Old offenses v “new offenses”

I am I

I am I

All-Conference
We’ve had Callahan, Reilly, Solich, Pellini...now Frost. 

I excpect us to at least move the ball and score points. The intangibles will have to wait. The superior blocking and open spaces will have to wait. Finding the right cogs in this machine to click may have to wait...but it will come. 

 I pose this:  is an “up to date, fast paced offense” that kids are playing since middle school, just exactly the thing we need to start clicking?  

Watching a Taylor Martinez and Roy Helu work, vs a Tanner Lee and JD Spielman run offense vs a SF offense just be that much better? 

Will it work because it’s new and fast and innovative; were the offenses we had just outmoded and stiff?

I think we’re about to embark on a new set that is modern, yet relies on simple old football. 

Will SF offenses generate what we think it will, simply because it’s pretty cutting edge or are the Reilly and Callahan offenses just too damn “old”? 

Ive watched all the clips from SF offenses and the break downs therein and I’m excited, but how could those old offenses just suck so bad?

Im excited but reserved i guess. 

 
We should see a lot of Run Pass Option and if executed very well this can be deadly.  The QB needs to be a special player to make it all work.  Put fast pieces in place and you have an offense that can overwhelm teams and never be out of any game.  When I see high powered offenses like some we have seen in the past at Oregon, UCF, Baylor, and Texas Tech they never are able to put elite defenses on the field.  If Nebraska can do this then Frost will be a championship coach.  The exciting flashy part will be some of the offense we run but the tell tale signal to me will be about if we can put a highly athletic superior defense on the field. Defenses that play alongside these offenses are on the field a lot.  It will take a special combination of players to make an elite defense that is on the field a lot.  I think someone like Bookie would relish this type of opportunity.  We'll see.       

 
I truly believe that, no matter where or what football evolves into, the battle at the line of scrimmage is what wins the majority of plays; and thus, games. It's just what football is at it's core.

No offense... 'NO' offense, can be successful if the defensive line gets consistent penetration into the offenses backfield.

By the same token, Any offense can have success if the O-line is dominant at what they do (unless you are SEVERELY hampered at QB)...

Wash St. offense would be unstoppable if they put together an O-line that could consistently give the QB 3,4,5 seconds to read the D and make a good decision and deliver a good ball. 'Bama/Wisc. look unstoppable when their Line gets a consistent push and eventually wears down the defense.

Stacking the box/LOS is what teams try to do to beat the fast paced spread offenses of today; but still, if the o-line can beat the D's front 7/8, the offense becomes unstoppable by exposing the 1-on-1 match-up problems that arise when you play that style of defense.

Win at the LOS... win the game.

 
I am I said:
Will SF offenses generate what we think it will, simply because it’s pretty cutting edge or are the Reilly and Callahan offenses just too damn “old”? 
Click to expand...


The big difference between some of our better offenses of the past few coaches, and I wouldn't consider the Riley era in that statement at all, and Frost or Osborne is the (in)ability to consistently generate big plays. Any offense that can reduce the field to 1 on 1 in space has the ability to get big plays and big plays are necessary to score big points. If you can score in 2 plays vs 10 plays, you drastically reduce drive killing errors.

This is why Frost is trying so hard to recruit speed. Speed is what turns schemes into special.

 
Red_Payne said:
I truly believe that, no matter where or what football evolves into, the battle at the line of scrimmage is what wins the majority of plays; and thus, games. It's just what football is at it's core.

No offense... 'NO' offense, can be successful if the defensive line gets consistent penetration into the offenses backfield.

By the same token, Any offense can have success if the O-line is dominant at what they do (unless you are SEVERELY hampered at QB)...

Wash St. offense would be unstoppable if they put together an O-line that could consistently give the QB 3,4,5 seconds to read the D and make a good decision and deliver a good ball. 'Bama/Wisc. look unstoppable when their Line gets a consistent push and eventually wears down the defense.

Stacking the box/LOS is what teams try to do to beat the fast paced spread offenses of today; but still, if the o-line can beat the D's front 7/8, the offense becomes unstoppable by exposing the 1-on-1 match-up problems that arise when you play that style of defense.

Win at the LOS... win the game.
Click to expand...
I completely agree, and that is why I am amazed when our DCs want our DL to control gaps and not to penetrate.

 
We've had a veritable dukes mixture of offenses at Nebraska the last 15 years led by Qb's with varied skills and forced to play with O lines that often underperformed.  The years we had championship defenses we had anemic offenses.  Recruiting will be essential to get all the pieces we need on both sides of the ball.  A huge piece of the puzzle is a QB similar to Marcus Marriota who is elusive and can throw on the roll out or run when needed and get that 5 to 7 yard gain instead of a 10 yard sack.  That is not to discount having talent all over the field including O and D lines that don't back down from anyone, running backs who can get the tough yards, speed at the skill positions and depth.  Kinda sounds like Clemson who has held their own vs the better defenses like Ohio St and Alabama.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
With as much man coverage that UCF seems to see...I can only imagine the video game like numbers that T-Mart would have put up in this offense.  

 
brophog said:
The big difference between some of our better offenses of the past few coaches, and I wouldn't consider the Riley era in that statement at all, and Frost or Osborne is the (in)ability to consistently generate big plays. Any offense that can reduce the field to 1 on 1 in space has the ability to get big plays and big plays are necessary to score big points. If you can score in 2 plays vs 10 plays, you drastically reduce drive killing errors.

This is why Frost is trying so hard to recruit speed. Speed is what turns schemes into special.
Click to expand...
The thing that is most overlooked in the frost/Kelly and leach offenses isn't the 1 on 1 scenarios that it creates for the receivers and backs, it's doing the same thing for the linemen.  It'll probably be our saving grace for the next 2 years as our linemen have a lot of work to do in both technique and in strength.   Once we have more developed and experienced linemen it won't be quite as necessary to create those matchups and I could definitely see a more osborne-esque blocking scheme up front later on, as it helps to wear the defensive line down over the course if the game much more.  

 
If you guys are on Twitter and want to see how modern, spread offenses work, I recommend following SpreadOffense.com@SpreadOffense on Twitter.  They show a lot of film from spread offenses at all levels, and show why they work.  Here are a couple Tweets that they had this morning, commenting on our very own Scott Frost.



 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm confident Frost's offense will work in the B1G if they greatly improve the offensive line play and if he can get the right players into the university.

I think we do have to be cognizant of the more traditional power run teams in the B1G (like Wisconsin and Iowa) because their forte will be shortening the length of the game and playing physically. We'll need to have a response for that physicality. The good news is we saw this kind of culture mash in the Pac 12 with Oregon vs. Stanford, and Oregon came away winning a lot of those games. The ones they lost were the ones where they struggled to get the offense going.

 
Nice opinions and chat. I’ve began to believe the pro style, shifting sets, big arm QB style offense was looking very out moded by the time Callahan left. 

Not that it didn’t generate yds and points at times, but he and Riley’s offenses just looked out dated and boring. 

Give me either what Frost is bringing or what Wisconsin/Stanford/Ala do when they have the olines. Love that smash mouth. 

Excited to move into the modern era of offenses!! 

 
Offense is predicated on stretching the defense horizontally with RPO IZ with Key screens on the outside, OZ with the back and WR, and QB run game off of your IZ and OZ series.  Count the box and pick your poison.  Once defense overcommits to the perimeter screen game you gash them with the key and go.  

 
Crazyhole said:
The thing that is most overlooked in the frost/Kelly and leach offenses isn't the 1 on 1 scenarios that it creates for the receivers and backs, it's doing the same thing for the linemen.  
Click to expand...


Very true. I have commented on this before. It's a big reason these type of offenses spread so fast.

 
I am I said:
I’ve began to believe the pro style, shifting sets, big arm QB style offense was looking very out moded by the time Callahan left. 
Click to expand...


It's certainly not the most exciting or sexy thing to watch, but Bama and Florida State have both won national championships with old school pro style offenses within the last few years. Michigan State has done a great job with it as well, and obviously so has Wisconsin. 

It's pretty crazy how many different offenses, drastically different, we've seen in the last 15-20 years. We went from power I rushing/triple option offense to a little bit more of a spread option offense to a terrible west coast offense to a good west coast offense to an intentionally shut down/ball control wco/pro style offense to a zone read run heavy with wco passing schemes offense to a very 'multiple' run-heavy zone read spread to a west coast again.

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