The Option Offense - Making a Comeback?

[bshirt]

A spread option? What, like what RichRod ran?

I'd like to see a source on this, since Pelini has apparently wanted different kinds of offenses according to various reports. I think for the most part it's Shawn's show and that's how Pelini considers it. No?

It's like a marriage.

Bo wears the pants, but he lets Watson have responsibility for half of the relationship. If Watson gets out of line, Bo pulls the strings

chuckleshuffle

lol!

That may indeed be what it is. :thumbs

 

[Never Skerd']

When I am a coach, I will def use the triple option. It makes the defense think all game- and lets face it- Kids will make mistakes. I remember playing some spread teams back in HS, nothing easier for a DE like me, just pinned my ears back and went wild on the QB- then we finally lost to a Wishbone misdirection offense- I couldn't find the ball or it was gone before I even found it. It isn't even an argument in my mind.

 

[ESPY]

Let's not forget the always-entertaining argument that a power option attack can no longer work in CFB because defensive athletes have gotten too fast. That notion ignores the fact that OFFENSIVE athletes have also gotten faster. :ahhhhhhhh

HA! If only I had a dollar for every time I've heard that ridiculous argument. It would be move over Bill Gates.

I believe that's what all the pundits said about us back in '94, '95 & '97. Yeah, good argument.

 

[Enhance]

When I am a coach, I will def use the triple option. It makes the defense think all game- and lets face it- Kids will make mistakes. I remember playing some spread teams back in HS, nothing easier for a DE like me, just pinned my ears back and went wild on the QB- then we finally lost to a Wishbone misdirection offense- I couldn't find the ball or it was gone before I even found it. It isn't even an argument in my mind.

The only problem is eventually you are going to need someone who can pass the ball. The offense will be figured out in some capacity. Georgia Tech in the Orange Bowl last year was the perfect example. Nesbitt was 2/9 for 12 yards and an interception. As long as you get a quarterback that can do that and a couple of playmakers at WR that are also good blockers, then the offense is (imho) the most deadly offense ever created.

 

[huKSer]

On some of those mid-90's teams, Nebraska's linemen were plenty big, but not the kind of linemen other teams recruit. If you're running a pro-style offense, you're looking for guys that were 6'6" or 6'7" and have huge wingspans. Nebraska's dominant lines in the mid-90's were more stout, and they had great feet. They generally ranked more in the 6'2" range. So it is a different type of athlete. However, I have no idea if the type of athlete we had on offensive line in the mid-90's was any more rare than your typical pro-style offense lineman.

As far as the option offense goes, it's still the toughest offense to defend when it's run correctly.

Going against the current "trend" makes sense recruiting and game planning. QB "A" is a strong armed thrower who can scramble. In the 80's and 90's if you are running pro-style you are competing with most schools. QB "B" has a good option set of skills. Back then NU was competing with Army and Navy.

If you have only one week of limiting practice time (sorry Michigan) it is. If you have a bye week or for a bowl game, with enough time most defenses can figure out how to defend or slow down the option (sorry Missouri)

 

[zoogs]

When I am a coach, I will def use the triple option. It makes the defense think all game- and lets face it- Kids will make mistakes. I remember playing some spread teams back in HS, nothing easier for a DE like me, just pinned my ears back and went wild on the QB- then we finally lost to a Wishbone misdirection offense- I couldn't find the ball or it was gone before I even found it. It isn't even an argument in my mind.

The only problem is eventually you are going to need someone who can pass the ball. The offense will be figured out in some capacity. Georgia Tech in the Orange Bowl last year was the perfect example. Nesbitt was 2/9 for 12 yards and an interception. As long as you get a quarterback that can do that and a couple of playmakers at WR that are also good blockers, then the offense is (imho) the most deadly offense ever created.

Which I think in the end, means that if you want to run an effective option offense, you're still going to need to find a damn good QB, and those are in short supply. Sure, maybe it's a QB with a different skillset, but it doesn't make the recruiting any easier.

I think when it comes to these kind of athletes coming out of HS, you might get 1 in 5 that would make a good QB - a true dual threat. Electric in the running game, a threat through the air. But that doesn't even get to the 'gamer/leader/command of the offense/smart' type qualities that you need in any QB of any style. But with that kind of athleticism, 4 out of 5 times you get a guy that would make a good (RB/WR/S/other skill position).

So when it comes to this type of QB, I'm usually of the opinion that yes, we can take on a project or two and hopes he really blossoms and makes our offense deadly - but most of the time, it would better suit our team to put these guys where they will most likely use their athleticism.

I'm not really that afraid of recruiting competition. There are plenty of QB A's, and there are fewer QB B's - but there are still few good QBs. I figure we take some A's, some B's, and then mold them into the kind of QBs we want. We'll find a good one. Someone will always step up.

I think I'm going off on quite a tangent, but I guess the point I wanted to stress again is that switching to the option doesn't give an inherent magical recruiting advantage or anything.

 

[Enhance]

When I am a coach, I will def use the triple option. It makes the defense think all game- and lets face it- Kids will make mistakes. I remember playing some spread teams back in HS, nothing easier for a DE like me, just pinned my ears back and went wild on the QB- then we finally lost to a Wishbone misdirection offense- I couldn't find the ball or it was gone before I even found it. It isn't even an argument in my mind.

The only problem is eventually you are going to need someone who can pass the ball. The offense will be figured out in some capacity. Georgia Tech in the Orange Bowl last year was the perfect example. Nesbitt was 2/9 for 12 yards and an interception. As long as you get a quarterback that can do that and a couple of playmakers at WR that are also good blockers, then the offense is (imho) the most deadly offense ever created.

Which I think in the end, means that if you want to run an effective option offense, you're still going to need to find a damn good QB, and those are in short supply. Sure, maybe it's a QB with a different skillset, but it doesn't make the recruiting any easier.

I think when it comes to these kind of athletes coming out of HS, you might get 1 in 5 that would make a good QB - a true dual threat. Electric in the running game, a threat through the air. But that doesn't even get to the 'gamer/leader/command of the offense/smart' type qualities that you need in any QB of any style. But with that kind of athleticism, 4 out of 5 times you get a guy that would make a good (RB/WR/S/other skill position).

So when it comes to this type of QB, I'm usually of the opinion that yes, we can take on a project or two and hopes he really blossoms and makes our offense deadly - but most of the time, it would better suit our team to put these guys where they will most likely use their athleticism.

I'm not really that afraid of recruiting competition. There are plenty of QB A's, and there are fewer QB B's - but there are still few good QBs. I figure we take some A's, some B's, and then mold them into the kind of QBs we want. We'll find a good one. Someone will always step up.

I think I'm going off on quite a tangent, but I guess the point I wanted to stress again is that switching to the option doesn't give an inherent magical recruiting advantage or anything.

You're right, and I agree with you.

My biggest problem with switching offenses in general is the inherent problems that will come with it. Not only have you been recruiting guys to play a certain style of offense, but some of them have been coached in that offense for years. For everybody's sake, it just makes sense to stick with the offense we have now and tailor it every year to fit the quarterback.

If our quarterback has great legs, then we run the zone read or option a little bit more. If he's got a great arm, then we focus on the passing game and leave the running to the running backs.

 

[huKSer]

You're right, and I agree with you.

My biggest problem with switching offenses in general is the inherent problems that will come with it. Not only have you been recruiting guys to play a certain style of offense, but some of them have been coached in that offense for years. For everybody's sake, it just makes sense to stick with the offense we have now and tailor it every year to fit the quarterback.

If our quarterback has great legs, then we run the zone read or option a little bit more. If he's got a great arm, then we focus on the passing game and leave the running to the running backs.

I'd be very, very worried

 

[Never Skerd']

When I am a coach, I will def use the triple option. It makes the defense think all game- and lets face it- Kids will make mistakes. I remember playing some spread teams back in HS, nothing easier for a DE like me, just pinned my ears back and went wild on the QB- then we finally lost to a Wishbone misdirection offense- I couldn't find the ball or it was gone before I even found it. It isn't even an argument in my mind.

The only problem is eventually you are going to need someone who can pass the ball. The offense will be figured out in some capacity. Georgia Tech in the Orange Bowl last year was the perfect example. Nesbitt was 2/9 for 12 yards and an interception. As long as you get a quarterback that can do that and a couple of playmakers at WR that are also good blockers, then the offense is (imho) the most deadly offense ever created.

No doubt there. Iowa if I remember correctly, had quite the time frame to prepare for the offense. I know that is an unfair argument and they won the game, but would they have shut it down as well if they didn't have over a month to prepare for Paul Johnson? And you are right on the pass game- Not to revert back to the HS days, but the exact play we bit on was a fake FB dive, pass to the tight end for a TD. A well oiled wishbone offense is my choice for sure.

 

[REDSTEEL]

Face it no matter what, your going to get the people that will say the option will never work now. (Though the offense Nebraska runs now isn't working either)

What gets me is the Nebraska fans they say this and then turnaround and vote 1995 team as the best ever. ........Well if they ran the option and the option could'nt work now, then how could they be the best team ever?

 

[bshirt]

Face it no matter what, your going to get the people that will say the option will never work now. (Though the offense Nebraska runs now isn't working either)

heh....that's what tears me up too.

Poster after poster continues to say we can't go back to the option because it would screw up the offense we have now (even though it doesn't work at all....and actually never has vs any decent defense until garbage time). It's really quite a hoot. :corndance

 

[Never Skerd']

To me it was like our name brand, and now we have decided to go with something else(I mean we are making our way back to what we were doing). But it was Nebraska football played by Nebraska kids, Now we have to have Nebraska football played by Texas California and Florida kids. Yes Yes I know we have always had our recruits from these places but it seemed we relied on them more with this spread bs. But then again, I was watching the 2000 game on TV yesterday vs Colorado, and we were in the Spread quite often with Crouch.

 

[Enhance]

To me it was like our name brand, and now we have decided to go with something else(I mean we are making our way back to what we were doing). But it was Nebraska football played by Nebraska kids, Now we have to have Nebraska football played by Texas California and Florida kids. Yes Yes I know we have always had our recruits from these places but it seemed we relied on them more with this spread bs. But then again, I was watching the 2000 game on TV yesterday vs Colorado, and we were in the Spread quite often with Crouch.

Nebraska was a great place to recruit for our scheme. The skill position guys were generally from out of state. That said, it's interesting when you think about the fact that some of the most talented offensive players we ever had were Nebraska boys.

I realistically perceive our program for what it is, and I know that we will never have what Osborne's offense was like (as far as scheme is concerned). My biggest problem is that we have to recruit the same guys for similar schemes that dozens of other universities are running.

 

[Never Skerd']

Enhance, I feel like we are brothers. I agree completely.

 

[Jeremy]

I'm sure most here remember - Osborne didn't always have a dual threat guy running down the line with a pitchman, not for his 1st 7 seasons. I read somewhere about the reasons why he implemented the option after starting out with an offense that was very similar to what the NFL had at the time.

He noticed after several years that Oklahoma was incredibly hard to prepare for with only a week, given they were different than most, if not all the other teams on the schedule.

Then, during the game, he would carefully and tediously build a lead, only to see the Sooner QB run through a tired Blackshirt unit and beat us a lot of times toward the end. So, he got speedy Turner Gill to come to Lincoln, the offense changed quite a bit. However, Osborne didn't want to be Oklahoma - he wanted to build and break tendencies several times during games to keep defenses honest and off-balance. The 1983 and 1995 offenses are probably the best Nebraska's ever seen, not to mention some of the best ever in college football. On a side note, the '97 offense was comprised of 10 of 11 starters from Nebraska.

I like where our offense is going, because I think it's integral to have a dual-threat guy taking snaps.