Why the option?

[Mierin]

I grew up watching Nebraska football. I like running teams, and I liked the option. I'm confused about why it's so confusing that people are excited to see it. (But like others have said, I don't think we're doing traditional option anyway. Maybe every once in awhile).

 

[Blackshirt316]

Also the reason people want that kind of offense is because we can recruit that kind of offense.

We can recruit the elite offensive-linemen and power runners out of the Midwest (the guys Wisconsin and Iowa and Ohio State get right now and that we used to stockpile) AND get the fast RB's QB's and WR's from Florida, Texas, California etc. that we currently have on the roster.

Not every team has the location and tradition to get both.

 

[beanman]

I thought Oregon was more of a spread type thing.

Oregon runs the spread option. Very similar to what Nebraska was just starting to run in 1997 before Osborne Retired and Solich went more conservative.

Similar to what we ran last year I'd say.

Or where we have been trying to get to recently, at least.

Remember how sick of the read option we got last year? Guys were denouncing it left and right.

Because we ran it 75% of the time and half the time Taylor made the wrong read.

Uhhh.....because he had a bad ankle on one leg and turf toe on the other "might" have had something to do with it?

He was making the wrong reads the whole year, but got away with it because we were playing teams like K-State who were terrible against the run. And Zoogies, our offense last year looked like about 10% of the variety of option plays that Oregon ran, so I don't agree with your statement. I think an offense similar to 97 where we ran a mix of power/spread and ran the option with Wiggins would be successful today, particularly with some of the young speed we've got this year. I am all for running the option(with a little more creativity than Watson had).

 

[orhusker]

An argument for an updated option based offense can be made. Nebraska will always be at a disadvantage in recruiting. We will have a hard time winning recruiting battles for elite 11 QB's. There are however tons of great athlete QB's that would rather play option QB in college rather than change positions (Devin Fuller I hope).

Secondly, very few teams see the option attack regularly. Preparing for it in one week can be a handful

Finally, we are NU and its part of our identity.

 

[stlspartan]

I'm very interested to see how this plays out. The B10 often has a team with an option package, but it's generally broken out in big games as a novel formation where it is run for a series or two. The difference with NU is that the conference hasn't had a dedicated, traditional option team. I don't think the defensive coaches are clueless about it, but I don't think the've seen it run to perfection either.

Obviously, NU tilts towards the run as much as any team in the B10 and probably more. It seems like it's one of those attacks that works when you outclass the other guys. I've no clue if that will be the case against the top half of the conference, especially against the teams that like to play smash mouth. If it works, then NU will be top dog, but I would like to believe it won't be that easy. I'm guessing that there's a reason that the traditional powers in the conference like UM and OSU gave up on physically dominating everybody and have turned to more balanced attacks.

 

[Scarlet Overkill]

Why are people practically drooling over the possibility of running an option based offense? Sure it was great fun to watch in the 90's, but things have evolved, IMO, and if 'we' started running that type of offense, I think it could actually hurt recruiting in the future.

What's your opinion?

You're wrong? that's my opinion.

That whole sentiment got us Callahan in the first place. Things haven't evolved much... Tebow running the option won florida 2 titles basically. Paul Johnson was killing teams at Navy and has chronic over-achievers at GT now due to the option. As everyone else has said, see Oregon.

and the zone read is 'option.'

and you know what... we had an identity we could recruit to when we ran it.

So, a 6-7 record last year was over achieving for GT? My fear is (and you could be correct in saying I'm wrong), once your opponents get familiar with it, it's no longer an advantage.

EDIT: to add that GT's 6 wins last year were against the crappiest possible teams. A depleted NC team, Duke, South Carolina State, close one over WF, Virginia, and Middle Tennessee.

 

[orhusker]

Why are people practically drooling over the possibility of running an option based offense? Sure it was great fun to watch in the 90's, but things have evolved, IMO, and if 'we' started running that type of offense, I think it could actually hurt recruiting in the future.

What's your opinion?

You're wrong? that's my opinion.

That whole sentiment got us Callahan in the first place. Things haven't evolved much... Tebow running the option won florida 2 titles basically. Paul Johnson was killing teams at Navy and has chronic over-achievers at GT now due to the option. As everyone else has said, see Oregon.

and the zone read is 'option.'

and you know what... we had an identity we could recruit to when we ran it.

So, a 6-7 record last year was over achieving for GT? My fear is (and you could be correct in saying I'm wrong), once your opponents get familiar with it, it's no longer an advantage.

G.T. seems to run an option offense similar to our 90's version. An updated version like Tebow's Florida, WVU, or Oregon might get you the same advantages with more balance.

 

[zoogs]

The limitations on variety last year came from having a guy who had very few years of experience as a QB being the man, in my opinion. I am not so sure that this year will be so different, because even as a sophomore, he still doesn't have that much experience being a QB. I guess what I am trying to say is that Oregon is where we have been trying to head since Bo got here, with last year being a big (if too sudden) step in that direction and this year being another one. We'll see what the results are!

I'm not sure Oregon's offense is very comparable with 1997 though. Some people have said it is what TO would be running toda if he were still coaching, but today is 10+ years past 1997.

 

[Scarlet Overkill]

If GT craps the bed again this year, will they stay with their option? 6 wins against what amounts to air doesn't make me think that the true option football can be the bread and butter alone.

 

[Hercules]

Why are people practically drooling over the possibility of running an option based offense? Sure it was great fun to watch in the 90's, but things have evolved, IMO, and if 'we' started running that type of offense, I think it could actually hurt recruiting in the future.

What's your opinion?

You're wrong? that's my opinion.

That whole sentiment got us Callahan in the first place. Things haven't evolved much... Tebow running the option won florida 2 titles basically. Paul Johnson was killing teams at Navy and has chronic over-achievers at GT now due to the option. As everyone else has said, see Oregon.

and the zone read is 'option.'

and you know what... we had an identity we could recruit to when we ran it.

So, a 6-7 record last year was over achieving for GT? My fear is (and you could be correct in saying I'm wrong), once your opponents get familiar with it, it's no longer an advantage.

It's harder to get familiar with the option offense when defenses usually only face it once or twice a year.

Anyways, you're really just stating the same old fears that everyone has expressed about option offenses since the 1980's. In the 80's, Tom Osborne couldn't beat Florida teams because they were too fast and our offense was outdated. Then we won 3 national championships in 4 years, 2 of them against Florida teams, and 2 of them against SEC teams. People constantly said that our offense was outdated and slow, and they were constantly proven wrong.

Option offenses still work when run well, and with the right personnel. Simply saying, "It's not the 90's anymore" is a terrible argument. In the 90's, people were saying, "It's not the 70's anymore." Those same geniuses also came up with the argument that Nebraska wouldn't be able to run their offense against Florida on a grass surface. Whoops.

Seriously, check out these "experts."

 

[GoBigRed66]

People.....Its not the X's and the O's but the Jimmy's and the Joe's. You have to have the right pieces to run an offense! Currently we are closer than we have been in the past but right now than we havn't been closer since Eric Crouch! The spread option is a very dynamic and generalized offense that takes some precision! We first and foremost need a QB that can run it...Beck is going to run simple and basic plays where there is only an option or two and then Martinez is gonna run! Thats 2011 O-fense! I still think they will be fine but the O needs to be outstanding at there 40-50 plays this year!

 

[zoogs]

I'd add to that last point by GBR66. It's more than the label you want to slap on the offense and the similarity of the kinds of plays installed. It is the totality of the entire offensive system and adjustments. It all comes back to the unity of the staff and the coherence of the vision of the guy who installs it.

Kevin Cosgrove could learn what Bo does and install his system as a DC elsewhere, but it isn't going to work. Why? Because he's not Bo Pelini.

It doesn't matter so much just what we choose to run in my opinion. We need that kind of guy at the helm of it all, or it is just not going to work.

 

[Blackshirt316]

The limitations on variety last year came from having a guy who had very few years of experience as a QB being the man, in my opinion. I am not so sure that this year will be so different, because even as a sophomore, he still doesn't have that much experience being a QB. I guess what I am trying to say is that Oregon is where we have been trying to head since Bo got here, with last year being a big (if too sudden) step in that direction and this year being another one. We'll see what the results are!

I'm not sure Oregon's offense is very comparable with 1997 though. Some people have said it is what TO would be running toda if he were still coaching, but today is 10+ years past 1997.

It's not that it's similar to what he'd be running today. It's what he was building towards running in 1998,1999,2000 and 2001 with Crouch/Newcombe. (though what he was building towards was probably closer to Florida than Oregon)

Instead Osborne retired and we got 6 years of the QB keeper right, QB keeper Left, HB dive and Punt offense from Solich.

 

[Hercules]

The limitations on variety last year came from having a guy who had very few years of experience as a QB being the man, in my opinion. I am not so sure that this year will be so different, because even as a sophomore, he still doesn't have that much experience being a QB. I guess what I am trying to say is that Oregon is where we have been trying to head since Bo got here, with last year being a big (if too sudden) step in that direction and this year being another one. We'll see what the results are!

I'm not sure Oregon's offense is very comparable with 1997 though. Some people have said it is what TO would be running toda if he were still coaching, but today is 10+ years past 1997.

It's not that it's similar to what he'd be running today. It's what he was building towards running in 1998,1999,2000 and 2001 with Crouch/Newcombe. (though what he was building towards was probably closer to Florida than Oregon)

Instead Osborne retired and we got 6 years of the QB keeper right, QB keeper Left, HB dive and Punt offense from Solich.

Osborne has talked in public about how he admired Urban Meyer's offense. If he had kept coaching, he would have stolen plenty from Meyer (while Meyer was at Utah), and we'd probably see a combination of 1997 Nebraska offense with Meyer's Florida offense and Kelly's Oregon offense. I don't know how much Osborne's offense would look like Kelly's, but Kelly has stolen an awful lot of Osborne's concepts and installed them in his offense.

 

[bshirt]

Why are people practically drooling over the possibility of running an option based offense? Sure it was great fun to watch in the 90's, but things have evolved, IMO, and if 'we' started running that type of offense, I think it could actually hurt recruiting in the future.

What's your opinion?

You're wrong? that's my opinion.

That whole sentiment got us Callahan in the first place. Things haven't evolved much... Tebow running the option won florida 2 titles basically. Paul Johnson was killing teams at Navy and has chronic over-achievers at GT now due to the option. As everyone else has said, see Oregon.

and the zone read is 'option.'

and you know what... we had an identity we could recruit to when we ran it.

So, a 6-7 record last year was over achieving for GT? My fear is (and you could be correct in saying I'm wrong), once your opponents get familiar with it, it's no longer an advantage.

EDIT: to add that GT's 6 wins last year were against the crappiest possible teams. A depleted NC team, Duke, South Carolina State, close one over WF, Virginia, and Middle Tennessee.

No one ever has GT a recruiting powerhouse yet last year they led the nation in rushing but their new DC got cremated. P. Johnson has had success for years everywhere he's been and I wouldn't count him out due to "one" year's defensive failure.

Speaking of crappy teams, how about Clownahan's fluffball 2004 (5-6) and 2007 (5 -7) teams? Oh yeah, I know.......lots & lots of garbage pts/yds so the offensive stats look good. Soooo impressive.

Thanks a lot, but I'll take my chances with Bo/Beck's "run-first" offense.