For all the kool-aid drinkers, Sip serves up something else

[ColoradoHusk]

One great thing about our offenses in the 80s and 90s was that the defense needed to defend from sideline to sideline.  And, we ran a power run offense.  Plays like bubble screens do somewhat the same thing as our old option plays.  They actually get the ball out to the perimeter faster.  However, just like those old option plays, we have to have the players to run them and good execution.  It seems like some fans think that power football is just running between the tackles with a fullback.

In the 80s, Osborne utilized tighter formations and 2-2 personnel to get the defense tight to the formation, and then exploit it to the outside with speed.  Then, as the defense would go wide to stop the outside pitch and option, he would counter with inside runs and FB traps.  As defenses got faster in the 90s, Osborne switched it up and spread out his offense, and then ran power inside after giving looks of going outside.

The idea of Frost's offense is to stretch teams horizontally and vertically to create space.  The power runs by Mills were successful against Wisconsin and Iowa because Frost set their defense up by stretching them horizontally.  The big thing lacking the Frost offense at NU has been the lack of a vertical/downfield threat.  Once NU has a couple of those, that's when the offense will create more space and really start humming, including those cute, swing passes.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Ditto what Colorado Husk says. The bubble screens were fairly successful, given that they are generally designed to replace first down running plays, where a four or five yard gain is still a success, and maybe you'll get lucky and break one. They're also designed to loosen up the middle for future running plays and passing lanes. Problem was that Frost got too dependent on them, and they became overly-cautious and easily predicted by the defense. And as Adrian Martinez continued in his funk, they became less simple passes, too often behind the receiver or out of step. 

Every coach in football keeps the bubble screen in his playbook. The running backs appreciate them, too. We'll still see them next year, but hopefully as part of a more dynamic, less predictable offense. 

 

[BigRedBuster]

Also....one term I wish would be lost in Husker fandom is "cute".  

It's way over used.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Also....one term I wish would be lost in Husker fandom is "cute".  

It's way over used.

Agree. In the 12 years I've been on Huskerboard "cute"  has been used to describe any forward pass. 

 

[WyoHusker56]

Really, I think you could cut that down to bad OL play (especially early in the season) and no deep threat. Almost all of our other problems on offense stemmed from those two. I mean, I wouldn't say that we had bad WR play - Spielman and Wan'Dale were pretty great at what they do. Problem is, neither is much of a deep threat - we didn't have a real replacement for Stanley. Hopefully someone emerges for that role next season.

As for the OL, well, I was saying all year that they were really inexperienced for an OL, and thus I expected them to continue to suck most of the year. OLs take more time to develop and gel as a unit than anything else on a team. But the flipside is that in the long-term, the same players could improve substantially. I think we started to see some of that toward the end of the year. What's as interesting as anything is how few O linemen we took in this recruiting class - hopefully that means Frost feels good about his current players' potential in the long-term. Question is, just how 'long-term' do we need to look before the OL starts to look like what Frost wants?

Ya that's fair on the WR, I think depth was the biggest issue there especially once Wan'Dale went down.

As far as taking so few lineman, we took a ton in 2018 so I imagine they are trying to level numbers out I think. I saw that we have I believe 14 or 15 scholarship offensive lineman with the new class so that's about where you want to be.

 

[NoLongerN]

I predicted 8-4 it was there for the taking, but coaching blunders against; Colorado, Purdue, and Indiana cost us. Add in terrible QB play making.

Next year is all about the Purdue game it’s make or break much like Colorado was.  We must start 6-1 before going to Columbus or no Bowl.  I don’t see that happening.  The ceiling is 7-5 but I think your right 5-7 is most likely.  If we start off with a loss to Purdue it could be a really ugly year. 
 

I’d give Frost one more bad year/ losing season, next year.  If he can’t get a winning record in year 4, 2021 time to move on.  We will know his undefeated season was a fluke.  

If we have another losing season I hope he makes some big staff changes.  He needs help.

I enjoyed your words and input.  Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts and view.

The one area I would encourage you to consider is that it won't be until after this next year that his system and guys will be ready to compete with an almost apples to apples comparison.  Thus, you sound like you are willing to fire him at just the time his rebuild should begin to show it's real effects [that is ... if the program was really in as bad a shape as I think it was].  Thus, I would expect whoever is your next coach to do quite well as the attitude and kids that were at the root of the problem are now gone.

For me, I don't know if Scott's system/scheme/philosophy will work as he imagined in the B1G.  However, the root attitude/belief issues and the proper kids with the right development is still being set in place.  We need all that to be working properly to see if his system/scheme/philosophy will work.
 

 

[BigPeterJ]

Agree. In the 12 years I've been on Huskerboard "cute"  has been used to describe any forward pass. 

Unless its to a TE who is big but slow, if the TE never makes any moves but just barrels over someone and falls forward then it qualifies as manly.  If the TE tries to juke though......way too cute

 

[84HuskerLaw]

Ya that's fair on the WR, I think depth was the biggest issue there especially once Wan'Dale went down.

As far as taking so few lineman, we took a ton in 2018 so I imagine they are trying to level numbers out I think. I saw that we have I believe 14 or 15 scholarship offensive lineman with the new class so that's about where you want to be.

Not sure if this is the best thread to discuss this further but I think we are short in some positions and long in others in scholarship distribution.  Theoretically I’d say the balance ought to be more like this:

OL - 17.     DT -  6.     Punter - 2

TE - 3.       DE - 7.       PK - 2

WR - 7      LB - 12.     LS - 2

RB - 5.       S - 6.        Returners - 2

QB - 4.      CB - 6.      Holder - 1

WB - 3

total 85

Of course there are some crossover possibilities such as WBs and WRs and Returners/holders etc. 

But the most important areas are the big guys.  You can’t win if you lose the battle in the trenches.  And QB running as heavy creates more need in QB depth but we need more OL, DL, DE and LBs it seems to me.  Those are vital to be built first and foremost.  
Add extra walkons as Athletes that can add the 4th man in depth. 

 

[KCBuc]

If you're defining "power football" based on the formation, then you're never going to be happy with Frost. We do a lot of pulling lineman and downhill blocking, and if that doesn't qualify as power football to you I dunno what to say. It's not exclusively power football, but it's a lot of what we do. We're just not doing it particularly well.

Use of the fullback. Third and one. Push them backwards. NU had momentary success but went away from it. Wish to see more. 

 

[Husker in WI]

Use of the fullback. Third and one. Push them backwards. NU had momentary success but went away from it. Wish to see more. 

Pretty much what these guys said - we had success with it for one drive. And we use our TEs as fullbacks a fair amount, and they're a little more versatile. I agree pushing other teams backward would be nice, but it's not like we aren't trying to - we just need to be better at it. Would you say Minnesota was a power football team this year? They don't use a fullback, and outside zone works horizontally more than vertically.

The stuff that initially worked against OSU was because it was something they did not prepare for, once they got a look at it, it was done...it bordered more on gimmicky than a sound gameplan

Also, the one time we had success with the FB this year everyone seems to forget that tOSU used a SINGLE time out to correct their defense and shut it down. When we came back to it later in the game or later in the year we were stuffed at the line or in the backfield every time.

 

[gossamorharpy]

nothing happens without an O line. our talent and play in the trenches has been f'n pitiful since maybe Bo's last or 2nd to last year.  Unfortunately for some of you, you seem to live in a world where its expected an o line goes from utter trash to consistently solid in a year or 2?  Doesnt work that way... i;d argue its the toughest position group to build up from scratch (which is where we were) as talent + cohesiveness + pure growth as a human being is all required.  Compared to other skill positions where raw talent can lead a freshman to playing meaningful football, it just doesnt happen that often in the trenches due to the inherent advantage a 22-23 year old dude in a system will have over an 18 or 19 year old.

Sure, there is clear improvement needed from this staff, but its not like frosty has the equivalent to these teams mentioned by Sip on the o line to work with.  I for one, am optimistic that the recruits hes brought in on the O line are the mold of what we need and what other progrums are built on. 

 

[Huskers93-97]

I know they didn't work as much as we liked. I understand that, my point is that all this b!tching wouldn't be happening. Hell even 25% may even be enough. It's a very effective play when ran well as @PasstheDamnBallGuy stated. Need the right guy and effective blocking.

I dont think most people on here have a problem with using that play. Its using it 50 times in 1 game when its not working. At what point do you say its not working/we dont have the personnel so do something else.

 

[Undone]

Old school Oregon will never survive in the B10.

I think this is a fallacy. Old school Oregon offense would do just fine in any conference. It just has to be matched with a physical defensive style a la the likes of Wisconsin & Iowa.

But the crux of our current issue is the offensive line. Maybe people get tired of talking about this point because it's so basic. Our offensive line was nowhere close to the level of, say, the top 6 teams in the conference this season. Both run blocking and pass blocking sucked for the first 3/4 of the year.

This is why this is a 4-5 year fix. Once these big, talented, young offensive line recruits are ready to play, the entire outlook changes. It's really hard to say in my opinion how much of a good jump our OL could realistically make by next season - my guess is not that much. But in 2021 I think we have a good chance of winning the West.

 

[84HuskerLaw]

nothing happens without an O line. our talent and play in the trenches has been f'n pitiful since maybe Bo's last or 2nd to last year.  Unfortunately for some of you, you seem to live in a world where its expected an o line goes from utter trash to consistently solid in a year or 2?  Doesnt work that way... i;d argue its the toughest position group to build up from scratch (which is where we were) as talent + cohesiveness + pure growth as a human being is all required.  Compared to other skill positions where raw talent can lead a freshman to playing meaningful football, it just doesnt happen that often in the trenches due to the inherent advantage a 22-23 year old dude in a system will have over an 18 or 19 year old.

Sure, there is clear improvement needed from this staff, but its not like frosty has the equivalent to these teams mentioned by Sip on the o line to work with.  I for one, am optimistic that the recruits hes brought in on the O line are the mold of what we need and what other progrums are built on. 

This is my feeling exactly.  I’m reminded of the slogan: Where’s the beef?    Until we get much more powerful around the line of scrimmage  on both sides of the ball AND get better in special teams, wins are going to be hard to come by.   
I do think Frost knows this better than we do but it takes 3-4 years to really build this up to meet the Big Ten challenge.  The big ten is justly known for its beef and finesse won’t be sustainable to win week in week out.  A couple key injuries and we don’t measure up!  

 

[Husker in WI]

I think this is a fallacy. Old school Oregon offense would do just fine in any conference. It just has to be matched with a physical defensive style a la the likes of Wisconsin & Iowa.

But the crux of our current issue is the offensive line. Maybe people get tired of talking about this point because it's so basic. Our offensive line was nowhere close to the level of, say, the top 6 teams in the conference this season. Both run blocking and pass blocking sucked for the first 3/4 of the year.

This is why this is a 4-5 year fix. Once these big, talented, young offensive line recruits are ready to play, the entire outlook changes. It's really hard to say in my opinion how much of a good jump our OL could realistically make by next season - my guess is not that much. But in 2021 I think we have a good chance of winning the West.

I think there could be some significant improvement. By the end of the year they were decent, and they should be improved across the board since we have everyone back and some guys with another year under their belts to push them. I think we could see big jumps at Center (2nd full year for Cam) and Guard - Farniok should be an instant improvement over either Hixson or Wilson. They're both a little limited by athleticism and size respectively. I don't think Benhart/Gaylord is an instant improvement at RT, but probably not a drop off from Farniok.