Husker Offense Looking for "Plus Twos"

[Enhance]

15 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

But, I see a difference in the zone blocking mentality that you mention where you're redirecting guys.....and expecting them to be pushed two yards back.

I'm definitely far from an expert, but what I think it boils down to is two things: S&C and what the scheme is trying to accomplish.

 

S&C is pretty straight forward - I think the playing field has really leveled itself out in the last 15-20 years making physical domination of another opponent more challenging. You can still get S&C wrong (oh hi Mike Riley) but there are more tools and knowledge available to get it right. As for scheme, I just think the spread doesn't really lend itself to that mentality of wanting/needing to knock guys down. The speed, the deception, the style. I think coaches place value elsewhere and need the players to execute a bit differently in order to have success.

[brophog]

16 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

But, I see a difference in the zone blocking mentality that you mention where you're redirecting guys.....and expecting them to be pushed two yards back.

 

Think of a play like an inside zone. The guard and tackle* will combo block, with the guard initial redirecting a defensive lineman to the tackle and then moving to the second level to take on a LB. That guard should definitely push that LB 2 yards and because you’ve created a favorable angle for the tackle to execute his block, he should be able to get his 2 yards, too.

 

This is why basically everyone runs an inside zone. Combo blocks allow you to get that important initial push on a defensive lineman.

 

*Just an example. The whos and whats will be based on front.

[Stumpy1]

Anytime you can knock an opposing player on his a$$, it's a good thing.   Shows mental and physical toughness. 

[BigRedBuster]

On 3/20/2019 at 7:13 PM, Stumpy1 said:

Anytime you can knock an opposing player on his a$$, it's a good thing.   Shows mental and physical toughness. 

 

I agree. It’s just much more difficult to accomplish that now on a reagulat basis with the equalization of strength and nutrition. 

[grandpasknee]

On 3/19/2019 at 3:38 PM, Undone said:

 

You're not wrong, but I'm going to nitpick slightly and add some context to your paragraph there.

 

Because of scheme (and probably speed at the I-Back position), we averaged more yards per carry. But on 3rd & 1, which team's offensive line you going with last season? I am unashamedly going with Iowa's. And that's one of the reasons we didn't score a proportional amount of points to the yards we racked up.

This is why "getting push" is unarguably really important, and especially in Big 10 play. If we had good push, we could have iced the Northwestern game. And we would have scored more points - at a minimum more field goals - by not having drives get stalled when we got into the opponent's half of the field but then failed on simple 3rd & short plays that got stuffed.

That's where I was going...the +2 will be huge on 3rd and / or 4th down situations.  Can't say how many times I've complained the last 10+ years that we couldn't just line up and get a first down when it was 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1.  Hope that ends.

[grandpasknee]

On 3/19/2019 at 4:35 PM, BigRedBuster said:

 

I somewhat agree with this.  It's obviously not nearly as easy to get pancakes now compared to back in the 80s when we were one of only a few teams who actually lifted and had nutrition.  So, expecting your O line to knock people down every play is a little unfair.

 

But, I see a difference in the zone blocking mentality that you mention where you're redirecting guys.....and expecting them to be pushed two yards back.

I'm no where near an expert, but I wonder if moving a defender a couple of yards back, or left or right isn't more effective in some ways than just knocking him down.  If you can move him two yards away from where he wants to be, you might also be causing congestion that prevents other defensive players from their assignments.  Kind of like battlefield strategy.  If you kill a guy, the other side is minus one guy.  If you wound a guy, the other side loses two to three guys that have to help the wounded one.

[brophog]

On 3/19/2019 at 3:38 PM, Undone said:

But on 3rd & 1, which team's offensive line you going with last season? I am unashamedly going with Iowa's. And that's one of the reasons we didn't score a proportional amount of points to the yards we racked up.

 

Iowa converted at a lower rate than we did. So did Wisconsin.

 

3rd and Short (1-3 yards) Rushing First Downs Conversions

Iowa 14-23 (60%)

Wisconsin 20-34 (58%)

Nebraska 27-35 (77%)

 

I don’t disagree that conversions of short yardage situations was a contributing cause for our poor yards per play stat. Part of that isn’t just conversion percent, though, it’s the number of attempts, and where those attempts take place at. 

 

Note: In general, Iowa was a much better 3rd down team, just not in this particular situation.

[caveman99]

That seems pretty agressive, normally invites only allow for a plus one......

[Nebfanatic]

8 minutes ago, caveman99 said:

That seems pretty agressive, normally invites only allow for a plus one......

This ain't your average party

 

[boach_clack]

On 3/19/2019 at 2:12 PM, BigRedBuster said:

OK, educate me.

 

Back in the day, we were coaching our linemen to blast off the ball and knock people down.  We measured success in pancakes.  It was awesome.  This was done more with a lot of communication along the line pre snap and each guy knew who he was supposed to block.  Fire off and go get him.

 

Then, we went to this zone blocking and I remember a point in maybe Callahan's era where it came out that our OC didn't really want our linemen knocking people down.  Seriously, I remember the discussions amongst fans.  The argument was that defenders on the ground got in the way.  They wanted the linemen to move the defender in the direction he starts and just move him farther than he wants to go so that it opens up a hole.  They were supposed to move the defender more down the line in one direction or the other instead of back.

 

So....now we have +2.  I'm liking what I'm hearing.  This seems to be moving back more towards old thought processes.  We want to reestablish the line of scrimmage with the defenders moving back.

 

So, am I correct in that we are going back more to what we knew and loved in the 80s and 90s where we want or guys firing off forward and attacking the guy on the other side?

 

I am far from an expert in blocking schemes.  All I know is I loved how we used to block and I hated zone blocking when it was brought to Nebraska.  

 

Teach me.

 

Thanks.

I dont think zone blocking is going anywhere.  It is still a pretty big part of the offense.   I do believe that they are preaching to be more physical at the point of attack.  You can still zone block and be physical.