[Husker] The Offense

[Lynette Tillner]

Jon, 

We haven't yet played a really strong opponent at home! TT will be a big test of our "at home" strength. That's my HO (humble opinion). I'm nervous and excited about this game. 

Re a strong running game -- you mentioned that it's "what we're used to seeing." Not since Solich was HC have we had a really strong running game IMO. 

Just my 2 cents worth! 

Go Big Red! Really hoping for some Red revenge! 
 Lynette (Tillner) Peavey
ltillner at yahoo.com 




________________________________
From: jon johnston <jon.johnston at gmail.com>
To: David Strong <gbrlist at yahoo.com>
Cc: Husker List <husker at tssi.com>
Sent: Fri, October 16, 2009 6:39:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Husker] The Offense

Same guys would have bitched had we run the ball over and over and had the same success. Why not throw it? - Would have been the cry.

I don't think this offensive line is capable of establishing a good running game, and lining up more tight ends would have allowed Missouri's defense to concentrate on lesser landscape, so that doesn't make much sense either. We've also lost our bowling ball back, so we'll need to find another one

People tend to focus on the last game. Zac Lee has performed well at home. If we throw the ball 40 times, who the hell cares?

Jon J.

On Oct 16, 2009, at 8:16 AM, David Strong wrote:

> Here is an article from Omaha.com about the offensive game plan in the Missouri game.  The author makes a pretty strong arguement that it sucked.  Watson said we kept throwing because Missouri was stacking the box.  This guy says if you look at the film, Missouri did so only on 16 out of 67 plays and 7 of those were in the final drive when we were eating clock.  The basic question was....why so many spread formation passing plays when:  1. it was pouring ...and more importantly 2.  it wasn't working.
> 
> http://www.omaha.com/article/20091015/BIGRED/710159751
> 
> My take at the time....SW called a lousy game.  But we won.  Keep Green warmed up.
> 
> Dave
> 
> --- On Fri, 10/16/09, Killmar, John <John.Killmar at stjude.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> From: Killmar, John <John.Killmar at stjude.org>
> Subject: RE: [Husker] The Offense
> To: "Husker List" <husker at tssi.com>
> Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 9:01 AM
> 
> 
> During the first 3 quarters of the Missouri game Lee could not get the ball to his receivers and yet the offense still continued to rely on passing instead of going to the ground game I was expecting because of the weather.  Why was this?  Any input on why the Huskers kept on throwing the ball and missing and not running more?
> 
> John Killmar
> Memphis
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: husker-bounces at tssi.com [mailto:husker-bounces at tssi.com] On Behalf Of Steven
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:48 AM
> To: jon johnston
> Cc: Husker List
> Subject: Re: [Husker] The Offense
> 
> I know we are used used to seeing a "strong" or "solid" running game,  but
> the point I make is as follows: If  Zac Lee only completes 34% of his passes
> then we better darn well be able to run to make up that void.
> 
> 
> Steven K
> Class of 83
> 
> 
> Email Disclaimer:  www.stjude.org/emaildisclaimer
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker

jon johnston
jon.johnston at gmail.com



_______________________________________________
husker site list
husker at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker