Ozigbo as our #1= at least 4 more wins this year
- Thread starter T...Chafes
- Start date
Hmmm, maybe 6 less turnovers = 4 more wins. Sure is promising watching Ozigbo though
Seriously, had we pounded the rock more, we would have won so many more games. Having Newby and Cross as our backs was not effective, Ozigbo is. Less passing attempts also makes Armstrong so much more effective.
16 carries for Ozigbo before today on the year, why?????
16 carries for Ozigbo before today on the year, why?????
Last edited:
Solid points, but dont base it on this game. UCLA's rush D is horrid
This. You realize we played an uninterested UCLA team that beat Colorado by a fluke. They aren't a top 30 team.
Guess they didn't play to win the game then. Maybe they should listen to Herm Edwards more.
Did it look like they were uninterested?
Such bs to suggest the other team is uninterested, not how athletes think at all. We were more physical period
Every time we win a bowl game against a favored team it's they weren't interested. I don't care. They were a top 10 team early in the season. Maybe not now but it's still a good team. And these message boards have been full of talk about talent. Well UCLA is not short on talent. 4 stars all around. GBR
The game got awfully chippy for them being uninterested.
It is easier to be interested when things arw going your way. Getting knocked in the mouth tends to lower your amount of interest.
UCLAs front 7 was severely depleted - not sure we are going to face too many teams in conference next year where we have that big of an advantage. However it was nice to see us exploit our advantage and save from a few head scratchers on the goal line stick with the run.
We couldn't take advantage of the 8 man front we saw in the 4th quarter in the passing game which we will need to work on for next year.
Would be nice to see 55/45 run pass ratio next year. The offensive line is going to be very young so we will see.
We couldn't take advantage of the 8 man front we saw in the 4th quarter in the passing game which we will need to work on for next year.
Would be nice to see 55/45 run pass ratio next year. The offensive line is going to be very young so we will see.
What games are you referring to? There was some games we just could not get the run game going.
That's what happens when you're getting your *** handed to you in the trenches.
Maybe Ozigbo struggles in pass-protection? Sounds like this was a game in which the NU coaches were legitimately committed to running the ball, which meant Ozigbo could be on the field more often - if that is the case.
Incidentally, NU played two teams that had worse run defenses than UCLA this year - Miami and Purdue. NU lost to both. NU ran it 32 times and passed it 45 against Miami; they ran it 29 times and passed it 48 against Purdue.
Incidentally, NU played two teams that had worse run defenses than UCLA this year - Miami and Purdue. NU lost to both. NU ran it 32 times and passed it 45 against Miami; they ran it 29 times and passed it 48 against Purdue.
I even questioned why Oz wasn't played more but you sometimes have to throw the ball to keep a defense guessing. I don't think people understand how negatively it affects your offensive playcalling when Tommy doesn't throw short and move the chains. Also the team has gelled and it affects playcalling in a positive way.
Yep. I just alluded to that in another post - throwing the ball 40+ times a game is great if you have the guys to do it. NU doesn't - at least at the QB spot.
Of course you do, and NU did a great job of that last night. But in the games in which they absolutely abandoned the ground game and showed no interest in running the ball, the defense wasn't "guessing." They were too busy racking up INTs.
I'm not under the illusion that NU goes 11-1 or wins the Big Ten or whatever, using the offensive game plan that was employed last night. But they sure as Hell don't lose to Illinois or get boatraced by Purdue.
Great win last night, but it means nothing as far as what we can expect to see next year. Our OC has shown on several occasions (namely, those two games alluded to above) that, if all else fails, he'll stick to the pass more than the run. I expect to see more of the same next year.
There wasn't one game this season that Nebraska tried to set up the run as they did last night. That game plan wasn't going to work against every team we've played this season but they got run shy easily this season which I suppose could be due to our defense early on.
I agree that running more would have won us a couple more games this year at least. Our OL is much better at run blocking than pass blocking. Ozigbo looked really good, and Tommy looks pretty good when he gets the chance to run it. Combine that with more Janovich would have been nice to see. Cross hasn't looked too bad lately, but I think Janovich has just as much power with a lot more quickness.
I'm not even sure I'd say that running more would have won us more games this season. I think in a few cases running the ball could have changed a game but I wouldn't blame all of our losses on not running the ball. We lost by way of defensive issues more than we have due to offensive issues. If we had a solid defense then we have more than enough offensive capability to win those games that we lost. Hell, we were close to winning some of them even with all of our problems and I'd say our offense was good enough to keep us in that position. They just weren't good enough to overcome some issues with the defense.
Ozigbo can't be good, he's just a 3 star that was comitted to lowly Iowa State that played low level high school football in Texas that we signed out of desperation when 4 star running back Bussey decomitted.
Sounds like you didn't watch the game. Lots of trash talking on their side
This is accurate. We will not face a worse front 7 next year or at least that depleted. Our coaches did a good job seeing the glaring weakness.
N-sane - before you give O the heisman and make fun if 4 stars, maybe he can start by beating out our 4 stars. Just saying.
You will have a hard time selling me the Purdue front 7 over the UCLA front 7.
Omg.. Handing him the heisman? Really?... I can only assume you were one the "know-it-all" posters smugly belittling his commitment almost exactly a year ago. The kid is a TRUE FRESHMAN and I would say it's already safe to say he's at the very least a solid back that will be (barring injury) much more than scout team fodder. Far from a wasted scholarship. Believe me I'm not making fun of 4 star players, I'm making fun the posters who were whining and crying when the kid was offered. I can only assume you were one of them since my post seems to have bothered you.
First of all, Oz did great, don't get me wrong he's a great back and looks very promising. He might be our best back. But the reason the run game worked was because our coaches decided they were going to run it and keep running it. They could have done that with Cross (or OZ) all year and been more successful than we were. People want to blame talent, tommy, etc. but the fact is if we dedicated ourselves to the run all year like we did yesterday we would have beat Illinois, Purdont, and BYU at the very least regardless of who was running behind Janovich and the O-Line. Play action and tight end and only 19 pass attempts to receivers who were determined to pound the d-backs when they had the ball was and would have been a bonus.
Yes, UCLA was not good against the run, but neither were Illinois or Purdont. And even if they were better we would not have needed 37 points to beat those teams (granted we would not have turned the ball over as much against Purdue leading to them having more scoring opportunities than us...I realize they scored more than 37 but they wouldn't have had we controlled the game with the run)
And stop with the UCLA wasn't that good crap. They were a good and talented team and NU earned this win and it was a good one so we should enjoy it and give the team and coaches props.
My hope is that our coaches learned something yesterday. No, not all teams will let us run that well. But establishing and keeping a run game in the Big 10 will pay dividends again and again. You won't win them all, but you'll be in the hunt and you'll win more than 5. Then get your recruiting going and those 9 win seasons with quality coaching will turn into top 10 seasons.
Yes, UCLA was not good against the run, but neither were Illinois or Purdont. And even if they were better we would not have needed 37 points to beat those teams (granted we would not have turned the ball over as much against Purdue leading to them having more scoring opportunities than us...I realize they scored more than 37 but they wouldn't have had we controlled the game with the run)
And stop with the UCLA wasn't that good crap. They were a good and talented team and NU earned this win and it was a good one so we should enjoy it and give the team and coaches props.
My hope is that our coaches learned something yesterday. No, not all teams will let us run that well. But establishing and keeping a run game in the Big 10 will pay dividends again and again. You won't win them all, but you'll be in the hunt and you'll win more than 5. Then get your recruiting going and those 9 win seasons with quality coaching will turn into top 10 seasons.
I've seen plenty of teams not play with good effort and after getting their butts kicked play after play, start to retaliate with cheap shots. It's frustrating as a coach to see players put more effort into dirty play than what really matters.
I really think Devine was a guy they wanted more than Bussey but they were going to honor commitments from the previous staff. Devine does so many things well it appears to me and he's a scary guy for a DB to have to try to tackle when he gets to the second level.Ozigbo can't be good, he's just a 3 star that was comitted to lowly Iowa State that played low level high school football in Texas that we signed out of desperation when 4 star running back Bussey decomitted.
Who was it that was saying it was a reach when I said Ozigbo needed more touches? Wondering if that's still the case...
He showed me that he would have been an upgrade over Newby most of the year. That said, he suddenly came down with a case of the dancies late in the game. Dunno if the success got to him or what, but he was starting to cut and bounce too much.
Doesn't strike me as a guy who will end up on the short list of all-time greats, but IMO he'll be a nice back in a 2-3 RB rotation for his career. Dunno if he's a #1 under ideal circumstances, but he looked like the best of the guys they were willing to play this year.
Wilbon still on that milk carton. His knee not ready to go yet?
He showed me that he would have been an upgrade over Newby most of the year. That said, he suddenly came down with a case of the dancies late in the game. Dunno if the success got to him or what, but he was starting to cut and bounce too much.
Doesn't strike me as a guy who will end up on the short list of all-time greats, but IMO he'll be a nice back in a 2-3 RB rotation for his career. Dunno if he's a #1 under ideal circumstances, but he looked like the best of the guys they were willing to play this year.
Wilbon still on that milk carton. His knee not ready to go yet?
Sure ;looked like they were trying to me. Getting tired of hearing something is always wrong with our opponent when we win a bowl game over a team favored to beat us..
The most important attribute of a RB is vision. Difference between a one yard gain and 4-5 yards. Too much emphasis on flash and speed but if you can't find the small cracks (newby, Taylor) you aren't going to be productive. Any stiff or track guy can run through massive holes.
I agree somewhat. Our defensive backs were the worst position group by far and they cost us a lot of games. But the offense put the defense in bad spots a lot of times turning the ball over and going 3 and out on horrible 3rd down pass plays. Our offensive line is geared to run the ball and were pretty bad in pass protection for most of the year. Running the ball would have salvaged a few more wins. It would have turned our major offensive weaknesses in the OL and QB position into a strength.
This. If I had to say running the ball more would have "guaranteed a few wins," it would have been Illinois and Wisconsin.
BYU/Miami/Purdue/Northwestern were mostly losses because of defensive issues/lack of depth.
I agree, but even then, these were close losses. Running the ball could have salvaged a couple more wins against those teams, too.
Half the board complained when we even offered Ozigbo last winter. People will learn pretty quickly not to doubt Riley recruits at the skill positions in particular.
I was at the game and can tell you they , UCLA, were interested in this game. They were playing hard and wanted to win, period .