I understand what Knap and blasted_imposter are saying, and to a point I agree with both. As much as I loved our 60-4 run, and even including what happened in 1993, as much as I loved that because that's what I grew up in, I think there are a few things to point out.
1. Weightlifting programs and facilities for Nebraska were SO much more advanced at the time which contributed a lot to our success. Other teams have caught up in these areas.
2. The offense itself: Our offense was not slow and big by any means. Our linemen back then were smaller and quicker, so they could pull to the outside, we had speed at the position skills, Frazier, Phillips, Green, and then a WHOLE lot of depth at running back that we don't have today. Clinton Childs, Damon Benning, Makovicka brothers at full-back, Dan Alexander, Correll Buckhalter, DeAngelo Evans, and possession receivers and tight ends that you could count on that blocked like mad men: Reggie Baul, Matt Davison, Lance Brown, Kenny Cheatham, Brendan Holbein, Eric Alford, Sheldon Jackson, Abdul Muhammad. Walk-on's and having more scholarships to hand out helped A TON as well.
3. Oklahoma was down. I know the Big Eight was still top heavy in the mid-90s, especially 1995 without Oklahoma, but they were still down none-the-less.
4. Coaching staff: Our staff was together for so long, you don't see that in this day in age, we were TREMENDOUSLY lucky to have the same staff for years and years. Our coaching staff had cohesiveness like no one of their kind of coaching staff before. That won't ever happen again.
5. Defense and defensive speed: We always had speed and size on offense, but when we got a NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP caliber defense, is when we wont National Championships, when we could stop the big offenses at the right times. We went smaller at linebacker and we were flying all over the field, we got more aggressive and switched from a base 5-2 to a base 4-3 and played balls out. Osborne always said he didn't want to play offense like Miami or Florida State, he wanted to play defense like Miami and Florida State.
6. The Option: This used to be a prominent offensive style for high school, now no one really runs this offense, so it is SO hard to recruit for it. I know we weren't a true Flexbone or 90% option offense, but it was just another wrinkle for our power run, but again, our quarterbacks and running backs were much faster than Wisconsin's running backs and quarterbacks now, which is why we pulled it off back then, because of SPEED on offense. We weren't slow by ANY means on offense. Once we got depth and leaders on offense, we were able to sustain drives, much like defense getting critical stops.
7. Leaders: Frazier, the Peter brothers, Tomich, Wistrom, and other guys I didn't mention, we don't have "those kind" of leaders anymore, or at least not that we have seen yet. Someone with a little fire in their belly. Is it Bo? I'm sure it is, in fact I know it is, but he has to be able to be himself and fire his team up if no one on the team is doing it. This is a huge miss right now.
It is SO important, more than ever, to watch film and study and to know exactly what the offenses are going to do. Which is why I am so glad we have Bo and his staff, more than ever, you need to examine and break down film with so many different types of offenses, I'm not sure if our staff back then could do what is done today. Could they? Possibly, but it's not a fair argument.
Lastly, you can still have a "power" running game by spreading it out. Osborne even said he would probably run some variation of a spread offense today that gave defenses fits. You can still be power by being in 4 or 5 wide, with motion, fakes, keepers, reads, choices, double options, option pass, etc. It's all about an attitude, and that attitude starts up front that we are going to knock the guys in-front of us over, and our speed guys in the backfield and on the outside are going to get open or get the blocks they need to open the running and passing game. But again, we had speed on offense in the 90s, it's not like we had a bunch of John Clays' or Ron Daynes' back there for us.
It's not like saying we are going from 1997 offense to Texas Tech. THAT would be the definition of going from one extreme to the next. Even in the West Coast Offense days, we still had a running game. It just wasn't option, quarterback, or depth oriented like in the 90s or 2000s.
You can still be power without running I-Form Twin Tight End or Maryland I. It's all about attitude that starts up-front and having guys on the edge having speed or good hands too to keep the defense honest of a play-action, or breaking a run to the outside and relying on a receiver to block. The same concepts still exist, it is just spread out.
A power game like Wisconsin works, but they don't have the same caliber players in their backfield that we did in the 90s or 2000s. We were MUCH faster and athletic than Wisconsin's running game. Everyone has an obsession with their offense, but our old offense was so much more different than what they run today, which is why our offense of old would still work today, but you have to recruit for it, and right now, we are not recruiting for our old offense, it seems most high schools aren't running that, and most kids want to get to the NFL, so they are going with more pro or spread offenses. With us, we seem to be going spread option offense with a lot of no huddle.
We will be just as fast on offense as we are on defense, and to me that sounds a lot like how we were back then. Not saying we will win it all next year or go 60-4, but it's the philosophy of having speed and starting it up-front, is where it begins.
I am not discrediting what we did, I think 1995 Nebraska is the greatest college football team of all-time. But you have to admit, everything went right for us, everything was aligned for us and NO ONE will EVER repeat what we did from 1993-1997. No one. That run was ours and only ours, we should be thankful because everything worked so great for us and I appreciate everything that everyone did to get us that run.
