Why wait?

newearthhusker said:
Then what team has ever run a “power/spread option” attack. Oregon is far from “power” running.

So Tebow and Newton barreling ahead, shoulder down running over people on short yardage situations wasn’t “power” football?

When people throw the terms “power” and “spread” together I guess I draw a blank as far as examples go.
Click to expand...
Isn't the whole point of the "spread" that you spread the defense across the field, negating the need to "power" through their massed DL and LBs? I think you're making a valid point.

Regardless of what the terminology is, I just want to see us be capable of lining up and running the damn ball. If that's out of a spread, Wing T, Wishbone, Power I or whatever makes no difference to me. Just run it however you can and be effective at it.

Same goes for the passing game. I'm really easy to please - just don't shoot yourself in the foot and move the ball.

 
knapplc said:
newearthhusker said:
Then what team has ever run a “power/spread option” attack. Oregon is far from “power” running.

So Tebow and Newton barreling ahead, shoulder down running over people on short yardage situations wasn’t “power” football?

When people throw the terms “power” and “spread” together I guess I draw a blank as far as examples go.
Click to expand...
Isn't the whole point of the "spread" that you spread the defense across the field, negating the need to "power" through their massed DL and LBs? I think you're making a valid point.

Regardless of what the terminology is, I just want to see us be capable of lining up and running the damn ball. If that's out of a spread, Wing T, Wishbone, Power I or whatever makes no difference to me. Just run it however you can and be effective at it.

Same goes for the passing game. I'm really easy to please - just don't shoot yourself in the foot and move the ball.
Click to expand...
:yeah

 
junior4949 said:
Isn't he 6'5? Even at 220 with that height he'll still be pretty skinny.
Click to expand...
Even only at 220-230, IMO, he will be big enough to take the punishment that the power/spread attack comes with. Jammal Lord was only around 220 pounds, but he was a pretty powerful runner. I'm not comparing the two, but just because he might only weigh 220-230 pounds at 6'5" does not mean he doesnt run with power.

 
Cam Newton is 6'5, 250. Tebow is like 6'2, 245. Even Gabbert is 6'5, 235. 220 for Bubba would still be on the small side. He needs to pack on some pounds.

 
knapplc said:
newearthhusker said:
Then what team has ever run a “power/spread option” attack. Oregon is far from “power” running.

So Tebow and Newton barreling ahead, shoulder down running over people on short yardage situations wasn’t “power” football?

When people throw the terms “power” and “spread” together I guess I draw a blank as far as examples go.
Click to expand...
Isn't the whole point of the "spread" that you spread the defense across the field, negating the need to "power" through their massed DL and LBs? I think you're making a valid point.

Regardless of what the terminology is, I just want to see us be capable of lining up and running the damn ball. If that's out of a spread, Wing T, Wishbone, Power I or whatever makes no difference to me. Just run it however you can and be effective at it.

Same goes for the passing game. I'm really easy to please - just don't shoot yourself in the foot and move the ball.
Click to expand...

Knapplc have you been reading my thoughts again? I told you to stop.

 
I am very thankful for 2008.

Sometimes you have to have the patience to build a program from the ground up. And that means never giving up or taking lumps one season for hypothetical gains down the road. Instilling a culture of winning in a team that had lost its way...there's one way to go about that, and that is expecting to win every game from the very beginning, and doing everything you can as a coach to do that.

Nebraska had just gone 5-7 and everyone's boy Bo Pelini was back in town. He had the luxury of going the patient route and I think it paid dividends immediately the next year. Bill Callahan hardly had that same luxury, and you can see by the JUCOs he pulled in, as well as the "Screw this year, we're building for next" philosophy in 2004. It was a quick turnaround and we did fine in 2005 and 2006 given where we were headed. But when things went south again, people still had the bitter taste of 2004 to hold against him, in addition to 2007. A bad choice in hindsight, IMO.

 
My explanation is that Beck was brought in with the idea that he would be the OC 2-3 years later. In 2008, my guess is we didn't fire Watson because:

1. Osborne wanted to keep him around for continuity on the offense until Bo built up the defense

2. Much of the offensive side of the ball were seniors, who were familiar with the current offense, so it wouldn't make sense to fire him and have 2008 be bad for both sides of the ball. Ganz, Swift, Peterson, Slauson, Murtha, Lucky, etc. were all familiar with the WCO up to that point.

Personally, after 2009, I would've fired him, just so we could move on with the assumed original plan, moving back to a run-oriented Read Option team. The 2009 Offense was very young, they had room to grow and develop in a new offense. but we've basically wasted 1-2 years, depending on how you look at it. However, we're not hurt too badly, IMO. We have a young Qb as the incumbent starter, who's skillset fits the Read Option anyways, as well as a fairly young stable of backs, young WR's, and a lot of new talent coming in at the OL spot. Most of these guys should be able to work with each other in the new offense just fine for at least 2-3 years, and then we'll have more young talent to develop, hopefully.

My .02

 
The reason we didn't immediately go to the spread in 2008 was because of the learning curve with the OL. Under Clownahan, we had recruited OL to pass block. 2008 might have looked eerily similar to 2004 had we dove into the spread.

 
knapplc said:
newearthhusker said:
Then what team has ever run a “power/spread option” attack. Oregon is far from “power” running.

So Tebow and Newton barreling ahead, shoulder down running over people on short yardage situations wasn’t “power” football?

When people throw the terms “power” and “spread” together I guess I draw a blank as far as examples go.
Click to expand...
Isn't the whole point of the "spread" that you spread the defense across the field, negating the need to "power" through their massed DL and LBs? I think you're making a valid point.

Regardless of what the terminology is, I just want to see us be capable of lining up and running the damn ball. If that's out of a spread, Wing T, Wishbone, Power I or whatever makes no difference to me. Just run it however you can and be effective at it.

Same goes for the passing game. I'm really easy to please - just don't shoot yourself in the foot and move the ball.
Click to expand...
I think blocking schemes have more to do with building a "power" attack vs. a "finesse" attack. Oregon runs power football just as Auburn does, they just don't have a 250 lb QB, and eve their running backs are smaller.

Now, you could argue that Oregon runs more zone read, which like the triple option is more finesse than just a FB dive, and that Auburn runs less zone read and more power, but either way you've got pretty similar philosophies that are just on slightly different ends of the power vs. finesse spectrum. It's not like Oregon is a "finesse offense" and Auburn is a "power offense." Auburn and Oregon do both finesse and power, and they both do it in the spread option game.

As far as the point of the spread, I think the idea is to create open space for your playmakers. But that in itself doesn't make you less of a "power" team, I don't think, just smaller matchups. Even if you've got 4 WRs on the field, and the defense is in the dime, a power run is still a power run. You have to beat your man one on one, whether it's a fullback against a linebacker or a slot receiver on a nickelback.

 
doesn't matter what offense you choose to run, you have to have the offensive line to run it. 7 of BCs OL recruits never stepped foot on the field, we're still reeling from that.

 
GBRsal said:
doesn't matter what offense you choose to run, you have to have the offensive line to run it. 7 of BCs OL recruits never stepped foot on the field, we're still reeling from that.
Click to expand...
Solid point, depth has sucked, we've had to play too many walking-wounded. Though I do think we should've developed the line better also.

 
I think the issue at the start was continuity, and I have to say I was optimistic that with W/Bo and Watson NE would thrive. Clearly despite his flaws some of Watson's success had to do with Callahan, of course most of these offenses over the years looked good until they hit a real D. What is needed is not some cute scheme it is discipline and execution, throw in some talent and you have Oregon, Boise and TCU. Auburn had some of this also but they have a hell of a lot of talent not just some.

Bottom line is our offense was sloppy and slow, what success they had was due to having more talent and a D that helped them out. Watch old Husker clips or ever the teams I have mentioned and you will see offense that executed quick clean plays. Early this year we had that but injuries showed that Martinez was at least good enough to make Watts look good. Bo defenses are good because of execution and player development, this is why not every coach can jut mirror the Bo system.

 
Our offense finished the season ranked at #28 in total offense according to Rivals. The age old argument has been all the patsies we played. However, according to College Football Power Rankings our strength of schedule was #25. Okie State ended up ranked #3 in total offense, but their strength of schedule was #40. OU ended up #17 in total offense while their strength of schedule was #28.

The thing to keep in mind is the fact that we led the nation in fumbles and led the conference in penalties. It seemed like any time we got something rolling offensively we either put the ball on the ground or committed a penalty. Player development does have a lot to do with success. In three years under Bo, we have started a new QB each year. Martinez was our starter. His only college experience was playing receiver on the scout team his redshirt year. Turnovers and dropped passes cost us the Texas game. Turnovers cost us the Big 12 Championship game. Penalties cost us the A&M game. A great team might be able to overcome excessive penalties or excessive fumbles, but they can't overcome both.

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