The next offense scheme..

[TGI Falwell]

I like the I-set based on power running with a mobile QB that can sprint out of the pocket. That's easiest for linemen to learn, and it reduces the necessary skillset requirements. You can develop excellent o-linemen when they only need to focus on simple techniques.

 

Whatever happens, I don't think the next coach can deviate too much from the current offensive strategy; if it changes too much, we will end up with a lot of disgruntled players, and they will plague us again for the next four years (like the Solich seniors did this year).

[strigori]

I expect a version of the spread option. When run right it is a total nightmare do defend, and it is great at getting the ball to playmakers in space(assuming of course the coach knows what he is doing)

 

Depends on the QB, Pat White and Vince Young make it look great, Colt McCoy makes it look like crap.

Texas just isnt very good at adapting to what they have on hand all the time. And McCoy was great last year, no idea what the issues are this time around, but the whole Texas team has played poorly this year.

[General Blackshirt]

Mix of West Coast and Spread.

[BaytownHusker]

I just dont want to see us try and go back to the damn wishbone and nothing but option game... I truely believe you are not going to be able to win 10 games a year with that offense.. Look at ATM they run the heck out of the ball but they can not depend on the passing game to bring they back against a power house defense...

[walksalone]

Go back to the days of the ground and pound (aka, running the ball) and playing hellacious defense so that when we do throw (the post pattern to the TE) they won't be in the least bit ready...

 

As the Good Doctor said, "We used to be a team people hated to play, because they felt it for two or three weeks."

 

because throwing the ball doesn't put the hurt to anyone, it's smacking them in the mouth every down, that hurts them...

 

a football version of "60 minutes of hell"

[Wharf Rat]

I just dont want to see us try and go back to the damn wishbone

When did NU ever run the wishbone? Answer - never.

[Wharf Rat]

No was can say that it didnt work...

Unless you needed a 3rd down conversion where we were 2-11 for an abysmal 18%.

[DaveH]

IMO we gotta stay diversified. I don't have a problem with the kind of ball we were playing, x's and o's wise that is.

[restored_order]

Spread option seems to be the most popular, and Dr. Tom likes it. I think he wants to get someone in there who knows how to be punishing, how to punch other teams in the gut, kick them in the teeth.

[Husker Deb]

Good thread guys and educational.

I don't know that many specifics about offense besides the option.

 

Great to learn... keep up the lessons.

[SkerMin8r]

I personally like the offense that Oklahoma runs. They have a very good power running game and can still kill you with the pass.

[Hunter94]

a return to some sort of power running game, at least as part of the scheme. ganz as a mobile qb who runs more and throws safer passes is a must as well. cally put ganz in some bad plays and forcing the ball over the middle is never without risk. plenty of out patterns and slants that can reduce the INT chances as well.

[Bleeding Husker Red]

I just dont want to see us try and go back to the damn wishbone

When did NU ever run the wishbone? Answer - never.

 

 

Never huh? I s'pose you've never heard of the 'OS-bone'? NU used it in the late 80's among other times.. Not exclusively but TO used it. Yes, Nebraska HAS run the wishbone before.

[huskerpilot]

The kind that turns the ball over? TOs offense didn't turn the ball over nor committ penalties. His team played more like KANSAS! Mangino would be the guy if society wasn't so biased!

 

you are 400lbs aren't you

[robsker]

I just hope we continue to run the style off O that we have run the past 2 weeks.. No was can say that it didnt work...

Alright. After watching that Texas Tech offense and how good they were just score and score, i wondered.. how come a team that runs that offense cant win a NC? I mean, Florida doesnt run that. WV doesnt run that (i dont think).

 

The reason is, you score so fast that the D is on the field a lot and gets tired and falls appart

Im not sure, but my guess is because its a very incosistent offense depending on the day. Texas Tech ran up and down the field on Oklahoma, but was shut down against Colorado. Heck, a Bill Callahan coached team should have beaten them in 2005.

 

It's hard to run the clock down when needed most of those offense have no running game when needed. They have to resort to passing all the time and every incomplete pass just helps the other team. Remember when Nebraska would take 5 to 8 minutes off the clock when they wanted to shorten the game. Take the Missouri game yesterday where they had that 28-7 lead and kept on passing. The spread is nice but it's not a offense that you can run to take 5 to 9 minutes of time off the clock.

 

 

Excellent points.

 

It seems to me that the Texas Tech (or any all-pass oriented offense) offense is as limited as is an all-running team type offense. That is, if you can only pass but not run (like TT) then, if the opposition can get pressure and/or limit open field after the catch yardage, the offense will shut down. Plus, as was astutely pointed out by others, the offense does not use up clock and the opposition has tons of time to score themselves. Similarly limited is a run only offense that chews up clock (but if you get behind it is tough to catch up). Such an all running offense is limited because if the opposition has great speed and is athletic (as much so or more than is your offense) they will stop that run. Both an all passing (TT) or an all running offense are limited and doomed to limited success.

 

What is best is balance --- not necessarily 50/50 balance, but balance --- even if it is 75/25 or so. Many do not realize that the Osborne offenses of the 1990's were quite balanced offenses. Sure the running was the feature, but NU had a potent and very effective passing plays that worked well and really complimented the running game. Look back at the stats. Those teams decimated the opposition with primarily running but also with key, selective, and very damaging passing that moved the chains and scored many TD's. In many games, they were so good that they did not need to diversify and so they did not. Yet, against great competition Osborne's offenses used the passing game very, very well. You need not pile up gaudy passing statistics to have an effective passing game if you are able to run well. Play action is still and will always be a potent and devastating offensive weapon to use. Unlike many who claim that NU was all running and monolithic in the Osborne era --- let me say this, yes the running game stood out because it was featured and very, very good --- but those teams could pass too.

 

I hope that the new regime has in view balance. And, if the balance slightly favors one over the other, let it be the running that is emphasized. Remember --- with a pass, only three things can happen --- and two of them are bad.