Scott Frost

newearthhusker said:
cerny50 said:
probably outside Turner Gill the best coach out there now with Nebraska ties
Click to expand...
:dunno :dunno :dunno :dunno

http://www.ohiobobcats.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/gdowski_gerry00.html

http://www.wmubroncos.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4600&ATCLID=1413825

http://www.usctrojans.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/kiffin_monte00.html

http://www.soonersports.com/school-bio/jay_norvell.html

http://www.ohiobobcats.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/solich_frank00.html

http://www.ohiobobcats.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/albin_tim00.html

http://clemsontigers.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/steele_kevin00.html
Click to expand...
Outside of Kiffin who's prolly down to his final years of coaching anyway Frost is still ahead of those guys in my mind not that he's but JMO, but very good finds I couldn't find that many, listen folks I'm not here saying Scott Frost is the best candidate for OC b/c we already have one anyway, I'm not saying he should be our OC, it's about a guy that we could bring into the program that knows an offense that we are trying to or in the process of moving towards and could be a great teacher, forget Mahlzan he wouldn't touch us unless we offered him a HC gig, it's just a guy I'd love to see come in b/c I think he would be able to recruit really well and can be a great coach, yeah if Mark Mangino wanted the job of OC if we let go of Watson of course I'd take him in a heartbeat, but I'm also being realistic here about who we can bring into our program, I'm not going to throw a name like Leach out b/c so many ppl on here say Leach for OC when they're just wasting their time, I'd like to bring in Scott Frost nothing more nothing less JMO.

 
Don't dismiss Leach and Mangino so quickly just because you think they're both searching for HC jobs. Leach and Mangino are both still unemployed. Neither are wanted in the HC world. There were 21 FBS HC vacancies, and there are 21 new coaches that filled those vacancies - most with resumes no where near these two's. At this point it's looking like 2011-2012 for both if that's the route they want to go. I'd take an OC job and Nebraska for 500k a year over unemployment. I'd turn NU's offense into a top 25 unit so that was the first line on my resume rather than that line being filled with "fired from XYZ school"

(I don't see Leach coming to NU either - but not because he wouldn't take an OC job)

 
Out of those 21 coaching vacancies, Leach was contacted for one. I believe Mangino was contacted for zero.

Leach's offense in the Big 10 would be a bloodbath. The Big 10 had only two teams with Pass Defenses ranked in the top 25 last year. Seven of them were #60 or lower. A pass-first offense would make hay in that league.

 
One of the biggest reasons Texas Tech never had a decent defense under Leach was because the defense was on the field a majority of the time. The offense either scored exceptionally fast or they stalled exceptionally fast. This is why we don't see a lot of fun'n gun offenses anymore. Take Mizzou for example under Boogie his last year. They I believe were ranked last in time of possession even though they scored huge points and were ranked really high offensively. Their defense was poorly ranked for the same reason. I compare the fun'n gun offense in football to the offenses in basketball that depend on the three point shot. If you're having an off night, you get beat because that's all you got. Okie State is a good example from 2010. When they faced pretty good defenses, they lost. The fun'n gun is about rhythm and confidence. A good defense disrupts both of those. If you can't grind out some runs and extend some possessions, you lose to good defenses. In 2009, Texas Tech lost every game except one where they didn't score over 30 points a game. In 2008, Texas Tech lost every game they didn't score at least 35 points. I don't think this is the kind of offense we desire.

 
junior4949 said:
One of the biggest reasons Texas Tech never had a decent defense under Leach was because the defense was on the field a majority of the time. The offense either scored exceptionally fast or they stalled exceptionally fast. This is why we don't see a lot of fun'n gun offenses anymore. Take Mizzou for example under Boogie his last year. They I believe were ranked last in time of possession even though they scored huge points and were ranked really high offensively. Their defense was poorly ranked for the same reason. I compare the fun'n gun offense in football to the offenses in basketball that depend on the three point shot. If you're having an off night, you get beat because that's all you got. Okie State is a good example from 2010. When they faced pretty good defenses, they lost. The fun'n gun is about rhythm and confidence. A good defense disrupts both of those. If you can't grind out some runs and extend some possessions, you lose to good defenses. In 2009, Texas Tech lost every game except one where they didn't score over 30 points a game. In 2008, Texas Tech lost every game they didn't score at least 35 points. I don't think this is the kind of offense we desire.
Click to expand...
Oregon ranked 102nd in time of possession, w/ the 26th ranked defense. Auburn 67th in TOP. Nebraska 27th in TOP. I'm not too worried about time of possession being and issue - plenty of teams win ball games that way. A top 30 time of possession school...vs Oregon only means that their defense played a total of 3 minutes less. I am fully confident our defense could be on the field for a couple more minutes a game and survive.

Our defense was on field the 28 minutes and 33 seconds a game this year, giving up 304 YPG. (in 2009 Tech's defense played 31 minutes a game) That averages to just around 10.65 yards surrendered per minute of play. If we had Leach's offense, and gave up another 33 yards on defense dropping us to 337 YPG or 28th (2 behind Oregon) - I'd be fine w/ that. Would you not be ok with a top 10 offense (every single year) and top 26 defense?

PS: Tech didn't have the Pelini brothers

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nebraska wouldn't have a #26 rated defense if Mike Leach was our OC. This is the point. Oregon doesn't run a fun'n gun pass happy offense and neither does Auburn. I'm not real sure why you even mentioned them other than the time of possession. Oregon ranked #50 in pass offense while ranking #5 in running offense. Auburn ranked #57 in passing offense while ranking #4 in running offense. I'd rather not have a team that has to score 35 or more points a game just to win. If this is really what we're after, we fired the wrong coach a few years back. Of the pass happy teams in 2010, OU was the best. OU used to be known as a top notch defensive team, yet they only managed a #35 ranking defensively. They lost to Mizzou because their pass happy offense passed the ball too many times to the wrong team. They lost to an A&M team that dared them to run. Because running was out of their comfort zone, OU didn't try to run the ball at first. This might be how and why A&M had three goalline stands. Once they tried to run, they couldn't. Perrennial fun'n gun teams like Hawaii and Houston that rank high in passing offense rarely have a defense that cracks the top 50, and they typically have a tough time winning games against teams with a defense.

Here's a little data per rivals over the past four National Champions:

2010 - Auburn's pass offense was rated #57, running offense #4, total defense #54

2009 - Alabama's pass offense was rated #67, runnin offense #8, total defense #1

2008 - Florida's pass offense was rated #47, running offense #9, total defense #5

2007 - LSU's pass offense was rated #44, running offense #12, total defense #20

The highest rated pass happy offense was #44 while the worst rushing offense was #12. This is why I don't want Mike Leach as OC.

 
junior4949 said:
Nebraska wouldn't have a #26 rated defense if Mike Leach was our OC.
Click to expand...
What are Saturday's powerball numbers? I'd really like to win, but can't seem to ever predict the future. Since you know these things...can you fill me in? At least give me the 5 white balls...I'll buy 80 tickets and get the PowerBall myself.

junior4949 said:
The highest rated pass happy offense was #44 while the worst rushing offense was #12. This is why I don't want Mike Leach as OC.
Click to expand...
Good thing we aren't hiring him to be the HC. This is the same thing w/ Mangino - why do people think that whoever we hire as OC will be EXACTLY like they were as an HC...as if Bo doesn't have any word in regards to how things are done around here.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is no direct correlation between a productive passing offense and a good defense.

Boise St: #6 Passing Offense; #2 Scoring Defense

Alabama: #27 Passing Offense; #3 Scoring Defense

Stanford: #29 Passing Offense; #10 Scoring Defense

Missouri: #33 Passing Offense; #6 Scoring Defense

You can look back through the years and find plenty of teams that pass well and have solid defenses. Because a team is highly rated at passing does not automatically mean they can't play defense. There's no evidence to support the allegation that you can't do both.

 
knapplc said:
There is no direct correlation between a productive passing offense and a good defense.

Boise St: #6 Passing Offense; #2 Scoring Defense

Alabama: #27 Passing Offense; #3 Scoring Defense

Stanford: #29 Passing Offense; #10 Scoring Defense

Missouri: #33 Passing Offense; #6 Scoring Defense

You can look back through the years and find plenty of teams that pass well and have solid defenses. Because a team is highly rated at passing does not automatically mean they can't play defense. There's no evidence to support the allegation that you can't do both.
Click to expand...

Actually, what you will find is those teams rushed the ball well. Boise State was #26 in rushing offense, Bama was #36 in rushing offense, Stanford was #18 in rushing offense, and Mizzou was #49 in rushing offense. These teams were balanced teams that could pass the ball but could also run the ball if need be. In 2009, Texas Tech run offense ranked #113. In 2008, TT run offense ranked #96. In 2007, TT run offense ranked #120. In 2006, TT run offense ranked #112.

 
junior4949 said:
knapplc said:
There is no direct correlation between a productive passing offense and a good defense.

Boise St: #6 Passing Offense; #2 Scoring Defense

Alabama: #27 Passing Offense; #3 Scoring Defense

Stanford: #29 Passing Offense; #10 Scoring Defense

Missouri: #33 Passing Offense; #6 Scoring Defense

You can look back through the years and find plenty of teams that pass well and have solid defenses. Because a team is highly rated at passing does not automatically mean they can't play defense. There's no evidence to support the allegation that you can't do both.
Click to expand...

Actually, what you will find is those teams rushed the ball well. Boise State was #26 in rushing offense, Bama was #36 in rushing offense, Stanford was #18 in rushing offense, and Mizzou was #49 in rushing offense. These teams were balanced teams that could pass the ball but could also run the ball if need be. In 2009, Texas Tech run offense ranked #113. In 2008, TT run offense ranked #96. In 2007, TT run offense ranked #120. In 2006, TT run offense ranked #112.
Click to expand...
None of which proves the point that a solid passing offense equates to a poor defense.

Further, Tech had a poorly ranked rushing offense because they rarely ran the ball. During the years you cited Tech attempted an average of 21 actual rushes per game. Their short-passing game was their primary rushing weapon. To say that Tech "couldn't" rush the ball is only telling half the story.

 
Back
Top