Frost's Offense

[Blackshirts44]

Nebraska offense is narrowing schemes down to Huskers' 'bread and butter'

Nebraska’s offense has to decide what it does well, perfect that, stick with it, and try to make the execution of those staples as easy as possible.

omaha.com

Here’s a pretty good article I found from October. Both Austin and Lubick talked about simplifying run and pass schemes this year. Sure doesn’t seem like they’ve simplified things much. I wonder if there’s maybe some head butting between Austin/Lubick and Frost?

 

[Pipe Line]

So I'd like to re-bring up a thread I started last week I think, about going back to running Osborne's style of offense under Frost. I know it's a broken record, but I don't want to do it on there because I've lost general respect for quite a bit of them and their stupid responses. My question is this, and I apologize if it's already been answered but I'm going to ask again for the sake of my own learning....


A lot of people say Osborne's style can't work anymore. No one really explains WHY it can't work anymore......if you recruit to it, and you put your S&C to it and you take the time to teach and coach it....Frost or not.....WHY couldn't it work again?


In it's most basic form, isn't it Wisconsin's normal offense, including the legendary option and full back trap? If so, if that works, then why can't the full Osborne offense work?


I find it ironic that people say that can't work, when Wisconsin does it at a pretty high level, they're known for it, and people make a big deal about it when they play them.


So why not?

 

[HCFord1]

I just wanna let everyone know who's posted ITT that this is the exact reason that I'm on this board. Thank you for an analysis-based, non emotional football discussion.

 

[huskerj12]

Going back to Zatechka, does Lubick even call plays? Shouldn't playcalling criticism be on Frost? Maybe I missed something. Whatever is going on, there clearly seems to be either too many, or not enough, cooks in the kitchen. Hard to tell from the outside.

 

[Huskers633]

Great thread, with great insight. You can't get great discussion like this on RSS. Just need to keep the potatoes on RSS off this board and it will continue to be a great place.

 

[slattimer]

Nebraska offense is narrowing schemes down to Huskers' 'bread and butter'

Nebraska’s offense has to decide what it does well, perfect that, stick with it, and try to make the execution of those staples as easy as possible.

omaha.com

Here’s a pretty good article I found from October. Both Austin and Lubick talked about simplifying run and pass schemes this year. Sure doesn’t seem like they’ve simplified things much. I wonder if there’s maybe some head butting between Austin/Lubick and Frost?

I don't think they have either. I don't know if they're head butting on what to r un. I personally feel like they have this huge menu and they pick and choose what they want to run each week with what they feel will best attack that defense. You can get a feel for what they like to run vs certain fronts. Some weeks you'll see Dart, like early in the year, Haven't really seen it since NW. Or Short trap, see it vs 4 down teams. The opposing theory to this is run your stuff regardless of the front and teach adjustments to it instead of trying to call the "right" plays vs a front. Which I feel Nebraska is in that camp. Constantly trying to out scheme people.

So I'd like to re-bring up a thread I started last week I think, about going back to running Osborne's style of offense under Frost. I know it's a broken record, but I don't want to do it on there because I've lost general respect for quite a bit of them and their stupid responses. My question is this, and I apologize if it's already been answered but I'm going to ask again for the sake of my own learning....


A lot of people say Osborne's style can't work anymore. No one really explains WHY it can't work anymore......if you recruit to it, and you put your S&C to it and you take the time to teach and coach it....Frost or not.....WHY couldn't it work again?


In it's most basic form, isn't it Wisconsin's normal offense, including the legendary option and full back trap? If so, if that works, then why can't the full Osborne offense work?


I find it ironic that people say that can't work, when Wisconsin does it at a pretty high level, they're known for it, and people make a big deal about it when they play them.


So why not?

I think it can work, but I don't know what the ceiling is for it anymore for a couple of reasons. The biggest limiting factors to me are #1, the game has changed. It's a spread world mostly all over the country, and that's what kids feel comfortable playing in, even in high school. #2 - QBs - Kind of goes with number 1, but where are you going to get the type of QB you want/need, because you're probably going to need multiple based on number 3. #3 - DLs are bigger, freakier, faster, angrier than ever before. Playing in loaded boxes vs them isn't my idea of keeping a QB healthy. Finally, #4 defenses today are much more complex IMO, and have a shit ton of tools in their toolbox. Would they be able to stop it thought, possibly? But would be a concern because I feel like defenses today would get 9 dudes to fit the run game in a hurry.

Why it could work. It is based on the tried principles of IZ/OZ. That was the basis of the offense. The compliments were the double options, the counter game, and the play action pass. All of those can be very difficult to defend if the IZ/OZ game is going.

Wisconsin's offense is nowhere close really to Osborne's offense. They may be in the "I" a lot, but that's about the extent of it. Wisconsin is much more of a gap based blocking system team. I don't think I've ever seen Wisconsin recently run an option or a short trap.

 

[Ext. 55]

To add to the running game conversation:

Frost’s scheme does in fact lend itself towards creasing teams. When it works, it’s a thing of beauty.

The problem IMO is we have had to play RB’s who don’t excel at that style of running. Mills would be a great RB in a pro-style I-formation offense. Same with Marvin Scott. But neither is quite quick enough yet to find that crease before it closes. They are meant to be situational, change of pace backs in this offense.

Thats precisely why you see Wan’Dale looking head and shoulders like our best RB at times even though he’s not even a RB. That’s why you saw Mo Washington break off some electrifying runs (when he actually saw the crease).

Frost clearly recruits two types of RBs:

Type 1: Crease runners. Small, shifty, able to get through the hole before the defense sees what is happening. Also a receiving threat out of the backfield. Washington, Rahmir, Thompkins, and Morrison were all recruited to fill this role.

Type 2: Power backs. Guys who can get you 2-4 yards consistently. A change of pace back to be used situationally. 3rd and short and grinding out games. Frost needs this guy especially because we are in the B1G. Mills and Scott were recruited to fill this role.

You could argue that we have done an exceptional job at getting talented versions of both those types of backs to Lincoln. The problem, however, is that all of our “Type 1” running backs are flaming out and our “Type 2” running backs are the best we have. Morrison is young and injured. Thompkins was coming off of 2 major knee injuries and disappeared late this season. Mo was an erratic head-case. Rahmir is not developing like we hoped. 0/4 so far. Now the guys that are supposed to be used situationally and to feed off of your feature backs become the feature backs themselves, but the skill set doesn’t match the blocking scheme.

That’s why we are forced to play Wan’Dale at RB, and that’s why he is more effective when he’s back there. That’s why we struggle to find an offensive rhythm when Mills is back there. He was never meant to be out there every play.

Call it recruiting misses. Call it poor player development. Call it stubbornness. Call it bad luck. Who the hell even knows.

But I know the scheme is not the issue. The square peg in the round hole is the issue.

That’s why when I hear Frost say over and over again we are so close, I believe him.

Competent QB play wins us the Northwestern, Illinois, and Minnesota games by itself this year.

A healthy Mo Washington-type running back, a WR who can stretch the field, and an OLB who can generate a pass rush? We’re talking about a rematch against OSU this weekend instead of a meaningless game against Rutgers.

You can debate who’s fault it is all day long. There’s been some play calling issues. But damnit, it’s true, we are close, and the RB situation is a prime example.

Savage. Well done.

 

[Pipe Line]

I don't think they have either. I don't know if they're head butting on what to r un. I personally feel like they have this huge menu and they pick and choose what they want to run each week with what they feel will best attack that defense. You can get a feel for what they like to run vs certain fronts. Some weeks you'll see Dart, like early in the year, Haven't really seen it since NW. Or Short trap, see it vs 4 down teams. The opposing theory to this is run your stuff regardless of the front and teach adjustments to it instead of trying to call the "right" plays vs a front. Which I feel Nebraska is in that camp. Constantly trying to out scheme people.

I think it can work, but I don't know what the ceiling is for it anymore for a couple of reasons. The biggest limiting factors to me are #1, the game has changed. It's a spread world mostly all over the country, and that's what kids feel comfortable playing in, even in high school. #2 - QBs - Kind of goes with number 1, but where are you going to get the type of QB you want/need, because you're probably going to need multiple based on number 3. #3 - DLs are bigger, freakier, faster, angrier than ever before. Playing in loaded boxes vs them isn't my idea of keeping a QB healthy. Finally, #4 defenses today are much more complex IMO, and have a shit ton of tools in their toolbox. Would they be able to stop it thought, possibly? But would be a concern because I feel like defenses today would get 9 dudes to fit the run game in a hurry.

Why it could work. It is based on the tried principles of IZ/OZ. That was the basis of the offense. The compliments were the double options, the counter game, and the play action pass. All of those can be very difficult to defend if the IZ/OZ game is going.

Wisconsin's offense is nowhere close really to Osborne's offense. They may be in the "I" a lot, but that's about the extent of it. Wisconsin is much more of a gap based blocking system team. I don't think I've ever seen Wisconsin recently run an option or a short trap.

I respect the "I don't know what the ceiling is" much more than "it can't work just because" so thank you for that.

1. CFB being a spread world is precisely why I think that kind of offense can work well. But I agree with you in saying I really don't know how far it can go because we just haven't seen it in a long time. You had another question in my last thread about it being, wouldn't other teams run it if it worked today? No, I don't think they would. Strictly because it isn't "the cool thing to do". In its most basic concept, I think kids just want to win football games, and want to go to winning programs. That then ties into recruiting and what kind of kids would want to/vs. not want to play in that sort of system. I think Nebraska, especially with the most recent examples in attrition, bodes well to the kids who are looked over and are the developmental 3 and low 4 star kids because they have a chip on their shoulder at all times, instead of the drama filled big city high 4 and 5 star kids who want all the limelight. Those looked over kids still make it to the league and sometimes have better careers. Tom Brady, Danny Woodhead, Rex Burkhead are some examples

2. QB: I don't know, I guess T.O. used the 2 QB system sometimes so it's hard to argue that one. I personally think Adrian would be nasty running T.O.'s offense. Obviously when they stack the box, that's when you pop those throws over top to they scoot the safeties back out. Issue is then Martinez's throwing ability over top. Would have to recruit a QB like Martinez with more accurate throwing ability in my opinion. Most QBs now a days like to run anyway, and arguably already RBs that can throw a little bit, so I think that's actually much easier to do than maybe some other things.


3. My only real comparison to Wisconsin is jus the smash mouth wear you out in the running game concept. I love it. It just fits Midwest football in my opinion. I listened to that Rob Zatechka podcast and he was explaining the blocking schemes. Stuff I didn't know about. He explained it that zone blocking is basically like "shielding" off defenders and almost like just standing in their way almost, instead of hat on hat run blocking to create pancakes.

 

[slattimer]

3. My only real comparison to Wisconsin is jus the smash mouth wear you out in the running game concept. I love it. It just fits Midwest football in my opinion. I listened to that Rob Zatechka podcast and he was explaining the blocking schemes. Stuff I didn't know about. He explained it that zone blocking is basically like "shielding" off defenders and almost like just standing in their way almost, instead of hat on hat run blocking to create pancakes.

I'm really surprised Zatechka would say that about zone blocking in general. Would you really call how they blocked "shielding" off defenders in the 90s? I would say Milt's OL was notorious for being physical and "nasty." And I'd say they zone blocked upwards of 70% of their run plays. Maybe he was referring to the way Nebraska zone blocks today, which would make more sense.

In all actuality, I despise the notion that one blocking scheme is more physical than another. It literally makes no sense. No OL coach ever has coached his players within a scheme to be soft, or not as physical, it's just some up motion that media or fans make up, like Collinsworth last night going crazy about this "new" blocking technique the Steelers were using..."Moving their feet in short steps." Holy fuck, that guy is a moron.

I personally don't care what the scheme is or where the center is, if you're OL is getting double teams, then you're going to get pancakes, and if they're good and able to navigate and pick up the shit defenses do, and come off on the second level. Then you've got a really good OL, and your offense will be good, even with less than stellar skill players.

 

[...TrueColors...]

I respect the "I don't know what the ceiling is" much more than "it can't work just because" so thank you for that.

1. CFB being a spread world is precisely why I think that kind of offense can work well. But I agree with you in saying I really don't know how far it can go because we just haven't seen it in a long time. You had another question in my last thread about it being, wouldn't other teams run it if it worked today? No, I don't think they would. Strictly because it isn't "the cool thing to do". In its most basic concept, I think kids just want to win football games, and want to go to winning programs. That then ties into recruiting and what kind of kids would want to/vs. not want to play in that sort of system. I think Nebraska, especially with the most recent examples in attrition, bodes well to the kids who are looked over and are the developmental 3 and low 4 star kids because they have a chip on their shoulder at all times, instead of the drama filled big city high 4 and 5 star kids who want all the limelight. Those looked over kids still make it to the league and sometimes have better careers. Tom Brady, Danny Woodhead, Rex Burkhead are some examples

2. QB: I don't know, I guess T.O. used the 2 QB system sometimes so it's hard to argue that one. I personally think Adrian would be nasty running T.O.'s offense. Obviously when they stack the box, that's when you pop those throws over top to they scoot the safeties back out. Issue is then Martinez's throwing ability over top. Would have to recruit a QB like Martinez with more accurate throwing ability in my opinion. Most QBs now a days like to run anyway, and arguably already RBs that can throw a little bit, so I think that's actually much easier to do than maybe some other things.


3. My only real comparison to Wisconsin is jus the smash mouth wear you out in the running game concept. I love it. It just fits Midwest football in my opinion. I listened to that Rob Zatechka podcast and he was explaining the blocking schemes. Stuff I didn't know about. He explained it that zone blocking is basically like "shielding" off defenders and almost like just standing in their way almost, instead of hat on hat run blocking to create pancakes.

The issue I have with blaming a scheme for any shortcomings is because the implication is that the players are executing the scheme right and it’s still not working.

I don’t care what you run, if you can’t run outside or inside zone correctly you won’t be able to run any scheme.

 

[slattimer]

The issue I have with blaming a scheme for any shortcomings is because the implication is that the players are executing the scheme right and it’s still not working.

I don’t care what you run, if you can’t run outside or inside zone correctly you won’t be able to run any scheme.

So many ways to run those as well. It's really incredible how different one can teach those. Hell, some are using Duo as a way to run IZ. My personal preference is Tight Zone. OSU style, vertical displacement. IMO, there isn't a better run scheme in football than tight zone. Handles almost everything you can throw at it. It's versatile in that you can pair so many backfield actions with it.

 

[Pipe Line]

I'm really surprised Zatechka would say that about zone blocking in general. Would you really call how they blocked "shielding" off defenders in the 90s? I would say Milt's OL was notorious for being physical and "nasty." And I'd say they zone blocked upwards of 70% of their run plays. Maybe he was referring to the way Nebraska zone blocks today, which would make more sense.

In all actuality, I despise the notion that one blocking scheme is more physical than another. It literally makes no sense. No OL coach ever has coached his players within a scheme to be soft, or not as physical, it's just some up motion that media or fans make up, like Collinsworth last night going crazy about this "new" blocking technique the Steelers were using..."Moving their feet in short steps." Holy fuck, that guy is a moron.

I personally don't care what the scheme is or where the center is, if you're OL is getting double teams, then you're going to get pancakes, and if they're good and able to navigate and pick up the shit defenses do, and come off on the second level. Then you've got a really good OL, and your offense will be good, even with less than stellar skill players.

Yep Zatechka was talking about today's O-Line blocking in Frost's scheme, compared to the 90s. Said right now, it's in my own words to be able to describe it, they're basically creating a wall for the RB to find that one crease and hit it, instead of the 90s being hat on hat and driving someone back and into the ground to create holes.

 

[KidsSeeGhosts]

Co

The issue I have with blaming a scheme for any shortcomings is because the implication is that the players are executing the scheme right and it’s still not working.

I don’t care what you run, if you can’t run outside or inside zone correctly you won’t be able to run any scheme.

Couldn’t agree more with this. We just plain haven’t been a good run blocking team the past two years. It is maddening to hear about our problem being lack of commitment to the run when Mills is averaging 3.5 yards per carry.

 

[...TrueColors...]

So many ways to run those as well. It's really incredible how different one can teach those. Hell, some are using Duo as a way to run IZ. My personal preference is Tight Zone. OSU style, vertical displacement. IMO, there isn't a better run scheme in football than tight zone. Handles almost everything you can throw at it. It's versatile in that you can pair so many backfield actions with it.

If you get board you May have to explain tight zone to me.

 

[Kaladin]

People on RSS saying Austin might leave. If so, who replaces him?

 

[slattimer]

People on RSS saying Austin might leave. If so, who replaces him?

Where’d you see that?

 

[Kaladin]

Where’d you see that?

In the Sipple thread. I think that curious guy mentioned it

 

[slattimer]

In the Sipple thread. I think that curious guy mentioned it

I like Austin. But his unit has under performed. I still feel like if he got more time he’s be okay. And that he’s hamstrung by all the offense they want to run and he has to teach it. Because his room was an absolute shit show of weak asses when he showed up. And he’s got some dudes coming that I think will be good players soon.

 

[...TrueColors...]

Where’d you see that?

In the Sipple thread. I think that curious guy mentioned it

That dude GO B1G RED has said that Austin is leaving. I’m all but certain Frost and @Elizabeth Reed plowed that dude’s wife and maybe at the same time because he has levied a lot of personal attacks against the both of them.

 

[Kaladin]

That dude GO B1G RED has said that Austin is leaving. I’m all but certain Frost and @Elizabeth Reed plowed that dude’s wife and maybe at the same time because he has levied a lot of personal attacks against the both of them.

I've always assumed that Frost must have screwed quite a few wives back in the day because there are a lot of Husker fans who have had an irrational hatred for him from the day his name was mentioned as a candidate for HC.