Time to go back to the option/power offense

First, NU's offense gets a lot of yards, they just suck in the red zone.

Second, everyone in the conference is running this stuff for the most part.

Right now, it is all about scoring points (the yards are there) and cleaning up the flags.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am I said:
Because of lockdown I can proudly say I watched every game that was possible on YouTube from 1991-2001. Also watched multiple games from 2002-2012, and watched a few of old ones from 70-80s. 
 

Starting in like 1983 or so TO ran mostly I-formation. Then he went 4 wide a lot, double wing, motion to trips, twins a crap ton to the wide side, etc etc (Around 92-93ish)...over and over the announcers would comment that “the difficultly in prepping for Nebraska is that they run their power game so well. But also throw in multiple formations and sets and actually spread teams out a lot.”  Good base, multiple formations, similar plays but spread out vs the base I-form. 
 

basically, don’t forget when TO hit his stride 91-97 he had his base power plays and formations but ran 6-8 other formations that built mismatches and scheme problems for opponents.  But there was a core, a system of plays from every formation. Then expanded from there. Also, he was a f#&%ing master play caller. Maybe the best ever? 
 

return to a “triple option, 4 formation set?” Hell no!! (Which is mostly what TO had from 82-90). 

Frost needs to have a base that works and build multiple layers on top of that. For instance...where the f#&% is the uptempo, snap it every 27 seconds base? Or the quick draw, sprint option, make a read on the DE/OLB quick hit RPO base (once they have dime in) to a lead power from formation to motion power base? What is the BASE and contiguous levels built on them? 
 

we are on our heels instead of putting defenses  on theirs IMHO. What is our PRESS? Whether Power or Tempo.  Muscle or Speed. What do we DO that is the best and build layers on that? 
 

I don’t know the answer, I just know we don’t have a base and don’t seem to have layers built on it. 
 
Click to expand...
This is the major difference with TO.   He did not beat teams with tons of plays, he did it with a limited set that they could execute too perfection.  These were ran from multiple formations that created the mismatches and also "looked" like a lot of different plays.  Austin alluded to the run game this year paring down to what we were really good at instead of all the average stuff. Find our identity.

Year 3, we still look like we are slinging crap at the wall and seeing what sticks.  No real ebb and flow to the play calling.  Definitely not up tempo in the least......

3rd down success percentage when we are "behind schedule", penalties and lack of red zone offense are killing us.

 
hqdefault.jpg


 
knapplc said:
Yeah, I was confused by that comment, too. Spread offense is the current wave. Everyone is running it. 
Click to expand...
Just being cagey, but wouldn’t it make since do something different particularly if your offensive identity isn’t set yet? 
 

not advocating for the option, but I remember opposing coaches saying it was hard to prepare for because no one else really ran it. 

 
krc1995 said:
Just being cagey, but wouldn’t it make since do something different particularly if your offensive identity isn’t set yet? 
 

not advocating for the option, but I remember opposing coaches saying it was hard to prepare for because no one else really ran it. 
Click to expand...


There's merit to that. But one of the reasons Osborne was able to use the Option/Power I so well was his advantage in S&C. We no longer have that, and defenses have the speed to shut it down on the edges. 

 
I honestly hate sounding even remotely disrespectful to the OP, but sometimes I think I'm watching a different game than other people are.

442 yards of total offense is just fine. We don't have a problem moving the chains, we just can't put the ball in the end zone. The option almost certainly doesn't fix that.

Now a better power rushing game from our running backs? I definitely agree there. Mills is an underrated part of the problem in my opinion. We need that Ameer Abdullah type of special guy where when you give him just any kind of a lane at all he twists, spins, and jukes his way for gains. Currently, we don't have that guy - not on the field, at least.

 
knapplc said:
There's merit to that. But one of the reasons Osborne was able to use the Option/Power I so well was his advantage in S&C. We no longer have that, and defenses have the speed to shut it down on the edges. 
Click to expand...


Beat me to it.

If Nebraska announced it's intention to go to power I or option football, and to largely abandon the pass, our running game might actually be less successful than it is now. The option was all about playing the edges, and defensive players and systems have gotten a lot better at closing the edges than they were in Osborne's day. 

Also, option football is all about split second decision making by the QB running high risk plays.  If our guy is telegraphing his forward passes, that's still a huge liability when making pitches behind the line of scrimmage.

The OP makes a haunting reference to CM Husker, who believed Nebraska would forever be too backwards and undesirable to attract players at these so-called "skill" positions that involve passing and catching. That's just silly. And depressing. 

 
Also, Frost and a lot of the successful modern coaches like running a "rhythm" offense, playing fast, no huddles, catching the D off-guard. That's where it really helps to have an improvising dual threat QB.  It's worked before, but I didn't see it on Saturday -- a lot more looking to the sidelines, giving the defense time to align, then running a 5 yard play on 3rd and 11. 

 
Guy Chamberlin said:
Also, Frost and a lot of the successful modern coaches like running a "rhythm" offense, playing fast, no huddles, catching the D off-guard. That's where it really helps to have an improvising dual threat QB.  It's worked before, but I didn't see it on Saturday -- a lot more looking to the sidelines, giving the defense time to align, then running a 5 yard play on 3rd and 11. 
Click to expand...


Yeah. We gave two different quarterbacks a chance in this game and they both threw really stupid interceptions into the end zone, right?

Imagine if those picks didn't happen and both drives just result in field goals.

This is B1G football when you play teams like Northwestern, Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State...yeah, they line up in spread offense formations more and more today, but many games tend to be lower scoring. And the team that plays better on special teams, plays good field position, doesn't commit turnovers, and kicks a bunch of field goals is often times the winner - just like the brand of football that was being played in this conference 25 years ago.

We haven't been able to show up disciplined enough to really play that brand of football. Scheme isn't the problem; the problems are much more basic and systemic than even scheme.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
lo country said:
This is the major difference with TO.   He did not beat teams with tons of plays, he did it with a limited set that they could execute too perfection.  These were ran from multiple formations that created the mismatches and also "looked" like a lot of different plays.  Austin alluded to the run game this year paring down to what we were really good at instead of all the average stuff. Find our identity.
Click to expand...


This gets debated a lot, but my understanding is that Tom Osborne's offense wasn't that simple; in many ways it required more skill, finesse, and precision than lots of other offenses. Those multiple formations and options all had to be practiced to perfections, and Tom still had 15-20 pass plays feathered in, and actually had more elaborate trick plays than a lot of coaches who are accused of getting "cute." But when executed with talent and commitment, that offense certainly was a thing of beauty. 

And don't underestimate the value of having a defense that only gives up 12 points a game. Nebraska offenses under Osborne could afford to start slow or bog down, knowing they rarely had to play come-from-behind.  Recent Nebraska offenses get forced into shooting matches early, and that can mess with any game-plan. 

 
WyoHusker56 said:
I mean Undone said stupid INTs and throwing a pass into the back of one of your lineman's helmets is pretty stupid.
Click to expand...


Yeah. Down by 8 in the 4th quarter, second & goal from the 4...if it's not there, toss it into the third row of the stadium and live to see 3rd down.

If we took a poll and the majority of people chalked that play up to bad luckk, then fine. I've posted this what seems like 10 times since Saturday afternoon but I'll say it again: The big issue is we need to drive back the line of scrimmage with a RB that can make something out of nothing and get into the damn end zone.

That's probably the real issue.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top