Cutting down the playbook

[lo country]

This has been mentioned in several threads, but I wanted to make one for it alone.

KB abd Bo both spoke of slimming down the playbook. I like the idea and the methodology behind it. I hope it pays off big time. Seems they looked at 12-18 months of film and canned what the team couldn't execute well. When KB was asked about it, he said if it was stuff they did ok or alright it was gone.

More here:

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/huskers-hope-leaner-playbook-fattens-offensive-production/article_1d0d8ac9-f13d-5e8d-9490-33aaf155a3b6.html

 

[The Maudfather]

The playbook always seems to be "too big". Whenever Watson left, we were told that Beck was going to slim down the playbook and make it less complex.

It seems like this is a topic of discussion just about every single offseason.

 

[BigRedBuster]

I like starting with a basic offense that you expect your offense to do well with. Then, if you master that, you can always add plays as you go. You add them as the team can handle them.

I know it gets old talking about "the good ol days". But, TO has said that Frazier was the only QB that ran his entire offense. He was the only one who was good enough and their long enough to master the entire play book. You also have to have a veteran line and skill positions too.

Master the basic offense and move on from there.

 

[QMany]

Lost on some of those who have been complaining about snippets of 50/50 balance:

If the Huskers can use more parts of the field in their passing game, Pelini hinted, they can be a better, smarter passing team while still leaning on the strength of the offense — Abdullah and the rest of the running backs.

“We need to take shots every now and then, but you have to be efficient and make it effective,” Pelini said. “It doesn’t mean you’re chucking it downfield every pass. It means using your backs in your passing game.”

 

[QMany]

He believes in going for the 50-50 split, too. But why would you want to achieve balance when you have that much strength in the running game?

“Because balance will make our running game that much more effective,” Pelini said. “It’s always going to start with the running game with me, but I believe in being balanced. The more balanced you are, the harder it is to defend.

 

[kchusker_chris]

He believes in going for the 50-50 split, too. But why would you want to achieve balance when you have that much strength in the running game?

“Because balance will make our running game that much more effective,” Pelini said. “It’s always going to start with the running game with me, but I believe in being balanced. The more balanced you are, the harder it is to defend.

It's when the running game is already effective and we go to an ineffective passing game that people b!^@h about.

 

[zoogs]

Woah - Bo seems to be really changing his tune on what he believes in for offense.

 

[sd'sker]

He believes in going for the 50-50 split, too. But why would you want to achieve balance when you have that much strength in the running game?[/size]

“Because balance will make our running game that much more effective,” Pelini said. “It’s always going to start with the running game with me, but I believe in being balanced. The more balanced you are, the harder it is to defend.

It's when the running game is already effective and we go to an ineffective passing game that people b!^@h about.

i agree with you, but to play devil's advocate, i believe the theory is that is when you can really take advantage of a defense. if they start keying in on your run game because it has been successful, then you complete an effective pass, the defense will be completely lost. so it is, do you change before they force you to, to force them to change (ideally making running easier), or do you wait till they stop you and then try something else.

 

[TAKODA]

[SIZE=10.5pt]I don't care what they do or when they do it, just do it well. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]It's not the plays that are called that are going to make a "D" start 2nd guessing themselves when they are lining up, it is the efficiency on how well we do on the plays!!![/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Looking forward to the season! Woot![/SIZE]

 

[papersun87]

if they keep slimming down the playbook, we'll have about four plays left by fall.

 

[Abdullah the Butcher]

Well they had 500 signals to begin with, a little more trimming wouldn't hurt.

 

[kchusker_chris]

It's when the running game is already effective and we go to an ineffective passing game that people b!^@h about.

i agree with you, but to play devil's advocate, i believe the theory is that is when you can really take advantage of a defense. if they start keying in on your run game because it has been successful, then you complete an effective pass, the defense will be completely lost. so it is, do you change before they force you to, to force them to change (ideally making running easier), or do you wait till they stop you and then try something else.

Agree. But that comes within a series, not to start a series IMO. If you're effectively running the ball, it'll open up the pass and you can take a shot down the field. This might be more of an observation than fact - but it seems like we'll be running the ball well for a couple quarters, then Beck will come out fresh off an opponent score and pass-pass-pass-punt. Momentum swings. That is what agitates me.

 

[kchusker_chris]

And for the record, I'm not a proponent of the run heavy offense. I'd love to see us run something like KU ran when Beck was there, which is what I thought we were getting with Beck. You've got an up-tempo offense, that is about distributing the ball to your playmakers. Reesing wasn't going to burn you. But he was efficient. A 65%ish passer, with a 3-1 TD/INT ratio. Scrambled well, saw the field, etc.

That's not the guys we're recruiting though. I honestly think that's the offense Beck is pushing us towards, but we aren't recruiting guys that would lead that offense. Stanton might fit that mold, but I don't think Armstrong or anyone we recruited last year do. Our QB recruiting does not match the offensive direction IMO. It really doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Recruit run-first QBs then try to pass the ball around the field with a masters level offense that lacks identity. Why?

 

[sd'sker]

Agree. But that comes within a series, not to start a series IMO. If you're effectively running the ball, it'll open up the pass and you can take a shot down the field. This might be more of an observation than fact - but it seems like we'll be running the ball well for a couple quarters, then Beck will come out fresh off an opponent score and pass-pass-pass-punt. Momentum swings. That is what agitates me.

i agree. and, it seems you can do a lot with a run game that is working that will keep the other team on their toes. i think our oc needs to be careful not to out-think himself.

 

[SouthAfricanHusker]

Agree. But that comes within a series, not to start a series IMO. If you're effectively running the ball, it'll open up the pass and you can take a shot down the field. This might be more of an observation than fact - but it seems like we'll be running the ball well for a couple quarters, then Beck will come out fresh off an opponent score and pass-pass-pass-punt. Momentum swings. That is what agitates me.

i agree. and, it seems you can do a lot with a run game that is working that will keep the other team on their toes. i think our oc needs to be careful not to out-think himself.

I think the bigger issue is what type of pass play is called. Is it a bomb to KB with a 50/50 shot at completion. Sure thats a huge play if it works. If not you are staring at 2nd and 10 and the smart money is to pass then, and again on 3rd down.

However if the first down play is a screen pass to Newby or a short out route, something high percentage but shorter, that will work better. You may have a 75% chance of completion or better. It may only be 2nd and 5 but you do several things. The D is now at least considering a pass play, the offense gains confidence, and it can help setup future plays by eliminating the trend of running every first play of a drive.

The biggest thing is the way you become a top notch play caller (like TO was) is to keep them guessing. So we can't allow our offense to rule out passes when the run is working. We just need high percentage plays that we know we can execute. If that means simplifying the playbook so we know we can execute every play we have available... I'm all for it.