Husker Offense

brophog said:
They have good skill guys, but the key to that offense is they have offensive lineman that can really move. They ask a lot of their lineman with their reach blocks. That makes the defenders overplay to beat them to those spots and then the 49ers utilize a lot of motion and misdirection to punish them when they do that.

All of their big guys can really move whether that's OL, TE, or FB and that immensely helps them with a wide variety of screen passes. They also love quads and with all of that motion that creates a lot of opportunities. Purdy gets a lot of easy throws at times because they can either create a numbers advantage in this way or set it up so that they can isolate a backside receiver if the defense overplays the strong side. They simply do a fabulous job stretching you laterally with their motion and mobility, and off of that lateral stretch they can create verticality by attacking those seams. It's this mobility by everyone, but in particular the offensive line, that forces the defense to overplay and that allows the running and passing game to sync off of one another.

As it relates to Nebraska, this falls in line with our overall recruiting and S&C philosophy. Both offensively and defensively, we want big guys that can move and guys on both sides of the ball made big strides towards that end this past season.
Click to expand...
BINGO. you're the only poster on this thread who seems to understand what makes SF's offense work.  I'll get even more granular- its trent williams.  Dont agree? just look at the games and stats when he doesnt play.  The guy single handily protects the blindside while also making runs substantially easier whether its in the in the box, upfield, or pulling trent out to the flat for outside runs.  Guy is a top 3 LT of all time and gets minimal credit for what makes SF special

chamrocck said:
I’d argue SF has all sorts of weapons that make a game manager like B. Purdy successful.  D. Samuel is a unique weapon. McCaffrey also is a stud and Kittle a top TE.  I sort of envision Raiola stretching the field with deep balls to fast guys.  We seem to be getting strong TE’s which I like. I think we need more dynamic backs and a thumper too.
Click to expand...
This is an insult to Brock Purdy and what good qb play should look like.  

Mavric said:
This is why it makes me shake my head when people drool over fullbacks and tight ends.  All you do when you go to a heavy formation is bring more defenders into the box.  Which is more guys to block, more blocks to not screw up and just generally more traffic to work through. 

I'm all about a strong running game.  But I'd much rather spread the defense out and run to daylight than have to run over people.
Click to expand...
Your comment like the bolded one makes me shake my head all the time.  It screams 2004.  Specially in college, the majority of the snaps the offense lines up, checks the defense, checks the sidelines, makes adjustments and then goes.  SF welcomes loaded boxes because they know they can audible to a quick hitting pass play, flat or over the top to a kittle/Deebo. Fans complaining about going against stack boxes scream they dont pay attention to modern football or how its called at the college level

Undone said:
San Francisco runs a relatively high amount of 21 personnel (2 backs, 1 tight end), and then a healthy dose of 22 personnel. That's lining up then with just 2 receivers. Kyle Shanahan uses some good creativity with motion and the use of two tight ends. It's kind of hard to say how that could translate to what we could do when you look at just how amazing & versatile Debo Samuel and McCaffrey are.
Click to expand...


Perhaps a year or 2 ago this would be correct, but this is no longer the case.  Shanny has moved more to Kittle being the sole TE on the field and using a lot of pre snap motion between Deebo/Kittle/CMC to confuse a defense while having Aiyuk/Jennings (WRs) work routes along with Deebo (when he''s not in the backfield)

 
Undone said:
Yeah. Purdy leaving hurts us quite a bit, IMO. I really expected he'd be the starter next year and Rhule would try to redshirt Raiola, probably giving Raiola his four allowable games.
Click to expand...
Eh, we'll be fine.  Purdy looked solid because the only comparisons were some of the worst QBs in the country.  He def seemed to have a better grasp and more playmaking than the other alternatives but lets also not selectively forget the pretty basic INTs he threw that directly cost us wins to end the season. 

You get a QB like raiola you start him week 1.  If Rhule doesnt think he's ready after seeing him first hand in spring ball action then i imagine we go in the portal for someone and should have no issue finding someone close or better than what purdy brought to the table

 
BigRedBuster said:
I think the thought is that when you bring in 2 really good QBs in the same class, you would hope that you could redshirt one to spread out their eligibility.

However, if Dylan is as good as we think he is, there's a chance he's not going to be here 4 years anyway.  And, we need to bring in a good QB every year, so hopefully, we have another one coming in to compete next year.
Click to expand...


Mavric said:
Generally speaking, I agree.   It's mostly for linemen and other guys that need to physically develop.

But this situation is somewhat different.  Like you said, most teams usually take one QB per year.  We took two this year.  So it makes sense to split them up if possible.  Also, the hope would be a local kid who is at his "dream school" would be more likely to stick around, like HH has done so far.
Click to expand...
Makes sense with 2 QB's coming in this year yes. 

 
BigRedBuster said:
Am I the only one in this thread that gets half way through reading a post thinking SF is referring to a former coach?
Click to expand...
lol, same.  as I was typing my response i was like, i hope this doesnt confuse ppl and should use the HCSF acronym standard moving forward :)

runningblind said:
I was tracking with SanFran, but now I have an eye twitch when reading it, so thanks!  :lol:
Click to expand...
Please, brother, remove San Fran out of the lexicon.  we hate it when ppl use that term.  Its like when I see nebraska referred on other boards as UN or neb or nebby.   

 
Last edited by a moderator:
gossamorharpy said:
lol, same.  as I was typing my response i was like, i hope this doesnt confuse ppl and should use the HCSF acronym standard moving forward :)

Please, brother, remove San Fran out of the lexicon.  we hate it when ppl use that term
Click to expand...
The Frisco?  Oakland West?  What do you prefer out there?  ;)

 
gossamorharpy said:
Your comment like the bolded one makes me shake my head all the time.  It screams 2004.  Specially in college, the majority of the snaps the offense lines up, checks the defense, checks the sidelines, makes adjustments and then goes.  SF welcomes loaded boxes because they know they can audible to a quick hitting pass play, flat or over the top to a kittle/Deebo. Fans complaining about going against stack boxes scream they dont pay attention to modern football or how its called at the college level
Click to expand...


Most of the college offenses doing the "check with me" are operating out of four- and five-wide sets.  Not what I am talking about.

A "stacked box" in the NFL is significantly different than a stacked box in college.

 
Mavric said:
Most of the college offenses doing the "check with me" are operating out of four- and five-wide sets.  Not what I am talking about.

A "stacked box" in the NFL is significantly different than a stacked box in college.
Click to expand...
Well, I think its simply fair to say there are more college offenses running some form of spread, RPO heavy pass, or air raid variation than old school running formations.  Hence, your first comment is true.  That being said, a lot of plays have pre-baked audibles/adjustments that the QB can make or sideline will signal in depending on what defense is showing.  This is obvi more apparent in passing plays where receivers will move all over, but there's also running based variations that might signal a different guard pulling, running to a different side, etc. 

I dont think the concept of stacked box is significantly different compared to college. One can argue the wider hash marks in the college game do make it different for certain routes to be ran vs nfl and the game hence is a bit different.  For simplicity purposes tho, typically 8-9 in the box is a pretty telling indicator of what the defense is thinking for both college and nfl

 
gossamorharpy said:
I dont think the concept of stacked box is significantly different compared to college. One can argue the wider hash marks in the college game do make it different for certain routes to be ran vs nfl and the game hence is a bit different.  For simplicity purposes tho, typically 8-9 in the box is a pretty telling indicator of what the defense is thinking for both college and nfl
Click to expand...


I would be interested for you to provide data or examples of how often NFL teams have 9 in the box.

 
Mavric said:
I would be interested for you to provide data or examples of how often NFL teams have 9 in the box.
Click to expand...
It happens a lot more often that you think.  A defense running their base personnel and bringing in a safety or corner closer to the formation qualifies as a stacked box.  

Hell, our defense probably fell in the stacked box stat frequently last year given all the pre snap motion/looks we have our defenders present to the offense. 

I could spend time finding stats but not worth my time.  My first comment was in regards to you saying you dont like it when people want to see more TE and FB formations because it brings more guys in the box for us to block.  If thats really a challenge for us then thats just a kind way of saying our OC and QB are garbage.  My point is that a stacked box shouldn't be seen as a deterrent- it should be seen as an easy way for the offense to gain an edge and hopefully have the IQ and players able to capitalize when a defense sells out to stop the run or leaves themselves exposed in a cover 0 or cover 1 formation to get ripped with a big pass play over the top or crossing routes with nothing but open field to run with (this is the hallmark of the niners btw... deebo and kittle are so filthy at showing an initial block, and then running to open space, getting the ball and having nothing but field inbetween them and the endzone)

If you really want to change the argument to frequency of NFL teams have 9 in the box then fine.  But that my friends falls in the  :movegoalpost: category

 
Last edited by a moderator:
GlobalHusker said:
Wait…who wouldn’t want to run what Niners run. With a Trent Williams to rely the blind side, Swiss Army knives at just about every position. How man FB’s you know that can run a wheel route like Yoos? Or with Kittle’s speed, catching, AND blocking ability. Deebo can line up in the backfield or split wide. CMC can catch run and block. They can run many sets without rotating personnel that puts pressure on the defenses to stop with what they have. Seems very distant from happening anytime soon here
Click to expand...
lol, i missed this comment the first go around...

I'm waiting for fred hoiberg to have a press conference and announce he wants to do what the 2017 warriors did.  We'll just look over the fact of having 4 HOFs on the team we're doing it babbyyyy

 
Mavric said:
This is a convenient way to say "I don't really know but it's what I want to believe."
Click to expand...
lol, at least its more relevant than completely changing your original point around?  I was simply trying to say your take on the stacked boxes thing is just a cop out.  Other progrums have no issue handling a stacked box, to say its a nebraska problem is just lazy.  

I do like your methods of responding tho- basically challenging someone to prove their point with an exhaustive research/data/stat exercise which 99% of ppl wont do, and then u claim victory.  

Perhaps after my last meeting this afternoon I'll dive in and report back, stay tuned.... :)

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top