. All I've been saying is why take so much risk when you don't have to. I realize teams will stack the box, but no one can tell me it's better to throw pick sixes than it is to endure a few short runs, and then make your opponent work for their wins instead of just gifting it away like it doesn't mean a thing. Also, I don't believe that the option offense is the way to go, but just being smarter with the playcalling would be nice. By the way, TA averaged a little over 36 passes per game which meant there was too much risk with that many passes.

 

[Exorbitant]

That might have gotten a little more in depth than was necessary for the intended audience

Typical brainwashed youngster here.

 

[Exorbitant]

Bring on the option!

No, I'll use some common sense... Limit the amount of passes by TA. A winning season for 2015 would have been nice to see. Even Mad Dog Bo had those in all 6 of his seasons.

I know, I know, I'll get some "I want Bo back" replies now. No I don't want him back.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

You're wrong, there is something you can do if a QB isn't making good pass play decisions and passing erratically, and that's to not have him pass 40 to 50 times per game. All I've been saying is why take so much risk when you don't have to. I realize teams will stack the box, but no one can tell me it's better to throw pick sixes than it is to endure a few short runs, and then make your opponent work for their wins instead of just gifting it away like it doesn't mean a thing. Also, I don't believe that the option offense is the way to go, but just being smarter with the playcalling would be nice. By the way, TA averaged a little over 36 passes per game which meant there was too much risk with that many passes.

You need to check your stats. He averaged 33.5 attempts per game. Do you know when you need to pass? When you can't run the ball. We ran the ball nearly 64% of the time on first down. Unfortunately, we'd often get behind the chains and have to throw. I agree that a short run is better than an INT, but our defense was not good enough to play that type of football. In a lot of the games that we lost, it'd be 3 and out then punt over and over again. That would not have worked. Oh, and TA would have still thrown picks, because he threw the majority of his INTs within the first 20-25 attempts.

 

[Exorbitant]

You need to check your stats. He averaged 33.5 attempts per game. Do you know when you need to pass? When you can't run the ball. We ran the ball nearly 64% of the time on first down. Unfortunately, we'd often get behind the chains and have to throw. I agree that a short run is better than an INT, but our defense was not good enough to play that type of football. In a lot of the games that we lost, it'd be 3 and out then punt over and over again. That would not have worked. Oh, and TA would have still thrown picks, because he threw the majority of his INTs within the first 20-25 attempts.

I don't remember where I got the 36 passes per game stat, but I just checked the Husker Max site and you're right, it was 33.5 passes per game, which obviously is still too many pass attempts for an erratic QB like TA. If Riley is still going to be intent on passing that many times per game, I sure hope with TA that he'll stick with the less risky types of passes.

 

[Wamu]

Bring back Bo Pelini!