What sort of offensive scheme do you think Frost will/should adopt?

[Jason Sitoke]

27 minutes ago, r06ue1 said:

Does anyone have the clips from the 2019 game against Ohio State where Frost brought out the triple option for one series (and it was working before Martinez overthrew the receiver for an Int)? 

That series was probably the high point of the Frost tenure.  And fittingly did not end with any points.

[White Flash]

i think the scheme we run now is fine.

 

we need MUCH better execution.  we don't have any consistent accuracy at qb and our wrs can't read a defense.  that's a huge problem, especially going into year 5.

[BaytownHusker]

10 minutes ago, White Flash said:

i think the scheme we run now is fine.

 

we need MUCH better execution.  we don't have any consistent accuracy at qb and our wrs can't read a defense.  that's a huge problem, especially going into year 5.

 

LMAO 3-9 worth of fine..

 

Bring me a Michigan, Michigan St, Iowa or Wisconsin style of O and ill be happy..

[ColoradoHusk]

39 minutes ago, r06ue1 said:

Also, for all of those that believe the triple option cannot work because there's too much team speed and other teams will just stack the box, consider that was also what many analysts were saying about Florida's defense before the 1995 National Championship game and how that turned out. 
 

 

I wish fans would go back and watch the NU offenses from the mid-90s.  While NU did run plenty of option, it wasn't the basis of the offense.  The basis of the offense was power hand offs, pitches, and play action passes off the power-run game.  By the '96 Fiesta Bowl, Osborne was incorporating a lot of spread offense methods.  I quickly went through the first 3 quarters of the 96 Fiesta Bowl and counted the number of option plays (including FB traps or passes off option items).  There was only 19 of them through the first 3 quarters.  That was not the base offense for Osborne.  Also, if you go through and watch the game, Osborne is implementing a number of spread sets with 1 or zero backs, and shotgun spread.  NU fans need to stop perpetuating the myth that Osborne was running a triple-option based offense.  Here is the 60 minute version of the Fiesta Bowl so you can see for yourself.

 

 

[White Flash]

1 hour ago, BaytownHusker said:

 

LMAO 3-9 worth of fine..

 

Bring me a Michigan, Michigan St, Iowa or Wisconsin style of O and ill be happy..

we would've screwed that up the same way.  if we could execute consistently it wouldn't matter what type of offense we have.

 

be it coaching/development, talent or both.  doesn't matter right now.  we don't execute.  we have a dysfunctional passing attack and it would be dysfunctional in any scheme.

 

we're bad at pass blocking, passing and running routes. top to bottom.

[Born N Bled Red]

8 minutes ago, BaytownHusker said:

 

LMAO 3-9 worth of fine..

 

Bring me a Michigan, Michigan St, Iowa or Wisconsin style of O and ill be happy..

 

[Huskers93-97]

19 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

I wish fans would go back and watch the NU offenses from the mid-90s.  While NU did run plenty of option, it wasn't the basis of the offense.  The basis of the offense was power hand offs, pitches, and play action passes off the power-run game.  By the '96 Fiesta Bowl, Osborne was incorporating a lot of spread offense methods.  I quickly went through the first 3 quarters of the 96 Fiesta Bowl and counted the number of option plays (including FB traps or passes off option items).  There was only 19 of them through the first 3 quarters.  That was not the base offense for Osborne.  Also, if you go through and watch the game, Osborne is implementing a number of spread sets with 1 or zero backs, and shotgun spread.  NU fans need to stop perpetuating the myth that Osborne was running a triple-option based offense.  Here is the 60 minute version of the Fiesta Bowl so you can see for yourself.

 

 

I would bet the number of option plays ran in 97 went down even more. I think it would have always been a staple of Osborne system. But it was becoming a smaller percentage over time as he was diversifying.

[ColoradoHusk]

1 minute ago, Huskers93-97 said:

I would bet the number of option plays ran in 97 went down even more. I think it would have always been a staple of Osborne system. But it was becoming a smaller percentage over time as he was diversifying.

But according to a lot of NU fans, Frost running draws out of the shotgun and having the I-back be the lead blocker is basically the same as the wing-bone option.  When Osborne was asked about offenses well after his retirement, he said multiple times that his offense was evolving and he would probably run a similar offense to what Urban Meyer was running at Florida and Ohio State.  But, NU fans only want to think Osborne=full-house, triple option with a fullback.

[Jeremy]

18 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

But according to a lot of NU fans, Frost running draws out of the shotgun and having the I-back be the lead blocker is basically the same as the wing-bone option.  When Osborne was asked about offenses well after his retirement, he said multiple times that his offense was evolving and he would probably run a similar offense to what Urban Meyer was running at Florida and Ohio State.  But, NU fans only want to think Osborne=full-house, triple option with a fullback.

Obviously, I'm a flexbone guy, but I would be fine with an Urban Meyer-style scheme. The problem is that we would need Urban Meyer to run it. I would say the Buckeyes have changed a good deal since Day took the helm. Another issue, though, is that we would need a QB that is, at the very least, moderately accurate with his passing. We haven't had a guy like that since...Joey Ganz?

[Jason Sitoke]

1 hour ago, ColoradoHusk said:

I wish fans would go back and watch the NU offenses from the mid-90s.  While NU did run plenty of option, it wasn't the basis of the offense.  The basis of the offense was power hand offs, pitches, and play action passes off the power-run game.  By the '96 Fiesta Bowl, Osborne was incorporating a lot of spread offense methods.  I quickly went through the first 3 quarters of the 96 Fiesta Bowl and counted the number of option plays (including FB traps or passes off option items).  There was only 19 of them through the first 3 quarters.  That was not the base offense for Osborne.  Also, if you go through and watch the game, Osborne is implementing a number of spread sets with 1 or zero backs, and shotgun spread.  NU fans need to stop perpetuating the myth that Osborne was running a triple-option based offense.  Here is the 60 minute version of the Fiesta Bowl so you can see for yourself.

 

 

@42:07....still not a catch.

[The Duke]

1 hour ago, ColoradoHusk said:

I wish fans would go back and watch the NU offenses from the mid-90s.  While NU did run plenty of option, it wasn't the basis of the offense.  The basis of the offense was power hand offs, pitches, and play action passes off the power-run game.  By the '96 Fiesta Bowl, Osborne was incorporating a lot of spread offense methods.  I quickly went through the first 3 quarters of the 96 Fiesta Bowl and counted the number of option plays (including FB traps or passes off option items).  There was only 19 of them through the first 3 quarters.  That was not the base offense for Osborne.  Also, if you go through and watch the game, Osborne is implementing a number of spread sets with 1 or zero backs, and shotgun spread.  NU fans need to stop perpetuating the myth that Osborne was running a triple-option based offense.  Here is the 60 minute version of the Fiesta Bowl so you can see for yourself.

 

 

Excellent post!

 

Nebraska back in the 90's was NOT a triple-option offense. It was a Power Option offense, and when we did run the option it was almost always a single read for the QB after a token fake to the fullback. It looked like triple-option, but it was not.

 

Now to be fair we did have a play in the Osborne playbook called 11-19 Veer which was a true triple option. In 1996 we attempted to run that play only 16 times. In 1997 we only ran it 4 times.

 

Percentage of Option Runs in 1996 & 1997

• 1996 Option Runs - 19.1%
• 1997 Option Runs - 16.6%

 

The best way to describe Nebraska back in the 90's is that it was a multiple formation, multiple set, power running offense which used a multiple run blocking schemes and multiple double option concepts. We were far more likely to give straight hand offs to the I-back or do a play-action pass then we were to call an option.

 

Below is a basic list of our blocking schemes used back then, and remember Osborne had play-action passes off of ALL of these blocking schemes.

 

Run Blocking Schemes Used

• Inside Zone
• Outside Zone (Used with our outside stretch play, 41-49 pitch play, and double options)
• Counter Sweep 
• Counter Trap
• FB & QB Trap (Note our FB-Trap was used similar to how teams use a Power-O play. Our 32-38 Trap was essentially a power play with our FB running through the C-Gap of the offensive line. We also had an inside FB-Trap called 34-36 Trap.)
• I-Back & QB Draw

 

Percentage of Rushes (No scrambles or options) in 1996 & 1997

• 1996 running plays not including option - 52.4%
• 1997 running plays not including option - 53.4

 

Percentage of Passes in 1996 & 1997

• 1996 Passing Plays - 25.9%
• 1997 Passing Plays - 24.8%

 

 

I won't suggest Nebraska and Scott Frost go exclusively back to this kind of offense. I agree that the college game has changed to where you do have to pass a little bit more in order to be successful. However, I do think finding a power running element either from under-center or the pistol (not the shotgun), along with a strong play-action passing package would go a long way in helping Nebraska turn these close losses into wins.

[ColoradoHusk]

2 minutes ago, The Duke said:

Excellent post!

 

Nebraska back in the 90's was NOT a triple-option offense. It was a Power Option offense, and when we did run the option it was almost always a single read for the QB after a token fake to the fullback. It looked like triple-option, but it was not.

 

Now to be fair we did have a play in the Osborne playbook called 11-19 Veer which was a true triple option. In 1996 we attempted to run that play only 16 times. In 1997 we only ran it 4 times.

 

Percentage of Option Runs in 1996 & 1997

• 1996 Option Runs - 19.1%
• 1997 Option Runs - 16.6%

 

The best way to describe Nebraska back in the 90's is that it was a multiple formation, multiple set, power running offense which used a multiple run blocking schemes and multiple double option concepts. We were far more likely to give straight hand offs to the I-back or do a play-action pass then we were to call an option.

 

Below is a basic list of our blocking schemes used back then, and remember Osborne had play-action passes off of ALL of these blocking schemes.

 

Run Blocking Schemes Used

• Inside Zone
• Outside Zone (Used with our outside stretch play, 41-49 pitch play, and double options)
• Counter Sweep 
• Counter Trap
• FB & QB Trap (Note our FB-Trap was used similar to how teams use a Power-O play. Our 32-38 Trap was essentially a power play with our FB running through the C-Gap of the offensive line. We also had an inside FB-Trap called 34-36 Trap.)
• I-Back & QB Draw

 

Percentage of Rushes (No scrambles or options) in 1996 & 1997

• 1996 running plays not including option - 52.4%
• 1997 running plays not including option - 53.4

 

Percentage of Passes in 1996 & 1997

• 1996 Passing Plays - 25.9%
• 1997 Passing Plays - 24.8%

 

 

I won't suggest Nebraska and Scott Frost go exclusively back to this kind of offense. I agree that the college game has changed to where you do have to pass a little bit more in order to be successful. However, I do think finding a power running element either from under-center or the pistol (not the shotgun), along with a strong play-action passing package would go a long way in helping Nebraska turn these close losses into wins.

Excellent post, yourself, sir!!!

[Huskers93-97]

1 hour ago, ColoradoHusk said:

But according to a lot of NU fans, Frost running draws out of the shotgun and having the I-back be the lead blocker is basically the same as the wing-bone option.  When Osborne was asked about offenses well after his retirement, he said multiple times that his offense was evolving and he would probably run a similar offense to what Urban Meyer was running at Florida and Ohio State.  But, NU fans only want to think Osborne=full-house, triple option with a fullback.

I would love it if we ran the Urban Meyer, Tim Tebow offense. It was spread but physical power game at the same time. Tebow couldnt throw for s#!t- but it was good enough to win a natty or 2.

[r06ue1]

37 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

I wish fans would go back and watch the NU offenses from the mid-90s.  While NU did run plenty of option, it wasn't the basis of the offense.  The basis of the offense was power hand offs, pitches, and play action passes off the power-run game.  By the '96 Fiesta Bowl, Osborne was incorporating a lot of spread offense methods.  I quickly went through the first 3 quarters of the 96 Fiesta Bowl and counted the number of option plays (including FB traps or passes off option items).  There was only 19 of them through the first 3 quarters.  That was not the base offense for Osborne.  Also, if you go through and watch the game, Osborne is implementing a number of spread sets with 1 or zero backs, and shotgun spread.  NU fans need to stop perpetuating the myth that Osborne was running a triple-option based offense.  Here is the 60 minute version of the Fiesta Bowl so you can see for yourself.

 

 

There's a big difference between asking for a return to triple option (which has many variations, including modern one's) and asking for a return to the I-Formation which we ran in the 70's (the latter would never work today). 

You can in fact run the triple option from many sets, TO used the Pro Set for much of his. What I refer to is the more modern variations of the triple option that are being utilized today.

[r06ue1]

Also, Navy nearly beat Wisconsin this season with a triple option and look at their recruits (mostly 0 stars). When was the last time we were that close to beating them?