Frost Installing Osborne's Playbook

[Undone]

22 minutes ago, PoloWearingBeaver said:

 

Lol jesus, Walters admitted the staff gave up on the game at 21-0 and are holding plays back for Northwestern. 

 

That's what he said. Do you think he says exactly what the team is going to do to the media?

Please tell me the answer is "no."

[ActualCornHusker]

I don't blame them for that. I just wish we would have pulled a series or two out of that formation earlier in the year. Say, against CU?

[PoloWearingBeaver]

5 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

That's what he said. Do you think he says exactly what the team is going to do to the media?

Please tell me the answer is "no."

 

I think you're focusing on the wrong half of the quote, the staff quit in the second quarter. 

[Mavric]

Just now, PoloWearingBeaver said:

I think you're focusing on the wrong half of the quote, the staff quit in the second quarter. 

 

No, that's not what he said.  That's what you're reading into it.

[Undone]

6 minutes ago, PoloWearingBeaver said:

 

I think you're focusing on the wrong half of the quote, the staff quit in the second quarter. 

 

I guess it's possible that your interpretation could be accurate. But on the flip side of that, when you're down by 21 points you're probably not going to come back by running out of the 'I.' You pretty much have to throw the ball typically.

So I'd lean on the side of interpreting it as "what good would it have done to run plays that can't quickly put points up on the board if it shows Wisconsin & Iowa some of our stuff for down the road?"

[CapoValley]

5 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

I guess it's possible that your interpretation could be accurate. But on the flip side of that, when you're down by 21 points you're probably not going to come back by running out of the 'I.' You pretty much have to throw the ball typically.

So I'd lean on the side of interpreting it as "what good would it have done to run plays that can't quickly put points up on the board if it shows Wisconsin & Iowa some of our stuff for down the road?"

We could have not lost by 41 on national tv, set a record for a gameday loss by a host and made a better showing for the recruits in town?  

 

I mean there are more reasons but those are a few for starters 

[Undone]

13 minutes ago, CapoValley said:

 

I mean there are more reasons but those are a few for starters 

 

We'll see what happens these next four games.

[CapoValley]

2 hours ago, Undone said:

 

We'll see what happens these next four games.

Indeed we will. But saying “we need to hold back because there’s no sense in showing everything in a loss” is a far cry from “this offense is explosive, no deficit is too big and teams are going to have to adjust to us”. Especially in a three score game in the first half. 

[Undone]

Just now, CapoValley said:

Indeed we will. But saying “we need to hold back because there’s no sense in showing everything in a loss” is a far cry from “this offense is explosive, no deficit is too big and teams are going to have to adjust to us”. Especially in a three score game in the first half. 

 

But you see what I'm saying though, right? You tend to need to throw downfield when you're down by 21, so isn't the whole "rolling out a bunch of new I-formation running plays" thing kind of a non-issue as far as the Ohio State game goes?

 

Your point is a good one. But just speaking for myself, I'd rather save the best stuff for the Wisconsin game. That's the most important game of each season for the foreseeable future.

 

Of course, people will pile in calling out the idea that we're actually good enough to not show our full hand. That's fine. 

[Jeremy]

18 hours ago, CapoValley said:

Indeed we will. But saying “we need to hold back because there’s no sense in showing everything in a loss” is a far cry from “this offense is explosive, no deficit is too big and teams are going to have to adjust to us”. Especially in a three score game in the first half. 

Well, we had 700 yds in the win over Illinois, which is pretty explosive. It's obvious we aren't explosive against teams like OSU, BUT...when we went all 1997, they DID have to adjust, did they not?

[CapoValley]

10 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

But you see what I'm saying though, right? You tend to need to throw downfield when you're down by 21, so isn't the whole "rolling out a bunch of new I-formation running plays" thing kind of a non-issue as far as the Ohio State game goes?

 

Your point is a good one. But just speaking for myself, I'd rather save the best stuff for the Wisconsin game. That's the most important game of each season for the foreseeable future.

 

Of course, people will pile in calling out the idea that we're actually good enough to not show our full hand. That's fine. 

Oh no, I’m not being run the ball guy, im just saying the claim of this offenses strength is that it’s fast and puts points up in a hurry. To say the game was out of reach is an odd one. 

[ndobney]

What percentage of the offense do you think this would entail. I would guess maybe 15%. Its a simple offense but it takes a lot of repetition and details to get good at it. I would think if you were going to put that much time into the offense you would do a little more with it then just make a wrinkle in the offense.

[Husker in WI]

3 hours ago, CapoValley said:

Oh no, I’m not being run the ball guy, im just saying the claim of this offenses strength is that it’s fast and puts points up in a hurry. To say the game was out of reach is an odd one. 

 

I think some of that has to do with misinterpretation of his answer. They asked Walters why we didn't go back to it later, not specifically the next drive IIRC. So the reason we didn't go back to it immediately could've been the look the defense was giving us, and the reason we didn't go back to it later was because at that point it was more out of reach than 21-0.

[CapoValley]

33 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

 

I think some of that has to do with misinterpretation of his answer. They asked Walters why we didn't go back to it later, not specifically the next drive IIRC. So the reason we didn't go back to it immediately could've been the look the defense was giving us, and the reason we didn't go back to it later was because at that point it was more out of reach than 21-0.

Plausible.  I wish we had a media bank that wasn’t worthless because there are tons of things I’d love follow up questions on and it would help with the speculation that goes on. 

[Guy Chamberlin]

On 10/2/2019 at 10:44 AM, Undone said:

 

I guess it's possible that your interpretation could be accurate. But on the flip side of that, when you're down by 21 points you're probably not going to come back by running out of the 'I.' You pretty much have to throw the ball typically.

So I'd lean on the side of interpreting it as "what good would it have done to run plays that can't quickly put points up on the board if it shows Wisconsin & Iowa some of our stuff for down the road?"

 

When your team is so physically defeated and demotivated, the #1 responsibility is to get their heads back into the game and give them a taste of success. You don't stand a chance of winning? Fine. Just show that you belong on the field, gain yards however possible, and get a man in the end zone. If they're expecting you to pass out of desperation, then run the ball instead.  Give players game-time experience. Let a bench player show his stuff. Keep playing with real stakes. Test that new play you've been practicing in game conditions. 

 

At the end of the day, an opponent will be watching game film. You'll always be showing them the breadth of the playbook. Most the time you're going for in-game adjustments --- they think they know you, and you have to mix them up. If you're depending on a new look or scheme you've never tried in big game stakes — and this bigger playbook demands practice reps -- it may not be worth it.

 

Or to put it another way, by the time we play Iowa, do we have anything we've held back,?  Does compiling losses while withholding looks make any sense? Or does it just allow excuses? And if you abandon the element of surprise the moment you get punched in the mouth, what's the point?

 

I not confronting you, Undone. Mostly just venting.