Things I've Noticed and Heard...

[druski_2k5]

 

Thank God we don't "pound the ball" (something that worked for DECADES, winning BIG, with NCs to boot) because now we do something that WORKS!!

 

2009 & 2010.....now THAT is what WORKS!! Fluffball baby, since 2004.....look how far it's taken us...it's the only way!

 

Completely missed the point.

 

We won National Championships because of our defense. When Osborne was criticized for not "throwing the ball like Miami" he said, and I'm paraphrasing, "I don't want to throw the ball like Miami, I want to play defense like Miami."

 

So after we switched up our defensive scheme from a 5-2 to a 4-3, and started RECRUITING smaller linebackers and changed our defensive philosophy, only then did we win National Championships.

 

If we could have stopped anyone in 1983, we would have won the National Championship then too.

 

Again, I'm not taking anything away from what our offense did in the 90s. It worked flawless. And it was fun to watch us blow teams up with that style.

 

However, we had better facilities, better weight training programs and we weren't limited with roster scholarships, that plays a part in our success too, not just "lining up and playing smash-mouth football." It's a combination of things. Sure, we wore defenses out in the 4th quarter, which is what our speed will do now, or at least in theory, but we still emphasize running the ball effectively, rather it's power or spread, we are still emphasizing on running the ball, Bo has always wanted a strong run game, it's just a different "base set" of where our run game will come from.

 

But you can't run the Power Offense game WITH our CURRENT roster and who we are currently recruiting. Our running backs are not built to carry the ball 20-25 times per game. We aren't 4 or 5 deep at running back and can just insert the next running back and let him go to work on an already tired defense, our running backs on the roster are not built for that nor were they recruited for that.

 

You can't run a 100% West Coast Offense with guys who were recruited to play in the Power I/Option attack or you get what the results we did in 2004. So if we tried to run Wisconsin's offense with our current offense, it would not be pretty, perhaps even 2004 results, we would have injuries galore as well, even if we had a championship style defense, we still wouldn't be able to run a Power I/Option attack with our current roster, they aren't built for that.

 

If we had a different roster, different recruiting philosophies, different athletes at quarterback who are familiar with the option game, things might be different and we could use a Power I/Option base set.

 

But the fact is, our current roster cannot run this set, nor are we recruiting to that style. What teams lately have won National Championships with a true Power I run game? You don't have to ALWAYS run Power I to have an effective power running game, it can come from different formations, but it also needs to be an attitude that no matter what formation we are in, we are going to blow the other guys up on the other side, run effectively and keep them honest with passing and some option game as well.

 

Sometimes I think people just want to keep with the Power I of old because they don't want to let it go. It's over. The 90's are gone.

[zoogs]

Yea! We did not run the ball enough last year.

[dubsker]

The more I hear about this "new" offense the more I start to dread it. Im not so fond of the Missouri, Kansas, etc, no huddle offenses where they line up and then look to the sideline for the play.

 

Why can't we just line up under center and pound the football? Wisconsin can do it, why can't we? Ugh

 

 

Solution: Change your college favorite football team to Wisconsin then. Seriuosly, right now, change your team to rooting for Wisconsin.

 

I mean, really? It's posts like this that make me shake my head at times. "They do it why can't we do it?!" Yeah, you want to know something else? Other teams WIN BCS Bowl Games and Conference Championships. That is what we should REALLY be saying "They can do it, why can't we do it?!"

 

So let me get this straight: You would probably rather watch ups "line up under center and pound the football" rather than do something that WORKS?! You're telling me you would take image over substance? You have got to be kidding me. Tell me something. Did you stop watching when we switched to the West Coast Offense in 2004? I'm not saying Wisconsin's doesn't work, but that's not our style, we have to go with what we are recruiting for.

 

 

I am behind Bo 110%, he has a vision and that vision is going to be seen-through by him, because that is what we are going for, you can't put a round peg through a square hole, that is what we did on offense for the last two years and frankly, I'm sick of THAT philosophy, and am excited for some change and a breath of fresh air finally.

 

I too, have wishes of a few changes for our uniforms, field, sound system, stadium, and yes, I even want to see different types of plays in our offensive playbook and defensive playbook. However, I am not going to whine and complain and not watch when things aren't "exactly" how I want them if I were coaching the team.

 

I'm not saying you are threatening not to watch, I know some people might, but it's childish to hear crap like this. It sounds like it will just absolutely kill you if you had to watch our quarterbacks and receivers and backs look to the sideline for an audible or a hot read. This is the philosophy Bo has wanted since he stated it in December 2007, and here we are, February, almost March, 2011 and we are finally making that transition. The defense has been fixed, now it's time to see through the rest of the plan. If you don't like it, go watch some other worthless college football program.

 

News flash: This isn't the 1990's anymore where we are 5 deep at running back with a mobile quarterback that can make throws with an offensive line that weak Big 8 teams don't see every week, and we don't have a huge edge in weightlifting either anymore. Our weightlifting program is good, don't get me wrong, but other teams have caught up.

 

So what do you do when you don't have an edge at something anymore? You tweak it.

 

I don't care what offense we run, I just want it to work and score more points than the other team. I don't give a crap about image. Give me something that works.

 

If we have to line up in Maryland-I and pound it up the middle for the whole season, fine, go ahead. I'm also fine lining up in 4 and 5 Wide sets on every down if we need to move the ball effectively.

 

Hell, if we have to run Mickey Mouse trick plays all season long to score points on offense, so be it. Something that works!

 

Now I know what you're saying "But Wisconsin's offense does work!" True, it does for them. However, they recruit for that system. We have been recruiting for a Spread Option offense since Bo got here. So we just can't "line up and pound the football" with smaller backs that we have now and in-coming. Granted we should run between the tackles more from under center, but that's a play-calling issue, and sticking to what works, not a philosophy issue like a "Power Running Game" as opposed to a "Balanced" "Spread Option" "Air Raid" "Spread" philosophy style.

 

Not sure if you have been reading, but Tim Beck, the new offensive coordinator, has stated he is still committing to running the ball effectively. You can have "power running" with a Spread Option set. It's all about the blocking schemes. For those that miss the option, the Spread Option offense is just as fun to watch, if not more fun depending on the plays that are drawn up, and just as hard to defend and cover, even if we have to "look to the sidelines for the play".

 

Again, not sure if you've been paying attention or not, but the defense does the same, they look for audibles from the defensive staff to change something up. That's what the linebackers and safeties do. You know they do some motion with their hands, arms, or touch a part of their uniform, to change up the play? AFTER looking towards the sideline for a tweak.

 

Next play result: We get off the field.

 

I've heard more than once people don't want this offense because of the "stupid" look to the sideline for play crap. Guess what guys? It works.

 

Apparently this will be up-tempo, like Oregon's base, and we are still committed to running the ball as well, and running it between the tackles, which is what you're insinuating you want, so that will be what you get, just in a different style.

 

I'm sorry, but with Wisconsin's strategy of 75-25 or 80-20 run, I think you HAVE to keep the defenses honest in this day and age. Just like an 80-20 pass to run ratio. Just like Georgia Tech. It looks pretty, but they aren't effective, nor very deep with their personell. You can play the pass almost every down against teams that sling it around. You need a good effective run game to mix with a wide open passing game, just like you need a good passing game with a pound it out running game.

 

Again though, times have changed and I think you need a GREAT defense, which is what we have, and on offense you have to be balanced, unpredictable, attacking, "multiple", adjust to the defense, take what you want, do what you need, and score some ******* points, so at the end of the play we can hear "There Is No Place Like Nebraska" blared by the band as we watch our team celebrate in the end-zone, watching the balloons fly in Memorial, or watching the other fans cry on TV as we just took what we wanted and making a name for ourselves on the road, and take this thing back to the level we used to be at and make everyone envious of everything that we have, what we want to have, and more.

 

 

 

Oh yeah, what a great point.

 

Thank God we don't "pound the ball" (something that worked for DECADES, winning BIG, with NCs to boot) because now we do something that WORKS!!

 

2009 & 2010.....now THAT is what WORKS!! Fluffball baby, since 2004.....look how far it's taken us...it's the only way!

 

That's an awesome reply. I'll let you guys figure out in what way, hah.

[Hercules]

 

I could be wrong, but when people say they want to see us run an offense like we did in the 90's, they don't mean "just pound it straight ahead, over and over again." That's not what we did in the 90's. What they mean is, "God, I wish Tom Osborne was still coaching our offense."

 

Osborne's offense evolved all the time, just look at the 1995 offense and the 1997 offense - they are significantly different. No one knows exactly what Osborne's offense would look like today, but I'm sure it would be run-first, I'm sure it would feature the option game, I'm sure it would be fast-paced, and I'm sure it would cause major headaches for our opponents.

 

When people talk about the 90's, it's not because they're living in the past, or because they don't understand that football evolves over time. It's because between then and now, we forgot what made Nebraska football go, and we're trying to find that magic again.

[shyndy]

The more I hear about this "new" offense the more I start to dread it. Im not so fond of the Missouri, Kansas, etc, no huddle offenses where they line up and then look to the sideline for the play.

 

Why can't we just line up under center and pound the football? Wisconsin can do it, why can't we? Ugh

 

 

Solution: Change your college favorite football team to Wisconsin then. Seriuosly, right now, change your team to rooting for Wisconsin.

 

I mean, really? It's posts like this that make me shake my head at times. "They do it why can't we do it?!" Yeah, you want to know something else? Other teams WIN BCS Bowl Games and Conference Championships. That is what we should REALLY be saying "They can do it, why can't we do it?!"

 

So let me get this straight: You would probably rather watch ups "line up under center and pound the football" rather than do something that WORKS?! You're telling me you would take image over substance? You have got to be kidding me. Tell me something. Did you stop watching when we switched to the West Coast Offense in 2004? I'm not saying Wisconsin's doesn't work, but that's not our style, we have to go with what we are recruiting for.

 

 

I am behind Bo 110%, he has a vision and that vision is going to be seen-through by him, because that is what we are going for, you can't put a round peg through a square hole, that is what we did on offense for the last two years and frankly, I'm sick of THAT philosophy, and am excited for some change and a breath of fresh air finally.

 

I too, have wishes of a few changes for our uniforms, field, sound system, stadium, and yes, I even want to see different types of plays in our offensive playbook and defensive playbook. However, I am not going to whine and complain and not watch when things aren't "exactly" how I want them if I were coaching the team.

 

I'm not saying you are threatening not to watch, I know some people might, but it's childish to hear crap like this. It sounds like it will just absolutely kill you if you had to watch our quarterbacks and receivers and backs look to the sideline for an audible or a hot read. This is the philosophy Bo has wanted since he stated it in December 2007, and here we are, February, almost March, 2011 and we are finally making that transition. The defense has been fixed, now it's time to see through the rest of the plan. If you don't like it, go watch some other worthless college football program.

 

News flash: This isn't the 1990's anymore where we are 5 deep at running back with a mobile quarterback that can make throws with an offensive line that weak Big 8 teams don't see every week, and we don't have a huge edge in weightlifting either anymore. Our weightlifting program is good, don't get me wrong, but other teams have caught up.

 

So what do you do when you don't have an edge at something anymore? You tweak it.

 

I don't care what offense we run, I just want it to work and score more points than the other team. I don't give a crap about image. Give me something that works.

 

If we have to line up in Maryland-I and pound it up the middle for the whole season, fine, go ahead. I'm also fine lining up in 4 and 5 Wide sets on every down if we need to move the ball effectively.

 

Hell, if we have to run Mickey Mouse trick plays all season long to score points on offense, so be it. Something that works!

 

Now I know what you're saying "But Wisconsin's offense does work!" True, it does for them. However, they recruit for that system. We have been recruiting for a Spread Option offense since Bo got here. So we just can't "line up and pound the football" with smaller backs that we have now and in-coming. Granted we should run between the tackles more from under center, but that's a play-calling issue, and sticking to what works, not a philosophy issue like a "Power Running Game" as opposed to a "Balanced" "Spread Option" "Air Raid" "Spread" philosophy style.

 

Not sure if you have been reading, but Tim Beck, the new offensive coordinator, has stated he is still committing to running the ball effectively. You can have "power running" with a Spread Option set. It's all about the blocking schemes. For those that miss the option, the Spread Option offense is just as fun to watch, if not more fun depending on the plays that are drawn up, and just as hard to defend and cover, even if we have to "look to the sidelines for the play".

 

Again, not sure if you've been paying attention or not, but the defense does the same, they look for audibles from the defensive staff to change something up. That's what the linebackers and safeties do. You know they do some motion with their hands, arms, or touch a part of their uniform, to change up the play? AFTER looking towards the sideline for a tweak.

 

Next play result: We get off the field.

 

I've heard more than once people don't want this offense because of the "stupid" look to the sideline for play crap. Guess what guys? It works.

 

Apparently this will be up-tempo, like Oregon's base, and we are still committed to running the ball as well, and running it between the tackles, which is what you're insinuating you want, so that will be what you get, just in a different style.

 

I'm sorry, but with Wisconsin's strategy of 75-25 or 80-20 run, I think you HAVE to keep the defenses honest in this day and age. Just like an 80-20 pass to run ratio. Just like Georgia Tech. It looks pretty, but they aren't effective, nor very deep with their personell. You can play the pass almost every down against teams that sling it around. You need a good effective run game to mix with a wide open passing game, just like you need a good passing game with a pound it out running game.

 

Again though, times have changed and I think you need a GREAT defense, which is what we have, and on offense you have to be balanced, unpredictable, attacking, "multiple", adjust to the defense, take what you want, do what you need, and score some ******* points, so at the end of the play we can hear "There Is No Place Like Nebraska" blared by the band as we watch our team celebrate in the end-zone, watching the balloons fly in Memorial, or watching the other fans cry on TV as we just took what we wanted and making a name for ourselves on the road, and take this thing back to the level we used to be at and make everyone envious of everything that we have, what we want to have, and more.

 

TLDR version: I just want to win.

 

as a side note imostly agree

[redout22]

Thanks for the insight man. I'm ready to bring this speed to the Big 10. We will be a very fast team next year.

[Hercules]

I'm sorry, but with Wisconsin's strategy of 75-25 or 80-20 run, I think you HAVE to keep the defenses honest in this day and age. Just like an 80-20 pass to run ratio. Just like Georgia Tech. It looks pretty, but they aren't effective, nor very deep with their personell.

Also, to say that Wisconsin's offense, "isn't effective..." Where in the world does that come from. It's not my favorite offense, it's not what I want to see Nebraska do, and it's not close to what Nebraska was doing back in the 90's...

 

But to say it's not effective is just plain wrong. Wisconsin won the Big 10 conference this year, and were probably one of the best 5 teams in college football. While we were playing a freshman QB with turf toe on one leg and a busted ankle on the other, Wisconsin was putting up 80 points (literally) against Big 10 competition.

[druski_2k5]

I'm sorry, but with Wisconsin's strategy of 75-25 or 80-20 run, I think you HAVE to keep the defenses honest in this day and age. Just like an 80-20 pass to run ratio. Just like Georgia Tech. It looks pretty, but they aren't effective, nor very deep with their personell.

Also, to say that Wisconsin's offense, "isn't effective..." Where in the world does that come from. It's not my favorite offense, it's not what I want to see Nebraska do, and it's not close to what Nebraska was doing back in the 90's...

 

But to say it's not effective is just plain wrong. Wisconsin won the Big 10 conference this year, and were probably one of the best 5 teams in college football. While we were playing a freshman QB with turf toe on one leg and a busted ankle on the other, Wisconsin was putting up 80 points (literally) against Big 10 competition.

 

What I meant by "isn't effective" was Georgia Tech's offense against good teams. They averaged 26 on the year, but in a terrible ACC and only put up 7 against Air Force.

 

Wisconsin's offense > Georgia Tech's offense.

 

Although they did score more against Kansas than we did, which is sad.

 

I still shudder at how awful that game was to watch in person at the stadium. Awful game, awful atmosphere.

[huskerfan333157]

I'm sorry, but with Wisconsin's strategy of 75-25 or 80-20 run, I think you HAVE to keep the defenses honest in this day and age. Just like an 80-20 pass to run ratio. Just like Georgia Tech. It looks pretty, but they aren't effective, nor very deep with their personell.

Also, to say that Wisconsin's offense, "isn't effective..." Where in the world does that come from. It's not my favorite offense, it's not what I want to see Nebraska do, and it's not close to what Nebraska was doing back in the 90's...

 

But to say it's not effective is just plain wrong. Wisconsin won the Big 10 conference this year, and were probably one of the best 5 teams in college football. While we were playing a freshman QB with turf toe on one leg and a busted ankle on the other, Wisconsin was putting up 80 points (literally) against Big 10 competition.

 

They put up 80 against indiana..i dont think they know what a defense is there? Of course it could work with the right personell (which is was druski was stating) but it never wins championships. When has that type of offense won a major bowl game or NC? I dont think it has in the past decade while the offense that Beck is wanting to run has been proven to win NC's.

[Hercules]

I'm sorry, but with Wisconsin's strategy of 75-25 or 80-20 run, I think you HAVE to keep the defenses honest in this day and age. Just like an 80-20 pass to run ratio. Just like Georgia Tech. It looks pretty, but they aren't effective, nor very deep with their personell.

Also, to say that Wisconsin's offense, "isn't effective..." Where in the world does that come from. It's not my favorite offense, it's not what I want to see Nebraska do, and it's not close to what Nebraska was doing back in the 90's...

 

But to say it's not effective is just plain wrong. Wisconsin won the Big 10 conference this year, and were probably one of the best 5 teams in college football. While we were playing a freshman QB with turf toe on one leg and a busted ankle on the other, Wisconsin was putting up 80 points (literally) against Big 10 competition.

 

They put up 80 against indiana..i dont think they know what a defense is there? Of course it could work with the right personell (which is was druski was stating) but it never wins championships. When has that type of offense won a major bowl game or NC? I dont think it has in the past decade while the offense that Beck is wanting to run has been proven to win NC's.

 

Teams win championships, offenses don't. You put 2010's Wisconsin offense with Nebraska's 2010 defense, and you have a championship winner. Furthermore, players win championships, not schemes.

 

I'm looking forward to the offense that Beck puts together, and assuming that it is the sort of power spread option scheme we generally think it is, it's exactly what I want to see. But that's no reason to take away from what other programs do, especially when they've been infinitely more successful than we have over the past few years.

[rawhide]

not a single "what" yet . ...... wow

 

 

GBR

[REDSTEEL]

The more I hear about this "new" offense the more I start to dread it. Im not so fond of the Missouri, Kansas, etc, no huddle offenses where they line up and then look to the sideline for the play.

 

Why can't we just line up under center and pound the football? Wisconsin can do it, why can't we? Ugh

 

 

Solution: Change your college favorite football team to Wisconsin then. Seriuosly, right now, change your team to rooting for Wisconsin.

 

I mean, really? It's posts like this that make me shake my head at times. "They do it why can't we do it?!" Yeah, you want to know something else? Other teams WIN BCS Bowl Games and Conference Championships. That is what we should REALLY be saying "They can do it, why can't we do it?!"

 

So let me get this straight: You would probably rather watch ups "line up under center and pound the football" rather than do something that WORKS?! You're telling me you would take image over substance? You have got to be kidding me. Tell me something. Did you stop watching when we switched to the West Coast Offense in 2004? I'm not saying Wisconsin's doesn't work, but that's not our style, we have to go with what we are recruiting for.

 

 

I am behind Bo 110%, he has a vision and that vision is going to be seen-through by him, because that is what we are going for, you can't put a round peg through a square hole, that is what we did on offense for the last two years and frankly, I'm sick of THAT philosophy, and am excited for some change and a breath of fresh air finally.

 

I too, have wishes of a few changes for our uniforms, field, sound system, stadium, and yes, I even want to see different types of plays in our offensive playbook and defensive playbook. However, I am not going to whine and complain and not watch when things aren't "exactly" how I want them if I were coaching the team.

 

I'm not saying you are threatening not to watch, I know some people might, but it's childish to hear crap like this. It sounds like it will just absolutely kill you if you had to watch our quarterbacks and receivers and backs look to the sideline for an audible or a hot read. This is the philosophy Bo has wanted since he stated it in December 2007, and here we are, February, almost March, 2011 and we are finally making that transition. The defense has been fixed, now it's time to see through the rest of the plan. If you don't like it, go watch some other worthless college football program.

 

News flash: This isn't the 1990's anymore where we are 5 deep at running back with a mobile quarterback that can make throws with an offensive line that weak Big 8 teams don't see every week, and we don't have a huge edge in weightlifting either anymore. Our weightlifting program is good, don't get me wrong, but other teams have caught up.

 

So what do you do when you don't have an edge at something anymore? You tweak it.

 

I don't care what offense we run, I just want it to work and score more points than the other team. I don't give a crap about image. Give me something that works.

 

If we have to line up in Maryland-I and pound it up the middle for the whole season, fine, go ahead. I'm also fine lining up in 4 and 5 Wide sets on every down if we need to move the ball effectively.

 

Hell, if we have to run Mickey Mouse trick plays all season long to score points on offense, so be it. Something that works!

 

Now I know what you're saying "But Wisconsin's offense does work!" True, it does for them. However, they recruit for that system. We have been recruiting for a Spread Option offense since Bo got here. So we just can't "line up and pound the football" with smaller backs that we have now and in-coming. Granted we should run between the tackles more from under center, but that's a play-calling issue, and sticking to what works, not a philosophy issue like a "Power Running Game" as opposed to a "Balanced" "Spread Option" "Air Raid" "Spread" philosophy style.

 

Not sure if you have been reading, but Tim Beck, the new offensive coordinator, has stated he is still committing to running the ball effectively. You can have "power running" with a Spread Option set. It's all about the blocking schemes. For those that miss the option, the Spread Option offense is just as fun to watch, if not more fun depending on the plays that are drawn up, and just as hard to defend and cover, even if we have to "look to the sidelines for the play".

 

Again, not sure if you've been paying attention or not, but the defense does the same, they look for audibles from the defensive staff to change something up. That's what the linebackers and safeties do. You know they do some motion with their hands, arms, or touch a part of their uniform, to change up the play? AFTER looking towards the sideline for a tweak.

 

Next play result: We get off the field.

 

I've heard more than once people don't want this offense because of the "stupid" look to the sideline for play crap. Guess what guys? It works.

 

Apparently this will be up-tempo, like Oregon's base, and we are still committed to running the ball as well, and running it between the tackles, which is what you're insinuating you want, so that will be what you get, just in a different style.

 

I'm sorry, but with Wisconsin's strategy of 75-25 or 80-20 run, I think you HAVE to keep the defenses honest in this day and age. Just like an 80-20 pass to run ratio. Just like Georgia Tech. It looks pretty, but they aren't effective, nor very deep with their personell. You can play the pass almost every down against teams that sling it around. You need a good effective run game to mix with a wide open passing game, just like you need a good passing game with a pound it out running game.

 

Again though, times have changed and I think you need a GREAT defense, which is what we have, and on offense you have to be balanced, unpredictable, attacking, "multiple", adjust to the defense, take what you want, do what you need, and score some ******* points, so at the end of the play we can hear "There Is No Place Like Nebraska" blared by the band as we watch our team celebrate in the end-zone, watching the balloons fly in Memorial, or watching the other fans cry on TV as we just took what we wanted and making a name for ourselves on the road, and take this thing back to the level we used to be at and make everyone envious of everything that we have, what we want to have, and more.

 

 

 

Oh yeah, what a great point.

 

Thank God we don't "pound the ball" (something that worked for DECADES, winning BIG, with NCs to boot) because now we do something that WORKS!!

 

2009 & 2010.....now THAT is what WORKS!! Fluffball baby, since 2004.....look how far it's taken us...it's the only way!

 

You really think the offense we ran in the 90s an early 00's will work nowadays? Sorry, it DOES NOT WORK anymore. Name one team thats had a lot of success with it? Also, if pounding the ball is your philosophy, you will NOT get the great qbs nor will you get any good WR's to keep the defense honest. Please name one team in the last decade that won a national championship while running the ball the majority of the time? Alabama had great balance so they dont count. If you run the ball the majority of the time, it is VERY easy to stop. Sorry, the power running game died when mike vick, mcnabb, etc went into the nfl an made fast qb's think they could start in the NFL. I cant think of one team that has had success strictly power running the ball and success..success meaning winning a bcs game (sorry wisconsin lost to tcu, tcu didnt have problems stopping the run and ga tech got their butts kicked by iowa in the bolw game a few years ago). As druski stated, you need good balance to win NC's, you cant be pass heavy (unless youre mike leach but he is to offense what bo is to defense)and you can not be strictly power run.

I find it funny that people who think like this will then go and claim that the 1995 team is the greatest team ever, but then claim that same offense could not work today.

 

It's personel thats the problem not scheme and if Nebraska had the same caliber of players that the 1995 team had they could still win a NC running that kind of offense. Nebraska would find it easier putting together a great offensive line,fb, rb, TE, and mobile qb. Trying to find a great pocket passing qb and NFL type receivers that willing to come to Nebraska puts Nebraska at a disavantage competing against the likes of the SEC, Texas and USC's of the world.

[EZ-E]

Very excited about Tim Beck as an OC.

[huskerfan333157]

 

You really think the offense we ran in the 90s an early 00's will work nowadays? Sorry, it DOES NOT WORK anymore. Name one team thats had a lot of success with it? Also, if pounding the ball is your philosophy, you will NOT get the great qbs nor will you get any good WR's to keep the defense honest. Please name one team in the last decade that won a national championship while running the ball the majority of the time? Alabama had great balance so they dont count. If you run the ball the majority of the time, it is VERY easy to stop. Sorry, the power running game died when mike vick, mcnabb, etc went into the nfl an made fast qb's think they could start in the NFL. I cant think of one team that has had success strictly power running the ball and success..success meaning winning a bcs game (sorry wisconsin lost to tcu, tcu didnt have problems stopping the run and ga tech got their butts kicked by iowa in the bolw game a few years ago). As druski stated, you need good balance to win NC's, you cant be pass heavy (unless youre mike leach but he is to offense what bo is to defense)and you can not be strictly power run.

I find it funny that people who think like this will then go and claim that the 1995 team is the greatest team ever, but then claim that same offense could not work today.

 

It's personel thats the problem not scheme and if Nebraska had the same caliber of players that the 1995 team had they could still win a NC running that kind of offense. Nebraska would find it easier putting together a great offensive line,fb, rb, TE, and mobile qb. Trying to find a great pocket passing qb and NFL type receivers that willing to come to Nebraska puts Nebraska at a disavantage competing against the likes of the SEC, Texas and USC's of the world.

 

You did not comprehend anything i wrote. I said that offense wont work NOW because of the michaels vicks, steve mcnair's and the vince young's being able to play in the nfl. you really think we could have gotten frazier if he knew he would have a chance to be an nfl qb? No, we wouldnt have. So im obviously saying we wouldnt ever get the recruits like we did then for the system to be ran properly.

[Husker Z]

Carnes came into Lincoln at about 180 I bet. He honestly looks like he's at 190/195. Shoulders definetly look broader and his arms look more toned.(no homo) I'm excited.

 

**Bell is a pretty straight shooter kinda guy but hilarious at the same time.

 

The thing that kind of scared me is he believes the new offense will be no-huddle, check downs at line, and audibles. We don't necessary have a QB that can make those kind of calls. A lot like Peyton Manning being the QB/offensive coordinator for the Colts. He run's that entire offense. Beck is entirely correct that he's looking for a leader for the offense(totally makes sense). It will be interesting to say the least.

 

I saw that he posted on Facebook this morning that he was at 202. Then, some chick said he was still a sting bean and said that she could bench more than him, which cracked me up.

 

Anyway, there is your Facebook stalk of the day!