Learning Frost's Offense

Gage County

Gage County

Banned
I feel kinda like a player, I'm trying learn Frost & Co spread and get in better shape. So far I've found some good videos and pages. So far, I've lost exactly 0 pounds of fat and have put on exactly 0 pounds of lean muscle. Here are some links that I've learned a lot from. Please post links that you think will help me learn scheme (I don't need any fitness links, thx). 

Duck Fish has several videos on Chip Kelly's Oregon Ducks spread. These two give some good information on the inside and outside zone reads. Fish has goos info about other base formations too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekf3RGWwqMQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L1x5u1mNH0

This page has some interesting insight on the motion Frost uses to disrupt defenses.

https://blogs.usafootball.com/blog/4999/how-scott-frost-evolved-chip-kelly-s-offense-at-central-florida

This page talks about pulling the linemen. The meat of the article is just after a sweet video of Frost QBing the scout team running Navy's option.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2017/10/23/16501428/scott-frost-ucf-coach-offense

This page puts the motion and line play together, lots of examples.

https://www.landof10.com/nebraska/film-room-scott-frost-brings-pace-space-football-nebraska

I don't know how I could watch football for 40 years and have such a shallow understanding of it. hahaha

 
The land of 10 article was a good read. Year 1 at UCF they didn’t install the complete offense in order to focus on getting basic techniques worked out. I thought the coaches said they installed the full offense already this spring. Maybe it’s not the full offense with all the bells and whistles.

 
4skers89 said:
The land of 10 article was a good read. Year 1 at UCF they didn’t install the complete offense in order to focus on getting basic techniques worked out. I thought the coaches said they installed the full offense already this spring. Maybe it’s not the full offense with all the bells and whistles.
Click to expand...
Could be the fact that all of the coaches know the offense now inside and out and it is much easier to install the offense when you arent teaching your assistant coaches the playbook and techniques.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Very interesting informational stuff.  Some of the terminology used is 'greek' to me so it is a little hard to understand for me I guess.   

Ultimately, almost all offense vs defense in football schemes is trying to get mismatches (either individual player superiority over individual player) or numbers mismatches where the defense or the offense has a numerical advantage in defending particularly play or types of plays.  Having a QB that is a legitimate running threat tends to even up the offense vs defense into a game of 11 on 11 as opposed to 10 vs 11 if the QB is essential a ball handler and not a carrier thereby limiting the QB to either hand off, pitch or pass to another of about 5 other offensive players.

Many, or perhaps nearly all, offenses (by scheme/type/formations etc) attempt to get an advantage in strength or speed or both over defenders.   Most plays don't actually require the offense to 'defeat' or over power (block or otherwise take the guy out of the play action such that he is not able to help stop the advancement of the ball). For example, the cornerback playing on the far side (away)  is really not going to have much of an effect on a sweep left running play if he is 25 yards away from the point of attack.  

The Frost offense (shall we call it) does a number of these sorts of schemes.   So did the "Osborne run based option attack that Frost QB'ed in 1997.   Osborne ran frequently to the short side of the field so often because he had a numbers advantage at the point of attack.   

One advantage, I think I can see, in the Frost offense, is your WRs may not need to be such great physical blockers because the DBs have to play pass defender on nearly every play, no matter the down or distance or formation apparent.   That is, assuming they are GREAT pass catchers and route runners with a QB who can and will frequently throw them the ball.   If the secondary has to defend the pass on nearly every play, they are not going to help much in stopping the run.    Conversely, Osborne wanted WRs who were great blockers that could now and then go out and catch a pass.  He liked to wear down the secondary by making them tackle bruising RBs while coping with a punishing blocker that was banging on them instead of them baning on the WRs in passing situations.  

Osborne blocked the big defenders and one or two of the smaller ones and expected his RBs could run over or around the remaining defenders.  As the fatigue and frustration of the pounding of the game went on, the defenders were either avoided or worn down and won't be able to stop plays and prevent first downs and touchdowns.   

Frost offense may not wear the defense out with physical power but will make the defense run itself all over the place and attempts to gain advantage with surprise and misdirection and personnel groupings / numbers advantage and also hopes the defense will misalign themselves effectively creating offensive advantages.   

However, in the end, the articles and commentators also stress that without a dominant offensive line, the teams with strong defensive fronts will 'control' the Frost offense.   This is basically true in any type of offense vs. defense schemes.   Games are still won 'in the trenches' in essence and blocking and tackling are the fundamentals of football.  Teams that block and tackle the best usually win.   No matter what the scheme.  

 
84HuskerLaw said:
Very interesting informational stuff.  Some of the terminology used is 'greek' to me so it is a little hard to understand for me I guess.   

Ultimately, almost all offense vs defense in football schemes is trying to get mismatches (either individual player superiority over individual player) or numbers mismatches where the defense or the offense has a numerical advantage in defending particularly play or types of plays.  Having a QB that is a legitimate running threat tends to even up the offense vs defense into a game of 11 on 11 as opposed to 10 vs 11 if the QB is essential a ball handler and not a carrier thereby limiting the QB to either hand off, pitch or pass to another of about 5 other offensive players.

Many, or perhaps nearly all, offenses (by scheme/type/formations etc) attempt to get an advantage in strength or speed or both over defenders.   Most plays don't actually require the offense to 'defeat' or over power (block or otherwise take the guy out of the play action such that he is not able to help stop the advancement of the ball). For example, the cornerback playing on the far side (away)  is really not going to have much of an effect on a sweep left running play if he is 25 yards away from the point of attack.  

The Frost offense (shall we call it) does a number of these sorts of schemes.   So did the "Osborne run based option attack that Frost QB'ed in 1997.   Osborne ran frequently to the short side of the field so often because he had a numbers advantage at the point of attack.   

One advantage, I think I can see, in the Frost offense, is your WRs may not need to be such great physical blockers because the DBs have to play pass defender on nearly every play, no matter the down or distance or formation apparent.   That is, assuming they are GREAT pass catchers and route runners with a QB who can and will frequently throw them the ball.   If the secondary has to defend the pass on nearly every play, they are not going to help much in stopping the run.    Conversely, Osborne wanted WRs who were great blockers that could now and then go out and catch a pass.  He liked to wear down the secondary by making them tackle bruising RBs while coping with a punishing blocker that was banging on them instead of them baning on the WRs in passing situations.  

Osborne blocked the big defenders and one or two of the smaller ones and expected his RBs could run over or around the remaining defenders.  As the fatigue and frustration of the pounding of the game went on, the defenders were either avoided or worn down and won't be able to stop plays and prevent first downs and touchdowns.   

Frost offense may not wear the defense out with physical power but will make the defense run itself all over the place and attempts to gain advantage with surprise and misdirection and personnel groupings / numbers advantage and also hopes the defense will misalign themselves effectively creating offensive advantages.   

However, in the end, the articles and commentators also stress that without a dominant offensive line, the teams with strong defensive fronts will 'control' the Frost offense.   This is basically true in any type of offense vs. defense schemes.   Games are still won 'in the trenches' in essence and blocking and tackling are the fundamentals of football.  Teams that block and tackle the best usually win.   No matter what the scheme.  
Click to expand...


One of the "catchphrases" used with the WR is "No block, no rock" and they take it very seriously.  Frost brought this straight from Osborne and is a major difference between this offense and similar ones.

 
I thought this was a really good breakdown by Dan Orlovsky of the run pass option. He’s an awesome twitter follow for those that love X’s And O’s. Always breaking down film like this:


 
Great example. Frost already does this with switch routes. 

This is the trending "formula" for handling RPO offenses; throw a lot of bodies close to the line, often either in Cover 0 or a shallow Cover 1. It's exactly what Auburn started with in the Peach Bowl, but they had to adjust (and keep adjusting).

 
swmohusker said:
Could be the fact that all of the coaches know the offense now inside and out and it is much easier to install the offense when you arent teaching your assistant coaches the playbook and techniques.  
Click to expand...


Yes, it was said multiple times during Spring ball that the staff staying together and this being the second go-round really made a difference.  Being comfortable with the schemes and each-other allowed them to really hit the ground running and install much more efficiently.

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