Husker Offense

[Mavric]

Well.... we already have a Purdy...

 

 

[chamrocck]

I’d argue SF has all sorts of weapons that make a game manager like B. Purdy successful.  D. Samuel is a unique weapon. McCaffrey also is a stud and Kittle a top TE.  I sort of envision Raiola stretching the field with deep balls to fast guys.  We seem to be getting strong TE’s which I like. I think we need more dynamic backs and a thumper too.

[lo country]

Even "run the damn ball guy" likes those comments. And QB's who can actually open the running game by being able to throw.  Tired of seeing us try to run against an 8 man front.  And what's not to like about what San Fran is doing.  Dallas runs something similar.  They call it Texas Coast.  Of course San Fran as mentioned has play makers at all key positions, same with Dallas.  Could NU have that?  DR or DK, Fidone/Nelson, Chi, unsure which RB would be named (Emmett Johnson?).  I'd like to see us lean on one guy who gets the vast majority of snaps at RB.

[Undone]

San Francisco runs a relatively high amount of 21 personnel (2 backs, 1 tight end), and then a healthy dose of 22 personnel. That's lining up then with just 2 receivers. Kyle Shanahan uses some good creativity with motion and the use of two tight ends. It's kind of hard to say how that could translate to what we could do when you look at just how amazing & versatile Debo Samuel and McCaffrey are.

 

I think you could argue that things fall apart with whatever Shanahad would try to do without those two guys right now. But, they're 3rd in points per game in the league currently, so Shanahan's scheme is definitely doing a lot of things well.

 

That said, I'd rather do more of what Michigan does and be in standard 11 man personnel a ton with three wideouts. I'm referring to when Raiola actually takes the reins as the starter.

 

Assuming we'd have the receiver talent up to speed at that point, I personally think 3-wideouts sets would take more advantage of his elite arm talent than the big sets would, but I know that Husker fans just love having a fullback out there and lining up in the heavy formations.

 

I also think if we go slow pace-wise at that point it'll be a big mistake.

[Husker in WI]

I think (especially in the college game) the SF concepts could pretty easily be translated to 3-WR stuff. I'm sure there will still be a lot of 21 and 22, but you don't recruit this many receivers without a plan to play them. 

 

We'll see if Satterfield is able to make it more than a gimmick, but there is an appeal to something like a skill package of Coleman, Bonner, Fidone, Nelson, and Emmett - is that 21 personnel, or are we going 4 or 5 wide? You don't need the defense to be questioning that every time you huddle up, but the ability to look like you're following a tendency and then coming out in a totally different formation is nice.

 

Really curious how much Rhule's comments about handing Nelson the ball actually come to fruition. Maybe our short yardage answer now that we're not going to run Raiola or Kaelin into a pile like we did with Sims/Haarberg?

[Mavric]

41 minutes ago, lo country said:

Even "run the damn ball guy" likes those comments. And QB's who can actually open the running game by being able to throw.  Tired of seeing us try to run against an 8 man front.  And what's not to like about what San Fran is doing.  Dallas runs something similar.  They call it Texas Coast.  Of course San Fran as mentioned has play makers at all key positions, same with Dallas.  Could NU have that?  DR or DK, Fidone/Nelson, Chi, unsure which RB would be named (Emmett Johnson?).  I'd like to see us lean on one guy who gets the vast majority of snaps at RB.

 

This is why it makes me shake my head when people drool over fullbacks and tight ends.  All you do when you go to a heavy formation is bring more defenders into the box.  Which is more guys to block, more blocks to not screw up and just generally more traffic to work through. 

 

I'm all about a strong running game.  But I'd much rather spread the defense out and run to daylight than have to run over people.

[Husker in WI]

4 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

This is why it makes me shake my head when people drool over fullbacks and tight ends.  All you do when you go to a heavy formation is bring more defenders into the box.  Which is more guys to block, more blocks to not screw up and just generally more traffic to work through. 

 

I'm all about a strong running game.  But I'd much rather spread the defense out and run to daylight than have to run over people.

 

Sounds like all we need to do is combine Oregon Speed with Husker Power, and I know just the guy!

 

I do agree with you though, I like having a FB as a change of pace but spreading the defense out and making them defend the whole field is better. The spread running game looked pretty great for the second half of 2018.

[BigRedBuster]

56 minutes ago, lo country said:

Even "run the damn ball guy" likes those comments. And QB's who can actually open the running game by being able to throw.  Tired of seeing us try to run against an 8 man front.  And what's not to like about what San Fran is doing.  Dallas runs something similar.  They call it Texas Coast.  Of course San Fran as mentioned has play makers at all key positions, same with Dallas.  Could NU have that?  DR or DK, Fidone/Nelson, Chi, unsure which RB would be named (Emmett Johnson?).  I'd like to see us lean on one guy who gets the vast majority of snaps at RB.

I would like to see one RB get the vast majority too. It would mean we have a really good RB.  But, that doesn’t seem to be the direction football is going. We need multiple guys producing at that position. 

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, Mavric said:

 

This is why it makes me shake my head when people drool over fullbacks and tight ends.  All you do when you go to a heavy formation is bring more defenders into the box.  Which is more guys to block, more blocks to not screw up and just generally more traffic to work through. 

 

I'm all about a strong running game.  But I'd much rather spread the defense out and run to daylight than have to run over people.

You can have multiple tight ends without having the offense bunched up though.  Split out Fidone and do some short motion back to a slot area with another TE on the other end line.   Essentially gets Fidone matched up with a smaller DB or safety and can take advantage of his size.   Chiefs have don’t a lot to 2 and 3 TE sets, mainly because their Receivers suck out loud and they use them pretty creatively.  

[admo]

I think that once we start hitting some passes consistently, the running game shall open up.  And that will be a problem for opponents to defend.  

 

 

[brophog]

12 hours ago, chamrocck said:

I’d argue SF has all sorts of weapons that make a game manager like B. Purdy successful.

 

They have good skill guys, but the key to that offense is they have offensive lineman that can really move. They ask a lot of their lineman with their reach blocks. That makes the defenders overplay to beat them to those spots and then the 49ers utilize a lot of motion and misdirection to punish them when they do that.

 

All of their big guys can really move whether that's OL, TE, or FB and that immensely helps them with a wide variety of screen passes. They also love quads and with all of that motion that creates a lot of opportunities. Purdy gets a lot of easy throws at times because they can either create a numbers advantage in this way or set it up so that they can isolate a backside receiver if the defense overplays the strong side. They simply do a fabulous job stretching you laterally with their motion and mobility, and off of that lateral stretch they can create verticality by attacking those seams. It's this mobility by everyone, but in particular the offensive line, that forces the defense to overplay and that allows the running and passing game to sync off of one another.

 

As it relates to Nebraska, this falls in line with our overall recruiting and S&C philosophy. Both offensively and defensively, we want big guys that can move and guys on both sides of the ball made big strides towards that end this past season.

[GlobalHusker]

Wait…who wouldn’t want to run what Niners run. With a Trent Williams to rely the blind side, Swiss Army knives at just about every position. How man FB’s you know that can run a wheel route like Yoos? Or with Kittle’s speed, catching, AND blocking ability. Deebo can line up in the backfield or split wide. CMC can catch run and block. They can run many sets without rotating personnel that puts pressure on the defenses to stop with what they have. Seems very distant from happening anytime soon here

[Undone]

57 minutes ago, GlobalHusker said:

Wait…who wouldn’t want to run what Niners run. With a Trent Williams to rely the blind side, Swiss Army knives at just about every position. How man FB’s you know that can run a wheel route like Yoos? Or with Kittle’s speed, catching, AND blocking ability. Deebo can line up in the backfield or split wide. CMC can catch run and block. They can run many sets without rotating personnel that puts pressure on the defenses to stop with what they have. Seems very distant from happening anytime soon here

 

To your first statement, maybe the problem is locking in on one specific type of scheme and thinking "this is the scheme that wins games." Seems like we're talking about a fan's preference? The way I'd rephrase that statement would be "who wouldn't want to be 3rd in the league in scoring?" That's what you're after.

 

When I look at the Niners, I see an organization that put together a roster to run a specific scheme. But not only does the talent fit the scheme, the talent is also just stupid good.

 

I don't really have strong preferences on what we do, I just don't want to suck anymore. But my number one concern (especially looking at having landed a QB like Raiola) is whether our offensive staff is capable of putting together a playbook during an offseason that maximizes what your personnel can do. No more round peg, square hole stuff.

[BigRedBuster]

2 minutes ago, Undone said:

I don't really have strong preferences on what we do, I just don't want to suck anymore. But my number one concern (especially looking at having landed a QB like Raiola) is whether our offensive staff is capable of putting together a playbook during an offseason that maximizes what your personnel can do. No more round peg, square hole stuff.

That's the main thing.  I don't care what we run.  We just need to score and not turn the ball over constantly.  

 

I think we are going to see a very very different offense than last year.  The staff was just trying to figure out how to win games with the crappy QB play we had.

[Cdog923]

17 hours ago, Mavric said:

Well.... we already have a Purdy...

 

 

 

Not so fast, my friend.