What is Our Offensive Identity?

[FAR2BLAZED]

Run the football and hope there isn't any turnovers

[HuskerBCS]

We are a running team ....... take what we want on the ground to set up easy passes for servicable passing QB's. BTW I hate the take what they give saying, I don't want to rely on the othe D to tell our Offense what to take.

 

Thank You!

[HuskerBCS]

When a quarterback sees a defense lined up to stop the running play he just called, and he knows they're willing to leave one of his wide receivers open, he -- or a coach on the sideline -- often change the play to exploit that. Some call it "taking what a defense gives you." Others just call it "football."

 

That is soooooooo much different than changing the way your offense is run each and every week based on the style of defense you are facing. There's no convincing you though.

[HUSKER FREAK]

Didn't they already say that they want to run an uptempo no huddle that uses the run to set up the pass. Based on what the defense gives us?

[bshirt]

When a quarterback sees a defense lined up to stop the running play he just called, and he knows they're willing to leave one of his wide receivers open, he -- or a coach on the sideline -- often change the play to exploit that. Some call it "taking what a defense gives you." Others just call it "football."

 

That is soooooooo much different than changing the way your offense is run each and every week based on the style of defense you are facing. There's no convincing you though.

 

 

Yes, you're right. More like a night and day difference.

 

In theory it sounds just great to just wave the magic wand and *poof*....you're an efficient spread offense....wave it again next week and *poof*.....you're an efficient power I smashmouth offense......wave it again next week and *poof*......you're an efficient fun & gun offense...... ect, etc.

 

For cfb with it's restricted practices an eligibility rules it's simply impossible to come even close to excelling at everything offensively. But again, you're right, we're not going to convince anybody.

 

Still though, there's legit hope Bo & Beck get it. SW couldn't/wouldn't and wanted "multiple", where we excelled in everything which resulted in the worst offense we had in over 40 years (2009). Ironically, it wasted arguably the best defense we've had the last 40 years.

 

Sure, vs the creampuffs "multiple" does indeed pay off as you can and will exploit any defensive weakness an opponent has. Even in 2009 our offense totally lit up the three SunBelt teams it played. Then we started playing BCS teams and it was "3 & out" all year long.

 

When playing a good team with a good defense is where having an identity offensively pays off. When the going is tough and the game is in question, running something you "really" excel at helps a lot. To excel at something, as Uncle Milt always said "you need reps". Lots & lots of reps. For cfb, that simply can't be done for everything.

 

GBR!

 

 

run the ball......stop the run.......win the game.

[HuskerBCS]

When a quarterback sees a defense lined up to stop the running play he just called, and he knows they're willing to leave one of his wide receivers open, he -- or a coach on the sideline -- often change the play to exploit that. Some call it "taking what a defense gives you." Others just call it "football."

 

That is soooooooo much different than changing the way your offense is run each and every week based on the style of defense you are facing. There's no convincing you though.

 

 

Yes, you're right. More like a night and day difference.

 

In theory it sounds just great to just wave the magic wand and *poof*....you're an efficient spread offense....wave it again next week and *poof*.....you're an efficient power I smashmouth offense......wave it again next week and *poof*......you're an efficient fun & gun offense...... ect, etc.

 

For cfb with it's restricted practices an eligibility rules it's simply impossible to come even close to excelling at everything offensively. But again, you're right, we're not going to convince anybody.

 

Still though, there's legit hope Bo & Beck get it. SW couldn't/wouldn't and wanted "multiple", where we excelled in everything which resulted in the worst offense we had in over 40 years (2009). Ironically, it wasted arguably the best defense we've had the last 40 years.

 

Sure, vs the creampuffs "multiple" does indeed pay off as you can and will exploit any defensive weakness an opponent has. Even in 2009 our offense totally lit up the three SunBelt teams it played. Then we started playing BCS teams and it was "3 & out" all year long.

 

When playing a good team with a good defense is where having an identity offensively pays off. When the going is tough and the game is in question, running something you "really" excel at helps a lot. To excel at something, as Uncle Milt always said "you need reps". Lots & lots of reps. For cfb, that simply can't be done for everything.

 

GBR!

 

 

run the ball......stop the run.......win the game.

 

+100000000000000000000

[Hammerhead]

If you're a coach or coordinator and a recruit asks you what your offensive identity is, tell them "Beat the absolute dog sh*t out of every defense we line up against".

 

That should influence their decision quite a bit.

[Guy Chamberlin]

When a quarterback sees a defense lined up to stop the running play he just called, and he knows they're willing to leave one of his wide receivers open, he -- or a coach on the sideline -- often change the play to exploit that. Some call it "taking what a defense gives you." Others just call it "football."

 

That is soooooooo much different than changing the way your offense is run each and every week based on the style of defense you are facing. There's no convincing you though.

 

You're right. You're not convincing me. Because it's not so different. You make adjustments week to week as well as in game. That doesn't mean they are wild adjustments or over-reactions. It just means a team with more weapons and more plays will have more options to exploit a defense.

 

You may think it sounds cool to declare yourself a smashmouth run-first offense that will inflict its will on ANY defense.

 

Then you run Burkhead between the lines 10 times and get 12 yards (against Ohio State) and realize you may have to mix it up. And only then, when you've diversified your offense, will Burkhead start ripping off chunks.

 

As Hammerhead says, every coach will tell every recruit they plan to be a smashmouth offense. And every OC watching tape every week is figuring out how best to take what a defense is most willing to give.

 

Again, the people bugged by this identity issue seem to consider the forward pass a sign of weakness. I think we've got the balance just fine.

[HuskerBCS]

Again, the people bugged by this identity issue seem to consider the forward pass a sign of weakness.

 

Then there are people just like you who believe the game has "evolved" SO MUCH that you MUST throw the ball in order to have a chance to win.

 

In theory it sounds just great to just wave the magic wand and *poof*....you're an efficient spread offense....wave it again next week and *poof*.....you're an efficient power I smashmouth offense......wave it again next week and *poof*......you're an efficient fun & gun offense...... ect, etc.

 

Take another look at this sentence....probably the best out of his post.

 

Guy, if you cant see the difference between making in game adjustments and audibles VS changing the style of offense you run each week, then there really isn't much more I want to discuss here.

[Danny Bateman]

[Stumpy1]

For the people that need to know our offensive identity, can you list the top 15 teams in the counrty and tell me what their offensive identity is. As far as I can tell from watching these teams, they all run the same thing. They are all multiple in what they do. There is no real identity to them.

 

I watched Alabama the other day and they would line up in the I and run power plays out of it and then turn around and run the pistol or a zone read or have 5 wideouts. To me, this is a jack of all trades offense. They are good at it because they have been running it for sometime now and will probably continue to do so. I believe we will get to that point in due time but I do not think it can be called a specific name like everyone wants.

[HuskerCarter]

I do believe many times that offensive players and Tim Beck has expressed that the offense we run is multiple and agressive. That should be enough for the media and fans.

[kchusker_chris]

For the people that need to know our offensive identity, can you list the top 15 teams in the counrty and tell me what their offensive identity is. As far as I can tell from watching these teams, they all run the same thing. They are all multiple in what they do. There is no real identity to them. I watched Alabama the other day and they would line up in the I and run power plays out of it and then turn around and run the pistol or a zone read or have 5 wideouts. To me, this is a jack of all trades offense. They are good at it because they have been running it for sometime now and will probably continue to do so. I believe we will get to that point in due time but I do not think it can be called a specific name like everyone wants.

LSU/Alabama are probably where we'd like to head. They don't have a specific offensive identity primarily because they aren't offensive teams at their core. Those 8 wins are defensive driven wins. Their team identity falls more on that side of the ball IMO. Both are more "power" teams though. That's why you can plug in whoever at QB and still grind out 11 wins a season. The only need 22-25 points a game for a win. Their defense will probably give them 7 of those.

 

Oklahoma State on the other hand has a clear offensive identity. It's also what carries their team.

 

Standford, the same way. Big in the trenches, pro-style system based around smart QB play. Doesn't mean they can't exploit a defense (washington) geared to stop that...but week in and week out they rely on their pro-style attack, dumps to tight ends, and luck finding receivers.

 

Boise State - same way.

 

Clelmson, likewise behind Boyd.

 

Oregon - I don't think I even need to describe their tempo and spread/read identity to you.

 

Arkansas goes back to LSU/Alabama description. This year they finally have a capable QB. In the SEC you don't need spectacular under center, just capable. The SEC offensive identity should just be "speed" across all teams. Get it in "insert speedy guy's name here" 's hands.

 

Michigan State - again more of a defensive team. As is K-State. K-State and Michigan State are 2 perfect examples of teams that are forced to rely on the defense because they dont' really have an identity. Especially K-State. If their defense fails them they lose, because there is no core to fall back on. They're still power w/ a mobile QB though. Michican state more dink-a-dunk w/ short passes.

 

Oklahoma - again easy to see their identity.

 

Wisconsin - again, easy to see their identity.

 

Nebraska, none. There's some option, theres some diamond, some pistol, some power formations. We've got a little spread, we used to utilize our tight ends a lot more but have gone away from that. We're tempo sometimes, more this year than last when they talked about it but never executed it. We are read/option, we will throw the ball 15 times in a row when up by 1, or run the ball 15 times in a row when down by 21. Who knows what we are .

[kchusker_chris]

I like the SEC style - because it's defensive driven. Their offense is based on speed. Whether they run out of the spread or a pro style attack they are geared to utilize their spead in different ways. I don't like teams like Oregon or Oklahoma State that have a very very specific identity/tendencies.

 

The main thing w/ the identity that I'd like to see is consistent reqruiting at the QB position. There for a while we were recruiting a pro style guy (Harrison Beck), followed by a dual threat (Josh Freeman), and then a pro-style (Blaine Gabbert, Lee, Witt) the next, followed by a dual threat (Spano) and then another dual threat (Green), a pro-style (Gabbert2), settling for a dual-threat (Carnes)....you get the point.

 

The offense is built around this possition. We need to be consistent in the approach we take to filling it IMO. There are miles of difference between Gabbert2 and Martinez. Where we planning on making that same HUGE transition as a whole with our offense to fit their styles as well?

[HuskerBCS]

For the people that need to know our offensive identity, can you list the top 15 teams in the counrty and tell me what their offensive identity is. As far as I can tell from watching these teams, they all run the same thing. They are all multiple in what they do. There is no real identity to them.

 

I would say 90% of teams in this day and age are trying to be multiple and they look very, very similar. Of those 90%, about 85% are mediocre teams who never really have any chance of winning a National Title. The other 5% are the teams like Alabama, Florida, Texas, etc who are able to attract the very best 5 star recruits. Nebraska is not in that top 5% which is exactly why we have been so very average the last 10 years.

 

We can argue about this till we're blue in the face. The fact of the matter is, Nebraska has to be different and unique in order to be among the best teams in college football. That is why we were so good in the 90's. If we continue to just go along with the norm in college football, we will continue to win 8, 9, 10 games a year, and never win another National Championship. Will will just be the nice team that once had an amazing run in history.