What I learned this week end

[Middle-aged_Ball_Coach]

If Farniok is better inside then they need to move him there.

Farniok is without question better off playing Guard ... but it's a team game. You're assuming that there is someone just as good or better ready to take his place at OT so he can slide over. There isn't ... yet. Gaylord was likely going to be that guy before he got hurt, and Benhart is quite likely going to be that guy at some point in the future, but that could be next game, next year, or even 2021, but I doubt that it'll be that late. If you move Farniok over, we'd get a boost at Guard, but not better at OT. Eventually, the calculus for the change will work. It's a question now of how soon we can play Benhart. My hope is that we win the next two games to become bowl eligible, and then we put Benhart at OT and Farniok at G for the last 3 regular season games and the bowl game. Benhart would still save his redshirt, and next year's O-line would have 4 games together as preparation.

 

[Middle-aged_Ball_Coach]

Here is the thing, this game was begging for Mills to get the ball about 20x. Inside zone mostly maybe from under center dives or what ever. How many carries did he have, 9 and most of that was late. Instead we start the game running Washington on inside zone. He is a great change of pace and 3rd down guy he is not an every down back.

Sometimes I think coaches get too caught up into what they want to do and how they want to play the game vs. what they need to do to win the game.

When I used to coach we always had to get on our HC who also called offense. This was 9th grade football. If we were up a couple of TD he would start calling every pass play in the playbook. After a couple of 3 and outs our DC would always look at him and say Run the Texasing ball. That would bring him back into what we needed to do to win the game.

Not saying it would have won us the game, but, I think we could have leaned on him a little more to try and get something going.

It is just too bad things got out of hand so quick in the second half. They were only down 2 scores, but you really saw who wanted it more in the 3rd quarter. Too bad that nice pass and run to Robinson gets called back on a block in the back. They score there and it is 7-14 going into half. Maybe a different game.

I thought some of the same things, but I wondered about a couple of potential answers: after MW had been benched for discipline last week, how would he respond to NOT starting and being the featured back in the first half? is Mills fully healthy? I also thought that we'd see a lot of Mills carrying the ball, and I expected to see more of it coming from the QB going back and forth from shotgun to being under Center so that Mills could start closer to the line in a 3-point stance. Like you said, even Mills running Inside Zone should have worked.

I wasn't surprised that Minnesota ran the ball well, but I had hopes that we would also.

 

[joncarl]

You can discuss whatever you want. And I will say it's ludicrous to talk about replacing anyone on this staff this early.

I really want to agree with you, but I can't. The problem is I really want to disagree with you, but I can't. This year is just so strange I don't know what to think. We have an inexperienced O line so I am not sure what to make of Austin but they just are not good. We have an experienced D line but I am sorry they have not been impressive at least to me (which I guess doesn't matter) and I am not sure what to make of Tuioti but he for sure should stay. It is almost like I want some change for the sake of change without really knowing why I want it or what it should be.

 

[HuSkaBob]

I really want to agree with you, but I can't. The problem is I really want to disagree with you, but I can't. This year is just so strange I don't know what to think. We have an inexperienced O line so I am not sure what to make of Austin but they just are not good. We have an experienced D line but I am sorry they have not been impressive at least to me (which I guess doesn't matter) and I am not sure what to make of Tuioti but he for sure should stay. It is almost like I want some change for the sake of change without really knowing why I want it or what it should be.

I think the change we all want is "winning" or at least looking like we were in the game.

 

[djlhuskerfan]

Farniok is without question better off playing Guard ... but it's a team game. You're assuming that there is someone just as good or better ready to take his place at OT so he can slide over. There isn't ... yet. Gaylord was likely going to be that guy before he got hurt, and Benhart is quite likely going to be that guy at some point in the future, but that could be next game, next year, or even 2021, but I doubt that it'll be that late. If you move Farniok over, we'd get a boost at Guard, but not better at OT. Eventually, the calculus for the change will work. It's a question now of how soon we can play Benhart. My hope is that we win the next two games to become bowl eligible, and then we put Benhart at OT and Farniok at G for the last 3 regular season games and the bowl game. Benhart would still save his redshirt, and next year's O-line would have 4 games together as preparation.

I hope we can move Farniok inside for a few games to see what he can do there. I have funny feeling he wont be much better there than at tackle. But they have to find out.

 

[NUinID]

I thought some of the same things, but I wondered about a couple of potential answers: after MW had been benched for discipline last week, how would he respond to NOT starting and being the featured back in the first half? is Mills fully healthy? I also thought that we'd see a lot of Mills carrying the ball, and I expected to see more of it coming from the QB going back and forth from shotgun to being under Center so that Mills could start closer to the line in a 3-point stance. Like you said, even Mills running Inside Zone should have worked.

I wasn't surprised that Minnesota ran the ball well, but I had hopes that we would also.

I don't know, it amazes me why every team we play has at least 1 RB that is 5'11"-6' and weighs 215 that knows how to find a cut back lane. Minnesota had 3 guys that look identical except for their numbers. We don't have 1 guy that looks or runs like that. I know their were a lot of cut back lanes for Minnesota to run through on Saturday, but there should always be some. We just don't run outside zone read very well or something.

The RB thing really bugs me. I am tired of the 5'8" 180 speed guys.

 

[Hville]

I thought Vedral played pretty darn well given the situation. First start of his NU career, on the road, in the cold & wet. He was pretty decisive and made some nice plays with his arm and legs. Got killed by bad penalties and our ole tackles. But he had the offense moving early and threatening before Robinson went out. Defense spots Minny 21 points before 3 minutes are gone in the 3rd and then it's tough to make things happen when they can tee off, especialy with your main playmaker in a boot.

He played ONE game. I'd rather see him trot out again and play that way than put Martinez back in too fast if he's not 100% physically by the time the bye is over.

Hey I'm not anti vedral but do despise the people who were calling for a QB change as if am was the problem. What was clear to me under am was verified with a vedral start. It is not a quartback issue. Making excuses for vedral s lack of production using the weather and first start will not alter the outcome of future games without addressing line play, scheme and play calling. AM is the man going forward. This was our worst offensive performance of the year.

 

[Greatest Fan of All]

This was our worst offensive performance of the year.

Nope. Vedral did very well for his first start...AM will be the starter as soon as he is ready, he is SF's chosen one and our immediate future, but it was nice to see Vedral play significant minutes...he is a gamer.

 

[ramsker]

Hey I'm not anti vedral but do despise the people who were calling for a QB change as if am was the problem. What was clear to me under am was verified with a vedral start. It is not a quartback issue. Making excuses for vedral s lack of production using the weather and first start will not alter the outcome of future games without addressing line play, scheme and play calling. AM is the man going forward. This was our worst offensive performance of the year.

The South Alabama game called . . . they'd like a recount. How many starts had that been for Martinez at the time (and in good weather at home) against a far inferior team?

So if Martinez isn't 100% healthy after the bye . . . you want him to start against Indiana?

 

[joncarl]

Hey I'm not anti vedral but do despise the people who were calling for a QB change as if am was the problem. What was clear to me under am was verified with a vedral start. It is not a quartback issue. Making excuses for vedral s lack of production using the weather and first start will not alter the outcome of future games without addressing line play, scheme and play calling. AM is the man going forward. This was our worst offensive performance of the year.

I never wanted a change I just wanted Vedral to get a series or two.

 

[goodnterribles]

Nope. Vedral did very well for his first start...AM will be the starter as soon as he is ready, he is SF's chosen one and our immediate future, but it was nice to see Vedral play significant minutes...he is a gamer.

He is a gamer and did a solid job. But he's not nearly as dynamic as a healthy AM.

 

[MHKHusker]

He is a gamer and did a solid job. But he's not nearly as dynamic as a healthy AM.

Completely agree. Healthy AM with decent protection is a completely different animal than we have seen this year (plus or minus a few wide receivers), as seen in last years Ohio State game.

 

[CornhuskerinWI]

Here is the thing, this game was begging for Mills to get the ball about 20x. Inside zone mostly maybe from under center dives or what ever. How many carries did he have, 9 and most of that was late. Instead we start the game running Washington on inside zone. He is a great change of pace and 3rd down guy he is not an every down back.

Sometimes I think coaches get too caught up into what they want to do and how they want to play the game vs. what they need to do to win the game.

When I used to coach we always had to get on our HC who also called offense. This was 9th grade football. If we were up a couple of TD he would start calling every pass play in the playbook. After a couple of 3 and outs our DC would always look at him and say Run the Texasing ball. That would bring him back into what we needed to do to win the game.

Not saying it would have won us the game, but, I think we could have leaned on him a little more to try and get something going.

It is just too bad things got out of hand so quick in the second half. They were only down 2 scores, but you really saw who wanted it more in the 3rd quarter. Too bad that nice pass and run to Robinson gets called back on a block in the back. They score there and it is 7-14 going into half. Maybe a different game.

Washington is useless running inside the tackles. It’s been obvious the entire season and I don’t know why they keep doing it. He isn’t built to run between them, doesn’t hit the “holes” hard enough, and just dreams of bouncing everything outside.

 

[skerinks]

Needs to be more rotation on d-line and probably o-line.........if the 5 o-line starters are the best they have..........then NU has serious problems.

I was wondering the same thing. Maybe it is time to reset the depth chart to who wants it the most regardless of stars or age? As a lot have mentioned, make a mistake at full speed not standing around with your hands on your hips, ala Nick Gates for heavens sake. All spots should be open for the bye week impo.

 

[CO4NU]

I'm afraid there's no bye week fix for the OTs . . . they are both just awful. Hate to say it, but it's clear by now that neither Jaimes nor Farniok have what it takes right now to be B1G tackles. Hoping we see some of the new blood get a chance with their 4 games to burn.

We won't though....their "not quite ready" yet.