blackshirts5115 Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 with all the QB recruits were looking at, including Cody Green, it seems to me like that's what we're looking at running. they usually have a pretty good run game with a fast QB capable of throwing, though not great at it. Cody Green, Brion Carnes, Kain Colter, Jamal Turner... is this the offense we're headed towards? and if so, is this what you want? VT is always a solid team but they always slip up along the way due to a lack of a good passing game, even with their defense and special teams thriving under Beamer Ball. Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 I would take a VT style offense, but I would be thoroughly displeased if we continued with VT-esque production from our offense. Quote Link to comment
typ3kal Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 I'll take it if we shut out opponents every game. Having a running QB isn't the worst thing in the world.. I distinctly remember quite a few national championships being won at a certain Nebraska University with running QB's who weren't exactly the best passers. A win is a win, but regardless the system, we won't win if we can't fix our problems in the offensive trench. Quote Link to comment
blackshirts5115 Posted January 10, 2010 Author Share Posted January 10, 2010 yeah that's my concern is that we are headed toward that kind of offense. i don't know enough about VT's offense to know what causes their ineptitude, but i think if we can run that style but just a little bit better than VT, we can do special things as a team. with our defenses in the future, our offenses don't have to be all-world, but at the same time, it doesn't mean we don't strive to be. i wouldn't be angry if VT's style is what we're going for, but i can think of a few better styles such as Bamas or Texas Quote Link to comment
mmmtodd Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 they seem to be able to get running backs that go for a lot of yards in that offense. maybe with a little more nebraska emphasis on the line, something like VaTechs O could work out here. i dunno. i just really want to run the ball down peoples throats, at will. 1st and 10? eh, run it down their throats. 3rd and 7? eh, run it down their throats. whats that? offsides? 1st and 15? eh, run it down their throats. Quote Link to comment
blackshirts5115 Posted January 10, 2010 Author Share Posted January 10, 2010 they seem to be able to get running backs that go for a lot of yards in that offense. maybe with a little more nebraska emphasis on the line, something like VaTechs O could work out here. i dunno. i just really want to run the ball down peoples throats, at will. 1st and 10? eh, run it down their throats. 3rd and 7? eh, run it down their throats. whats that? offsides? 1st and 15? eh, run it down their throats. agreed i think we can make that offense work. and yes, i would absolutely love to pound the rock consistently Quote Link to comment
Nexus Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 yeah that's my concern is that we are headed toward that kind of offense. i don't know enough about VT's offense to know what causes their ineptitude, but i think if we can run that style but just a little bit better than VT, we can do special things as a team. with our defenses in the future, our offenses don't have to be all-world, but at the same time, it doesn't mean we don't strive to be. i wouldn't be angry if VT's style is what we're going for, but i can think of a few better styles such as Bamas or Texas Statistically, Bama & VT ran the same type of offense in 2009. They both featured the same percentage with 53% rushing - 47% passing. As for Texas this year, their offensive percentage was 35% rushing - 65% passing, which was similar to the 2008 Huskers of 38% rushing - 62% passing. Quote Link to comment
krc1995 Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 I think that is what we are going to gravitate toward running, especially with TO as an AD. I think he may influence the future offense more then anyone will ever know. He has stated(in one of his books I think) that running is a better statistical option because the outcome will be one of two things: a gain or no gain. A pass can result in one of three outcomes, and two of them are bad. Of course you could always fumble, and I don't remember what he said about that. I think a predominately run oriented offense pairs well with a dominate defense, because it would slow down the game some and put the time of possesion back into our court-as long as we can get a few first downs. Isn't this traditional Nebraska ball? Isn't this also what is labled Beemer Ball(using the VT topic). THis is where the play of the line becomes as important, if not more important, then the QB. And this why I don't think Barney Cotton is going to the right guy for our offense- Watson either. Quote Link to comment
WVhuskerXX Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 Run the ball and play great defense.... Quote Link to comment
huKSer Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 Run the ball and play great defense.... AND have the option to pass the ball effectively when 9 in the box, 3rd and long or, heaven forbid, when we're behind in the fourth quarter. This was from 1980 to 1992 the biggest issue with TO's offense. Quote Link to comment
RedDenver Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 Run the ball and play great defense.... AND have the option to pass the ball effectively when 9 in the box, 3rd and long or, heaven forbid, when we're behind in the fourth quarter. This was from 1980 to 1992 the biggest issue with TO's offense. Yeah, I'd hate for that kind of production. But I agree with your point, we need to be able to pass at least some. But we're unlikely to have an offense that does everything well. I suspect we'll continue what has happened under Pelini and Watson - figure out what the players we have do best. Quote Link to comment
Ohio Pete Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 Run the ball and play great defense.... AND have the option to pass the ball effectively when 9 in the box, 3rd and long or, heaven forbid, when we're behind in the fourth quarter. This was from 1980 to 1992 the biggest issue with TO's offense. Yeah, I'd hate for that kind of production. 1988 1/2 vs. Miami (Florida) (11-1) L 3 23 @ Miami, FL Orange Bowl 1989 1/1 vs. Florida State (10-2) L 17 41 @ Tempe, AZ Fiesta Bowl 1990 1/1 vs. Georgia Tech (11-0-1) L 21 45 @ Orlando, FL Citrus Bowl 1991 1/1 vs. Miami (Florida) (12-0) L 0 22 @ Miami, FL Orange Bowl 1992 1/1 vs. Florida State (11-1) L 14 27 @ Miami, FL Orange Bowl Yeah that was great Quote Link to comment
RedDenver Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 Yeah, I'd hate for that kind of production. 1988 1/2 vs. Miami (Florida) (11-1) L 3 23 @ Miami, FL Orange Bowl 1989 1/1 vs. Florida State (10-2) L 17 41 @ Tempe, AZ Fiesta Bowl 1990 1/1 vs. Georgia Tech (11-0-1) L 21 45 @ Orlando, FL Citrus Bowl 1991 1/1 vs. Miami (Florida) (12-0) L 0 22 @ Miami, FL Orange Bowl 1992 1/1 vs. Florida State (11-1) L 14 27 @ Miami, FL Orange Bowl Yeah that was great Didn't 4 of those teams win the MNC? Serious question. Quote Link to comment
mitch7 Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 I know this is off topic, but will someone please explain to me what the Mythical National Championship is? They mentioned it during the AAA game yesterday too. I hope I am not making myself look too stupid. But yeah I would take VTECH's offense along with a solid defense. Haven't they won 10 games every year in a row for forever? 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.