Two-Back Set

Agreed.  Ive never had the distinction of taking a Super Bowl built team loaded with All-Pro players from first to worst, and Ive never taken a program that is legendary in winning status, one that returned the majority of its starters from a 10-3 team to its first losing season in decades.
Click to expand...
Here we go again. You keep insinuating that the Oakland team that Callahan took the Super Bowl was destined to go there because of their unbelievable talent. I don't agree. I think that Callahan took an aged past-their-prime team to the SuperBowl. Yeah, yeah....all those all-pros. I don't buy it.

Oh, back to the topic at hand. I hope that we use the two back set more often. We have such talented group of young backs and our offensive line could really use the additional back for blocking those blitzing schemes. If you watched the Alamo Bowl, Michigan ran alot of linebacker or interior blitzes that no one picked-up and Taylor had like a millisecond to get the ball off.

 
So, what's your opinion about the two-back set? (trying to get back to topic)
Click to expand...
As I recall, Walsh used a two-back set primarily with the 49ers (Craig, Tyler, Cribbs, Rathman) and didnt use the I formation nearly as much. But, those are also seasoned professionals.

 
This topic was split. The debate over USC's version of the WCO verses NU's version of the WCO is now in the thread "USC's WCO verses NU's WCO" here in the Husker Football forum.

This is getting old. Stay on topic. The very first rule listed for the Board reads, "Posts outside of the general theme of the topic which you are posting within will be moved or deleted."

 
Back
Top