POB

[ColoradoHusk]

 

Matt Ryan is considered by many to be a great QB, even elite. Did anyone else see throw he make directly to Lavonte David with less than 2 min to play?

 

These WCO/pro style passing systems are tough, even for the professionals.

 

The NFL is also full of elite running backs who get stuffed on third and inches, and/or shut down for entire ball games.

 

Consistent winning football is tough, even for the professionals.

 

The WCO is perhaps the most effective offensive system yet devised, and a decent high school quarterback knows how to run it.

 

If you think WCO is merely a pass-happy offense, I'll put that on the list of things you don't know about football.

 

I disagree with this statement. The WCO can be effective, but it's one of the most complex offenses in football. Most high schools and a lot of colleges have switched to the spread offense scheme because it's easier to coach and easier to run. Yes, the spread offenses may have similar philosophies with the WCO, but the spread offense has become much more effective in the high school and college game.

 

EDIT -- The spread offenses also enable a program to have an effective offense without needing the best talent on the field. The spread offenses don't require super talent at the offensive line. They don't require QB's with rocket arms and who can fit the ball into tight spaces. They don't require a stud RB, stud WR, and stud TE. They utilize the talent they have, the best way they can. They capitalize on spreading the field and finding the number and space advantages.

[cm husker]

 

Matt Ryan is considered by many to be a great QB, even elite. Did anyone else see throw he make directly to Lavonte David with less than 2 min to play?

 

These WCO/pro style passing systems are tough, even for the professionals.

 

The NFL is also full of elite running backs who get stuffed on third and inches, and/or shut down for entire ball games.

 

Consistent winning football is tough, even for the professionals.

 

The WCO is perhaps the most effective offensive system yet devised, and a decent high school quarterback knows how to run it.

 

If you think WCO is merely a pass-happy offense, I'll put that on the list of things you don't know about football.

 

 

Which is why it's dying at the college level (and even at the pros to some degree)...

 

I trust TO's opinions on offense, particularly around what's suited for success at Nebraska, and he's not a proponent of either the WCO or the elimination of a mobile QB.

 

And anyone who doesn't think that a true WCO (and Riley/Lang's version of it) isn't pass happy truly knows nothing about the history of that offense or the philosophies of its founders. Need I post quotes or are you willing to withdrawal your personal attack?

[4skers89]

Sounds like Riley wants to stick with Tommy http://www.omaha.com/huskers/mckewon-mike-riley-stays-upbeat-about-tommy-armstrong-sees-better/article_1bd1494f-6470-5a2e-97a2-2b765077b2e6.html

 

 

You add in the struggles against Iowa — when Armstrong made some errors that even his most ardent defenders can’t place on offensive coordinator Danny Langsdorf — and it wouldn’t be surprising if Riley took on that distant, matter-of-fact tone of voice coaches take when they want to put a player’s starting job up for grabs.

Riley does not take that tone and preaches optimism regarding Armstrong. Call it hopeful, call it odd, but Riley said he thinks the coaching staff can make Armstrong a better quarterback and mold the offense a bit more to his talents. And while Riley said there has to be competition in the spring for every job, it’s not as if all the quarterbacks have some clean slate. There will be a pecking order — and Armstrong is atop that order.

“No. 1, Tommy’s our starting quaterback,” Riley said, “and he’ll take the first turns (in the spring).”

No wavering. No proclamation for incoming freshman Patrick O’Brien.

[cm husker]

 

 

Matt Ryan is considered by many to be a great QB, even elite. Did anyone else see throw he make directly to Lavonte David with less than 2 min to play?

 

These WCO/pro style passing systems are tough, even for the professionals.

 

The NFL is also full of elite running backs who get stuffed on third and inches, and/or shut down for entire ball games.

 

Consistent winning football is tough, even for the professionals.

 

The WCO is perhaps the most effective offensive system yet devised, and a decent high school quarterback knows how to run it.

 

If you think WCO is merely a pass-happy offense, I'll put that on the list of things you don't know about football.

 

I disagree with this statement. The WCO can be effective, but it's one of the most complex offenses in football. Most high schools and a lot of colleges have switched to the spread offense scheme because it's easier to coach and easier to run. Yes, the spread offenses may have similar philosophies with the WCO, but the spread offense has become much more effective in the high school and college game.

 

EDIT -- The spread offenses also enable a program to have an effective offense without needing the best talent on the field. The spread offenses don't require super talent at the offensive line. They don't require QB's with rocket arms and who can fit the ball into tight spaces. They don't require a stud RB, stud WR, and stud TE. They utilize the talent they have, the best way they can. They capitalize on spreading the field and finding the number and space advantages.

 

 

The WCO is great in the pros when you have a plethora of talent and a lot of time to work on timing and all the nuances that go into coverage reads and audibles. It's also good at the pros because pros want some homogeneity due to free agency.

 

But in college, those reads are so much harder to develop due to lack of practice time. One of the big advantages of the spread is that it (a) usually takes a DB out of coverage, and (b) divides the field, and associated reads, in a way that makes it easier for QBs to identify where the open man will be based on coverage (which is why you see so much looking to the sideline for signals).

[Enhance]

 

Sounds like Riley wants to stick with Tommy http://www.omaha.com/huskers/mckewon-mike-riley-stays-upbeat-about-tommy-armstrong-sees-better/article_1bd1494f-6470-5a2e-97a2-2b765077b2e6.html

 

 

You add in the struggles against Iowa — when Armstrong made some errors that even his most ardent defenders can’t place on offensive coordinator Danny Langsdorf — and it wouldn’t be surprising if Riley took on that distant, matter-of-fact tone of voice coaches take when they want to put a player’s starting job up for grabs.

Riley does not take that tone and preaches optimism regarding Armstrong. Call it hopeful, call it odd, but Riley said he thinks the coaching staff can make Armstrong a better quarterback and mold the offense a bit more to his talents. And while Riley said there has to be competition in the spring for every job, it’s not as if all the quarterbacks have some clean slate. There will be a pecking order — and Armstrong is atop that order.

“No. 1, Tommy’s our starting quaterback,” Riley said, “and he’ll take the first turns (in the spring).”

No wavering. No proclamation for incoming freshman Patrick O’Brien.

 

I think I'd just call it the standard response. Unlikely a coach would throw his current starting QB under the bus.

 

I'm in a 'I'll believe it when I see it' mode with tailoring an offense to suit TA's strengths. I've personally felt they've had ample opportunity to make adjustments to fit his strengths this year and there were moments, even in the Iowa game (12 games into the season), where I felt they were trying to do too many things that didn't help TA. I don't want to set my opinion in stone, but, I'd be a little shocked to see serious changes in their mentalities.

[4skers89]

 

 

Sounds like Riley wants to stick with Tommy http://www.omaha.com/huskers/mckewon-mike-riley-stays-upbeat-about-tommy-armstrong-sees-better/article_1bd1494f-6470-5a2e-97a2-2b765077b2e6.html

 

 

You add in the struggles against Iowa — when Armstrong made some errors that even his most ardent defenders can’t place on offensive coordinator Danny Langsdorf — and it wouldn’t be surprising if Riley took on that distant, matter-of-fact tone of voice coaches take when they want to put a player’s starting job up for grabs.

Riley does not take that tone and preaches optimism regarding Armstrong. Call it hopeful, call it odd, but Riley said he thinks the coaching staff can make Armstrong a better quarterback and mold the offense a bit more to his talents. And while Riley said there has to be competition in the spring for every job, it’s not as if all the quarterbacks have some clean slate. There will be a pecking order — and Armstrong is atop that order.

“No. 1, Tommy’s our starting quaterback,” Riley said, “and he’ll take the first turns (in the spring).”

No wavering. No proclamation for incoming freshman Patrick O’Brien.

 

I think I'd just call it the standard response. Unlikely a coach would throw his current starting QB under the bus.

 

I'm in a 'I'll believe it when I see it' mode with tailoring an offense to suit TA's strengths. I've personally felt they've had ample opportunity to make adjustments to fit his strengths this year and there were moments, even in the Iowa game (12 games into the season), where I felt they were trying to do too many things that didn't help TA. I don't want to set my opinion in stone, but, I'd be a little shocked to see serious changes in their mentalities.

 

I agree it was probably a standard (and smart) response. Nobody including Riley knows how good POB will be next year. I'm not getting my hopes up for him. I think we'll see TA next season and hopefully some film study over the off season will make him a smarter QB. His mechanics will be about the same. They'll look OK at the start of the season and deteriorate as the season progresses.

[GOAT]

POB will be the starter by the end of next season; I have zero doubt. Riley has all of his chips bet on the development and success of POB. If he fails to deliver, Riley is gone.

[74Hunter]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Matt Ryan is considered by many to be a great QB, even elite. Did anyone else see throw he make directly to Lavonte David with less than 2 min to play?

 

These WCO/pro style passing systems are tough, even for the professionals.

The NFL is also full of elite running backs who get stuffed on third and inches, and/or shut down for entire ball games.

 

Consistent winning football is tough, even for the professionals.

 

The WCO is perhaps the most effective offensive system yet devised, and a decent high school quarterback knows how to run it.

 

If you think WCO is merely a pass-happy offense, I'll put that on the list of things you don't know about football.

I disagree with this statement. The WCO can be effective, but it's one of the most complex offenses in football. Most high schools and a lot of colleges have switched to the spread offense scheme because it's easier to coach and easier to run. Yes, the spread offenses may have similar philosophies with the WCO, but the spread offense has become much more effective in the high school and college game.

 

EDIT -- The spread offenses also enable a program to have an effective offense without needing the best talent on the field. The spread offenses don't require super talent at the offensive line. They don't require QB's with rocket arms and who can fit the ball into tight spaces. They don't require a stud RB, stud WR, and stud TE. They utilize the talent they have, the best way they can. They capitalize on spreading the field and finding the number and space advantages.

The WCO is great in the pros when you have a plethora of talent and a lot of time to work on timing and all the nuances that go into coverage reads and audibles. It's also good at the pros because pros want some homogeneity due to free agency.

 

But in college, those reads are so much harder to develop due to lack of practice time. One of the big advantages of the spread is that it (a) usually takes a DB out of coverage, and (b) divides the field, and associated reads, in a way that makes it easier for QBs to identify where the open man will be based on coverage (which is why you see so much looking to the sideline for signals).

Yeah,, all of what you and Colorado said are true. It's pretty much common knowledge.

[Redux]

 

 

Too much common sense and logic there. It's easier for some to pretend TA is a terrible QB and stupid.

Matt Ryan is considered by many to be a great QB, even elite. Did anyone else see throw he make directly to Lavonte David with less than 2 min to play?

These WCO/pro style passing systems are tough, even for the professionals.

 

There is a fairly obvious gigantic hole in your logic:

Tommy Armstrong was not recruited to play a pro style offense. If you watched at least one game this year, it was pretty obvious.

No hole at all. TA has enough skills at QB to have went something like 17-5 as a starter prior to this year.

 

 

This team was good enough to win 10-12 games against this schedule this season if we ran a system more suited for TA.

 

 

It's simply absurd that they couldn't grind out at least 8 or 9 wins against this schedule with TA at QB.

Think about this for a minute, what makes mor sense?

 

A) Change the system you want to implement in order to make it easier for the starting QB, who was not meant for pro style, to grasp it even though you will only have him for another year after your debut season.

 

B) Hope the starting QB has enough football smarts to grasp the system and improve as the season goes along. If he doesn't, you can replace him with a guy who actually fits the system.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

Too much common sense and logic there. It's easier for some to pretend TA is a terrible QB and stupid.

Matt Ryan is considered by many to be a great QB, even elite. Did anyone else see throw he make directly to Lavonte David with less than 2 min to play?

These WCO/pro style passing systems are tough, even for the professionals.

There is a fairly obvious gigantic hole in your logic:

Tommy Armstrong was not recruited to play a pro style offense. If you watched at least one game this year, it was pretty obvious.

No hole at all. TA has enough skills at QB to have went something like 17-5 as a starter prior to this year.

 

 

This team was good enough to win 10-12 games against this schedule this season if we ran a system more suited for TA.

 

 

It's simply absurd that they couldn't grind out at least 8 or 9 wins against this schedule with TA at QB.

Think about this for a minute, what makes mor sense?

 

A) Change the system you want to implement in order to make it easier for the starting QB, who was not meant for pro style, to grasp it even though you will only have him for another year after your debut season.

 

B) Hope the starting QB has enough football smarts to grasp the system and improve as the season goes along. If he doesn't, you can replace him with a guy who actually fits the system.

 

 

Ask Riley. He's (and many here upon the hiring) always said he would adapt his "highly adaptable system" to match the players' skill sets. The principles shouldn't be that hard to adapt, and it wouldn't require completely changing your system... maybe just not having said QB throw it 40 times in gale force winds, for example.

 

This team had plenty of talent, especially compared to the opponents it faced. It should have been able to grind out at least 9 wins. Instead, we got 5. That's a major red flag. And those blaming the current QB and foisting up the freshman are just rationalizing what was a horrendous result for this staff of "veteran" coaches.

[ColoradoHusk]

 

 

 

Too much common sense and logic there. It's easier for some to pretend TA is a terrible QB and stupid.

Matt Ryan is considered by many to be a great QB, even elite. Did anyone else see throw he make directly to Lavonte David with less than 2 min to play?

These WCO/pro style passing systems are tough, even for the professionals.

There is a fairly obvious gigantic hole in your logic:

Tommy Armstrong was not recruited to play a pro style offense. If you watched at least one game this year, it was pretty obvious.

No hole at all. TA has enough skills at QB to have went something like 17-5 as a starter prior to this year.

 

 

This team was good enough to win 10-12 games against this schedule this season if we ran a system more suited for TA.

 

 

It's simply absurd that they couldn't grind out at least 8 or 9 wins against this schedule with TA at QB.

Think about this for a minute, what makes mor sense?

 

A) Change the system you want to implement in order to make it easier for the starting QB, who was not meant for pro style, to grasp it even though you will only have him for another year after your debut season.

 

B) Hope the starting QB has enough football smarts to grasp the system and improve as the season goes along. If he doesn't, you can replace him with a guy who actually fits the system.

 

I think there is a middle ground in there. Riley and Langsdorf can implement their system, but also tailor it to their QB's strengths.

 

If they had been able to keep Wilson committed to NU, were they going to shove the WCO down his throat, or were they going to try and utilize some spread running concepts with Wilson, along with some WCO and spread passing concepts.

 

The best offense coordinators are able to adapt to the personnel on hand. We had a lot of talk about Riley doing that with TA, but there were moments where they put TA in a bad position due to their play calling.

[Redux]

 

 

 

 

Too much common sense and logic there. It's easier for some to pretend TA is a terrible QB and stupid.

Matt Ryan is considered by many to be a great QB, even elite. Did anyone else see throw he make directly to Lavonte David with less than 2 min to play?

These WCO/pro style passing systems are tough, even for the professionals.

 

There is a fairly obvious gigantic hole in your logic:

Tommy Armstrong was not recruited to play a pro style offense. If you watched at least one game this year, it was pretty obvious.

No hole at all. TA has enough skills at QB to have went something like 17-5 as a starter prior to this year.

 

This team was good enough to win 10-12 games against this schedule this season if we ran a system more suited for TA.

 

 

It's simply absurd that they couldn't grind out at least 8 or 9 wins against this schedule with TA at QB.

Think about this for a minute, what makes mor sense?

A) Change the system you want to implement in order to make it easier for the starting QB, who was not meant for pro style, to grasp it even though you will only have him for another year after your debut season.

B) Hope the starting QB has enough football smarts to grasp the system and improve as the season goes along. If he doesn't, you can replace him with a guy who actually fits the system.

Ask Riley. He's (and many here upon the hiring) always said he would adapt his "highly adaptable system" to match the players' skill sets. The principles shouldn't be that hard to adapt, and it wouldn't require completely changing your system... maybe just not having said QB throw it 40 times in gale force winds, for example.

 

This team had plenty of talent, especially compared to the opponents it faced. It should have been able to grind out at least 9 wins. Instead, we got 5. That's a major red flag. And those blaming the current QB and foisting up the freshman are just rationalizing what was a horrendous result for this staff of "veteran" coaches.

Yeah maybe.....or maybe it is simply a case of Tommy isn't very freaking good at running the system. Our WR corps did what they needed to, and half the time the ball never got near them.

 

Our game management sucked early on and halfway through the year. Not a secret, thats on the staff.

 

But throwing into double and triple coverage, missing open receivers, throwing when you are supposed to run, ignoring your check downs, forcing throws etc etc is all on Tommy.

 

The system we have in place is going to be pass happy. You don't have to like it but you better accept it.

[RADAR]

POB will be the starter by the end of next season; I have zero doubt. Riley has all of his chips bet on the development and success of POB. If he fails to deliver, Riley is gone.

Why is Riley always GONE if he doesn't do this or that to please you?

[cm husker]

Again, we ran the ball exactly as often as we passed the ball.

 

And if you honestly appraised the talent of this team, it made sense to get the ball to Westerkamp, Moore, Reiley and Carter as often as you gave it to Newby, Cross, Janovich and Ozigbo.

 

Our running game wasn't abandoned and it wasn't awful. It was precisely in the middle of the Big 10 pack.

 

I had predicted a breakout RB this year not named Newby. Maybe that's on the coaches. Let's see what they do next year. I'd be surprised if we don't rush more often.

 

And I'd prefer Tommy convert more passes he shouldn't throw into mad scrambles. That's what drives a defense nuts. It certainly works against our defense.

 

 

Forest for the trees man, forest for the trees. That's all I can tell you when you try to argue that because we ran almost as much as we passed that we weren't really a pass oriented offense.

 

 

Scrambling doesn't hurt a defense as much as designed runs, like the zone read, because a D isn't going to pull a guy out of coverage to account for pure scrambling. They are just going to adjust their rush techniques and lane integrity.

[Sargon]

 

Could we come up with a more flattering nickname/acronym than POB?

OSAL

Our Savior And Lord

 

TAO

The Anointed One

 

NTA

Not Tommy Armstrong