Which offense give us the best chance to win?

[The Dude]

http://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecruiting/football/recruiting/rankings/rank-rivalspsqb/2011

Simply look at last years pro style qbs. Where is this run of pro style qbs from the north to warmer climates?

I never made that claim.

As someone said earlier, it appears to do more with population than climate.

I've said that local recruiting bases has as much to do with it than anything, at least twice now...

Also, there isn't exactly a mass exodus for top QBs to cold weather schools. Which was my whole point.

 

[flatwaterfan]

I think the model to follow is T.O's It has proven results over a long period of time. There are more local players for that style so thus you expanded your pool of players that you have a high chance of signing. Fit's the weather better. I think it's easier for high schools to run thus you get more high schools running it and more pre trained players ready for your system.

 

[druski_2k5]

A lot of good information here, great topic and discussion.

I think a spread option offense, or a multiple offense with the threat of an option attack from any formation, is the best offense for us to win at Nebraska.

You would have to put in a lot of time to be able to execute the option, however I think it can be done. You need the coaches and the athletes in place to make it work. I think we have the coaches now, and I know for a fact we have the athletes to get it done. The fact we are going to put the best athletes on the field and get our younger guys out there quicker shows a positive step in the right direction.

However, a spread option offense I think is the way to go. You can be balanced 50/50 out of this philosophy [see KU 2007 and Urban Meyer Florida tams] while still imposing your will either through the ground or in the air. You have to be able to pass when need to, and you have to be able to run either around or right at the defenses to keep them guessing.

Our teams in the 90s and early 2000s were not 50/50, but we kept defenses guessing, which is what you had to do. You had no idea when you would see an Option pass from Shotgun or an option pass from an I-Formation set-up. We were probably 73/23 run to pass if I had to guess, but we kept defenses off balance, we kept them guessing. Any offense like that will be good, and it will be even more lethal if we can get a true 50/50 ratio going, which is what Bo wants to do, and he said himself he wants to run a Florida type spread when he was first hired. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Florida, Oregon, Texas 05, and Auburn of last year, were fun offenses to watch. And to say an offense is bad because Oregon "runs around them as opposed to running through them" what difference does it make? They are scoring points, moving the ball, and limiting turnovers, which is more than our offense can say last year. Yeah they didn't win the BCS Title Game, but Auburn did with their Spread Hybrid and a hell of an athlete at quarterback.

A balanced attack will always out-trump an all out air attack philosophy or an all out 3 yards and a cloud of dust philosophy.

 

[Hunter94]

my only concern is we will be nowhere close to calling a 50/50 type offense, not even 60/40....whether that is good or bad remains to be seen.

 

[bshirt]

Since we derailed the "QB depth thread" with our engaging QB debate, I'll start one here asking which style does everyone think gives us the best chance to win? All things considered - region, recruiting, whatever you think affects it.

My argument (as you may have read) is that a pro style offense gives us the best chance to win the most games. We've proven that we can recruit good backs and linemen, and solid receivers. My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

Why am I right/wrong? What do all of you think gives us the best opportunity to have the best offense year in and year out?

You're wrong. If I'm not mistaken we just spent the better part of 4 years proving that.

As far as what would work best, probably whatever the option would've evolved too if we wouldn't have gotten rid of it, it'd have been unique for both recruiting and teams facing us to defend, and the power running game was a thing of beauty.

Explain...

The Callahan era...

Which had some very good offenses? If we had the 08 offense two years ago we are national champions. Last year we would have been 13-1.

EDIT: Let me add I'm not saying Callahan was here in 08 :facepalm: , but it was his players with his coordinator

The 2008 offense wasn't a pro-style offense. It also played some absolutely terrible defenses in the Big 12. 2008 Oklahoma's offense was better than ours - in fact they tore through the conference and broke the 1983 Nebraska team's scoring record. They then scored a whopping 14 points against Florida - who won the national championship with a spread option offense and a QB who was not a pocket-passer.

Callahan's offenses also weren't as good as some remember them. They were just better than Cosgrove's horrific defenses.

They were more pass heavy, which is sort of the root of my view. And the 2006 and 2007 offenses were 14th and 9th.

In 2006, the best teams we played were Oklahoma, Auburn, and USC. We scored 7, 14, and 10 points respectively. That's not much different than the results our offense had last year with a beat-up QB. In 2007, we lost to Missouri 41-6. We lost to Oklahoma State 45-14. We lost to Texas A&M 36-14. We squeaked by a weak Wake Forest team, 20-17. Again, the offensive results in big games were not particularly good. Neither of those offenses were that good, but defense in the Big 12 at that time was particularly weak, and they got blown out often enough they could score some garbage points (76-31 loss to Kansas, 65-51 loss to Colorado, etc.)

100% on the money.

Clownahan's teams racked up big stats on the creampuffs and the truly endless garbage times when we were hopelessly getting blown out. Yeah, we scored big & racked up massive stats on their waterboys but that was about it. Fully agree it was better than Coz's defense but that wasn't saying very much (at all).

We "must" return to some kind of run-first offense as we're never going to out recruit the T. Brady, D. Marino, K. Stabler, etc pocket passers. I really, really hope Beck speaks true on where we hang our hat.

 

[GMoose]

Keller was a big get, and Lee was one of the top JUCO QBs in the nation.

Like I said, there are football reasons you can argue for going after one QB or another. But "We're in cold, lonely Nebraska, we can't " is not a good one. I also have to heavily disagree with "This is how we rolled in the old days, so this is the only way Nebraska can succeed." Times change and programs can either adapt (as ours *is* doing) or get left behind, perpetually pining for the past. Of course it doesn't preclude a program from doing the same thing it has done, but choosing whether or not to do so should be independent of "Well, that's what they did when they were winning 20 years ago."

+1 for balance. By the way, GMoose, I think you are advocating a balanced offense, not really a passing one, are you not? Unless 50/50 splits count as 'passing'. I think a lot of the models you could bring up, i.e, Alabama, Wisconsin, Wake, Kansas under Mangino, were all about 50/50 splits. Even the Huskers under Callahan and Watson were IIRC.

I have been a bit vague, I know. I've been so heavy on the throwing deal and prostyle deal is because my perfect offense is one that has equal capacity to throw as to run, instead of being great through the air and mediocre on the ground, or vice versa. If that means 50/50 run pass, so be it. I want an offense that if a secondary shuts down the air game, we can run the ball. If the run gets stuffed, we can air it out equally as well. If the offense was a little more run heavy, hey, I'm a Nebraska boy born and bred, so I wouldn't mind that. As far as the quarterback goes, I want one that gets the ball to our playmakers as efficiently as possible. Like the Ravens or Falcons offense. I would love that.

 

[Husker In Oklahoma]

Which had some very good offenses? If we had the 08 offense two years ago we are national champions. Last year we would have been 13-1.

EDIT: Let me add I'm not saying Callahan was here in 08 :facepalm: , but it was his players with his coordinator

All of those offenses sucked balls when they were ever forced to do anything. They were S T U F F E D by every good defense it saw. The 2008 offense sucked as well. It was nothing when it had to be. Hate to be negative, but none of those offense were any good whatsoever!