- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2001 Nebraska offense.....Can it work today? Why or Why not?
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:02 am
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:02 am
Watching these highlights made me realize Crouch was definitely deserving of the Heisman in '01. I never was a big fan of his, but watching these, he makes it look like HS highlights.
It makes me wonder why precisely 0 teams run the old school Nebraska I form option. it's not like it completely stopped working. This offense put them in the NC game (I know maybe they didnt' deserve it, but still my point stands) in 2001. They had a bad year in '02 going 7-6. But they rebounded to 9-3 the next year despite the school going full retard and firing Solich.
So, I know the argument is that defenses are too fast nowadays. Why does the spread option work then? If Wisky can run their pound it straight at you game, why can't a team run the I form option?Were defenses not fast enough in 2003? Hell, 9-3 was pretty good then IMO. They lost to a 8-4 Mizzou team on the road, got a beating by a 10-3 Texas team on the road, and lost to Kansas State who upset #1 OU that year with Darren Sproles. They beat the shite out of most everyone else that year, including a #24 9-3 Les Miles OSU team.
The crap that Navy and GT run is NOT what Nebraska used to run FWIW.
LINK
It makes me wonder why precisely 0 teams run the old school Nebraska I form option. it's not like it completely stopped working. This offense put them in the NC game (I know maybe they didnt' deserve it, but still my point stands) in 2001. They had a bad year in '02 going 7-6. But they rebounded to 9-3 the next year despite the school going full retard and firing Solich.
So, I know the argument is that defenses are too fast nowadays. Why does the spread option work then? If Wisky can run their pound it straight at you game, why can't a team run the I form option?Were defenses not fast enough in 2003? Hell, 9-3 was pretty good then IMO. They lost to a 8-4 Mizzou team on the road, got a beating by a 10-3 Texas team on the road, and lost to Kansas State who upset #1 OU that year with Darren Sproles. They beat the shite out of most everyone else that year, including a #24 9-3 Les Miles OSU team.
The crap that Navy and GT run is NOT what Nebraska used to run FWIW.
LINK
This post was edited on 7/31/12 at 11:11 am
13
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:05 am to Moustache
eh...if they play cupcakes like they used to...i doubt it would work in the SEC...well maybe you could win 8 or 9...but doubtful a title
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:06 am to Moustache
any offense can work if you have the right players imo
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:06 am to GhostBuster6
I believe it would work in most conferences (maybe not so much in the Big 10 or SEC) as long as you have enough and can recruit enough talent on the offensive line to run it.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:08 am to Moustache
quote:
This offense put them in the NC game (I know maybe they didnt' deserve it, but still my point stands) in 2001.
It didn't work so well in the NC game.
However, not many offenses were going to be effective against that defense.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:11 am to ohiovol
quote:
t didn't work so well in the NC game.
However, not many offenses were going to be effective against that defense.
Nobody was going to beat that Miami team dog.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:11 am to GhostBuster6
The SEC was not nearly on the level it is today in 2001.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:12 am to GhostBuster6
quote:
eh...if they play cupcakes like they used to...i doubt it would work in the SEC...w
I get that the SEC is top conference, but to say Nebraska used to play cupcakes is simply not true.
'95 UF says their head still hurts from that Nebraska skullfricking.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:12 am to kingbob
quote:
(maybe not so much in the Big 10 or SEC
Why not?
Malzahn's offense tore up the SEC and so did Meyer's. And there were a shitton of people saying the same old bullshite.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:13 am to brewhan davey
quote:
The SEC was not nearly on the level it is today in 2001.
Well, no. But I would argue athletes across the board are better today than they were in 2001 just due to better HS training/coaching and better facilities and $.
I also don't understand why every CFB question turns into a "Well, the SEC is certainly better and dominant now." Or a "that would be terrible in the SEC."
FAct is that Baylor and Nebraska last year would've beat every SEC team except LSU,Arky, Bama, and USCe. UGA would've been a toss up. Baylor and Arky would've certainly been competitive.
This post was edited on 7/31/12 at 11:16 am
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:13 am to Moustache
Watch 95 Nebraska's highlights. That was the best team of all time.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:14 am to Moustache
quote:
So, I know the argument is that defenses are too fast nowadays.
if you have the right players you could run the 2001, 1995 Nebraska offense with complete success today
Nothing substantial has changed RE: player quality in ten years. We're not comparing a 1905 team with a 1985 team
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:18 am to brewhan davey
The Nebraska option game was a combo of lead/load options out of the I formation. It was not their sole offense. They still ran the ball with their tailbacks alot out of the I.
Lead & Load options are forms of power option with no dive back. Instead of sucking the D in with a dive option, the FB is responsible for lead blocking for the QB or Load blocking on the DE or OLB.
The trend lately has been that most offenses can no longer stretch speed defenses laterally with the option WITHOUT the dive wrinkle. (dive option game is based on overpursuit and defensive assignment)
I'm not saying it couldn't work, but it could not be used exclusively.
Lead & Load options are forms of power option with no dive back. Instead of sucking the D in with a dive option, the FB is responsible for lead blocking for the QB or Load blocking on the DE or OLB.
The trend lately has been that most offenses can no longer stretch speed defenses laterally with the option WITHOUT the dive wrinkle. (dive option game is based on overpursuit and defensive assignment)
I'm not saying it couldn't work, but it could not be used exclusively.
This post was edited on 7/31/12 at 11:19 am
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:18 am to molsusports
quote:
Nothing substantial has changed RE: player quality in ten years. We're not comparing a 1905 team with a 1985 team
Well, can Nebraska pull those players in? I imagine that it's easy to recruit great RB's with that type of offense and there are literally a dozen QBs that are electric with the ball in their hands that get converted to DB/WR every year. Imagine R.Shepard in that offense.
Hell, right now they have a pretty good setup to run it with T. Martinez, Burkhead at FB, and Abdullah at RB. They just need 1 more elite RB.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:19 am to Moustache
quote:
Well no. But I would argue athletes across the board are better today than they were in 2001 just due to better HS training/coaching and better facilities and $.
Agreed.
quote:
I also don't understand why every CFB question turns into a "Well, the SEC is certainly better and dominant now." Or a "that would be terrible in the SEC."
Sadly, it's mostly my generation. (I just recently graduated from LSU) A lot of my fellow peers have a very selective and short-term memory when it comes to SEC success. Before the last few years of dominance, the SEC was not on the level (top-to-bottom) as the Big 10 or even the Big 12.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:19 am to TXGunslinger10
quote:
e Nebraska option game was a combo of lead/load options out of the I formation. It was not their sole offense. They still ran the ball with their tailbacks alot out of the I.
It was pretty much a mix of Wisconsin and the lead/load options with a few PA mixed in. That shite could work today with some updated passing routes.
quote:
'm not saying it couldn't work, but it could not be used exclusively.
The options by themselves? No, of course not. But even Nebraska ran some shotgun back then.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:22 am to Moustache
quote:
Nobody was going to beat that Miami team dog.
I agree completely. Those guys had been waiting for that game for over a year. No chance. For anyone.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:23 am to Moustache
Right on Moustache.
The Nebraska offensive philosophy was centered around stretching the D horizontally, be it option, toss, stretch, etc...and then they would KILL you with the zone play to catch teams in their overpursuit. That was how Lawrence Phillips made such a killing.
The Nebraska offensive philosophy was centered around stretching the D horizontally, be it option, toss, stretch, etc...and then they would KILL you with the zone play to catch teams in their overpursuit. That was how Lawrence Phillips made such a killing.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:24 am to ohiovol
quote:
I agree completely. Those guys had been waiting for that game for over a year. No chance. For anyone.
I know this will sound crazy and like a homer, but LSU could not have beaten them, but the way Davey and Reed were clicking along with our D peaking at the right time, we probably would've played them the closest out of anyone that year.
Posted on 7/31/12 at 11:24 am to TXGunslinger10
quote:
he Nebraska offensive philosophy was centered around stretching the D horizontally, be it option, toss, stretch, etc...and then they would KILL you with the zone play to catch teams in their overpursuit. That was how Lawrence Phillips made such a killing.
Yep. Pretty much the spread option, just not out of the shotgun.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News