• 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.

Scott Frost's offense - why the spread?

huskrthill

Crap
10 Year Member
Scott Frost certainly had some great success with the spread offense at Oregon, and he brought that success with him to UCF. But what is it that made him prefer that style of play over a more power style of offense?

Frost attended Nebraska from 1995-1997. Those three teams averaged 52, 42, and 47 points per game. That's a pretty potent offense, and they did it on the ground.

It's also obvious that Frost has a great deal of respect for Tom Osborne and the way in which Osborne ran the program. Osborne did it his way even when the rest of the world was always trying the next new thing.

So why did Frost become so enamored with the spread offense rather than embracing the grind it out on the ground offense?

Does anyone else think that an Osborne offense could be successful in 2020?
 

Bigger Ed

Red Shirt
2 Year Member
1. I think the successes he saw at Oregon and UCF were encouraging, to say the least.
2. The game has evolved and he didn't want to be left behind.
3. When you have guys like Urban Meyer praising your system, you tend to stick with it.
4. When first hired, he did mention a hybrid of the spread and a power running game. Obviously, that hasn't materialized yet.
 

wheat

Red Shirt
5 Year Member
I absolutely believe it could be successful. One thing that baffles me is we have I formation in the playbook. We ran an option out of it against tOSU. Where is that? It seems like we could use that a couple times a game with McCaffrey and use Robinson as the pitch man. You are creating opportunity for one on one matchups with guys that can win those. That's not the silver bullet but it is a tool you have that plays to your team's strengths. Why leave it on the shelf?

Edit: I meant to quote thill's party about whether TO's offense could succeed today. It would be very unique and a bear for teams designed to defend uptempo spread systems. The challenge would be finding the qb as the spread has taken over HS football, too.
 
Last edited:

Husker In Oklahoma

All Big 10
15 Year Member
Yes, an Osborne offense would still kill people today, if, it was ran right, and if, they could recruit to it. It’s not sexy nowadays so there could be issues with getting players. I will say, it’s a thing of beauty watching that Osborne offense. Watching the option ran to perfection is amazing to watch.
 

winnerwinner

Recruit
2 Year Member
I absolutely believe it could be successful. One thing that baffles me is we have I formation in the playbook. We ran an option out of it against tOSU. Where is that? It seems like we could use that a couple times a game with McCaffrey and use Robinson as the pitch man. You are creating opportunity for one on one matchups with guys that can win those. That's not the silver bullet but it is a tool you have that plays to your team's strengths. Why leave it on the shelf?
He’s acknowledged that we could do that before, but that he just doesn’t want to.
 

Bigger Ed

Red Shirt
2 Year Member
Yes, an Osborne offense would still kill people today, if, it was ran right, and if, they could recruit to it. It’s not sexy nowadays so there could be issues with getting players. I will say, it’s a thing of beauty watching that Osborne offense. Watching the option ran to perfection is amazing to watch.
Even TO thought the option read was a good concept. One of those, "why didn't I think of that" moments.
 

huskrthill

Crap
10 Year Member
I'll also add that I was hesitant to bring this up because I know some will think that I'm naive and pining for the 90s. There's maybe some truth to that, but football is fundamentally the same: block, tackle, run, throw, execute.

In my mind, there's really no reason a team couldn't be successful doing that again. Wisconsin has moved away from it a little, but they've had some recent success with a straight power game. Why not do what they have done, but with a more dynamic quarterback that can run some option?
 

RMR

Walk On Hero
15 Year Member
I think he can retain his desire to be spread. Just mature to it. Get the traffic out of the QB and offenses head. And lose the love of the shotgun formation. Get under center. Minimize snaps and allows RB's to get some steam coming forward. Bring back the quick slant. The quick pitch. Lose the bubble screen. Lose delayed draws. Lose more than two QB reads. Crawl/walk/run. SF either calls plays or manages everything else. Not both. 2 cent opinion before deductions of course.
 
Top