1620: Niles Paul on 1620 and his future/Offense's Change

[HuskerNMO]

I would Roll 212 to zoogies' post paraphrasing Niles Paul's interview where Niles said we switched offenses mid-Fall Camp, but then I'm of the opinion that Bo stated his intentions to run something resembling this offense when he first got here, and we've recruited to that end as well, and mostly I just like TDS and wanted to use Roll 212, too.

Bo has said so many different things about the offense, it's easy to pick a few. He's said many times how important it is to remain multiple.

http://bigrednetwork.com/story/can_bo_pelini_innovate_the_offense/

The word about the offense that we've heard the last few springs is "Multiple". It was a term thought of as a buzz word without substance. Nothing in 2009 appeared very multiple, as attempts to add variation in the offense often led to clear confusion, ineffective plays, short gains, or turnovers. That is until the Holiday bowl rolled around. After viewing Rex Burkhead in the wildcat against Arizona, as well as the precise, effective play of Zac Lee while running and passing, it gave me some hope. Coupled with the way the Spring Game turned out, and multiple doesn't seem like just a word anymore. It's a game plan.

But outside of what we've seen on the field in a bowl game and a glorified scrimmage, other clues point to a true transition to a diversified offense. We kept hearing about the word on Taylor Martinez's speed, Mike McNeil's move to receiver, and the leadership by Niles Paul increasing during the off season. And when Bo's thoughts on the offensive line came out at the Big 12 Media Days, pulling off a multiple game plan doesn't seem so far out of the question this year.

Shawn Watson last February, a summary of the column

http://www.omaha.com/article/20100220/BIGRED/702209799

Q: I understand you and Bo met with Tom Osborne and Milt Tenopir recently to talk running offense. How was that?

A: We just met for two days. Bo and I are so much alike in this way; we never, ever want to stay the same, always want to be evolving.

Q: Bo has said he wants to be more physical on offense. What are you doing to get there?

A: What we've talked about is we need to be more detailed. Physicality comes from running the football. But we have to do more with detail and assignment.

Q: Does this mean you will be running more out of more power sets with two backs? Can you run the ball and be physical out of the shotgun?

A: Absolutely. But here's the thing you have to know about us, we're not just a spread team or a gun team. That's not us. We want to be multiple, yet simple.

Being beneath the center and in the gun is important because the game is evolving back a little bit. Everybody runs a shotgun offense. It's evolving. We want to be under the center, and we want to be in the gun. That gives us multiplicity.''

Q: Will we see more fullback next year?

A: Yes. That's another part of our multiplicity. What you saw us do in the Holiday Bowl, that's what we're going to be doing. So you saw us under center, saw us in the shotgun and in multiple personnel groups and multiple formations. We're not changing much.

 

[zoogs]

A: Yes. That's another part of our multiplicity. What you saw us do in the Holiday Bowl, that's what we're going to be doing. So you saw us under center, saw us in the shotgun and in multiple personnel groups and multiple formations. We're not changing much.

Oops, huh?

Wonder if the stuff about detail and assignments isn't a little dig at Barney...well, not a dig, but an unheeded suggestion.

 

[HuskerNMO]

I've posted statistics to back up my claims, and you've used nothing.

You said CU's coach was "just fired", and implied they were playing poorly. Yet I refuted that saying he'd been fired 2 1/2 weeks prior and they had won 2 straight after that, but you gloss over that. Obviously I can't change your opinion, but at least mine is based on something other than ignorance of statistics.

You mean the stats where Cody was +8 against cellar-dwelling CU and mid-level ISU? Coulda swore I posted stats showing that even craptastic QBs from KSU and KU did better against the same competition.

But if that's the only tune you know, I say play on. :band

How do the other QB's relate to Taylor? How does that change the fact that Taylor did next to nothing while injured? All it does is show that some other quarterbacks performed better than Taylor once he was injured, which I agree with. Show me where I said Cody was a great quarterback, my only point is he was a better option than an injured Taylor Martinez. Cody in his 2 games was 3 TD's better against the other D's average than when Taylor was injured, the stats show that plainly. And you can say the competition that Taylor played was better, but KU, A&M, OU and Washington only combined to average a FG less than ISU and CU, the difference isn't that great, let alone 21 PPG different.

 

[knapplc]

I would Roll 212 to zoogies' post paraphrasing Niles Paul's interview where Niles said we switched offenses mid-Fall Camp, but then I'm of the opinion that Bo stated his intentions to run something resembling this offense when he first got here, and we've recruited to that end as well, and mostly I just like TDS and wanted to use Roll 212, too.

Bo has said so many different things about the offense, it's easy to pick a few. He's said many times how important it is to remain multiple.

http://bigrednetwork.com/story/can_bo_pelini_innovate_the_offense/

The word about the offense that we've heard the last few springs is "Multiple". It was a term thought of as a buzz word without substance. Nothing in 2009 appeared very multiple, as attempts to add variation in the offense often led to clear confusion, ineffective plays, short gains, or turnovers. That is until the Holiday bowl rolled around. After viewing Rex Burkhead in the wildcat against Arizona, as well as the precise, effective play of Zac Lee while running and passing, it gave me some hope. Coupled with the way the Spring Game turned out, and multiple doesn't seem like just a word anymore. It's a game plan.

But outside of what we've seen on the field in a bowl game and a glorified scrimmage, other clues point to a true transition to a diversified offense. We kept hearing about the word on Taylor Martinez's speed, Mike McNeil's move to receiver, and the leadership by Niles Paul increasing during the off season. And when Bo's thoughts on the offensive line came out at the Big 12 Media Days, pulling off a multiple game plan doesn't seem so far out of the question this year.

Are you sure you're quoting the correct thing? This does nothing to refute the quote of mine up there. This is the opinion of Tom Cudd, circa August, 2010. There isn't a quote from Bo refuting what I just said. It's some schmoe's opinion.

Shawn Watson last February, a summary of the column

http://www.omaha.com/article/20100220/BIGRED/702209799

With all due respect, this is the same Shawn Watson who's been shown the door the last two seasons. The same Shawn Watson who can't seem to score TDs in big games.

Quoting Watson on the purpose and direction of this offense is like quoting a prostitute discussing abstinence. He's the root of the problem, not an explanation of the solution.

 

[knapplc]

I've posted statistics to back up my claims, and you've used nothing.

You said CU's coach was "just fired", and implied they were playing poorly. Yet I refuted that saying he'd been fired 2 1/2 weeks prior and they had won 2 straight after that, but you gloss over that. Obviously I can't change your opinion, but at least mine is based on something other than ignorance of statistics.

You mean the stats where Cody was +8 against cellar-dwelling CU and mid-level ISU? Coulda swore I posted stats showing that even craptastic QBs from KSU and KU did better against the same competition.

But if that's the only tune you know, I say play on. :band

How do the other QB's relate to Taylor? How does that change the fact that Taylor did next to nothing while injured? All it does is show that some other quarterbacks performed better than Taylor once he was injured, which I agree with. Show me where I said Cody was a great quarterback, my only point is he was a better option than an injured Taylor Martinez. Cody in his 2 games was 3 TD's better against the other D's average than when Taylor was injured, the stats show that plainly. And you can say the competition that Taylor played was better, but KU, A&M, OU and Washington only combined to average a FG less than ISU and CU, the difference isn't that great, let alone 21 PPG different.

They don't relate to Taylor. Follow along.

They relate to CODY GREEN. You're posting stats which you think show that Cody coulda/shoulda/woulda done better had he been given command, and your stats don't support that. Your stats support the fact that Cody is comparable to average, middle-tier QBs in the Big XII like Mecham and Coffman - the kind who get annihilated by tough competition.

With an injured Taylor Martinez we lost to A&M and OU by six combined points. There is NOTHING you've shown that shows Cody would have been the difference in those games. I've shown stats which show that against similar competition, a quarterback who compares to Cody Green got destroyed by A&M.

Cody would have been demolished by OU and A&M. Cody Green could not have overcome the total team meltdown we experienced against Washington. Cody wasn't even good enough to get the "save us" duty when our WRs developed a case of the dropsies against Texas. He looked absolutely horrible against Washington in September.

The best two things Cody Green has going for him right now are Potential and Backup Quarterback status. Everyone loves the backup - he's the best player on the team.

 

[HuskerNMO]

I would Roll 212 to zoogies' post paraphrasing Niles Paul's interview where Niles said we switched offenses mid-Fall Camp, but then I'm of the opinion that Bo stated his intentions to run something resembling this offense when he first got here, and we've recruited to that end as well, and mostly I just like TDS and wanted to use Roll 212, too.

Bo has said so many different things about the offense, it's easy to pick a few. He's said many times how important it is to remain multiple.

http://bigrednetwork...te_the_offense/

The word about the offense that we've heard the last few springs is "Multiple". It was a term thought of as a buzz word without substance. Nothing in 2009 appeared very multiple, as attempts to add variation in the offense often led to clear confusion, ineffective plays, short gains, or turnovers. That is until the Holiday bowl rolled around. After viewing Rex Burkhead in the wildcat against Arizona, as well as the precise, effective play of Zac Lee while running and passing, it gave me some hope. Coupled with the way the Spring Game turned out, and multiple doesn't seem like just a word anymore. It's a game plan.

But outside of what we've seen on the field in a bowl game and a glorified scrimmage, other clues point to a true transition to a diversified offense. We kept hearing about the word on Taylor Martinez's speed, Mike McNeil's move to receiver, and the leadership by Niles Paul increasing during the off season. And when Bo's thoughts on the offensive line came out at the Big 12 Media Days, pulling off a multiple game plan doesn't seem so far out of the question this year.

Are you sure you're quoting the correct thing? This does nothing to refute the quote of mine up there. This is the opinion of Tom Cudd, circa August, 2010. There isn't a quote from Bo refuting what I just said. It's some schmoe's opinion.

Shawn Watson last February, a summary of the column

http://www.omaha.com...IGRED/702209799

With all due respect, this is the same Shawn Watson who's been shown the door the last two seasons. The same Shawn Watson who can't seem to score TDs in big games.

Quoting Watson on the purpose and direction of this offense is like quoting a prostitute discussing abstinence. He's the root of the problem, not an explanation of the solution.

The buzz word has been multiple, from Watson and Pelini.

With all due respect, Shawn Watson is still in charge of the offense at this point, and it doesn't appear that will change. Unless he's fired before the start of the season, Bo thinks he's the right guy for the job.

Even if the execution isn't there, Watson is the leader of the offense, he's the one with the playbook, he's the one scheming and calling the plays. I think I'll trust his quoted word over your recollection of what Bo said in the past, especially since you haven't managed to actually find a source.

 

[HuskerNMO]

I've posted statistics to back up my claims, and you've used nothing.

You said CU's coach was "just fired", and implied they were playing poorly. Yet I refuted that saying he'd been fired 2 1/2 weeks prior and they had won 2 straight after that, but you gloss over that. Obviously I can't change your opinion, but at least mine is based on something other than ignorance of statistics.

You mean the stats where Cody was +8 against cellar-dwelling CU and mid-level ISU? Coulda swore I posted stats showing that even craptastic QBs from KSU and KU did better against the same competition.

But if that's the only tune you know, I say play on. :band

How do the other QB's relate to Taylor? How does that change the fact that Taylor did next to nothing while injured? All it does is show that some other quarterbacks performed better than Taylor once he was injured, which I agree with. Show me where I said Cody was a great quarterback, my only point is he was a better option than an injured Taylor Martinez. Cody in his 2 games was 3 TD's better against the other D's average than when Taylor was injured, the stats show that plainly. And you can say the competition that Taylor played was better, but KU, A&M, OU and Washington only combined to average a FG less than ISU and CU, the difference isn't that great, let alone 21 PPG different.

They don't relate to Taylor. Follow along.

They relate to CODY GREEN. You're posting stats which you think show that Cody coulda/shoulda/woulda done better had he been given command, and your stats don't support that. Your stats support the fact that Cody is comparable to average, middle-tier QBs in the Big XII like Mecham and Coffman - the kind who get annihilated by tough competition.

With an injured Taylor Martinez we lost to A&M and OU by six combined points. There is NOTHING you've shown that shows Cody would have been the difference in those games. I've shown stats which show that against similar competition, a quarterback who compares to Cody Green got destroyed by A&M.

Cody would have been demolished by OU and A&M. Cody Green could not have overcome the total team meltdown we experienced against Washington. Cody wasn't even good enough to get the "save us" duty when our WRs developed a case of the dropsies against Texas. He looked absolutely horrible against Washington in September.

The best two things Cody Green has going for him right now are Potential and Backup Quarterback status. Everyone loves the backup - he's the best player on the team.

There is NOTHING you have shown that says he wouldn't have been. Fact is, when Cody was given the week to practice with the 1's and have a game plan put in place for him, we scored 31 and 45 points. When Taylor was injured in the last 4 games, we scored 20 against a team worse than Colorado or Iowa State, 6 against A&M (a mediocre LSU O hung 41 on them), 20 against OU (which Taylor had little to do with), and 7 against Washington.

Taylor was demolished by A&M and OU, there's nothing showing that Cody would have done worse. You don't think Cody could have managed to get sacked 7 times, throw a pick and fumble the ball 3 times against OU? Burkhead or 1/2 of our roster could have managed that. I guess I should clarify that this isn't as much about Cody being great, which I don't think I've claimed here, it's about an injured Taylor Martinez being essentially worthless after his injury. And showing that Taylor only produced against crap defenses, which is the same thing you're holding against Cody, and everyone holds against Zac Lee.

 

[knapplc]

The fact is that, unless you think Bo, Watson, and the rest of the coaching staff are complete boneheads, they chose an injured Taylor to start over a healthy Cody Green. That has to tell you enough right there.

First thing in the beginning of the season I was driving the Zac Lee bus. I still think the guy is aces, and I still want some "insider" to come in here and assure us that Zac really, truly could not play. I ran into Zac a couple of times and he looked healthy as a horse to me. I'm guessing there's a reason he didn't start, I'm hoping it's a better reason than "I just like Taylor more" but I don't have high hopes of that right now.

 

[HuskerNMO]

The fact is that, unless you think Bo, Watson, and the rest of the coaching staff are complete boneheads, they chose an injured Taylor to start over a healthy Cody Green. That has to tell you enough right there.

First thing in the beginning of the season I was driving the Zac Lee bus. I still think the guy is aces, and I still want some "insider" to come in here and assure us that Zac really, truly could not play. I ran into Zac a couple of times and he looked healthy as a horse to me. I'm guessing there's a reason he didn't start, I'm hoping it's a better reason than "I just like Taylor more" but I don't have high hopes of that right now.

They made some mistakes, I'm not convinced that Watson wanted Taylor to start the year, and I've been told that Watson wanted to put Cody in several times and was vetoed by Bo. But that's just rumor and speculation, I do know that Zac couldn't go vs Iowa State, and Cody wasn't supposed to play in the Kansas game. Beyond that I have no idea, but if I find out more I'll let you know. I may have a new "source" :corndance

 

[knapplc]

I must say that I've enjoyed throwing stats at each other. It's not football season, but it passes the time.

 

[HuskerNMO]

I must say that I've enjoyed throwing stats at each other. It's not football season, but it passes the time.

At least it's signing day tomorrow, and it gives me something to do after a foot of snow got dumped on us today

 

[Hercules]

Really everyone is so impressed by Taylor for just a few games against mediocre defenses.

Coming from a guy who thinks that Cody Green is a better QB based on blowing out a Colorado team that had just fired their head coach, and a close call with Iowa State, the above statement means absolutely nothing to me.

If you've read, I've said Taylor was a better option when healthy talent wise.

Roll 212:

I would take a healthy Cody over an injured Taylor any day, I would also take a healthy Cody over a healthy Taylor as our starting QB.

Best option when healthy? Probably, yes. When injured? Definitely not.

Of course you cut out the rest of the post where I said that was due to leadership and ability to run our offense. And that was an opinion, which is all you've posted in this thread. I've posted statistics to back up my claims, and you've used nothing.

You said CU's coach was "just fired", and implied they were playing poorly. Yet I refuted that saying he'd been fired 2 1/2 weeks prior and they had won 2 straight after that, but you gloss over that. Obviously I can't change your opinion, but at least mine is based on something other than ignorance of statistics.

Haha, so your argument is that CU hadn't fired their coach literally the day they played us, but an entire 2 1/2 weeks before? Gee, I wonder why I might have ignored that refutation...

As far as statistics go, Texas A&M and OU both ranked about 30 slots ahead of Colorado and Iowa State in total defense. Also, who are you kidding, it's Colorado and Iowa State! Kody Spano would have had decent games against those guys. Western Kentucky's total defense finished ranked ahead of both Colorado and Iowa State. Does that mean Taylor deserves more credit for his performance in that game?

Anyways, you want statistics, so here ya go:

Completion %

Martinez: 59.2%

2009 Lee: 58.6%

Green: 55%

Lee: 55%

2009 Green: 53.2%

Efficiency Rating

Martinez: 138.78

2009 Lee: 126.89

Green: 115.77

2009 Green: 100.37

Lee: 97.84

Yards per Carry

Martinez: 6.0

2009 Green: 5.1

Green: 2.6

Lee: 3.8

2009 Lee: 1.7

Whaddya know. Martinez is tops in every category.

 

[HuskerNMO]

Really everyone is so impressed by Taylor for just a few games against mediocre defenses.

Coming from a guy who thinks that Cody Green is a better QB based on blowing out a Colorado team that had just fired their head coach, and a close call with Iowa State, the above statement means absolutely nothing to me.

If you've read, I've said Taylor was a better option when healthy talent wise.

Roll 212:

I would take a healthy Cody over an injured Taylor any day, I would also take a healthy Cody over a healthy Taylor as our starting QB.

Best option when healthy? Probably, yes. When injured? Definitely not.

Of course you cut out the rest of the post where I said that was due to leadership and ability to run our offense. And that was an opinion, which is all you've posted in this thread. I've posted statistics to back up my claims, and you've used nothing.

You said CU's coach was "just fired", and implied they were playing poorly. Yet I refuted that saying he'd been fired 2 1/2 weeks prior and they had won 2 straight after that, but you gloss over that. Obviously I can't change your opinion, but at least mine is based on something other than ignorance of statistics.

Haha, so your argument is that CU hadn't fired their coach literally the day they played us, but an entire 2 1/2 weeks before? Gee, I wonder why I might have ignored that refutation...

As far as statistics go, Texas A&M and OU both ranked about 30 slots ahead of Colorado and Iowa State in total defense. Also, who are you kidding, it's Colorado and Iowa State! Kody Spano would have had decent games against those guys. Western Kentucky's total defense finished ranked ahead of both Colorado and Iowa State. Does that mean Taylor deserves more credit for his performance in that game?

Anyways, you want statistics, so here ya go:

Completion %

Martinez: 59.2%

2009 Lee: 58.6%

Green: 55%

Lee: 55%

2009 Green: 53.2%

Efficiency Rating

Martinez: 138.78

2009 Lee: 126.89

Green: 115.77

2009 Green: 100.37

Lee: 97.84

Yards per Carry

Martinez: 6.0

2009 Green: 5.1

Green: 2.6

Lee: 3.8

2009 Lee: 1.7

Whaddya know. Martinez is tops in every category.

This argument is played out, but great job ignorning KU and Washington in that comparison.

It's already been established that Taylor got his runs against crappy run defenses, 87% of his yards were against teams in the bottom 25% of rushing defenses. 100% of his TD's were against that same bottom 25%, 90% of his passing TD's we're against teams ranked 70th or lower in total D.

We played 5 games against defenses that were better than 86th against the run, in those games Taylor carried 69 times for 134 yards (1.94 per carry), and had 0 TD's.

Basically what we've established it that Zac Lee was bad last year when not playing the Sun Belt, Cody Green has been mediocre the times he's played a full game, and Taylor struggled when playing any defense with a pulse throughout the year. Our offense sucks, and if it continues to do so next year, we're in for another let down of a season.

 

[Hercules]

I don't think Taylor's perfect, jilehr, but I have seen absolutely nothing to convince me that there's anyone else on the team better. You want to talk about how Taylor's good games were against bad teams while ignoring the fact that the same Cody Green games you're discussing were also bad teams.

Taylor did struggle, especially in the second half of the year, when he was injured. When he was healthy, he struggled against SDSU (Cody didn't do anything in that game either despite playing the last 10 minutes of the game, if I recall correctly), and he struggled against Texas.

Against Texas, Martinez, like Lee, had several TD passes dropped. Had they been caught, then Texas has to back off the run, which obviously opens up the running game for Martinez and for the RBs.

Other than those two games, Martinez was money the entire time he was healthy. To come back now and argue that the decision to start him at the beginning of the year was a mistake because he sucked when he was playing with turf toe and a high ankle sprain doesn't strike me as a particularly fair argument.

As far as next season goes, I think we're in decent shape if we run a similar scheme. We'll have depth at the QB spot with Carnes and Turner that is a better fit for our offense than Cody Green, who probably fits better at TE in our offensive system than anywhere else. He's just not the explosive or elusive runner you need for the Oregon type spread option. If we ran something more like Auburn or Florida, where he was used more as a fullback on third and short, than I think he'd be a better fit.

 

[Hercules]

Since knapplc and I always mention how Pelini has always wanted to move to a spread option game since he first came to Nebraska, but never had a link to back it up (sorry if you have posted one knapplc and I missed it), I thought I'd just put this here...

The conversation occurred in late November of 2007.
Bo Pelini hadn't been hired yet as Nebraska's head football coach. But it was looking like he would get the job.

I asked him what type of offense he planned to use.

"A Florida-type spread, only better," he said in his usual confident manner.

link