Which offense give us the best chance to win?

[walksalone]

One that doesn't turn the ball over 5 times, go 10 for 140yds in penalties, and when they find something that works they immediately do what doesn't work...

 

3rd and Nebraska...

[Husker from Kansas]

i would really like to see an two back I formation offense with big powerful olinemen that runs the ball down the opposing teams throats and sets up the pass with playaction and is aggressive on every down and keeps the defense on its heels

[GMoose]

Subtopic: Who is the perfect QB mold for your ideal offense (anyone)? Not including generational freaks like Tommie Cam Newton, or Andrew Luck. For our offense, mine would be an Andy Dalton type. Can make all the throws, with the mobility to make plays outside the pocket and even do some designed running.

[EZ-E]

First football thread I have contributed to in months. Great topic GMoose.

 

I am not at all attached to this "we need to run the ball and give it to the fullback" type of crap. I enjoy watching us win football games. I really feel our best way to do that is with the type of offense that Florida ran under Meyer. I don't enjoy watching Oregon play very much because it seems to be run around you instead of through you. Florida's offense is what Osborne would run if he were still in the game. I have full confidence saying that. Now GMoose, remember that we can and we will be able to pull kids from Cali and Florida so I don't see finding a dual threat QB as hard as some may think.

[EZ-E]

Subtopic: Who is the perfect QB mold for your ideal offense (anyone)? Not including generational freaks like Tommie Cam Newton, or Andrew Luck. For our offense, mine would be an Andy Dalton type. Can make all the throws, with the mobility to make plays outside the pocket and even do some designed running.

 

Tommy Armstrong from Cibilo. THAT is the kind of build and skill set of QBs I really hope we continue to go hard after. I do think we end up with Tommy signing with us as well.

[GMoose]

First football thread I have contributed to in months. Great topic GMoose.

 

I am not at all attached to this "we need to run the ball and give it to the fullback" type of crap. I enjoy watching us win football games. I really feel our best way to do that is with the type of offense that Florida ran under Meyer. I don't enjoy watching Oregon play very much because it seems to be run around you instead of through you. Florida's offense is what Osborne would run if he were still in the game. I have full confidence saying that. Now GMoose, remember that we can and we will be able to pull kids from Cali and Florida so I don't see finding a dual threat QB as hard as some may think.

All good points. The success of many offenses hinges so heavily on the staff. Meyer at UF, Chip Kelly at Oregon, hell, Paul Chryst at Wisconsin. It's nice to want to run Chip Kelly or Urban Meyer's spread, but it's not like anyone can just do it because they want to. That's why I've never been big on saying I want "so and so's offense" rather than a style. I can certainly understand why people want those offenses though.

 

Regarding QBs, I like drop back passers because the variance from guy to guy is little. I imagine most QBs have a ratio - Zac Taylor was like 95-5 pass-run. Manning is a 100-0 pass run. With dual threat guys, there are so many "ratios" you can have. I'd call Martinez 30-70 pass-run. Carnes around 50-50. Jamal Turner was like 40-60. There's so much variance in the skillset that the offense and team has a lot of adjusting to do from QB to QB. With passers, it's pretty steady. Just another reason I favor that style.

[The Dude]

My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

History tears your point to shreds. And Joe Ganz is an awful example of someone who ran a "pro-style" offense. As he did not.

[Hercules]

First football thread I have contributed to in months. Great topic GMoose.

 

I am not at all attached to this "we need to run the ball and give it to the fullback" type of crap. I enjoy watching us win football games. I really feel our best way to do that is with the type of offense that Florida ran under Meyer. I don't enjoy watching Oregon play very much because it seems to be run around you instead of through you. Florida's offense is what Osborne would run if he were still in the game. I have full confidence saying that. Now GMoose, remember that we can and we will be able to pull kids from Cali and Florida so I don't see finding a dual threat QB as hard as some may think.

All good points. The success of many offenses hinges so heavily on the staff. Meyer at UF, Chip Kelly at Oregon, hell, Paul Chryst at Wisconsin. It's nice to want to run Chip Kelly or Urban Meyer's spread, but it's not like anyone can just do it because they want to. That's why I've never been big on saying I want "so and so's offense" rather than a style. I can certainly understand why people want those offenses though.

 

Regarding QBs, I like drop back passers because the variance from guy to guy is little. I imagine most QBs have a ratio - Zac Taylor was like 95-5 pass-run. Manning is a 100-0 pass run. With dual threat guys, there are so many "ratios" you can have. I'd call Martinez 30-70 pass-run. Carnes around 50-50. Jamal Turner was like 40-60. There's so much variance in the skillset that the offense and team has a lot of adjusting to do from QB to QB. With passers, it's pretty steady. Just another reason I favor that style.

 

I don't really buy into that ratio theory. No matter what type of QB your offense uses, the offensive coordinator has to find someone that fits his system, and he's going to have to fit his system to that QB. Some passing QBs can make throws that other passing QBs can't. That requires adjustments. Some running quarterbacks can make throws that other running QBs can't. That requires adjustments. Some running QBs can make runs that other running QBs can't. That requires adjustments.

 

You have to find someone that fits your system, and then you have to adjust your system in order to maximize that players' strengths and minimize his weaknesses. There is no single system that makes that process any easier - the only thing that makes it easier is picking a system and sticking with it for a while. That's what people mean when they say Nebraska's offense hasn't had an identity for a while; it keeps shifting every year - we need to settle on something and then pursue the players we need for that system. It looks like we're getting closer to that, just based on how we're recruiting a certain type of QBs much more consistently now (Carnes, Turner, Starling - now Armstrong).

[zoogs]

I think what Gmoose is getting at: it's not easy to find a QB that is going to be solid in multiple areas. Guys to have certain strengths and weaknesses. You get a guy who's good at everything...well, you're golden. But that's rare.

 

So it comes down to a pick-and-choose.

 

You can get a guy that can be a tremendous big-play threat running the ball.

 

Or you can get a guy who knows how to direct the troops and make the throws.

 

It's rare that you can get both, so if you have to choose between the two, I would pick the latter. But this isn't that much of a scheme-related question in my opinion. I don't see a reason why any program would limit themselves to recruiting only one or the other.

[GMoose]

My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

History tears your point to shreds. And Joe Ganz is an awful example of someone who ran a "pro-style" offense. As he did not.

I'm just using these guys as examples of good passers. And what exactly is the evidence that tears my point to shreds?

[Hercules]

I think what Gmoose is getting at: it's not easy to find a QB that is going to be solid in multiple areas. Guys to have certain strengths and weaknesses. You get a guy who's good at everything...well, you're golden. But that's rare.

 

So it comes down to a pick-and-choose.

 

You can get a guy that can be a tremendous big-play threat running the ball.

 

Or you can get a guy who knows how to direct the troops and make the throws.

 

It's rare that you can get both, so if you have to choose between the two, I would pick the latter. But this isn't that much of a scheme-related question in my opinion. I don't see a reason why any program would limit themselves to recruiting only one or the other.

 

The comparison of "a guy that can be a tremendous big-play threat running the ball," and "a guy who knows how to direct the troops and make the throws," isn't a reasonable breakdown of the dilemma. Are guys who are tremendous big-play threats running the ball unable to direct the troops? Turner Gill did OK - so did Steve Taylor, Tommie Frazier, Scott Frost, and Eric Crouch... Running the ball has nothing to do with directing the troops.

 

I think a program does have to limit themselves to recruiting guys that specifically fit their vision. Nebraska isn't going to be Miami, they're not going to flash up every couple of years with a ridiculous class of local recruits and storm through the college football season to a national championship. Nebraska's long-term success came through stability - Devaney passed down to Osborne, passed down to Solich, keeping as much continuity with the assistant coaches as possible. They ran the same scheme forever and ever, to the point that they knew every counter to their offense, so they always knew how to adjust to what the defense was doing.

 

I don't think Nebraska can take the luxury of dilly-dallying with a different system every year, looking at whichever QB recruits catch their eye from one year to another. Nebraska's offense needs a vision of what it wants to be, in the long term, and it needs to relentlessly pursue the pieces that will make that vision come to life. They need to have players who have been in the program for 4 years, learning the same system throughout their career so they know it like the back of their hand when they go in.

 

The offense needs to be as consistent and steady as the defense. The Pelini brothers recruit the players that fit their vision of defense, and they develop those players in the same system for four years. That's why our defense has an identity, and our offense hasn't for some time.

[walksalone]

I want consistency, and continuity.

 

Both of are easier to maintain, running the ball, in my estimation.

 

This will make me sound like an immense jackass, but at this point, what is our offense line, more tailored to? Run blocking, pass blocking, or both? Should we lean to the strength of what the line is?

[The Dude]

My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

History tears your point to shreds. And Joe Ganz is an awful example of someone who ran a "pro-style" offense. As he did not.

I'm just using these guys as examples of good passers. And what exactly is the evidence that tears my point to shreds?

At Nebraska we get guys like Turner Gill, Tommie Frazier, Eric Crouch, ect.. Blaine Gabbert and Josh Freeman types go elsewhere. We don't get big time NFL level WRs and QBs at Nebraska, we just don't. When we can sign two of the top running QBs in the nation in the same recruiting class, like we literally just did, it's pretty obvious what kind of QBs we attract. When was the last time we signed two of the top passing QBs in the nation in the same class?

[zoogs]

We signed two of the top running "QB"s in the class because we had a big need at the position, and when one of them arrived on campus in the spring, we could move him to WR. It's different that way with athletes.

 

Nebraska can get "in" with top so-called pro-style QBs and it has shown that. Zac Lee and Sam Keller weren't high school recruits, but recruits nonetheless. Josh Freeman committed but bailed, probably because he decided he needed to go to some fancy coastal or southern school. Gabbert we sort of bailed on by moving in a different direction. We can get them, if we choose.

 

Now obviously we are not choosing to, which is a different thing entirely. And there are good football arguments for making that choice. Just don't say we have to work with these kinds of players because we're Nebraska and we can't pull in top passing QBs. I don't buy it.

 

I am not at all attached to this "we need to run the ball and give it to the fullback" type of crap.

 

I agree with that a lot, EZ.

 

The comparison of "a guy that can be a tremendous big-play threat running the ball," and "a guy who knows how to direct the troops and make the throws," isn't a reasonable breakdown of the dilemma. Are guys who are tremendous big-play threats running the ball unable to direct the troops? Turner Gill did OK - so did Steve Taylor, Tommie Frazier, Scott Frost, and Eric Crouch... Running the ball has nothing to do with directing the troops.

 

Oh yes, Steve Taylor, Turner Gill, Tommie Frazier, Scott Frost, and Eric Crouch all did alright. Definitely.

 

Look, all I'm saying is that these guys are few and far between. Guys who are special in every aspect and are both really athletic and solid, solid QBs. You'll get a lot more guys who are only one or the other. Because let's face it, if you have both, you have a machine of pure awesome.

 

That is why you have to recruit some of these guys. Because if that light bulb ever comes on, it's a home run for the program. But if it doesn't come on...well, it's a receiver or a safety. And that is why you can't only recruit these guys. Because in the event that you don't strike gold, you end up with a lot of receivers and safeties, and no quarterbacks.

 

The question is really what skills you value more. In my opinion, the quarterbacking aspects of the game are tops. After that, depending on scheme, the ability to make throws vs the ability to make runs could be a bit of a push. I'd still favor the throws before the mobility, but that QB polish factor is #1. I think you have to go after at least some recruits who don't have to be starting from square One in this area after they arrive on campus.

[The Dude]

We signed two of the top running "QB"s in the class because we had a big need at the position, and when one of them arrived on campus in the spring, we could move him to WR. It's different that way with athletes.

 

Nebraska can get "in" with top so-called pro-style QBs and it has shown that. Zac Lee and Sam Keller weren't high school recruits, but recruits nonetheless. Josh Freeman committed but bailed, probably because he decided he needed to go to some fancy coastal or southern school. Gabbert we sort of bailed on by moving in a different direction. We can get them, if we choose.

 

Now obviously we are not choosing to, which is a different thing entirely. And there are good football arguments for making that choice. Just don't say we have to work with these kinds of players because we're Nebraska and we can't pull in top passing QBs. I don't buy it.

My point still stands. If fact you kind of proved it. We didn't get top guys when we were trying for force a square peg into a round hole. We got leftovers like Lee and Keller. History has proved it. Whether you choose buy it or not.