To all that didn't want to run the option!

CyHawk said:
It was great to see the Huskers and Frost have some success. Every single person on the team deserved to feel the vibe in that stadium yesterday. I have always loved watching a great option team, but I do believe that the game, the rules, and the players have moved on from it. It worked with Nortwestern, and it may work sporadically within an overall game plan, but a 100% option team, in my opinion, would not be successful today. Remember, it was Northwestern.
Click to expand...
What is a 100% option team? 

 
CyHawk said:
It was great to see the Huskers and Frost have some success. Every single person on the team deserved to feel the vibe in that stadium yesterday. I have always loved watching a great option team, but I do believe that the game, the rules, and the players have moved on from it. It worked with Nortwestern, and it may work sporadically within an overall game plan, but a 100% option team, in my opinion, would not be successful today. Remember, it was Northwestern.
Click to expand...
I could definitely see how a person with the handle name cyhawk would try to steer Nebraska away from running the option. I'd be scared too! Just reenforces why we should be running it. We just had the most dominant performance we have ever had, just wait till the shopmores and Freshman on the line become Seniors and we add depth. Frost is running a more modern version of the option one that actually has better passing and a two min options. If this offense starts doing this more consistently watch out. This isnt going to be like the Oregon teams that buckled when things got physical. This offense will be battle tested in the physical big ten. 

 
ColoradoHusk said:
do like the counter steps from Adrian and the I-back out of the pistol set, as it reminds me of the reverse pivots that the QB would do after taking the snap from under center.  
Click to expand...
Yes. I liked that too.  It really caught NW flat footed on one play

 
Nebraska55fan said:
 Technically yes, the word option is in the play

HOWEVER- MOST college teams run zone read

VERY VERY few run triple- because it's a whole nother level of complexity and time commitment. AND NU has so many nuances to theirs so it cant be taken away by looking at a formation or tendency. It's obvious theyve invested a lot of time in it- it's not a "cheap" series to install the way NU is doing it- not even close. 
Click to expand...
It's still the same Chip Kelly playbook from Oregon. They ran almost all these same plays. Most spread teams do have speed and load options in their play book, but like you said they use it more as a constraint play than bread and butter.

 
TGHusker said:
Yes. I liked that too.  It really caught NW flat footed on one play
Click to expand...
That jab step to the strong/wide side makes the LB's pause their pursuit for one beat, and sometimes it can catch the LB's flat footed (like you mention) and create a big play on the weak/short side.

 
BigRedBuster said:
You talking about option to the short side?

:blink:
Click to expand...
LOL, Betts long TD run was a pitch to the short side, although it came off of a fake give to Rahmir going to the strong side.

I know short side options were a joke under Solich, given his dependency on the option, and then Crouch would just go to whatever side had the fewer defenders.  However, short side options are very effective if there are even numbers, blocked well, or the ball carrier has enough speed to outrun the pursuit from the middle of the field.

 
ColoradoHusk said:
LOL, Betts long TD run was a pitch to the short side, although it came off of a fake give to Rahmir going to the strong side.

I know short side options were a joke under Solich, given his dependency on the option, and then Crouch would just go to whatever side had the fewer defenders.  However, short side options are very effective if there are even numbers, blocked well, or the ball carrier has enough speed to outrun the pursuit from the middle of the field.
Click to expand...
I was never against option to the short side. It’s a good play. 

 
DrinkinwitTerrellFarley said:
It reminds me of the way people talk about a knuckleball pitcher as a gimmick in baseball.  If there is enough talent and execution, great things can happen like R.A. Dickey winning the Cy Young award.
Click to expand...
I just think it is a dumb thing to say "100% option offense". Like did this person even watch the game? We ran several not option plays. Now if Cyhawk wants to argue that the option shouldnt be a part of college football then make that claim. I would argue some of our best football has been found when we have "options" on offense. I am sure no successful teams run any RPO right? Give me a break lol 

 
BigRedBuster said:
Good blocking and have the numbers. 
Click to expand...


This.  Osborne ran the option to the short side because our formation was strong to the field said so that's where the defense lined up as well.  So there were fewer people to get in the way to the short side.

Frank failed to understand basic concepts like that.  Amongst other things, he run the flex-bone formation which doesn't have a strong side then still run to the short side.  And on top of that, he'd run it to the short side with Lance Brown as the pitch man when he could have run it to the wide side with Bobby Newcombe as the pitch man.  Interesting choice.

 
Mavric said:
This.  Osborne ran the option to the short side because our formation was strong to the field said so that's where the defense lined up as well.  So there were fewer people to get in the way to the short side.

Frank failed to understand basic concepts like that.  Amongst other things, he run the flex-bone formation which doesn't have a strong side then still run to the short side.  And on top of that, he'd run it to the short side with Lance Brown as the pitch man when he could have run it to the wide side with Bobby Newcombe as the pitch man.  Interesting choice.
Click to expand...
This is how I felt about our offense under Solich for sure.  We probably ran more pitch options in Frank's 5 years than we ran in the previous 10 under Osborne, and as a fan it felt like it was because our coach did not have firm grasp on the concepts our offense had been based on previously.

 
CyHawk said:
It was great to see the Huskers and Frost have some success. Every single person on the team deserved to feel the vibe in that stadium yesterday. I have always loved watching a great option team, but I do believe that the game, the rules, and the players have moved on from it. It worked with Nortwestern, and it may work sporadically within an overall game plan, but a 100% option team, in my opinion, would not be successful today. Remember, it was Northwestern.
Click to expand...
True, Northwestern looks about as bad as I've ever seen them. But I contend that a Paul Johnson disciple could be successful at the P5 level outside of the Service Academies. A struggling, re-building Navy team just beat high-powered UCF running option every play. Army took Michigan to OT a couple years ago. Air Force beat cu in 2019 running option after the buffs beat us. It's a viable strategy, especially with the kind of athletes we can draw to Lincoln. 

I realize that this is all a moot point after the drubbing we delivered last night. I believe, however, after watching football since 1989, coaching for 15 or so years, basing an offense on the option is a viable scheme and attack. We'd be unique, hard to prepare for, keep the defense fresh, and wear opposing defenses down. There's no reason why it wouldn't be effective. 

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