Frost Installing Osborne's Playbook

PoloWearingBeaver said:
Lol jesus, Walters admitted the staff gave up on the game at 21-0 and are holding plays back for Northwestern. 
Click to expand...
I don't know if I blame them, to be honest. We could run those formations and plays till the cows come home, but we weren't getting back in that game. Not the way their offense moved the ball at will on us. 

 
PoloWearingBeaver said:
I think you're focusing on the wrong half of the quote, the staff quit in the second quarter. 
Click to expand...


I guess it's possible that your interpretation could be accurate. But on the flip side of that, when you're down by 21 points you're probably not going to come back by running out of the 'I.' You pretty much have to throw the ball typically.

So I'd lean on the side of interpreting it as "what good would it have done to run plays that can't quickly put points up on the board if it shows Wisconsin & Iowa some of our stuff for down the road?"

 
Undone said:
I guess it's possible that your interpretation could be accurate. But on the flip side of that, when you're down by 21 points you're probably not going to come back by running out of the 'I.' You pretty much have to throw the ball typically.

So I'd lean on the side of interpreting it as "what good would it have done to run plays that can't quickly put points up on the board if it shows Wisconsin & Iowa some of our stuff for down the road?"
Click to expand...
We could have not lost by 41 on national tv, set a record for a gameday loss by a host and made a better showing for the recruits in town?  

I mean there are more reasons but those are a few for starters 

 
Undone said:
We'll see what happens these next four games.
Click to expand...
Indeed we will. But saying “we need to hold back because there’s no sense in showing everything in a loss” is a far cry from “this offense is explosive, no deficit is too big and teams are going to have to adjust to us”. Especially in a three score game in the first half. 

 
CapoValley said:
Indeed we will. But saying “we need to hold back because there’s no sense in showing everything in a loss” is a far cry from “this offense is explosive, no deficit is too big and teams are going to have to adjust to us”. Especially in a three score game in the first half. 
Click to expand...


But you see what I'm saying though, right? You tend to need to throw downfield when you're down by 21, so isn't the whole "rolling out a bunch of new I-formation running plays" thing kind of a non-issue as far as the Ohio State game goes?

Your point is a good one. But just speaking for myself, I'd rather save the best stuff for the Wisconsin game. That's the most important game of each season for the foreseeable future.

Of course, people will pile in calling out the idea that we're actually good enough to not show our full hand. That's fine. 

 
CapoValley said:
Indeed we will. But saying “we need to hold back because there’s no sense in showing everything in a loss” is a far cry from “this offense is explosive, no deficit is too big and teams are going to have to adjust to us”. Especially in a three score game in the first half. 
Click to expand...
Well, we had 700 yds in the win over Illinois, which is pretty explosive. It's obvious we aren't explosive against teams like OSU, BUT...when we went all 1997, they DID have to adjust, did they not?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Undone said:
But you see what I'm saying though, right? You tend to need to throw downfield when you're down by 21, so isn't the whole "rolling out a bunch of new I-formation running plays" thing kind of a non-issue as far as the Ohio State game goes?

Your point is a good one. But just speaking for myself, I'd rather save the best stuff for the Wisconsin game. That's the most important game of each season for the foreseeable future.

Of course, people will pile in calling out the idea that we're actually good enough to not show our full hand. That's fine. 
Click to expand...
Oh no, I’m not being run the ball guy, im just saying the claim of this offenses strength is that it’s fast and puts points up in a hurry. To say the game was out of reach is an odd one. 

 
What percentage of the offense do you think this would entail. I would guess maybe 15%. Its a simple offense but it takes a lot of repetition and details to get good at it. I would think if you were going to put that much time into the offense you would do a little more with it then just make a wrinkle in the offense.

 
CapoValley said:
Oh no, I’m not being run the ball guy, im just saying the claim of this offenses strength is that it’s fast and puts points up in a hurry. To say the game was out of reach is an odd one. 
Click to expand...


I think some of that has to do with misinterpretation of his answer. They asked Walters why we didn't go back to it later, not specifically the next drive IIRC. So the reason we didn't go back to it immediately could've been the look the defense was giving us, and the reason we didn't go back to it later was because at that point it was more out of reach than 21-0.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Husker in WI said:
I think some of that has to do with misinterpretation of his answer. They asked Walters why we didn't go back to it later, not specifically the next drive IIRC. So the reason we didn't go back to it immediately could've been the look the defense was giving us, and the reason we didn't go back to it later was because at that point it was more out of reach than 21-0.
Click to expand...
Plausible.  I wish we had a media bank that wasn’t worthless because there are tons of things I’d love follow up questions on and it would help with the speculation that goes on. 

 
Back
Top