EmeraldIngot

Is that anything like this personal foul?

You know, I usually try to give refs the benefit of the doubt. I just find it incredibly strange that so many of the questionable calls benefit our opponent or hinder NU. Not just in this game, either. It's been a theme since we joined the B1G.

I think that, for the first time since joining the B1G, we actually look like a Big 10 team. Size and power on the lines, power and speed in the backfield, and size and speed at WR.

No. It's going to get worse.

If I remember correctly, we had Mills at FB and Robinson at IB, correct? The two TE could split out to the slot, with Robinson and the other WR split wide, Mills as the RB in shotgun. Play clock may have been an issue before that first play, but if we play with tempo and get lined up real quick, we would have the time to shift to a new formation.

Seeing them creep up like that, it would have been a good time to audible into spread. Either that, or attack the edges with PA, like a quick out, or some kind of sweep or pitch play to the field.

My thoughts exactly. I think we will end up using more 'power' formations with 2AM under center over the next four games. Mills looked really good running out of the FB position in both the flexbone and I formation looks we ran against Ohio State. We will make it seem like we are switching mid-season over to a power concept. When we line up against Whisky, their defense will be in a slower heavy set defense to slow our rushing attack. That's when we audible to spread and burn them on the edges. They sub out for a lighter, speedier set, and all of a sudden we line back up in Power and run it down their throats. We can (hopefully) keep them trapped in a neverending cycle of being in the wrong defensive formation at the wrong time. If we execute it well and hold on to the ball, we'll make their defense look inept. I hope.

The thing about a specific play on offense, is that it can be broken down into 'concepts'. Rather, a set of common movements that cause a play to work. You can see this in passing plays quite easily. The 'Texas' concept involves a pair of mesh routes (usually with a rub or a pick) at the linebacker level, coupled with a sort of wheel route by the FB or HB, but over the center of the field, rather than down the sideline. You can run that play out of damn near any formation with damn near any personal group. If you have a shotgun 4-wide look, have the slot recievers run the mesh and the HB run the Texas route. Or, in a 2-TE I-formation, have the two TE run the mesh, etc. The same holds true for run blocking schemes. A run play called 'inside zone's uses zone blocking to (hopefully) open up several holes along the defensive line using double teams at the points of attack, and usually one or more linemen will climb up the field to block a LB as well. The RB simply chooses the most open lane and runs for it. A Trap run play has the center leave the nose guard unblocked, and instead crashes down either towards another D-lineman, or climb up to a LB, while a guard pulls around and blindsides the nose guard from the side where he doesnt expect it and knocks him out of the way of the ball carrier. That leaves 4 or 5 yards of almost always clear ground for the ball carrier to gain straight up the middle of the field. You can run that play out of nearly any formation, but it works best in a formation where the RB or FB can hit the line of scrimmage very quickly, so that the defense can't react in time. A clever coach can find a way to run nearly any concept out of nearly any formation. If the 'core concepts' of a coach's offensive system dont change from formation to formation (and are only adjusted to account for the new offensive alignment, and of course adjusted for defensive alignment) then the formation matters very little. Of course, quick-hitting plays like FB Dive or a Trap run work best with a QB under center and a RB closer to the line of scrimmage than is typical for a Shotgun or Pistol look, but that doesnt mean it can't be done. Blocking schemes (like pulling linemen) and running routes (like counters) or pass routes (like a curl, an out route, or a fade) in specific combinations are concepts. The best coaches run advantageous concepts out of unusual formations to catch defenses by surprise. If the core concepts you run dont change, it doesnt really matter how many formations your offense lines up in; they already know what to do. And that, my friend, is 'being multiple' done right.

That was part of the whole logic of running up-tempo when Oregon started doing that all the time and not just in 2-minute drill situations; both to prevent substitutions and to tire out the guys their opponents had on the field.

This ^^^ If we can force a team into variations on Nickel and Dime personnel groups, we can create physical mismatches on the second level. That is, in the 'linebacker' and 'safety' areas of the field. Some teams even sacrifice a down lineman in favor of an extra DB against 4-wide spread packages. Im certain that even our anemic o-line could open holes against that kind of front. Even Ohio State had to call a timeout to substitute in and adjust their defense to stop it. If teams remain in their base 4-3 or 3-4 groupings, we can audible to a 4-wide spread and create physical mismatches in the slots; force a linebacker to try to cover a WR or a tall, (relatively) fast TE like Allen or Stoll. If they sub out for a Dime package, trading two of those LBs for DBs, we create a physical mismatch in a 'phone booth' power run game. Considering that a read option is basically a 'veer', the basic read in a wishbone, flexbone, or I-formation option run game, we can even scheme to take either a DE or OLB completely out of a play, granting an even greater advantage at the point of attack. We can run essentially the same concepts from either spread or power formations, and audible into whichever one we need to in order to create an advantage. Scott Frost should definitely integrate this into Nebraska's offense moving forward. Not only because it is useful and creates advantages, but the two setups also cover for the other's weaknesses. It's hard to run spread on the goal line effectively, and I-formation has a harder time passing the ball deep, because of only two wide receivers (the TE can run a seam route, sure, but he may get tangled up near the line of scrimmage, which could throw off the timing). That, and the nostalgia of seeing an I-formation option play is good for the fanbase.

The thing I like the most out of what we showed with the I formation, is that we can audible into it. We can line up in a 4-wide shotgun set and see what the defense is doing. With Spielman, Noa, Robinson, and either Stoll or Allen split wide, with Mills in the backfield, defenses would have to put in personnel more suited to defending a spread attack. If they're out in a Nickel or Dime formation, we could easily audible that into an I formation (or that flexbone look) and have a favorable personnel matchup. Run that with tempo and prevent them from substituting a better defensive personnel group in, and we could drive all the way down the field. Once they sub in a heavier, slower group, audible back out into spread and make them pay for it, again running with tempo to prevent them from substituting. We wouldn't have to change too much, personnel wise, to play two completely opposing styles of offense and catch them in a bad matchup. The downfall of this is what we saw with Ohio State. They had guys that were big and strong enough to stuff the power game, while also being fast and athletic enough to disrupt the spread. They could do both with the same group of guys, and while they were initially caught by surprise, they adjusted during the time out and stopped it cold. It's a good wrinkle, but we dont have the athletic advantage to pull it off against elite opponents yet.

Gonna be 45 going into half.

Up tempo I formation? Yes please!

We should punish teams who try that by scheming an RPO off of a zone read look. Have a TE lined up as an H-back just behind the LOS opposite of the RB; this will cause the defense to shift their LBs to the strong side. You could also have the TE lined up next to the RT, for a more traditional look. Have two wideouts split out on the backside of the play, and a third split out on the strong side. Snap the ball, leave the backside DE (or LB, if they are in 3-4) unblocked; if DE stays home, hand it off. If he crashes towards the RB, pull the ball and run. Next, read the Will LB (or backside ILB in 3-4); if he drops into a 'flat zone' coverage, cut inside and run the ball. If he flows towards the QB, pass to the bubble route. At the snap, the farthest WR on the backside runs a bubble route towards the inside, while the nearest WR steps up as if he would be blocking the CB or S covering him. Instead of blocking, though, he slips past and has space behind the coverage. If the CB/nickel back/Free Safety drops into coverage, hit the bubble for a good 5-10 yards: this is the most likely scenario if they are playing a soft coverage. If the CB bites hard on the bubble (the 'traditional' target of an RPO), pass to the streaking receiver behind him. The QB makes three reads in this play; DE (or OLB in 3-4) Will LB, and FS or nickel back. This play attacks the 'backside' of a formation after forcing the defense to shade towards the strong side of the line. It would work better if the inside zone or strong-side outside zone run game was working well, and would punish aggressive defenses, especially ones that are dedicated to stopping Martinez's runs. They read run, crash down towards the line, and the ball gets thrown over their heads. Technically, there are four options, but all three reads are in the same direction from the QBs point of view, so the three reads shouldn't be difficult for a college QB to manage, especially one that is already used to zone reads and RPOs.

I agree. She still has some improvements she could make. Like doing a better job of memorizing the rosters before games. But honestly, she's come a long way since that first game. I think she would benefit from taking some auctioneer classes though; she sometimes stumbles over her syllables, corrects herself, and falls behind the action on the field. Learning how to clearly enunciate while spitting out a machine-gun cadence would improve her calling ability quite a bit. Just my opinion.

For the other team.

Its final; Purdue beat Ohio State, 49-20.

Did you remember to bury the corpse under the goalpost? That'll make it permanent.

So who cast the voodoo spell that transferred our curse to Ohio State? I wanna shake your hand.

Hope our coaching staff takes note; gotta dominate that in-state recruiting.

A pick 6 to ice the game. Purdue gonna win.

If we play a perfect game and dial up some blitzes, yeah, it's possible. We've got a couple weeks to prepare.

Yeah. Purdue just scored again, pending the extra point, the score will be 42-20. Ohio State looks vulnerable, Purdue just needs to hold on for 3 and a half minutes.

Purdue up 35-13, 5 minutes left in the 4th. They might pull it off. Edit: Ohio State scored right after I posted, it's now 35-20.

Considering Purdue is beating them 21-6 right now, just going into the 4th quarter... we might have a chance. Just have Chinander watch Purdue's defensive plan and copy it a bit. Maybe ring up Purdue's DC and swap notes? Anyway, just saying that Ohio State doesn't look like a world beater right now.