What did we learn South Alabama?

Nebfanatic said:
We weren't 'vanilla' but Frost certainly wasn't playing the matchup game like he normally does. He wasn't creating disadvantages for the defense in the run game through formation and motions like we have seen from him 
Click to expand...


100% correct. However, I’d call that vanilla. Frost hates CU, and I guarantee they will be utilizing 85% of the full playbook this next weekend, ahead of where they left off last year. This man knows how to coach, and all of the questioning of this coaching staff after this game, a game we all knew we could win on talent alone, is ridiculous. They weren’t prepared for this game because they’ve been preparing for Colorado. Now enjoy the Kool-aid and the a$$ whipping they give Colorado next week. Colorado will think they have an easy win. Mission accomplished. 

I’m going back to my regularly tuned kool-aid channel... games from ‘97 on YouTube. Get your red drink on! 

 
ZMagers22 said:
100% correct. However, I’d call that vanilla. Frost hates CU, and I guarantee they will be utilizing 85% of the full playbook this next weekend, ahead of where they left off last year. This man knows how to coach, and all of the questioning of this coaching staff after this game, a game we all knew we could win on talent alone, is ridiculous. They weren’t prepared for this game because they’ve been preparing for Colorado. Now enjoy the Kool-aid and the a$$ whipping they give Colorado next week. Colorado will think they have an easy win. Mission accomplished. 

I’m going back to my regularly tuned kool-aid channel... games from ‘97 on YouTube. Get your red drink on! 
Click to expand...
I'd  agree that is the definition of vanilla but I think people are tired of that term so I was explaining more what that really means. As bad as the offense looked, I think if Martinez would have been sharper it would have been a major blow out. There were open recievers and opportunities to move the ball through the air, just didn't capitalize. Having no run game doesn't help, but still there were plenty of opportunities for the offense.

 
BIG ERN said:
Chinander's defense hasn't changed. We rarely overload or use Tannor, David, JoJo to our advantage. We run the same 5 flat alignments all the time and doesn't confuse the offense. Our safeties are also playing over 15 yards off the ball on situations where they don't need to be. Our defense def outplayed the offense, but we also played a very bad So Bama team. I really hope we turn it up next week. Colorado has a good offense. 
Click to expand...


Gonna quibble a little with the bolded. While their initial set was well off the receiver, most times they snuck up into press. I have no issues with that.

 
It'sNotAFakeID said:
Yeah, I really think Adrians game was due to a vanilla game plan, zone defense, and the high snaps. Half seconds are important in this offense and high snaps cost precious time.
Click to expand...




Let's add at least one more thing to your list, which was receivers' inability to get open. Martinez was patient in the pocket many times either to get sacked or throw the play away because there was nowhere to throw the ball.

Even then, though, the excuse of a vanilla game plan is a classic fanbase rationalization of the reality that we just played like s#!t. 

lo country said:
I've said numerous times, in the past I thought we were vanilla by plan, then multiple games in I realized that's all we had.  No surprises, no new wrinkles, nothing but the same crap we showed in game one year whatever (2007-2017).  Frost is an innovator.  No way the most boring game plan I have seen in years was his designed plan.  
Click to expand...




Ding ding ding. Trying to excuse this away as us, "saving" something for Colorado is ignoring the extent that we just played bad. Even if it was an intentionally vanilla gameplan, if we think we're a team that should be competing for the division and the conference this year, we should have been able to execute our vanilla gameplan well. We didn't. That is cause for concern.

You think Ohio State had a super complex and diverse gameplan against Florida Atlantic? I doubt their approach was any less vanilla than ours, but they executed it because they're a great team who takes care of s#!t the way they're supposed to.

 
oh also, I remember a lot of people were saying the same sorts of justifications of, "oh we were being vanilla saving it for our big opponent) in 2013 against Wyoming/Southern Miss, claiming (with some even offering insider source accounts) that we were saving the good stuff for UCLA, and also in 2007 against nevada/wake forest before our big matchup against USC

 
Landlord said:
oh also, I remember a lot of people were saying the same sorts of justifications of, "oh we were being vanilla saving it for our big opponent) in 2013 against Wyoming/Southern Miss, claiming (with some even offering insider source accounts) that we were saving the good stuff for UCLA, and also in 2007 against nevada/wake forest before our big matchup against USC
Click to expand...


I have inside sources that Frost is a chocolate man.

 
Landlord said:
Even then, though, the excuse of a vanilla game plan is a classic fanbase rationalization of the reality that we just played like s#!t. 
Click to expand...
Bingo.

The offensive line played poorly,  some receivers struggled to get open, some receivers did not do a good job helping Adrian extend plays when things broke down, Dedrick Mills didn't read or hit his gaps overly well, turnovers, penalties, and Adrian clearly tried to do too much a few times.

There's really no excuse for any of that. I could understand a modicum of it given that it was week one, but that was not a great football team they played. Probably not even a good one at this point. They should've done a much better job executing the game plan that they did have. Perhaps what's most disconcerting to me is that Frost made it seem like this was not the same offense he saw during all of fall camp. So, there are a lot of ways to look at that, and the sky certainly isn't falling. But, I think it's fair for all of us to feel and say that we expected a bit more than we saw.

Big kudos to the defense today. Massive improvement from recent years and 14 of the points they gave up came off of turnovers by the offense.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Landlord said:
oh also, I remember a lot of people were saying the same sorts of justifications of, "oh we were being vanilla saving it for our big opponent) in 2013 against Wyoming/Southern Miss, claiming (with some even offering insider source accounts) that we were saving the good stuff for UCLA, and also in 2007 against nevada/wake forest before our big matchup against USC
Click to expand...


Just do a search of this site for the word ‘vanilla’

 
Scarlet Overkill said:
Just do a search of this site for the word ‘vanilla’
Click to expand...
Sadly, it would start Sat after and incredibly simplistic and boring game plan with plenty of missed opportunities and mistakes.  Then there would be the apologetics that it was part of a broader plan to lull "X" opponent into not getting any good intel on our true plan.  To be followed by a loss the next week and then people realizing that's what we have is a mistake prone team that is doing it's best.

As people have alluded, vanilla doesn't mean poor execution.  Over years of watching a less than stellar product, we seem to try and excuse lack of performance, execution, mistakes etc as vanilla.....(not saying you are doing this).  

If we truly went in with 10% of our playbook, with 3 new starters on the OL (2 were centers), new RB, new receivers, etc and figured we could handily beat SAL, shame on Frost and Co.  The last NU team I can remember that could phone in a crappy game plan was the 95 Huskers....We need to work on everything all of the time.  Especially in a live atmosphere.  

A vanilla game plan didn't cause high snaps, missed blocks, missed holes, missed receivers, missed tackles, missed throws etc....That was just a crap outing.  And we need to be significantly better next week.  

 
Are the people criticizing Frost for being too vanilla the same folk who wished Reilly/Pellini/Callahan would find their bread and butter?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top