Too much zone read offense?

[ESPY]

Yes, because it was decided that we were not going to build off of that success in the Holiday Bowl, and instead going to go in a new direction with a running quarterback in Taylor Martinez. This stuff we're seeing now? It's that offense that "Bo wanted", that direction he's been supposedly wanting to go to since he got here. Enjoy it - most of us couldn't wait for those days to return, but I guess they weren't anticipating that it would come with drawbacks.

Right on the money. Hope our team has more patience with these drawbacks than lots of fans have with it right now 'cause this zone read offense is the future, and it's gonna work.

 

[huskerfan333157]

I think you can be a running team or passing team, and one of those is what you will consider your "bread and butter." If you can run the ZR you can also do any other kind of runs.

I think that's a gross simplification of the many different styles different teams might be suited for, depending on their strengths and weaknesses. I wonder, by the way, how good Taylor is from under the center. The fault of a lot of spread college QBs when they project to the next level is, people wonder how they fare under the center, which is much more prevalent in the pro's. Not sure what Taylor's HS offense looked like, but I remember it was a concern with Cody Green when he came in, as his HS offense was very simple and he was just in the shotgun all the time.

Also, watson's playcalling put us in third and long numerous times

Execution on the field put us in 3rd and long numerous times.

Watson had a good gameplan against arizona last year, in fact, it was an amazing gameplan and well balanced. I havent seen that this year at all.

Yes, because it was decided that we were not going to build off of that success in the Holiday Bowl, and instead going to go in a new direction with a running quarterback in Taylor Martinez. This stuff we're seeing now? It's that offense that "Bo wanted", that direction he's been supposedly wanting to go to since he got here. Enjoy it - most of us couldn't wait for those days to return, but I guess they weren't anticipating that it would come with drawbacks.

" Also, watson is keying on the wrs BLOCKING in practice. Since they dont get as many reps, he is PART of the problem they are dropping so much considering they dont focus as much on catching, which can cause drops in actual game situations.

Interesting that suddenly people are saying that an offense where we run the ball 70% of the time, isn't a good thing and that our receivers should be getting more action. You can't put the drops on Watson, but I agree our WRs all could be getting more chances than they have been getting. Take that up with Bo/Tom's vision for this offense. And Gilmore, who is really the guy responsible for WRs.

Im starting to wonder if you watched the defensive assignments that texas put on doing the game. The zone read could NOT be executed against the defense they were not running, you CAN NOT pint that on the players..The DE just kept their eyes on the martinze while they had a lb spy the running back. In that case, both options WERE COVERED. But if you put it as "poor execution" im guessing there are no bad coaches in ncaa because you might as well point the blame on the players and never the coaching. If the defense youre playing against is built up to stop your gameplan and you still dont adjust the first half or beginning of the third, then i guess thats the players fault and not the coaches fault for adjusting. I think gilmore should be gone too, but with watson's philosophy he is expected to work with the wr's on blocking. The WR coach cant just do whatever he wants with the wr's, he gets instructions from upstairs i.e., the offensive coordinator or whoever is in charge of the offense at that school. WATSON'S scheme wants the wrs to work on blocking more instead of working on their hands, which could be PART of the problem for the drops. You cant just blame the wrs, you have to blame the wrs, but also gimore and watson for not getting them prepared to catch the dang ball! But i guess Callahan was a good OC, but his players "didnt execute?" Callahan never adjusted signficantly neither yet everyone blamed him for not adjusting and blamed him for calling the style that didnt work against that specific D and not changing it up AT ALL. Why does watson get a pass when he can not adjust to good defenses very well? As this post has summed up, you can use the "poor execution" excuse to any coach and never blame bad coaching....Pretty sad when Iowa state can put up 28 points on texas..yet we couldnt do that, but they also knew how to stop our offense and we didnt exactly adjust.

 

[EbylHusker]

The game plan against Texas really looked like trying to sell the zone read and then go over the top for big plays. If that was what they were going for, it actually worked - we just couldn't catch the pass. I don't have much of problem with that plan, because had we actually caught the ball, we'd have won.

My issue was how long it took us to move away from that once it became apparent our players weren't capable of executing it. The reasons it wasn't working at that point didn't matter - it wasn't working, but it took us far too long to alter our game plan.

 

[druski_2k5]

I have a novel idea. How about we just stay completely open as an offense and run what will work depending on the defense we are playing. Run zone read for one game, I another, split backs another, shotgun, under center, isos, powers, throw deep, to TE's, screens, crossing routes, roll outs, boots, etc. Why do we need to be so dependent on one offensive set? Let's revolutionize football, be an offense that has sets and plays depending on what defense we play and how they can be exploited. I've always thought it was weird offenses haven't went to something like this, but I'm no expert, so what do I know. JMO.

Oh and why in the hell have we not run any misdirection. If we run the read to one side the defenses are flowing that way. How about some reverses and counters?

:yeah

-Absolutely!

Zone read should not land us in 3rd and long. It's Taylor's awful misreads that were doing that. You make the right read, and it's going to be either a short gain or a long one, almost all the time. We should be in 3rd and 7's to 3rd and 4's, which is a manageable situation.

I have a novel idea. How about we just stay completely open as an offense and run what will work depending on the defense we are playing. Run zone read for one game, I another, split backs another, shotgun, under center, isos, powers, throw deep, to TE's, screens, crossing routes, roll outs, boots, etc. Why do we need to be so dependent on one offensive set

Because it's not Playstation, and the ZR is our bread and butter? You don't just go away from what you do best. You change it up, but there's still a base, otherwise "changing it up" wouldn't be "changing" anything. I don't think you get how unrealistic that is out of Taylor. Niles Paul ran a freaking wide open crossing route, and did you see how badly Taylor missed him then? I also never thought I'd see the day when people actually started calling for screens. You think it's a lot of variety because the plays have different names, but the ZR doesn't lack in the power aspect, and I have no idea how it can't be considered misdirection. Taylor throws deep quite a bit, and as discussed before, roll-outs are a bit much to ask for from a guy that has trouble with standing-still throwing mechanics.

Also, the lack of throwing to McNeil, isn't really on the playcaller. That's on Taylor.

Zone Read is actually a great base play, matching up well in the numbers game against any defense not absolutely selling out to stop it. When they do, I'd love to say we can just start doing anything with Taylor, but the fact is we/he can't.

:bs:

Matt Davision, a former Division I Football player for Nebraska, even SUGGESTED this morning on the radio to "Do something different on first down". He didn't say "throw it all the time" on first down, but do something different. A rollout, a bootleg, a power play from UNDER CENTER, a misdirection/counter from UNDER CENTER, run RIGHT AT THEM, a short to intermediate pass on FIRST down.

Doesn't seem too "Playstation" like when you have a former player suggesting that we should have done some of these things to keep their defense honest and to "change it up" a bit.

And execution being the reason why we were in 3rd and long? Maybe a little on the players. But absolutely mostly on the play-calling. When one team sells out to stop one thing, it's time to go with something different to keep them off-balance.

The average 3rd down with Martinez in vs. Texas: 3rd and 9.5

The average 3rd down with Lee in vs. Texas: 3rd and 7.

You have to do something different, Watson talks a good game, really, I love his philosophy, but he doesn't execute what he talks about, and that's the issue I have. I'm asking for Arizona Holiday Bowl gameplan, and you can do that with Martinez, easily, he adds another element, a little bit of everything, and ask him to make those throws that Lee did.

Short slants? Posts? Slot wheels? C Routes? Misdirection? Direct snap? Option? Iso? Power I? Power plays from Pistol, which UCLA used to kill Texas' defense?

In regards to Mike McNeill not finding the ball, and it being on Taylor, I agree with you in some regard. However, my NFL team, the Tennessee Titans, have a few ways to make SURE their tight end gets the ball. It's a rollout, with Bo Scaife, the Tight End, being the ONLY passing option to get a good 5-10 yards on 1st or 2nd down, and if that is covered, Vince Young takes off himself. :hookerhorns

I remember McNeill having a few of these plays specifically FOR HIM in the Kansas State and Texas games last year, with motion, and then a rollout to him.

Have you watched Oregon, Alabama, Ohio State, teams like that offense? They do A LOT of different things GOOD. They have the pass to keep defenses honest, and have SOLID run games to go with it, that's being multiple, not being "Playstation".

Being "Playstation" would be throwing up fly routes all game long and user jumping/catching over the defenders, something myself and Huskerfan333157 and myself would know about from PS2 online days.

Being "Multiple" is not being "Unrealistic".

Watson had a good gameplan against arizona last year, in fact, it was an amazing gameplan and well balanced. I havent seen that this year at all. Sure, the zone read can work to perfection, but you have to have the athletes to run it well against great defenses. TExas has a great defense which as more speed and athleticism. We are not even in the same ballpark when it comes to comparing out athleticism to their athleticism. The zone read takes two seconds to develop and it depends on the decision making of the qb. People fail to understand that no matter what read taylor made, it was still going to be blown up in the backfield or for a minimal gain. If you payed attention to all the details, you could see that they cleary had the rb and qb contained. Even if T=mart handed it off, they still would have a defender their. When a defense is cheating up to play the run, you throw in a pass, thats common sense 101. I saw maybe ONE pass on first down in the whole first half. Also, we ran I form last year so its not like "learning something new." Of course, he could run is zone read but you could also add in a few runs from i-formation and run counters, iso's and off tackles. Also, watson's playcalling put us in third and long numerous times. If you have heard any nfl coaches, the goal is to get it at 3rd and 4 or less, not 3rd and long. The coach is also in charge of everyone doing their assignments and being mentally focused so they can catch balls. Yes, you have to blame the players, but to a certain extent you have to also blame the coaches. We have had this problem for two years now and hopefully things will get fixed. Also, "any offense" can be a well oiled machine, but if you watch most great coordinators they do watch film and adjust accordingly. They may look at the weakness of the defense and put in some new wrinkles that week in practice. Also, how many teams run NUMEROUS offensive sets? We have mainly been running shotgun but not many sets from under center, but you see alabama, ohio state, oregon, etc not onlyrun NUMEROUS sets to keep the defense offguard. You guys are acting like its impossible to run a few plays from iform or any formation under center for that matter and that we have to "stick with the zone read because thats the watson's bread and butter." Also, watson is keying on the wrs BLOCKING in practice. Since they dont get as many reps, he is PART of the problem they are dropping so much considering they dont focus as much on catching, which can cause drops in actual game situations. Our offense seems to fall apart in big games, when is it time that the offensive coaches take blame for the consisten lackadaisicalness by the offensive players?

:yeah

-Correct.

The game plan against Texas really looked like trying to sell the zone read and then go over the top for big plays. If that was what they were going for, it actually worked - we just couldn't catch the pass. I don't have much of problem with that plan, because had we actually caught the ball, we'd have won.

My issue was how long it took us to move away from that once it became apparent our players weren't capable of executing it. The reasons it wasn't working at that point didn't matter - it wasn't working, but it took us far too long to alter our game plan.

This is a good point, but it would have worked better if we had a running game, it was getting stuffed pretty well.

Look, I have nothing against the Zone read as a base formation with Martinez and our running backs back there, let me just get that out of the way.

I DO have a problem with how we keep going back to it when it's NOT WORKING. It's middle of the 3rd quarter, at home, against a team we haven't beat since 1999, and we are STILL running it?! Texas was cheating their dime and nickel backs up on the line of scrimmage to sell out the zone read, Texas also used 5 down-linemen in the game to stop the zone read, why keep running it? The defensive ends were in contain/spy the WHOLE game against Martinez. They were instructed to look at Martinez and Martinez only, not Helu, not Burkhead, not anyone, just Martinez. If he ran at you with the ball, make a play on him, they were prepared to stop the zone read, why keep trying it?

In regards to the wide receivers, yes it IS their job to catch the ball, and downfield blocking IS important, however, when we took on all of our teams before the Texas game, why were we not passing a little more to get our receivers comfortable with catching the ball in real-time situations? We just kept running zone read until the game was over, essentially. Why not give our receivers some reps because at some point in the season we were going to be down, the zone read was going to be shut down and we would need to air it out a bit to keep the defense honest, and we didn't get the work in that was needed in real-time situations to get them used to catching the ball.

 

[EbylHusker]

Yes, that was the real issue - staying with something that had no hope of working. You could tell by the end of the first that two things were happening... Texas was selling out to stuff the zone read, and Martinez wasn't making the correct reads to begin with. Those two things right there should have been enough indication to move away from the zone read in the second quarter. Or at least do something different on first down, lol.