Huskers Working On Passing Game Efficiency

[Mavric]

It's a back-and-forth, player-to-player dialogue that's critical to the success of the Huskers' passing game, which regularly features reactionary route adjustments before and after the snap. And if NU is to maximize the effectiveness of its passing attack, the quarterback has to make the same reads as his target.
“We come to the sideline after every set of reps, and talk about what we saw here, what we saw there,” Bell said. “It's easier to get on the same page as to what he's seeing.”

Quarterbacks want to think like receivers. Receivers want to think like quarterbacks.

That's one of the goals this spring — to build an analytical chemistry, so that in-game decisions are identical on both ends.

“One (receiver) may run a curl (route) if the safety's high, or one may run a corner (route),” Armstrong said. “If you know exactly what's happening and where they are, and what exactly they're thinking, you know exactly what to do.”

The coaches tweaked the offense's terminology this offseason, partly for this reason.

When blitzes are spotted at the last second and a play needs to be changed, they want to decrease the possibility of confusion. Same goes for when players recognize postsnap surprises from the opposing secondary.

“Most people (think) simplifying the offense is pretty much like narrowing stuff down, but it's not,” Armstrong said. “It's just making sure everyone's on the same page.”

OWH

 

[True2tRA]

I'm sorry, but that last comment of your paragraph you quoted makes zero sense to me Mavric. I don't get how simplifying means getting on the same page. No, that doesn't mean simplifying at all. It means working harder on communication, and understanding defenses in similar ways and on similar levels intellectually. Knowing what you're looking at doesn't mean they made it simpler. The first time you finally figure out algebra, it doesn't mean the algebra was simplified, it means you finally figured it out.

So all this talk of simplifying seems a bit scrambled to me now, but whatever. Simplified or not, as long as Armstrong does a better job of executing the offense that's all I care about, at the end if the day all the talk means sh#t.

Armstrong clearly had no idea he would be playing last year. But when Martinez got hurt, there Armstrong was thrown to the wolves. I expected mistakes, and mistakes were made. Many of them were clearly due to this exact thing. He and his receivers were not on the same page. Hopefully they are truly eliminating tose miscommunications.

 

[Mavric]

In this context, "simplifying" is talking about the verbiage used to call plays, not the offensive scheme. It has been noted a few times that they changed quite a bit about how they called plays to try to simplify it. As I understand it, they're trying to use fewer words to call each play so there is less room for misunderstanding and things can be communicated more quickly.

 

[True2tRA]

Okay. Gotcha.

 

[In the Deed the Glory]

In this context, "simplifying" is talking about the verbiage used to call plays, not the offensive scheme. It has been noted a few times that they changed quite a bit about how they called plays to try to simplify it. As I understand it, they're trying to use fewer words to call each play so there is less room for misunderstanding and things can be communicated more quickly.

Spot on Mav

 

[Count 'Bility]

Look at it this way True. Instead of calling "x robber z y blank max blue 7 country 43" theyre just calling "max protect, fake 24 power, Kenny's runnin a fly". There. dun. LOL.

 

[GSG]

But we pass the ball too much already!!!

 

[74Hunter]

But we pass the ball too much already!!!

Yeah, but when the run game isn't going, we don't pass enough! !!!

 

[BigRedBuster]

In this context, "simplifying" is talking about the verbiage used to call plays, not the offensive scheme. It has been noted a few times that they changed quite a bit about how they called plays to try to simplify it. As I understand it, they're trying to use fewer words to call each play so there is less room for misunderstanding and things can be communicated more quickly.

OK.....I must be the only one confused about this. It's probably because I have never really been around a no huddle offense like we run. But, if we have no huddle, there aren't words used to communicate the play. If there aren't words used to communicate the play, why does reducing the words used help?

 

[Mavric]

In this context, "simplifying" is talking about the verbiage used to call plays, not the offensive scheme. It has been noted a few times that they changed quite a bit about how they called plays to try to simplify it. As I understand it, they're trying to use fewer words to call each play so there is less room for misunderstanding and things can be communicated more quickly.

OK.....I must be the only one confused about this. It's probably because I have never really been around a no huddle offense like we run. But, if we have no huddle, there aren't words used to communicate the play. If there aren't words used to communicate the play, why does reducing the words used help?

Just because we (often) don't huddle doesn't mean the plays aren't communicated verbally. The WRs and probably RBs often get signals from the sidelines but you'll still see the QB walk up to the line and tell the linemen what the play is. And sometimes you'll see the QB tell the RB or a passing WR something. I think we use a combination of words and signals.

 

[BigRedBuster]

In this context, "simplifying" is talking about the verbiage used to call plays, not the offensive scheme. It has been noted a few times that they changed quite a bit about how they called plays to try to simplify it. As I understand it, they're trying to use fewer words to call each play so there is less room for misunderstanding and things can be communicated more quickly.

OK.....I must be the only one confused about this. It's probably because I have never really been around a no huddle offense like we run. But, if we have no huddle, there aren't words used to communicate the play. If there aren't words used to communicate the play, why does reducing the words used help?

Just because we (often) don't huddle doesn't mean the plays aren't communicated verbally. The WRs and probably RBs often get signals from the sidelines but you'll still see the QB walk up to the line and tell the linemen what the play is. And sometimes you'll see the QB tell the RB or a passing WR something. I think we use a combination of words and signals.

Watching this take place, when the QB turns around and says something to the RB or walks up to the line, at MOST he is saying 2-3 words. If it is more, he must be moonlighting as an auctioneer too. It's not like he stands there and says 2-3 sentences of verbiage.

Now....if they are simplifying the verbiage, I would think it would be a case of trying to make it easier for new players to learn.

 

[Mavric]

Now....if they are simplifying the verbiage, I would think it would be a case of trying to make it easier for new players to learn.

Not necessarily. That was one thing that was mentioned with Turner taking snaps at QB. He would have been expected to know the offense very well but he's having to re-learn the new terminology. Probably in the long run it will be easier but not in the short-term.

 

[Landlord]

No huddle does not equal not calling plays. Those aren't the same things.

We might not huddle up the way you'd see in a circle 15 years ago, but we still call plays, from the sideline and also from the quarterback. There are still checks and pre-snap reads (not just by the quarterback but by every player), still audibles, still a ton of communication going on.

 

[True2tRA]

In this context, "simplifying" is talking about the verbiage used to call plays, not the offensive scheme. It has been noted a few times that they changed quite a bit about how they called plays to try to simplify it. As I understand it, they're trying to use fewer words to call each play so there is less room for misunderstanding and things can be communicated more quickly.

OK.....I must be the only one confused about this. It's probably because I have never really been around a no huddle offense like we run. But, if we have no huddle, there aren't words used to communicate the play. If there aren't words used to communicate the play, why does reducing the words used help?

I got kind of the same thing from the article so I'm not sure if I'm the one misunderstanding or if a few others are. In my opinion it seems they are discussing quite the opposite of verbal communication. They pretty much want the WR's and the QB to read the defenses and come to the same conclusion, that's the way I took it. Probably much more so they wouldn't have to communicate as much. As I said in the past, reading the defense may be an area we have struggled with in the past. I think in Armstrongs game, this is the mental part he needs to work on, because physically he's got the rest of it. He just needs to make sure he and his receivers are seeing things the same way and adjusting as a single unit, not as individuals.

Or maybe I misunderstood.

 

[Mavric]

In this context, "simplifying" is talking about the verbiage used to call plays, not the offensive scheme. It has been noted a few times that they changed quite a bit about how they called plays to try to simplify it. As I understand it, they're trying to use fewer words to call each play so there is less room for misunderstanding and things can be communicated more quickly.

OK.....I must be the only one confused about this. It's probably because I have never really been around a no huddle offense like we run. But, if we have no huddle, there aren't words used to communicate the play. If there aren't words used to communicate the play, why does reducing the words used help?

I got kind of the same thing from the article so I'm not sure if I'm the one misunderstanding or if a few others are. In my opinion it seems they are discussing quite the opposite of verbal communication. They pretty much want the WR's and the QB to read the defenses and come to the same conclusion, that's the way I took it. Probably much more so they wouldn't have to communicate as much. As I said in the past, reading the defense may be an area we have struggled with in the past. I think in Armstrongs game, this is the mental part he needs to work on, because physically he's got the rest of it. He just needs to make sure he and his receivers are seeing things the same way and adjusting as a single unit, not as individuals.

Or maybe I misunderstood.

I think those are two separate things. There is a play call that sets up the general design of the play. But then the pass routes can be altered within the play based on what they see in the coverage. Those are often referred to as option routes. The receiver can break out if the defender is inside or the reverse. The receiver can go long if the corner jumps the short route.

Not sure if this is exactly what we're doing but here's an article from a couple years ago about the Patriots' option routes.