Difficulty of Changing Offensive Scheme

[Swiv3D]

 

 

 

 

I forgot bout Rich Rod. I lived in Michigan at the time and the Michigan fans make upset Husker fans seem like flower girls. Of course 3-9 and 5-7 are a lot worse than anything we have experienced in a long time. The Sparty fans loved every minute of it.

 

We went 5-6 and 6-7 in 2004/2015 tho

Don't forget the 5-6 season in 2007.

actually it was 5-7 in 2007

[Making Chimichangas]

 

 

 

I forgot bout Rich Rod. I lived in Michigan at the time and the Michigan fans make upset Husker fans seem like flower girls. Of course 3-9 and 5-7 are a lot worse than anything we have experienced in a long time. The Sparty fans loved every minute of it.

 

We went 5-6 and 6-7 in 2004/2015 tho

Don't forget the 5-6 season in 2007.

actually it was 5-7 in 2007

 

 

Oh..right.

 

[JJ Husker]

I'm not too concerned. They've already changed the scheme. Now they might actually have a QB that can run the scheme.

 

Could they have done better the last couple of years adjusting the scheme to the personnel they had? Probably, but that's water under the bridge now. The good thing is, they should not be starting from scratch h this year. The players should be familiar with what they want and now they actually have a chance of making it work.

[HuskerMerc44]

Riley is thinking long term.

He has a system in mind and he is building.

Mike knows what he wants and goes after what he wants.

[Elf]

It still amazes me that Fullmer ran an offense with one of the greatest pro-passing QBs of all time (P. Manning), and won the MNC the next year with a running QB. Why would a coach recruit these two players? The same situation happened at Oklahoma. Troy Aikman is lighting up the field passing, gets hurt and Jamele Holliway ends up leading Oklahoma to the MNC. Both of these cases look like coaches getting the best available talent and morphing their system to fit the talent available.

Jamelle Hollieway would have most likely beaten out Aikman eventually even w/o Aikman's injury. His injury ensured Jamelle would get the job over him so he transferred to USC where he had an excellent career.

[Elf]

 

 

We have gone through a couple of changes with Offensive scheme changes. We hear the excuse that it take time to put the scheme in place and to recruit the right players. How valid is this excuse? Tennessee went from Peyton Manning to T-Martin and won a MNC. TO switched from a pro passing O with Humm and Ferragamo to an option attack with no performance issues. Does changing offensive philosophy really take a couple of years with sub-par performance?

It's not an excuse but you will continue to believe it is.

 

Every coaching change situation is different and each brings its own challenges. Osborne simply changed the offensive philosophy, he didn't change the entire coaching staff. He already had significant talent and depth on the team. Riley had some talent when he showed up, but very little of it in depth.

 

Riley is building for the long term, I get it, you don't like that because you wanted results last year. We all did, but it didn't happen. Most of us moved on.

 

We saw the same thing with Callahan. TO and Tennessee made changes in scheme without staff changes, perhaps that helps.

 

With both Callahan and Riley we saw complete coaching staff changes. Osborne never had to deal with that even when he was changing his offense or defense. And he never did both at the same time. We're still comparing apples to green beans here.

[drfish]

 

 

 

We have gone through a couple of changes with Offensive scheme changes. We hear the excuse that it take time to put the scheme in place and to recruit the right players. How valid is this excuse? Tennessee went from Peyton Manning to T-Martin and won a MNC. TO switched from a pro passing O with Humm and Ferragamo to an option attack with no performance issues. Does changing offensive philosophy really take a couple of years with sub-par performance?

It's not an excuse but you will continue to believe it is.

 

Every coaching change situation is different and each brings its own challenges. Osborne simply changed the offensive philosophy, he didn't change the entire coaching staff. He already had significant talent and depth on the team. Riley had some talent when he showed up, but very little of it in depth.

 

Riley is building for the long term, I get it, you don't like that because you wanted results last year. We all did, but it didn't happen. Most of us moved on.

 

We saw the same thing with Callahan. TO and Tennessee made changes in scheme without staff changes, perhaps that helps.

 

With both Callahan and Riley we saw complete coaching staff changes. Osborne never had to deal with that even when he was changing his offense or defense. And he never did both at the same time. We're still comparing apples to green beans here.

 

Also, remember that Nebraska was already running some option, that wasn't the entire focus of the offense though. So, while some things changed and were morphed, other basic things like play call terminology, line call terminology and basic technique would not change entirely, nor did "chemistry" need to be developed with a new coaching staff. Much different situations IMO.

 

In the current situation, I would expect the offensive transition to go fairly smoothly, since there is no basic change in terminology, etc. The emphasis will be different, but the basics won't change all that much. While you are not likely to see much zone read or option, it is nice to see a version of the counter trey back. Hopefully backs can channel their inner Mike Rozier. If we can only get the O-line to channel their inner Dean Steinkuhler.

 

http://www.huskers.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=209848332

[Scratchtown]

We have gone through a couple of coaches changes with Offensive scheme changes. We hear the excuse that it take time to put the scheme in place and to recruit the right players. How valid is this excuse? Tennessee went from Peyton Manning to T-Martin and won a MNC. TO switched from a pro passing O with Humm and Ferragamo to an option attack with no performance issues. Does changing offensive philosophy really take a couple of years with sub-par performance?

At the D1 level. Its not an issue. Fans like to claim it as one so they can have an excuse for when the team stinks.

 

 

[Making Chimichangas]

 

We have gone through a couple of coaches changes with Offensive scheme changes. We hear the excuse that it take time to put the scheme in place and to recruit the right players. How valid is this excuse? Tennessee went from Peyton Manning to T-Martin and won a MNC. TO switched from a pro passing O with Humm and Ferragamo to an option attack with no performance issues. Does changing offensive philosophy really take a couple of years with sub-par performance?

At the D1 level. Its not an issue. Fans like to claim it as one so they can have an excuse for when the team stinks.

 

 

It absolutely is an issue.

 

The offensive terminology Riley and Langsdorf use are exactly what is used in the NFL. It takes most QBs 2-3 years of playing in a pro-style offense before they really begin to "get" it.

[teachercd]

 

We have gone through a couple of coaches changes with Offensive scheme changes. We hear the excuse that it take time to put the scheme in place and to recruit the right players. How valid is this excuse? Tennessee went from Peyton Manning to T-Martin and won a MNC. TO switched from a pro passing O with Humm and Ferragamo to an option attack with no performance issues. Does changing offensive philosophy really take a couple of years with sub-par performance?

At the D1 level. Its not an issue. Fans like to claim it as one so they can have an excuse for when the team stinks.

 

 

 

It really isn't a huge issue, Coach is right. Yeah you have to learn some new verbage but these guys are not morons and they practice and rep a ton. Now...where the issues might be is with certain players "fitting" but really learning the new stuff is not as hard as some of the fans would like it to be.

 

Side note. I once "installed" a brand new defense for a high school (3-5-3) during pregame, about 5-10 minutes on a marker board. Then another 5 minutes on the field. We lost the game 14-6 in OT...on of the TD's the other team scored was on a punt return for a TD. It was the least amount of points we let up all year by far.

 

Look at trick plays...you might practice those 5 times, total...and then you are good to go. The players get it.

[RedDenver]

 

 

We have gone through a couple of coaches changes with Offensive scheme changes. We hear the excuse that it take time to put the scheme in place and to recruit the right players. How valid is this excuse? Tennessee went from Peyton Manning to T-Martin and won a MNC. TO switched from a pro passing O with Humm and Ferragamo to an option attack with no performance issues. Does changing offensive philosophy really take a couple of years with sub-par performance?

At the D1 level. Its not an issue. Fans like to claim it as one so they can have an excuse for when the team stinks.

 

 

 

It really isn't a huge issue, Coach is right. Yeah you have to learn some new verbage but these guys are not morons and they practice and rep a ton. Now...where the issues might be is with certain players "fitting" but really learning the new stuff is not as hard as some of the fans would like it to be.

 

Side note. I once "installed" a brand new defense for a high school (3-5-3) during pregame, about 5-10 minutes on a marker board. Then another 5 minutes on the field. We lost the game 14-6 in OT...on of the TD's the other team scored was on a punt return for a TD. It was the least amount of points we let up all year by far.

 

Look at trick plays...you might practice those 5 times, total...and then you are good to go. The players get it.

 

If it's so easy to install a defense, then what was all the talk about Bo's defense being hard to learn about?

[teachercd]

 

 

 

We have gone through a couple of coaches changes with Offensive scheme changes. We hear the excuse that it take time to put the scheme in place and to recruit the right players. How valid is this excuse? Tennessee went from Peyton Manning to T-Martin and won a MNC. TO switched from a pro passing O with Humm and Ferragamo to an option attack with no performance issues. Does changing offensive philosophy really take a couple of years with sub-par performance?

At the D1 level. Its not an issue. Fans like to claim it as one so they can have an excuse for when the team stinks.

 

 

 

It really isn't a huge issue, Coach is right. Yeah you have to learn some new verbage but these guys are not morons and they practice and rep a ton. Now...where the issues might be is with certain players "fitting" but really learning the new stuff is not as hard as some of the fans would like it to be.

 

Side note. I once "installed" a brand new defense for a high school (3-5-3) during pregame, about 5-10 minutes on a marker board. Then another 5 minutes on the field. We lost the game 14-6 in OT...on of the TD's the other team scored was on a punt return for a TD. It was the least amount of points we let up all year by far.

 

Look at trick plays...you might practice those 5 times, total...and then you are good to go. The players get it.

 

If it's so easy to install a defense, then what was all the talk about Bo's defense being hard to learn about?

 

Talk...just talk.

 

Coaches love to be super "smart" and make things hard even though they preach all the time about "keeping things simple"

[RedDenver]

 

If it's so easy to install a defense, then what was all the talk about Bo's defense being hard to learn about?

Talk...just talk.

 

Coaches love to be super "smart" and make things hard even though they preach all the time about "keeping things simple"

 

Do you think Bo just wasn't good at teaching his scheme? Or what?

[teachercd]

 

 

If it's so easy to install a defense, then what was all the talk about Bo's defense being hard to learn about?

Talk...just talk.

 

Coaches love to be super "smart" and make things hard even though they preach all the time about "keeping things simple"

 

Do you think Bo just wasn't good at teaching his scheme? Or what?

 

I doubt it, I think what happens is (and I have done this too) you get your basic stuff installed quickly...so then you start thinking "Hmmm, we can install some more stuff here and there" and before you know it you have put in a bunch of stuff that you will never actually use. Once the game starts most coaches stick with that they know and trust.

 

Then the main thing to remember is this...the other team is trying to win too. So like when you have installed might be perfect IF the offense does exactly what you expect them too.

[MyBloodIsRed16]

 

 

If it's so easy to install a defense, then what was all the talk about Bo's defense being hard to learn about?

Talk...just talk.

 

Coaches love to be super "smart" and make things hard even though they preach all the time about "keeping things simple"

Do you think Bo just wasn't good at teaching his scheme? Or what?

Either bad teaching or really dumb players. I remember a few games under Bo when teams ran either play action or misdirection there was never anyone there for contain. No end or LB in sight. Once or twice I could blame it on the players but over an entire game/games that is on the coach.