You'll still see that, but it will be that the opponent is mentally worn down as opposed to physically.
This offense
- Thread starter Crazyhole
- Start date
You'll still see that, but it will be that the opponent is mentally worn down as opposed to physically.
I think we need to look at SFs and MVs history of qbs.
Anyone worrying about only ever having one great qb from these two are already behind the learning curve.
The list is long, Milton, Herbert,Mariotta, etc.
The other names we mostly rated top five in qb rating in cfb.
QB is not a worry with this staff.
Anyone worrying about only ever having one great qb from these two are already behind the learning curve.
The list is long, Milton, Herbert,Mariotta, etc.
The other names we mostly rated top five in qb rating in cfb.
QB is not a worry with this staff.
But they do, they use a TE instead of fullback.
Or, more often, they pull a lineman, creating better angles than a straight ahead approach, which can also 'hide' a back going through a hole, and can create a wash behind the los, where defenders can get caught up into it.
The wash is often deeper ,beyond the los as well, and not concentrated around the runner, where it can also limit him.
It why we see our linemen often catching our backs further downfield, pushing them forwards.
Just by adding more guys in the box shouldnt be construed as smashmouth, it comes in many forms
I disagree completely, to play smashmouth.. you need linemen who knock players on there ass. You need a back who runs downhill hard and will hit a LB or safety in the mouth when needed.
Smashmouth isn't 10 men in the box , it's about physical play and out muscling the D. It can be done in any offense except from a team that runs no back.
If you force a team to defend wide and push them into dime....then pound Ziggy up the gut against a single backer what would you call it
Great post, RED ED! I wholeheartedly agree with you.
Smashmouth is an attitude--and one that's an important ingredient to Scott's vision for the Husker offense. And while we still have a ways to go, we're seeing more and more signs from Ziggy, Mo, and our improving OL that we're capable of playing that style of ball.
While I hope you're right, even gurus miss or make a mistake from time to time. Miles got fired from LSU because he couldn't find the right guy for QB; some say the Harbaugh has finally found a guy who can run his offense; heck, even Meyer and OSU is struggling a bit this season because their guy at QB isn't a true dual threat.
The point is, we can't expect an Adrian Martinez at QB from here on out. Here's hoping that by the time there isn't, the Pipeline is back up and running and the RBs can shoulder more of the load.
Maybe we can't expect "an Adrian Martinez"-sized talent every cycle--particularly when Adrian Martinez is a true freshman. But that said, most years we'll be in the mix for the best dual-threat QB available.
That's a HUGE built-in plus for Scott and his coaching staff.
Dont hope, look it up.
Yes we can expect this level of play, look it up.
Now, Herberts been away from SF, and its showing.
Miltons qbr rating is 20 points below what he achieved as a soph under SF.
Now, will it always be this good with any SF coached qb?
No.
But can it be better? Yes.
A good example is this.
Miltons comp rate went from 67% under SF/MV down to 59% this year, his td production has dropped off as well.
As apples to apples as you can get, regardless that Milton should be even better this year.
Miltons comp rate went from 67% under SF/MV down to 59% this year, his td production has dropped off as well.
As apples to apples as you can get, regardless that Milton should be even better this year.
I just can't see QB talent being an issue going forward--SF and MV will recruit and develop a quality player at that position every year--
My bigger concern is recruiting enough quality defensive players to get us back to an elite level--
GBR
