What Kind of Offense Are We Really Trying to Run?

[Elf]

 

So Osborne had 25 superior line classes in a row? I'll agree that once the defense came around we were the most dominate team in college football but for 20 years Osborne managed to win at least 9 games a year with a very average defense. If you are trying to tell me that teams now days can't do that Guy are 100% dead wrong. Go back and watch Baylors last 2 games from last season.

If you go by All-Conference, All-Americans and Lombardi and Outland Award winners than yeah, Osborne had a pretty good run with dominating offensive lines. It also showed in their dominating run offense, which was not achieved simply by running the ball a lot, but by recruiting specifically for a rushing offense. Nebraska was a destination for offensive linemen. But it hardly happened overnight. Really not sure what you're disagreeing with here.

 

And "average defense?" Don't know about that, either. Nebraska's defense made a huge difference during our 40 year run of excellence. I'm not sure what teams you are choosing to remember, but great Nebraska defenses gave up only 8.0 points a game while the lesser Nebraska defenses still gave up only 14 points a game. Compare that to the 26+ ppg Nebraska defenses have given up in recent years and you can appreciate the difference that makes in the offense you run and the games you don't win.

 

Guy to many people don't recall when Osborne's teams struggled. They only remember when his teams were doing well. I admit, there is a lot of good to remember but it wasn't all roses all the time either.

[RedDenver]

 

 

So Osborne had 25 superior line classes in a row? I'll agree that once the defense came around we were the most dominate team in college football but for 20 years Osborne managed to win at least 9 games a year with a very average defense. If you are trying to tell me that teams now days can't do that Guy are 100% dead wrong. Go back and watch Baylors last 2 games from last season.

If you go by All-Conference, All-Americans and Lombardi and Outland Award winners than yeah, Osborne had a pretty good run with dominating offensive lines. It also showed in their dominating run offense, which was not achieved simply by running the ball a lot, but by recruiting specifically for a rushing offense. Nebraska was a destination for offensive linemen. But it hardly happened overnight. Really not sure what you're disagreeing with here.

 

And "average defense?" Don't know about that, either. Nebraska's defense made a huge difference during our 40 year run of excellence. I'm not sure what teams you are choosing to remember, but great Nebraska defenses gave up only 8.0 points a game while the lesser Nebraska defenses still gave up only 14 points a game. Compare that to the 26+ ppg Nebraska defenses have given up in recent years and you can appreciate the difference that makes in the offense you run and the games you don't win.

 

Guy to many people don't recall when Osborne's teams struggled. They only remember when his teams were doing well. I admit, there is a lot of good to remember but it wasn't all roses all the time either.

 

Osborne finished on an incredible 5-year run. Fans tend to forget the 7-consecutive bowl losses and the offense struggling or getting shutdown by good teams through the late 80's and early nineties.

[Elf]

 

 

 

So Osborne had 25 superior line classes in a row? I'll agree that once the defense came around we were the most dominate team in college football but for 20 years Osborne managed to win at least 9 games a year with a very average defense. If you are trying to tell me that teams now days can't do that Guy are 100% dead wrong. Go back and watch Baylors last 2 games from last season.

If you go by All-Conference, All-Americans and Lombardi and Outland Award winners than yeah, Osborne had a pretty good run with dominating offensive lines. It also showed in their dominating run offense, which was not achieved simply by running the ball a lot, but by recruiting specifically for a rushing offense. Nebraska was a destination for offensive linemen. But it hardly happened overnight. Really not sure what you're disagreeing with here.

 

And "average defense?" Don't know about that, either. Nebraska's defense made a huge difference during our 40 year run of excellence. I'm not sure what teams you are choosing to remember, but great Nebraska defenses gave up only 8.0 points a game while the lesser Nebraska defenses still gave up only 14 points a game. Compare that to the 26+ ppg Nebraska defenses have given up in recent years and you can appreciate the difference that makes in the offense you run and the games you don't win.

 

Guy to many people don't recall when Osborne's teams struggled. They only remember when his teams were doing well. I admit, there is a lot of good to remember but it wasn't all roses all the time either.

 

Osborne finished on an incredible 5-year run. Fans tend to forget the 7-consecutive bowl losses and the offense struggling or getting shutdown by good teams through the late 80's and early nineties.

 

All they have to do is watch the 1990 Fiesta Bowl vs Florida St. 41-10 final score.

[BRV920]

What I would say to you Elf is that we made it to the Fiesta bowl and lost to FSU. Something we haven't achieved since we went away from a run based attack.

[Redux]

What I would say to you Elf is that we made it to the Fiesta bowl and lost to FSU. Something we haven't achieved since we went away from a run based attack.

Offensive identity does not depict a program. Coaches and Players do, it's all about how the two units gel together that determines a programs success in any given era.

[Elf]

What I would say to you Elf is that we made it to the Fiesta bowl and lost to FSU. Something we haven't achieved since we went away from a run based attack.

So are you implying that Nebraska can't achieve greatness again w/o Osborne's offense or something similar?

 

But yeah, we made it to the Fiesta Bowl to play a team that curbstomped us. 41-10. There is a reason Osborne made changes to his team on both sides of the ball. Once all those changes were in place we went 60-3 over 5 years and that is what people pine for, the 5 glory years. Well we all want the glory years to return and I believe they will. Whether that happens with a run first offense, balanced offense or an air raid attack remains to be seen. Personally, I'll enjoy watching Nebraska's offense no matter what style it is. Other people can choose to be miserable/sad/pissed....or whatever, if we aren't running their offense of choice, but that's a choice on their part.

 

*Edit* Solich hadn't gone away from the run heavy offense but very few people will argue that his offense was doing as well as Osborne's had been. Our slide into mediocrity and away from competing for championships started while we were a run heavy team. Thank Frank for that.

[Guy Chamberlin]

The biggest changes Osborne made in his run to glory were on defense.

 

Defense, turnovers, penalties and even special teams have had a bigger impact on Nebraska's success than individual play calling.

 

Actually, 3rd and 4th down efficiency have been among Nebraska's best offensive categories in recent years.

[Undone]

But honestly, this doesn't tell us as much about our offense — or any winning ratio — as it does about the weak link in our defense. You don't have to be a pass-happy team to exploit a vulnerable pass defense.

 

Agreed.

 

Or the fact that we had three losses where with just a little more space and push provided by our offensive line, we get that last first down and ice the game.

 

Tangentially, I'm much more concerned with Riley and Langsdorf's ability to learn how to play from the lead and finish out a fourth quarter than I am with exactly what our run/pass ratio will be this year.

[BRV920]

Not implying that Riley can't win here but to build a consistent winner that avoids 500 seasons we will need a dominate running game. Also Elf you said that we lost to FSU because Osborne called to many running plays against a stacked box. What exactly did he change in his offense from that game until he retired? Please enlighten me I must have missed it. There's no doubt that the changes we made on defense started that incredible run.

 

Not sure why you think Solich was the downfall of Nebraska football? That started the day Callahan was hired. I'd take Frank's resume over Riley's, Callahans, or Pelini's any day of the week.

[SABER]

Not implying that Riley can't win here but to build a consistent winner that avoids 500 seasons we will need a dominate running game. Also Elf you said that we lost to FSU because Osborne called to many running plays against a stacked box. What exactly did he change in his offense from that game until he retired? Please enlighten me I must have missed it. There's no doubt that the changes we made on defense started that incredible run.

 

Not sure why you think Solich was the downfall of Nebraska football? That started the day Callahan was hired. I'd take Frank's resume over Riley's, Callahans, or Pelini's any day of the week.

Lets not start this again, but he is correct, Frank was lazy at recruiting and a poor CEO. 7-7 was the beginning of the end of the run. There is no disputing that.

[Elf]

Not implying that Riley can't win here but to build a consistent winner that avoids 500 seasons we will need a dominate running game. Also Elf you said that we lost to FSU because Osborne called to many running plays against a stacked box. What exactly did he change in his offense from that game until he retired? Please enlighten me I must have missed it. There's no doubt that the changes we made on defense started that incredible run.

 

Not sure why you think Solich was the downfall of Nebraska football? That started the day Callahan was hired. I'd take Frank's resume over Riley's, Callahans, or Pelini's any day of the week.

You really don't know how Osborne changed his offense? He went to more power running and less option. I'll also remind you that as the offensive coordinator under Devaney and his early years as head coach Osborne ran a pro-style offense and we even had a pair of NFL caliber quarterbacks here.

 

At this point the bolded part can only be called willful ignorance.

[Guy Chamberlin]

I don't think anyone really knows how Nebraskan fortunes would have changed for better or worse had Frank Solich been retained.

 

Hard to imagine the Huskers getting back to the unprecedented run Frank inherited, so some downfall is in order.

 

But it's hard to imagine Frank posting Callahan numbers either. Most coaches have some roller coaster to their careers and 15 years of Frank Solich would likely have had at least as many ups as we've had with the three subsequent coaches.

 

I think Husker football just hit the reality that every other football dynasty has had to live with.

 

But for those who think the Solich firing was pure Pederson agenda, keep in mind how many Husker fans considered that 7-7 season something no Nebraska team should abide.

[RedDenver]

Not implying that Riley can't win here but to build a consistent winner that avoids 500 seasons we will need a dominate running game.

Change that to "need a dominate defense", and I'd agree. Heck, even a very good defense would be consistent 500 seasons.

[BRV920]

You Crack me up Elf! We ran less option with Frazier and Frost? That's comical in itself. And to push your opinion as fact when it comes to Frank is plain stupid. The facts are that Frank had 1 bad season then fired some longtime coaches and followed it up with a 10 win season and was terminated by Stevie P. So for you to spew that nonsense is laughable. We also know that Callahan had 2 losing seasons in 4 years. You guys and your revisionist history make me laugh.

[BRV920]

Went back and looked at the defensive averages during the 70's and 80's Guy and you are right those defenses were better than average but playing Big 8 schools helped out those numbers. What I should have said was that they got faster and more atheletic. Fair enough?