• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Locked due to no posts in 60 days. Report 1st post if need unlocked Three & Out w/ Martinez @ the helm - 2013 so far

Status
Not open for further replies.
But posters have told me the last couple of days we can't do that. We are an uptempo offense. Can't slow down a polished mechanism like our uptempo offense. Runs too smooth to slow down and run ball control. Too hard to do. That's what I've been told.

I guess I'm getting called out here. For starters, weren't you upset with me for "putting words in your mouth?" Pot...meet kettle. I never called our offense smooth or polished. On the contrary, our offense is quite the opposite - choppy and inconsistent.

This started when I made the claim that Tommy Armstrong might be able to spark both sides of the ball. Taylor's erratic play when injured (and often when healthy) is deflating for the defense. Another poster responded that QB play didn't really matter, we just need to control the clock and limit turnovers. I responded that our offense just isn't built that way. Like most of you, I wish it were. I think we all miss the days when NU was a power running team that dominated time of possession. We just simply are not that team anymore.

I'll again make the comparison to Alabama. Saban was asked the other day if he ever thought about going up-tempo/no huddle. His response was in the vein of "That's not really our style. To play offense like that, you have to practice like that." If I had a broad point, it's simply that. We practice up-tempo....it's our "style." We are running an average of roughly 15 more offensive plays per game than we did back in the '90s. With limited practice time, it's difficult to be the ball control, power running team and the up-tempo spread team at the same time.
 

But is does eliminate the 30 second three and outs...

Unless you are trying to run time off the clock (which probably shouldn't necessarily by a goal of a "scoring explosion" offense except in the 4th Q maybe) there's really not much difference between running it three times for 3 yards and throwing 3 incompletions. The amount of time the defense gets to "rest" is about the same. I scratch my head every time I hear TV guys wig out about a possession where 3 straight passes results in a 3 and out..."OH! what were they thinking!? the defense only got to rest for 15 seconds!"...yet if the same team ran the ball 3 times for no first down it wouldn't be any different.
 
Last edited:
Unless you are trying to run time off the clock (which probably shouldn't necessarily by a goal of a "scoring explosion" offense except in the 4th Q maybe) there's really not much difference between running it three times for 3 yards and throwing 3 incompletions. The amount of time the defense gets to "rest" is about the same. I scratch my head every time I hear TV guys wig out about a possession where 3 straight passes results in a 3 and out..."OH! what were they thinking!? the defense only got to rest for 15 seconds!"...yet if the same team ran the ball 3 times for no first down it wouldn't be any different.

There's a lot of '90s nostalgia at play. The presumption when we go 3 and out passing is that had we just run the ball, it would have been a 12-play, 80-yard drive that burned 9 minutes off the clock. The fact that we run no-huddle doesn't seem to register nor does the fact that teams are loading the box and daring us to pass.
 



just said he fumbled three times. deal with it. I know facts bother folks but I'll keep putting them out there. and thanks for the reminder fumbles aren't always turnovers. I'll write that down somewhere.
 
I think the 6/15 3 and out drives in the UCLA are what stand out. Need to do a better job of changing field position even if the drive doesn't result in a score.
Well, I do know that on four of those drives Beck called runs on first and second down, leaving themselves in third and long situations every single time.
 




Unless you are trying to run time off the clock (which probably shouldn't necessarily by a goal of a "scoring explosion" offense except in the 4th Q maybe) there's really not much difference between running it three times for 3 yards and throwing 3 incompletions. The amount of time the defense gets to "rest" is about the same. I scratch my head every time I hear TV guys wig out about a possession where 3 straight passes results in a 3 and out..."OH! what were they thinking!? the defense only got to rest for 15 seconds!"...yet if the same team ran the ball 3 times for no first down it wouldn't be any different.

you are missing a half of that component though.... if you run more time off the game clock the other team has less time to score... 3 running plays takes about 90-100 seconds off the clock. 3 incomplete passes takes 20-30 seconds...
 
Last edited:
Well, I do know that on four of those drives Beck called runs on first and second down, leaving themselves in third and long situations every single time.

Get more yards when run plays are called behind what was said to be "the best offensive line since Pelini has been here"
 
Well, I do know that on four of those drives Beck called runs on first and second down, leaving themselves in third and long situations every single time.

And 1st down is generally a run down. If its gets stuffed, 2nd down then becomes the management to get to 3rd and medium/short. Usually your bread and butter pass or run is called. Theres no difference between an incomplete on 1st down, or a run for no gain on 1st down.
 



Not if you're running an uptempo offense.

edit: this in response to #69, not #70

The clock runs on a run play short of the line to gain... you know this and even if you are running up tempo... more seconds run off the clock than if we have three incomplete passes...
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top