Nuss' impact on the OLine and RBs?
The general consensus with Nuss is that he's developed a lot of good QBs and his philosophy is pro-style offense with an emphasis on short passing. Obviously this will open up the run game by forcing LBs to react to the possiblity of pass coverage, rather than be on speedballs screaming through the A gaps.
Aside from this, what other impact can he have on the run game? Obviously a change in OL coach would be the most direct way to change the OL performance/scheme, but let's assume Funk and Fred Jackson stay. It seemed like the OL last year made many mistakes and I'm unsure how many of those are really attributed to the scheme versus inexperience and poor positional coaching (same for RBs who I felt were often times hesitant, missed cutback lanes, etc).
Is Nuss going to fix the run game through the passing game, through improved blocking schemes, or will the impact be minimal (ie is Funk really the key)? How much direct impact can a "QB centric" OC have on the run game with the rest of the offensive staff in tact?
PS-I'm not advocating firing Funk or Jackson. Just considering the coaches we have today, what kind of improvement can we expect. Curious what others thought.
January 9th, 2014 at 1:29 PM ^
(same for RBs who I felt were often times hesitant, missed cutback lanes, etc).
I'm not really sure the RB's were to blame last year, ya some of it may have been them but after getting hit a half a second after you get the ball, over and over and over again. Even the imaginary test tube baby produced with a mixture of Walter Payton, Barry Sanders and Bo Jackson's DNA is going to be a little hesitant and more prepared to get hit than look for any type of cutback lane.
January 9th, 2014 at 1:42 PM ^
Agreed the OL was the main problem, but just to my untrained eyes, it seemed like when Green and Smith got the ball, if there was no hole, they would slow down too much and ultimately take a loss. With backs that big, you just need momentum. If there is no hole, then just jam it in there anyway, because Green and Smith aren't going to change direction or juke anyone for a gain in those situations.
Maybe I'm wrong...I just don't see how slowing down was doing any good with those big backs.
January 9th, 2014 at 1:46 PM ^
January 9th, 2014 at 1:32 PM ^
January 9th, 2014 at 1:33 PM ^
January 9th, 2014 at 1:47 PM ^
Can a new OC invigorate an offense, hell yes. Look at Auburn this year. Does Nuss showing up on campus automatically add 30 lbs to each of our (very, VERY young OL), hell no. It will take time to turn into a grinding offense, but it certainly seems to be going in the right direction.
January 9th, 2014 at 5:03 PM ^
Its been so long ago that we used to do that, that I almost forgot.... THAT was Michigan, wearing teams down.
January 9th, 2014 at 1:34 PM ^
January 9th, 2014 at 1:43 PM ^
...in this Chantel Jennings piece. Look especially at how the 2009 Washington rushing game improved from its dismal 2008 performance.
2009 WASHINGTON (2008 Washington stats in parenthesis)
- Points per game: 26.1 (13.2)
- Rushing yards per game: 139.0 (99.3) Yards per rush: 4.3 (2.8)
- Passing yards per game: 236.5 (163.8)
- Completion percentage: 58.3 (47.2)
- 3rd down conversion: 46 percent (42 percent)
- Red zone scores: 86 percent (71 percent)
- Touchdowns: 37 (19)
- Sacks allowed: 28 for 173 yards (31 for 257 yards)
January 9th, 2014 at 2:05 PM ^
That 2008 Washington team opened at Oregon (who would finish 10-3), lost a very close game to 10-3 BYU (the one where Locker drew a celebration flag pushing back the game-tying extra point and the kicker missed it), then lost to an OU team that went to the national title game.
In the second quarter of game 4 Locker got hurt and missed the rest of the season. Willingham then got fired halfway through the season, but stayed on as a lame duck to finish out the year.
Nussmeier has done impressive things, including at Washington, but that "turnaround" was going to happen no matter who the coach was once Locker came back healthy and the rest of the talent pool improved slightly above horrendous.
January 9th, 2014 at 2:06 PM ^
This is going to be a tuneup. The philosophy isn't changing, execution and effectiveness must. This offense had some unworldly games last year, and then it had others where the offense was off the charts bad. So, consistency in improved performance is the measure of success being sought in third down and red zone efficiencies.
If you can't rush the ball, you can't win, period. The Atlanta Falcons discovered that. Your qb will throw more picks if he's throwing more often to stay on time with the sticks. The best teams in the Big Ten are run-oriented. MSU, Ohio, Wisconsin and Nebraska. If you can't run, you won't move the ball consistently and you won't convert on third and fourth down and you won't score more points. That's just the way it is.
Your are always more effective throwing when you can run the ball enough to keep the defense from guessing on your tendencies.
Nussmeier now has a running qb. At least for a year. He has to work that into his offense after not having that dimension in McCarron at Alabama. He doesn't have a dynamic Oline and Heisman backs in his arsenal. He will be much more a teacher and developer here than in Tuscaloosa, I'm sure. Whether Gardner buys in to another coaching method is hard to fathom now. I guess he really doesn't a choice at this point. And so we will all see how this pans out.
January 9th, 2014 at 3:20 PM ^
Locker put up a little under 400 yards on the ground both years Nussmeier was there (though I suppose it is unclear whether he or Sark was really the primary guy running the offense). He also worked with Stanton at MSU. Should be pretty familiar with getting some rushing yardage from the QB spot.
January 9th, 2014 at 2:13 PM ^
running a number of schemes and blitz packages, it would be nice to see a little "take what the defense gives you" run from a solid base of inside zone. This means the ability to coach DG into making good checks at the LOS may have as much impact on the RB and OL success as anything else. By most accounts, this is Nuss's forte.
Edit: re-reading that, I sure crammed a lot of acronyms in there.
January 9th, 2014 at 3:08 PM ^
tl;dr
January 9th, 2014 at 3:32 PM ^
Are you available for other copy? I use editors for academic writing, too.
January 9th, 2014 at 3:04 PM ^
There are four basic protocols in resistance training: Hypertrophy, Strength, Endurance, Power.
January 9th, 2014 at 4:54 PM ^
January 9th, 2014 at 5:00 PM ^
...I'd sit down with each of the position coaches, get the general perceptions of coaches and players and other people around the program, and decide what was the best plan going forward. I wouldn't give two shits about the "perception and conversation across major college football", just the observations of people with first-hand knowledge of the situation.
But that's just me.
January 9th, 2014 at 5:06 PM ^
January 9th, 2014 at 5:22 PM ^
What "we all know" is irrelevant too. What would matter to me is (let's say, for argument's sake, that Magnus is right and the plan going forward is inside zone/outside zone): did Funk seem to be an effective teacher? Would he be an effective teacher, if what he was teaching was a steady diet of zone blocking instead of zone/power/iso/stretch? What's the talent level of the line, really? How close are they to where we need to get them? Do their skills fit the zone scheme I want to implement or do I need to rethink this?
Maybe the verdict would be that they were trying to teach too much too fast. Maybe the verdict would be that Funk and this particular group of linemen just never meshed. Maybe it's a moot point because I've already got someone in mind that knows how to teach exactly what I want.
I don't know how someone from the outside can know.