Listening to Bennings Description of His Interview with Langs

[cm husker]

You're overstating my position. And that's fine. We'll see how things play out.

 

I hope you're right. Because I like Riley as a person.

[I am I]

Ultimately, I'll guess we'll see how it plays out.

 

I'll just say, there are a lot of average ways to approach a challenge. My opinion is that NU can't go along with the average if we hope to achieve above average success.

 

Changing things up and having no real identity other than an "all you can eat buffet" doesn't strike me as a winning formula.

 

But again, we'll see what happens.

I'll take your word for it.

I asked because when we broke down film, then studied it all week, all we did was talk about our "install" and how/what we were going to put in to put ourselves in position to win the game

 

Just crazy that you didn't put in specific packages, looks, lineups...hell, sometimes we put stuff in we hadn't done since spring ball to attack certain PLAYERS when they came in the game. Entire formations and shifts defending on who was in/out of the game. (Talking my college team I played on, not little league I coach lol)

 

I'm not talking full out going from what TO's philosophies and basics were to an AirRaid offense week to week, but yeah, put in packages.

[cm husker]

I get that and know teams attempt that. I have a preference for system offenses that don't really install different packages week to week. Yeah, if you have an athletic MLB or a safety who can do things in run support, you talk about accounting for them, but you don't install a ton of different packages to try to exploit it. Another example would be if you know a D runs a certain front, you'd adjust blocking schemes, but it's not like you look at it and say "oh, this team has struggled with pass defense based on two other games, so I'll try to emulate those other two offenses."

 

Just different approaches.

 

Maybe we are using the terms "packages" in different ways, though.

[I am I]

True

[Saunders]

I think there's a fundamental misconception what we're talking about here. There's a difference between changing your run/pass ratio, or utilizing certain plays in your playbook more against certain opponents due to weaknesses, versus installing new play packages week to week based on your opponent. I think that's what Benning's comments were about.

[Pedro Guerrero]

Is this from the radio show, if so which segment so I can listen to it over lunch?

I always enjoy Benning’s takes on things (unlike the OP of this thread)

[BigRedBuster]

This is kind of a ridiculous argument.

 

Nobody all of a sudden installs a complete package of plays they have never practiced before with the kids just a few days before they play a game. A football play is way to intricate to run as a team well to do that.

 

What coaches do (and I think everyone knows this and why this is so ridiculous) is look and see what a certain defense does and where they are vulnerable and then exploit that vulnerability.

 

Anyone who thinks TO didn't do that is clueless. Looking back at the 1995 season, our pass attempts per game were as follows 20, 14, 20, 36, 20, 15, 17, 23, 21, 15, 27, 15. So, we went from passing it only 14 times to passing it 36 times. TO and Gill did that because they knew they could be successful doing different things against different defenses.

 

And, what team did TO get "cute" against and pass it 36 times? Pacific. Then, at the end of the season, he passed it 15 times against Kansas then 27 times against OU and then back to 15 times against Florida.

[GBRFAN]

This is kind of a ridiculous argument.

 

Nobody all of a sudden installs a complete package of plays they have never practiced before with the kids just a few days before they play a game. A football play is way to intricate to run as a team well to do that.

 

What coaches do (and I think everyone knows this and why this is so ridiculous) is look and see what a certain defense does and where they are vulnerable and then exploit that vulnerability.

 

Anyone who thinks TO didn't do that is clueless. Looking back at the 1995 season, our pass attempts per game were as follows 20, 14, 20, 36, 20, 15, 17, 23, 21, 15, 27, 15. So, we went from passing it only 14 times to passing it 36 times. TO and Gill did that because they knew they could be successful doing different things against different defenses.

 

And, what team did TO get "cute" against and pass it 36 times? Pacific. Then, at the end of the season, he passed it 15 times against Kansas then 27 times against OU and then back to 15 times against Florida.

 

^ Great post

 

This is a nice summary and should be the end to this thread!!!!

[Red Dead Redemption]

Yeah, passing 36 times against Pacific was important... as we had injuries to our running backs. Good thing we passed so much, we might not have beaten them otherwise. That was a close game....

[VectorVictor]

 

It doesn't matter. Coaches can do whatever they want. But if the goal is to win championships, maybe you should copy the winning blueprint.

And coppying the Alabama blue print wouldn't be a winning formula?

 

Um, lol

 

 

Do we have enough wealthy boosters willing to pay players under the table to emulate 'Bama though?

[cm husker]

Yeah, passing 36 times against Pacific was important... as we had injuries to our running backs. Good thing we passed do much, we might not have beaten them otherwise. That was a close game....

 

I'm sure that TO was just reacting to be stellar run defense that Pacific presented based on his scouting report.

 

 

Anyway, looking at attempts alone reveals the lack of understanding about TOs system. It's not like TO had installed a new package of plays/personnel when his team's had 25+ attempts. In reality, he was just reacting to what a defense was trying to do to stop his system.

 

Another example would be the record setting performance against Minnesota where the gophers basically blitzed every play and NU countered by running option (for a touchdown) in ever play.

 

It's not as though TO installed extra option that week to exploit a Minnesota weakness.

 

The defenses reaction to the system is what dictates the play selection.

[cm husker]

This is kind of a ridiculous argument.

 

Nobody all of a sudden installs a complete package of plays they have never practiced before with the kids just a few days before they play a game. A football play is way to intricate to run as a team well to do that.

 

What coaches do (and I think everyone knows this and why this is so ridiculous) is look and see what a certain defense does and where they are vulnerable and then exploit that vulnerability.

 

Anyone who thinks TO didn't do that is clueless. Looking back at the 1995 season, our pass attempts per game were as follows 20, 14, 20, 36, 20, 15, 17, 23, 21, 15, 27, 15. So, we went from passing it only 14 times to passing it 36 times. TO and Gill did that because they knew they could be successful doing different things against different defenses.

 

And, what team did TO get "cute" against and pass it 36 times? Pacific. Then, at the end of the season, he passed it 15 times against Kansas then 27 times against OU and then back to 15 times against Florida.

All I can say is listen to the interview. What is described is the installation of new plays and packages of personnel based on opponent. It's quite common at the NFL level. I just don't think it's effective at the college level.

 

I'll try to find the link again. It was one of the segments from yesterday.

[BigRedBuster]

 

Yeah, passing 36 times against Pacific was important... as we had injuries to our running backs. Good thing we passed do much, we might not have beaten them otherwise. That was a close game....

 

I'm sure that TO was just reacting to be stellar run defense that Pacific presented based on his scouting report.

 

 

Anyway, looking at attempts alone reveals the lack of understanding about TOs system. It's not like TO had installed a new package of plays/personnel when his team's had 25+ attempts. In reality, he was just reacting to what a defense was trying to do to stop his system.

 

Another example would be the record setting performance against Minnesota where the gophers basically blitzed every play and NU countered by running option (for a touchdown) in ever play.

 

It's not as though TO installed extra option that week to exploit a Minnesota weakness.

 

The defenses reaction to the system is what dictates the play selection.

 

Well....that's pretty much what all OCs do.

 

Do you have a link to this interview with Langs? I highly doubt he is talking about from week to week installing and learning all new plays just for individual teams. I'm sure he is talking about exactly what you are saying here.

 

Now.....right now he probably is watching a lot of film of other offenses and learning what they do and plan on evolving his offense to adopt what other offenses have done successfully. All OCs do that too....including TO. Langs would then teach those plays in fall camp leading into the season so that those plays are in the play book for when they need them.

 

I fail to see what the controversy is here.

 

It seems to me like you are trying to make up a problem where there isn't a problem.

[Guy Chamberlin]

I know a lot of coaches try that approach (and it goes beyond "tweaks"), and a lot of them aren't very successful.

 

Every coach uses that approach.

 

Every football coach in the history of football.

 

Every successful football coach in the world.

 

Every good coach in any sport.

[BigRedBuster]

And...for the record, I remember TO specifically talking about learning certain plays and keeping them in his pocket for certain opponents later in the season.