But...how do you adjust to an 8-man front, when two of your best receiving threats are on the bench? With Carter and Westerkamp on the field I think we win by a much more comfortable margin.
Worst offensive line play in a looooooong time...
- Thread starter HuskerNiQ0
- Start date
But...how do you adjust to an 8-man front, when two of your best receiving threats are on the bench? With Carter and Westerkamp on the field I think we win by a much more comfortable margin.
Of course having Westerkamp and Carter would help...
However...DPE, Stanley Morgan, Alonzo Moore, and Brandon Reilly can catch and make things happen with the ball in their hands. I am not buying that we can't adjust to the 8-9 man front with those talented receivers on the roster. Winking
Newsflash: We won. 7-0. Now back to your regularly scheduled hating.
Newsflash: this is a internet husker Message Board- people are allowed to have opinions and observations.
Not hating...just talking about counters to a team that puts 8-9 in the box for most of the game.
I am glad we are 7-0 but I can also point out some deficiencies that need to be addressed... so go back to trolling other fans. Winking
Last edited:
To be honest the OL play is the only reason Nebraska doesn't win by 4-5 touchdowns. D played well. Newby played great considering there were no holes. Tommy played well and Wideouts played well.
We won and we are 7-0 with no further injuries. Rest up this weekend and get ready to leave it all on the field in Madison.
I actually don't feel too bad about today's game, big picture wise.
Now excuse me but I have a baseball game to watch! Go Cubs!
We won and we are 7-0 with no further injuries. Rest up this weekend and get ready to leave it all on the field in Madison.
I actually don't feel too bad about today's game, big picture wise.
Now excuse me but I have a baseball game to watch! Go Cubs!
You don't think having 2 experienced seniors....One of which is a matchup nightmare, and the other who has been the most dependable receiver, and the favorite target of our QB...would make much difference over what we had on the field today? I disagree with that.
I said having them would help but it isn't like the other guys are walkons or true freshmen. Winking
I get so sick of this eight in the box rhetoric...whenever a team struggles to run husker fans who want to sound smart run in shouting EIGHT IN THE BOX!! to try to sound smarter than everyone. It's not that simple, and any fool watching what the d line did to the online today can tell you that the number they had in the box was irrelevant because of the way their d line was abusing our online, most of the time merely side stepping them and nothing more. (Also stop pretending that Morgan, Pierson el, and reiley are chopped liver.)
A main problem was the d line slamming inside gaps, ends and tackles were both slamming the inside gap. This is an unconventional, high risk style that paid off for them. Not sure why we didn't try more outside zone "reads" or log qb traps but it got better in the fourth, also some true bootlegs were open against that, not just roll outs.
But whatever eight in the box is more generic and sounds daunting. Fact is we struggled against a team we shouldn't have, but I'm damn happy being 7-0 which is the only stat that matters right now. Beating teams you are supposed to beat is job number one in becoming championship caliber, and it's easier said than done.
Well, I'll tell one thing that DOESN'T sound smart....
"merely side stepping them and nothing more."
I HIGHLY HIGHLY doubt they were merely side-stepping our OLinemen. If they were merely side-stepping us, we would have run up and down the field on them. No Defensive Line coach that I have ever heard of teaches a 'side step' technique.
There is nothing incredibly smart about being able to count the number of players within 3-4 yards of the LOS and inside the frame of the OLine. They brought an extra player into the box most of the time that I paid attention. A 4-3 or 3-4 generally has 7 players in the box. I think they decided that they were going to make Tommy beat them with his arm. And he obliged them. How many wide open TD passes did he miss today? I counted 3.
At any rate, I've never thought people were trying to sound smart when they say 8 in the box. They are simply noticing a Safety playing much closer to the line, which is generally to provide additional run support.
When have I suggested that any of those players you mentioned were chopped liver? Do you not understand what a matchup problem Carter brings to the table? Or that Westerkamp is our most sure-handed receiver?
And yes, I agree with the zone read. We scored on a zone read our very first offensive play of the game, and I didn't notice us running it very many times at all today. Admittedly I wasn't playing as close attention as I usually do because I was talkng to people at our table.
Last edited:
Just a reminder (not an excuse) that several linemen missed practice time this week due to being banged up. Perhaps it's time to evaluate whether said players playing at 60-70% are better than playing the back-up that's completely healthy? Coaches must think so? That's what is scary!
What I saw most of the time was confusion in the blocking assignments. It was as if the lineman in question, took the wrong guy, letting another defensive lineman go by. This was happening with a lot of frequency, and at different spots. In the middle, at the edge, etc. There were plays where we motioned a tight end off the line, only to have that defender come unblocked and tackle our RB behind the line of scrimmage. I know we have some injuries, but it seemed to me that there was more confusion as to whom to block than anything else. It was very frustrating to watch.
Langsdorf said similar things in his presser. It isn't that our guys were getting physically whipped. He said we were getting beat because we did not pick up the stunts and run blitzes properly. In other words... our line played confused and without cohesion. That is what happens when you are forced to move guys all over the place due to injuries.
Makes sense I guess, but kind of inexcusable too. My opinion is that the lineman need to be able to know their position and the one next to them, at a minimum. Sounds like they need to go over all of this again in the classroom. We won't stay a top ten team with blocking assignment confusion on the line.
Agreed. Injuries are important but it is clear we lack depth on the line. The "next man up" slogan only works if your second team guys are well coached and given lots of practice reps. Or maybe our second teamers just lack talent and the coaches are doing the best they can.
If the latter is true... that our second teamers are so lacking in talent that we need to play a clearly hobbled Knevel and Gates, then maybe, for the sake of salvaging THIS season, we need to consider burning some redshirts
What's to debate here? Our line isn't good. Gates is hurt but playing through it. End of story.
We got the win. Rest up and try to win a tough one on the road with banged up team.
We got the win. Rest up and try to win a tough one on the road with banged up team.
Purdue just did exactly what got them a win last year. Sold out to stop the run hoping we'd throw 5 picks. Kudos to Tommy for having a pretty solid passing game.
Trying to sound smart was not the right way to put it on my part....making excuses maybe?its one of the most over used stand irrelevant terms used by your average fan today.
Anyway, the eight in the box crap is overblown. Against certain formations we expect to see eight in the box and every team sees it. It's not a surprise to our offense. It's a normal part of football. It's no excuse to get dominated by the d line. The number of tackles for loss by their d line was alarming and eight in the box has nothing to do with it.
And as far as side stepping, you may want to watch the game. It wasn't on every play as they were hammering gaps, but I remember one play where the tackle in fact did side step the guard and the replay focused on it. It was one of the worst lookout blocks I've ever seen and the abc crew caught it, too.
Carter and western amp weren't going to help our o line block their line. I get it it's more weapons but we are arguing different things. I can see a blitz hitting its mark once or twice a game, but the sheer number of plays when their d line was camping out in our backfield was proof of poor play, execution, and play calling.
I am just hoping we are saving everything for the next 2 weeks and only trying to get 27 points on the board for SF. 
Carter would most certainly help the OL block. He's the best blocker on the edge the team has. C'mon man.
I am just hoping we are saving everything for the next 2 weeks and only trying to get 27 points on the board for SF.
I hope we score 27 and win next week. However, I am not 100% certain 27 will be enough.
I agree that having carter helps our team, but.....
We are arguing different things. Our o line got whooped by the people lining up right in front of them. Not safeties, not linebackers. If they don't fix it fast next week will be hell with wisconsins exotic stunts and blitzes.
Blocking the edge would have been simple for the end yesterday on plays where we need to take their end down or let him go on a read and go to the 2nd level but we didn't do that enough in the middle quarters.
I believe in American exceptionalism... as well I believe in Nebraska football exceptionalism... yes I am glad we won but the simple fact is the teams we have played are not good. We shall see in two weeks but after two weeks I feel there is going to be the feeling that this is not a top25 team unless both lines get nasty.
Ok Du, was it really an 8 man front? I didn't get a chance to see part of the first quarter but what I did see was not an 8 man front. It was stunting and twisting, shooting gaps by their line and our O linemen totally not picking them up all together or not getting good angles on blocks and the guy slips by untouched at times. That is why there were so many TFL against us. They were through before we could get a glove on them and they weren't LB's. The linemen were not together at all on their assignments.
Last edited:
And good teams can take advantage of a gambling team. We did not on any kind of consistent basis. Yes, there are things that are open in an all out effort to stop the run. What Purdue was doing was not an all or nothing D. We did not adjust well and there was likely some head shaking in the film room today.
It wouldn't be so bad if we were running out 2nd teamers but we've had to run out a couple of guys that were below that before the transfer and injuries. I knew we were going to be thin this year and couldn't afford any injuries. I'm amazed we've made it this far without a loss but I'm afraid that is about to change.
Amazing to me that Bryant is returning kicks and has had some touches, Jackson has played corner, Davis/Davis play, and Read trusts the crucial punting duty to a freshman, but Decker, Barnett and Gaylord have gotten no snaps on offense.
For the Xs and Os guys, isn't a good way to slow down the backers who cheat to the line (and safeties run blitzing) throwing slants and short crossing routes? Those don't seem to be in our playbook.
For the Xs and Os guys, isn't a good way to slow down the backers who cheat to the line (and safeties run blitzing) throwing slants and short crossing routes? Those don't seem to be in our playbook.
You mean like missing wide open WRs running toward the end zone? That type of taking advantage? We had open receivers on many occasions, and Tommie kept missing them. He hits on one or two of those, and they drop the safeties back.
I rewatched just a small amount of the game, and there were 9 players within 7 or 8 yards of the LOS on many occasions, all inside the TE. They allowed their corners to play man without any safety help on many occasions. They were just asking to get burnt long, and Tommy couldn't hit wide open guys. If I were Wisconsin, I would do the same thing, because they probably have the personnel to do so.
I was using the term 8-man front pretty loosely, meaning they had 8 or more guys pretty close to the LOS. No one is going to literally put 8 guys on the line. Their safeties were right behind their LBs on many occasions.
Oh I know. Hence the part where I said take their end down...those plays would have worked regardless of end yesterday.
I like how you avoided my overall point that our o line was getting owned in the interior.
We did throw some slants and they were effective at times. But you are correct we could see it more.
What there wasn't a lot of was safety blitzing.
I'm not trying to start an argument here, really I'm not...but where exactly do you expect a defense to line up against a tight end set, ones in which you are describing have no slot. 9 guys inside the te indicates no slot. Where are they supposed to line up? And I bet they weren't all literally inside the tight end but I get your point they were tight.
I don't see why these defensive sets are a surprise or seen as selling out to stop the run. To me it seems like common sense. Anything else would be selling out to stop the pass against a Texas tech or something.
And the guys in the second level weren't making the tackles in the backfield. The d line was.
It is possible to have success running against these defenses heck we've done it before even this season and did at times yesterday.
Wisconsin will do many things and it will be a challenge. Maybe this is what we needed a wake up call. On some board I saw someone call wiskys defense vanilla....man it's anything but and we could see tommy running for his life throwing off his back foot if we can't figure it out.
Safeties generally don't line up that close to the LOS. Not even remotely that close. That is packing things in pretty tight, and doesn't provide any safety support for the CBs on the outside. It looked to me that they were intent on making Tommie beat them with his arm and not his legs. He could have had 3 additional TD passes on long passes, had he been more on target.
I would say that Coach Cav has to shoulder a little bit of the blame for this. He has been pretty set on only playing a limited number of guys on the line. This doesn't allow there to be much depth built up. Supposedly going in to this season Foster was one of our best on the O Line. I am not sure he hardly played last year.
So I thing before we do a lot of saying what is the deal with this guy not playing or that guy not playing, lets take a look at how the position coach runs his unit. Now he has had to play some different guys this year, but why not give a young guy a series or two here or there.
Did I hear correctly that Gates was wearing a boot Saturday before the game, and yet he played the whole game?
So I thing before we do a lot of saying what is the deal with this guy not playing or that guy not playing, lets take a look at how the position coach runs his unit. Now he has had to play some different guys this year, but why not give a young guy a series or two here or there.
Did I hear correctly that Gates was wearing a boot Saturday before the game, and yet he played the whole game?
Agreed. IMO redshirts are overvalued by coaches at times.
I'd be very surprised if you have a lot of true freshman who are ready physically to step in and take on 21 and 22 year old guys who have been in a college lifting program for 4 and 5 years.
Without watching practice, I couldn't tell you who looks better than the next guy, but I can tell you Gates did not look like himself out there on that leg. Whatever the issue was, they made Purdue's DL look like we were lined up against Alabama all day.
Thank God for Newby running hard. Man is he a different player than he used to be.
Without watching practice, I couldn't tell you who looks better than the next guy, but I can tell you Gates did not look like himself out there on that leg. Whatever the issue was, they made Purdue's DL look like we were lined up against Alabama all day.
Thank God for Newby running hard. Man is he a different player than he used to be.
This is true, but it was Riley himself, a couple of weeks ago, who brought up the possibility of burning some redshirts on the offensive line. Does he want to? Of course not. But the mere fact he raised the issue tells you the coaches know guys like Conrad are not getting it done. Why else would he play Gates and Knevel despite the fact both are clearly hobbled and very diminished? That tells me they think an injured Knevel and Gates are still preferable to playing their backups.
Last edited:
True freshman that maybe is more athletic versus a sophomore or junior that has been in the system for 2 years now, that is the question. It appears that what defenses are throwing at them are tough enough for an older guy to mentally handle. Maybe you could get by with one freshman but man 2 would be self defeating. I guess I have to trust that they are putting the guys our there that they believe give them the best chance to win. The opposition has been able to confuse our O line, QB and RBs at times with their blitz packages so I'm not sure many true freshman could handle it mentally. Personally IF I thought burning a redshirt or two would be the difference in even one win, I would do it in a heartbeat. The stakes are high when you get to 6-0.