The 'Old' Nebraska Offense ... Why The Hell Not?

[Malth]

Because Tom Osborne isn't our coach anymore.

 

Why are people so insistent on forcing coaches into a certain style of offense? If that's not their strength and we don't have the athletes for it, why on Earth would you think it's a good idea?

[Street Novelist]

We would need a vastly improved offensive line to run that kind of offense; not to mention a new OC.

[Hercules]

Style du jour. Right now it's pistol/diamond for most. And I guess there's always a 'throwback Nebraska' contingent. Why else did Taylor excite so many people?

 

Doesn't make that much of a difference but it is all fans will talk about.

 

I would say the less dramatic the change, the better. You can simplify, you can evolve, but you are going to sacrifice a few years if you want to facelift. You could say we have sacrificed one already to that end.

 

The "diamond" formation is just a small twist on Osborne's double wing formation from 1997, which he used way more effectively than I've seen anybody use the diamond formation this year.

 

I would love to see this offense again. It was hard for defenses to prepare for, and it was intimidating. Our offenses of the 90's played fast and physical, like our defenses do now. The whole team was scary, not just the Blackshirts. There was an intense psychological advantage that Nebraska built during the 90's against their opponents, and it had more to do with the physical nature of the offense than it did the defense. It was just glorious to see us pound the ball 80 yards down the field on a series of isos and counter traps, just pummeling the defense into submission. The game would be over by the end of the first drive, because we'd already be in their head, they knew they couldn't stop us. They weren't confused, they weren't bewildered - they just knew they were outmanned.

 

Running this type of offense would probably be a better fit for Cotton if he stays around to coach the OL. We need different wide receivers - Brandon Kinnie can block, which is important, but we need guys that can absolutely burn turf and beat their guy on playaction pass, and Kinnie's not that fast. You need Abdul Mohammed/Clester Johnson type wide receivers - really fast bulldogs.

 

We'd also need to get some real fullbacks, Taylor Martinez would need to put on about 20 pounds (he needs to do that anyways), and we'd need a different playcaller.

[Hercules]

We would need a brilliant offensive mind at coordinator and a great offensive line coach to run our 80s and 90s offense to a perennial top ten position. Without those components, you have essentially the same thing we have now: An offense that can look cool against bad defenses, but falters to do much in the biggest games (think NCG vs. Miami). To make it to national title contendership, add in a all-conference IB and QB.

 

I don't know any available great offensive minds available to resurrect that type of offense. More realistic would be to find a good coordinator who can run a more basic offense and at least score in the mid-twenties against top 40 defenses. That, with Bo's defense, equals Big 10 championships.

 

I'd personally rather sputter in the national championship game than sputter against a 6-6 team that isn't ranked in the top 100 in defense...

 

Remember, Osborne didn't change his offensive philosophy to compete against the top tier teams after getting beat by Florida State and Miami so many years in bowl games. He changed his defensive philosophy. Then all of a sudden they were competitive with Florida State, Miami, and the next year they absolutely demolished Florida.

 

It didn't take Osborne 22 years to get his offense into shape. In 1983, his offense was one of the best ever, and they lost the national championship game by a point because of a mediocre defense.

 

Even in 2001 against Miami, the problem was more the defense than the offense. That was always a pretty good offense, even playing Miami. But when your defense is as bad as that one was (62 points given up to Shawn Watson himself), your offense isn't going to do much.

[The Dude]

I'd love to see the triple option make a comeback. But, if Watson was going to be fired it probably would have happened by now. I get the feeling we're going to continue the fumble, fumble, penalty, punt offense.

 

 

Don't mean to hijack the thread, but I completely disagree. Bo's going to take his time and evaluate where this team and staff is as a whole. Reacting to the debacle of a bowl game by firing Watson immediately would've been a rushed, emotion-driven decision. I'm glad he's taking the time to cool down and approach the decision rationally. That said, we need a change and Watson/Cotton/Gilmore have to go.

It wouldn't be rushed. It's well overdue. It needs to happen sooner than later so there's more good coaches available. Florida already went out and got Weiss for example. The sooner you get your staff together, the better.

 

But like I've said before, I'm not convinced Bo has the backbone to fire them.

[Mort Blort]

I would love to see this offense again. It was hard for defenses to prepare for, and it was intimidating. Our offenses of the 90's played fast and physical, like our defenses do now. The whole team was scary, not just the Blackshirts. There was an intense psychological advantage that Nebraska built during the 90's against their opponents, and it had more to do with the physical nature of the offense than it did the defense. It was just glorious to see us pound the ball 80 yards down the field on a series of isos and counter traps, just pummeling the defense into submission. The game would be over by the end of the first drive, because we'd already be in their head, they knew they couldn't stop us. They weren't confused, they weren't bewildered - they just knew they were outmanned.

 

I'm completely undazzled by Watson's razzle. That smashmouth stuff was the most beautiful thing ever ... those first two drives after the half against Tennessee in the 98 ('97 season) Orange Bowl, for instance. Both drives started inside the Husker 5-yard line, and if memory serves, the first consisted of 12 consecutive rushes, the second 13 (?) ... those drives utterly destroyed Tennessee.

 

Some people say it wouldn't work again. Options to the outside don't work against fast defenses, they say. It certainly is true that zone reads/read options to the outside did not work this year against Oklahoma. That we know.

[Hercules]

I would love to see this offense again. It was hard for defenses to prepare for, and it was intimidating. Our offenses of the 90's played fast and physical, like our defenses do now. The whole team was scary, not just the Blackshirts. There was an intense psychological advantage that Nebraska built during the 90's against their opponents, and it had more to do with the physical nature of the offense than it did the defense. It was just glorious to see us pound the ball 80 yards down the field on a series of isos and counter traps, just pummeling the defense into submission. The game would be over by the end of the first drive, because we'd already be in their head, they knew they couldn't stop us. They weren't confused, they weren't bewildered - they just knew they were outmanned.

 

I'm completely undazzled by Watson's razzle. That smashmouth stuff was the most beautiful thing ever ... those first two drives after the half against Tennessee in the 98 ('97 season) Orange Bowl, for instance. Both drives started inside the Husker 5-yard line, and if memory serves, the first consisted of 12 consecutive rushes, the second 13 (?) ... those drives utterly destroyed Tennessee.

 

Some people say it wouldn't work again. Options to the outside don't work against fast defenses, they say. It certainly is true that zone reads/read options to the outside did not work this year against Oklahoma. That we know.

 

Tom Osborne's option offense worked against one of the best and fastest defenses I've ever seen, 1994 Miami. That team had Warren Sapp AND Ray Lewis, and they were surrounded by studs. We beat them with two fullback traps, lol.

 

You do have to get the right personnel in place, but the notion that the old Nebraska option offense wouldn't work anymore is a lie.

[HuskerGBR]

I would like the old offense as much as the next guy, but I don't think it is completely necessary. Here is a list that I always thought we needed to be successful on offense.

 

1. We need our old line back. When our bright spot on this line is Ricky Henry (no offense intended to him, cause I like him) something is wrong, because he probably wouldn't sniff 3rd team on our old lines. We haven't had a high caliber line since maybe 2001 and that wasn't even one of our best by a long shot.

2. This goes with #1, but we need two offensive line coaches. One coaching pass blocking and the other coaching run blocking, just like we used to have.

3. We need an offense that doesn't rely on 5* WR's and amazing passing QB's. For some reason we have never been able to really recruit these positions with any type of consistency. Osborne was the last one to get a top notch WR and that was a long time ago. As far as QB's we have never gotten a Dan Marino or Peyton Manning and we probably never will.

4. We need an offense built around the recruits we have in our own backyard. Get as many high profile guys around the country for your skill positions for sure, but we also need to rely on what the kids are built for in our 300 mile radius recruiting circle.

 

I think a power run type offense would still be very successful here, but we don't need the old offense back...not that I wouldn't love to have it back though.

[HuskerAdisa]

one of the main problems with the option offense is that if you get behind its hard to come back.....

 

however, the present offense really isnt that bad, we just need more variety-- more passess on first down (preferably to the tight ends), more misdirections, LESS zone reads, and MORE deep post plays

[Big Red 40]

Tom Osborne's option offense worked against one of the best and fastest defenses I've ever seen, 1994 Miami. That team had Warren Sapp AND Ray Lewis, and they were surrounded by studs. We beat them with two fullback traps, lol.

You do have to get the right personnel in place, but the notion that the old Nebraska option offense wouldn't work anymore is a lie

I loved that 94 game, but the same type of Offense, (minus the Fullback but plus a Heisman QB) did poorly against the 2002 Miami defense (i thought they were slightly better than 94) in the Rose Bowl.

I dont think its necessarily the style of offense that wins or loses, but being able to execute whatever system you run at a high level.

[In the Deed the Glory]

Why the hell not the old offense?

 

...because we don't have anywhere near the talent here on the OL to run it. You need fast, agile, elite lineman at all 5 positions to run that offense. We have a hodgepodge of lineman that aren't cohesive together because half are run blockers and half are pass blockers.

 

You can't ask a 6'7" 350 lb. guy to play in a triple option offense, how is that guy going to be a pulling guard/tackle?

[Hercules]

I loved that 94 game, but the same type of Offense, (minus the Fullback but plus a Heisman QB) did poorly against the 2002 Miami defense (i thought they were slightly better than 94) in the Rose Bowl.

I dont think its necessarily the style of offense that wins or loses, but being able to execute whatever system you run at a high level.

 

Like I said before, the offense isn't going to do as well when your defense can't stop anything. In the 2002 Rose Bowl, our defense (which had just given up 62 points to Shawn Watson's offense) was awful, and they couldn't stop anything Miami had. Miami could've thrown up 80 on us, but thank God for Larry Coker pulling in the reins and only scoring 37.

 

The offense was outmanned in that game (let's remember that 2001 Miami was one of the best college football teams of all time), but if they had the 1994 Nebraska defense with them, it would have been a dogfight. Miami's offense and defense was great that year. I think our offense was pretty special in 2001, but we had a craptastic defense, and that's always going to make your offense look worse.

[Hercules]

Why the hell not the old offense?

 

...because we don't have anywhere near the talent here on the OL to run it. You need fast, agile, elite lineman at all 5 positions to run that offense. We have a hodgepodge of lineman that aren't cohesive together because half are run blockers and half are pass blockers.

 

You can't ask a 6'7" 350 lb. guy to play in a triple option offense, how is that guy going to be a pulling guard/tackle?

 

Our offensive line isn't good for any offensive system right now. I have a hard time imagining us taking a step backwards.

[huskerjack23]

Was it still a triple option offense even though the first fake to the FB was never an actual read in Osborne's option? Whenever the FB got the ball on that play, it was always a called play. That's what I've always heard anyway. I could be wrong.

[The Dude]

All the players I've heard talk about it call it the triple option. So I always assumed it was a true triple option.