• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Locked due to no posts in 60 days. Report 1st post if need unlocked Football Theory Question for all

Status
Not open for further replies.
ShortSideOption said:
Spurrier was an idiot that game, and kind of what I was talking about in post 19. Spurrier, when he was 5 wide, only had 5 linemen to protect his quarterback, his offensive line coach brought up that if we brought 3 from one side, or faked with one and bailed, or brought 6, that Florida wouldn't be able to block it. Spurrier said "don't worry, with our passing attack they won't blitz like that, or we'll score 100." Go watch Farley's first sack that should have been a safety, then Jamel Williams' sack that was a safety, those things just wouldn't happen now in my opinion...
Click to expand...

I get this.. Thanks *** :) Put it like you did, I'm surprised that the Fun & Gun worked so well for Spurrier that season. Part of it though, was McBrides bravado.. As you pointed out. Overloading a side and blitzing from odd angles. And our caliber of defensive athletes..
 

ShortSideOption said:
Spurrier was an idiot that game, and kind of what I was talking about in post 19. Spurrier, when he was 5 wide, only had 5 linemen to protect his quarterback, his offensive line coach brought up that if we brought 3 from one side, or faked with one and bailed, or brought 6, that Florida wouldn't be able to block it. Spurrier said "don't worry, with our passing attack they won't blitz like that, or we'll score 100." Go watch Farley's first sack that should have been a safety, then Jamel Williams' sack that was a safety, those things just wouldn't happen now in my opinion...
Click to expand...

The passing game has evolved since then and Spurrier does get some credit for that. Charlie was just ahead of him at that point.
 
Armchair said:
I get this.. Thanks *** :) Put it like you did, I'm surprised that the Fun & Gun worked so well for Spurrier that season. Part of it though, was McBrides bravado.. As you pointed out. Overloading a side and blitzing from odd angles. And our caliber of defensive athletes..
Click to expand...

McBride, if still around, would have adapted the defense to what we need now....
 



1997 Huskers vs. Tennessee. After fairly low production in the first half, we come out in the second half and literally beat up Tennessee with the fullback, I-back and Frost on the option and keepers. If I remember, we still managed over 400 yards rushing with most coming in the second half.

Defense played very stout the entire game. McBrides base was a 4-3 wasn't it? Press man or man coverage mostly? Were the Volunteers playing an offense closer to what we see from many FBS teams today? Did we evolve a little on D just from 95 to 97?
 
Armchair said:
1997 Huskers vs. Tennessee. After fairly low production in the first half, we come out in the second half and literally beat up Tennessee with the fullback, I-back and Frost on the option and keepers. If I remember, we still managed over 400 yards rushing with most coming in the second half.

Defense played very stout the entire game. McBrides base was a 4-3 wasn't it? Press man or man coverage mostly? Were the Volunteers playing an offense closer to what we see from many FBS teams today? Did we evolve a little on D just from 95 to 97?
Click to expand...

Did we throw a pass in the 2nd half?
 




Greatest Fan of All said:
You seem to forget that in 1995 we were hearing that same thing! The runup to the Fiesta Bowl was almost unbearable...one broadcast I remember called the game this way: "it's the offense of the 90's vs the offense of the 50's." They loved the "Fun n Gun" offense which was a precurser to everything we are seeing today. A power running game with dominant lines on both sides of the ball will win every time...you could be running the single wing or anything else. Alabama is proof this still works...in a very dominant way.

Few do it today because they fear being criticized for not doing what others are doing, or what they think the athletes, or fans, want. Most athletes just want to win, some fans do also. We have gotten caughten up in much of this the past several years.
Click to expand...

I have been wondering this myself about old Tim Becks O. Spreading a team out and making the D run is fine, but hitting them over and over again has value too. I think the contrast between Tim saying "we're going to go where the defense ain't" and the pipeline telling the defense what play would be run is striking. I want physical dominance first, then spreading the d and making them run is a bonus and more effective to boot.

I wonder what Frost has rattling around in his head up in Oregon, I know he's said he's like to make that O more physical.
 
Armchair said:
Despite going out on top, it was frequently said the game of football had passed Osborne by. Had it?
Click to expand...

It was being said when NU was getting made to look completely inept in bowl games against Miami...20-0, 23-3 and a blowout to GT. NU made some tweeks on both sides and recruiting and the result was what you saw in the games you mention.
 
Armchair said:
I'll expand on why I ask the question. Recently had the opportunity to re-watch the 95 Huskers against the Florida Gators, and the 97 squad against Payton Manning's Tennessee Volunteers. We looked shockingly good in both games, on both sides of the ball.

Despite going out on top, it was frequently said the game of football had passed Osborne by. Had it? Have there been any major rule changes, scheme changes, or any other great seismic shift that would preclude continued success?

Are there any teams out there, that are mimicking the Huskers of this era? And if not, why?
Click to expand...

i must have missed that conversation. i don't think anyone was saying that.
 
cm husker said:
Are Osborne and McBride calling the plays that were players prepared for under the tutelage of their staff?

Absolutely dominant. Those teams would be just as dominant today as they were in the 90s.

And no, if anything, the game has moved toward what Osborne ran offensively. TO ran a bunch of single back and "spread" type formations in the 90s.

However, the difference between TO's offense and say an Oregon spread is the reliance on dominant downhill running. People recall the option, but TO's "bread and butter" was the iso and other between the tackles running plays. The offense expanded out from there.

I'd say Malzahn's offensive philosophy is pretty similar to TO's, as is Paul Johnson's sytem (though both are out of different base formations (though TO was starting to tradition out of the I formation when he retired).
Click to expand...

i have to disagree with this. i think there are a lot more power elements in TO's offence compared to what GaTech is running. Malzahn ideally likes to throw the ball WAY more than TO ever did, but i think one of the best things he did this year was stick to what was working (amazing concept i know) and ran the ball all season because nobody has stopped it.
 



canadianhusker said:
i have to disagree with this. i think there are a lot more power elements in TO's offence compared to what GaTech is running. Malzahn ideally likes to throw the ball WAY more than TO ever did, but i think one of the best things he did this year was stick to what was working (amazing concept i know) and ran the ball all season because nobody has stopped it.
Click to expand...

I will also disagree with the similarity to Paul Johnson. Their only similarity is running the football. The PJ system of triple option football is centered around just that...the TRIPLE OPTION. NEB didn't actually run the true triple all that often (if ever). They ran call gives/keeps, power options, g-options, etc that were DOUBLE options. PJ/Navy/G.Southern all run the Triple based system where almost every other play in the system is a counter or compliment to the Inside Veer and what teams do to take it away. I don't know for sure but looking at old film i would assume our gameplan and complimentary or constraint plays were based on how teams defended our power game (meaning the POWER)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top