huskerguy Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 Anyone else see him say this on the Big Red Wrap-up show? It only makes sense to use him like this more. It sounds like we will have a lot of 2 back formations with one scat back in and another power back. He even pointed out that you won't see guys like Cody (Glenn) and Q (Castille) in at the same time. So I imagine we will see Marlon come in and possibly motion out of the backfield and line up as a WR. I see this being highly effective! Also it seems like we will see the option at least a little bit so I was wondering how many of you can see Marlon getting the pitch and just having to make one guy miss and going for huge gains. All Marlon needs is a little space which I see the option giving him a lot of. Quote Link to comment
adc7236 Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 Anyone else see him say this on the Big Red Wrap-up show? It only makes sense to use him like this more. It sounds like we will have a lot of 2 back formations with one scat back in and another power back. He even pointed out that you won't see guys like Cody (Glenn) and Q (Castille) in at the same time. So I imagine we will see Marlon come in and possibly motion out of the backfield and line up as a WR. I see this being highly effective! Also it seems like we will see the option at least a little bit so I was wondering how many of you can see Marlon getting the pitch and just having to make one guy miss and going for huge gains. All Marlon needs is a little space which I see the option giving him a lot of. I like that we will finally be playing to ML's strengths as well as not telegraphing our plays based on personnel packages. D's will not know if we are going with power or finesse (2 back set). Throw in a bit of play action and we will keep Defenses guessing even more. Quote Link to comment
melscott62 Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 great to hear...i have been pushing this on this board for a while Quote Link to comment
DJR313 Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 Makes too much sense...it'll never work. Quote Link to comment
papersun87 Posted January 17, 2008 Share Posted January 17, 2008 I like it . . . Quote Link to comment
admo Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Sounds good. Westbrook is bad azz! Quote Link to comment
chamrocck Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 I like this strategy. I could never understand why we didn't run more formations with Lucky in with another one of the backs. Great to have Lucky back for his senior year...he is going to be key for us. Quote Link to comment
huskernumerouno Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 I like the sound of what is coming out of the Husker staff Quote Link to comment
Spartness Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 I figure it wouldn't hurt either to run the fullback a little to keep the defense honest. USC ran theirs a little, but Callahan never did except a couple of times when he experimented with Glenn and Castille. But then of course the fullbacks were in the game less than half the time. I would think that could help Lucky and the other RBs. Quote Link to comment
Blackshirt316 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 I thought this is what we should have been doing all along... expecially if we weren't going to utilize a true WC FB... The only thing I wish he didn't say was that Q and Glenn wouldn't be out there together, I'd like to see some plays with Q at FB and Glenn at HB or vice versa in goal line or short yardage situations once in a while for some extra muscle. Other than that it seems we may actually have a coach that isn't a total idiot when it comes to offensive personnel. Quote Link to comment
huskernation20 Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Just reading all you guys posts.....all I can say is I CAN'T WAIT FOR THE NEXT SEASON TO START!!!! GBR Quote Link to comment
macroboy Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 I could never understand why we didn't run more formations with Lucky in with another one of the backs. "It's very complicated. You wouldn't understand...."- BC Quote Link to comment
huskerguy Posted January 18, 2008 Author Share Posted January 18, 2008 I could never understand why we didn't run more formations with Lucky in with another one of the backs. "It's very complicated. You wouldn't understand...."- BC Yeah the reasons are pretty technical... Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.