Which offense give us the best chance to win?

[GMoose]

Since we derailed the "QB depth thread" with our engaging QB debate, I'll start one here asking which style does everyone think gives us the best chance to win? All things considered - region, recruiting, whatever you think affects it.

My argument (as you may have read) is that a pro style offense gives us the best chance to win the most games. We've proven that we can recruit good backs and linemen, and solid receivers. My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

Why am I right/wrong? What do all of you think gives us the best opportunity to have the best offense year in and year out?

 

[AR Husker Fan]

While the Martinez/Taylor "type" may not be prevelant in the midwest, I believe you'll find a LOT more of that type throughout the nation than you do "pocket passers." That means that rather than fighting over guys that everyone is recruiting, we have a better shot at the ones that outnumber the kind of offense built for them. I also think that, given the conference and the region, NU has to have a run-based offense. Whether spread, spread option, option, Power I (with option) - what matters is that the offense is based off the run rather than the pass.

 

[redblooded]

Since we derailed the "QB depth thread" with our engaging QB debate, I'll start one here asking which style does everyone think gives us the best chance to win? All things considered - region, recruiting, whatever you think affects it.

My argument (as you may have read) is that a pro style offense gives us the best chance to win the most games. We've proven that we can recruit good backs and linemen, and solid receivers. My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

Why am I right/wrong? What do all of you think gives us the best opportunity to have the best offense year in and year out?

You're wrong. If I'm not mistaken we just spent the better part of 4 years proving that.

As far as what would work best, probably whatever the option would've evolved too if we wouldn't have gotten rid of it, it'd have been unique for both recruiting and teams facing us to defend, and the power running game was a thing of beauty.

 

[GMoose]

Since we derailed the "QB depth thread" with our engaging QB debate, I'll start one here asking which style does everyone think gives us the best chance to win? All things considered - region, recruiting, whatever you think affects it.

My argument (as you may have read) is that a pro style offense gives us the best chance to win the most games. We've proven that we can recruit good backs and linemen, and solid receivers. My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

Why am I right/wrong? What do all of you think gives us the best opportunity to have the best offense year in and year out?

You're wrong. If I'm not mistaken we just spent the better part of 4 years proving that.

As far as what would work best, probably whatever the option would've evolved too if we wouldn't have gotten rid of it, it'd have been unique for both recruiting and teams facing us to defend, and the power running game was a thing of beauty.

Explain...

 

[Hercules]

While the Martinez/Taylor "type" may not be prevelant in the midwest, I believe you'll find a LOT more of that type throughout the nation than you do "pocket passers." That means that rather than fighting over guys that everyone is recruiting, we have a better shot at the ones that outnumber the kind of offense built for them. I also think that, given the conference and the region, NU has to have a run-based offense. Whether spread, spread option, option, Power I (with option) - what matters is that the offense is based off the run rather than the pass.

In addition to that, many other teams are looking for those pocket passers. We don't have to compete against Oklahoma, Texas, USC to get guys like Taylor Martinez. The whole PAC-10 passed him up as a QB.

Players like Joe Ganz and Todd Reesing are nice, but they had respectable careers in an era of exceptionally weak defense in the Big 12. They weren't Sam Bradford. Nebraska never has had a Sam Bradford.

Anyways, I think some kind of run-first offense that includes some option, whether it's out of the spread or not, gives Nebraska the best chance to win. Look at Nebraska's history, and I think it'll prove me right.

 

[Hercules]

Since we derailed the "QB depth thread" with our engaging QB debate, I'll start one here asking which style does everyone think gives us the best chance to win? All things considered - region, recruiting, whatever you think affects it.

My argument (as you may have read) is that a pro style offense gives us the best chance to win the most games. We've proven that we can recruit good backs and linemen, and solid receivers. My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

Why am I right/wrong? What do all of you think gives us the best opportunity to have the best offense year in and year out?

You're wrong. If I'm not mistaken we just spent the better part of 4 years proving that.

As far as what would work best, probably whatever the option would've evolved too if we wouldn't have gotten rid of it, it'd have been unique for both recruiting and teams facing us to defend, and the power running game was a thing of beauty.

Explain...

The Callahan era...

 

[GMoose]

Since we derailed the "QB depth thread" with our engaging QB debate, I'll start one here asking which style does everyone think gives us the best chance to win? All things considered - region, recruiting, whatever you think affects it.

My argument (as you may have read) is that a pro style offense gives us the best chance to win the most games. We've proven that we can recruit good backs and linemen, and solid receivers. My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

Why am I right/wrong? What do all of you think gives us the best opportunity to have the best offense year in and year out?

You're wrong. If I'm not mistaken we just spent the better part of 4 years proving that.

As far as what would work best, probably whatever the option would've evolved too if we wouldn't have gotten rid of it, it'd have been unique for both recruiting and teams facing us to defend, and the power running game was a thing of beauty.

Explain...

The Callahan era...

Which had some very good offenses? If we had the 08 offense two years ago we are national champions. Last year we would have been 13-1.

EDIT: Let me add I'm not saying Callahan was here in 08 :facepalm: , but it was his players with his coordinator

 

[zoogs]

I favor GMoose's brand of offense. I'm not sure I'd really call it a pro-style, just an unspectacular, tough on the trenches power game with a QB whose job is to manage the game and deliver the ball to the playmakers. An athletic QB can certainly be molded into that role and given some leeway of his own to make plays, but the #1 thing for the QB will be the mental aspect of the game and being able to make decisions on the field.

McElroy, Tolzien are a couple of examples that come to mind. Hey I don't mind if they run a 4.4. As long as they can command the offense.

 

[Hercules]

Since we derailed the "QB depth thread" with our engaging QB debate, I'll start one here asking which style does everyone think gives us the best chance to win? All things considered - region, recruiting, whatever you think affects it.

My argument (as you may have read) is that a pro style offense gives us the best chance to win the most games. We've proven that we can recruit good backs and linemen, and solid receivers. My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

Why am I right/wrong? What do all of you think gives us the best opportunity to have the best offense year in and year out?

You're wrong. If I'm not mistaken we just spent the better part of 4 years proving that.

As far as what would work best, probably whatever the option would've evolved too if we wouldn't have gotten rid of it, it'd have been unique for both recruiting and teams facing us to defend, and the power running game was a thing of beauty.

Explain...

The Callahan era...

Which had some very good offenses? If we had the 08 offense two years ago we are national champions. Last year we would have been 13-1.

EDIT: Let me add I'm not saying Callahan was here in 08 :facepalm: , but it was his players with his coordinator

The 2008 offense wasn't a pro-style offense. It also played some absolutely terrible defenses in the Big 12. 2008 Oklahoma's offense was better than ours - in fact they tore through the conference and broke the 1983 Nebraska team's scoring record. They then scored a whopping 14 points against Florida - who won the national championship with a spread option offense and a QB who was not a pocket-passer.

Callahan's offenses also weren't as good as some remember them. They were just better than Cosgrove's horrific defenses.

 

[redblooded]

Since we derailed the "QB depth thread" with our engaging QB debate, I'll start one here asking which style does everyone think gives us the best chance to win? All things considered - region, recruiting, whatever you think affects it.

My argument (as you may have read) is that a pro style offense gives us the best chance to win the most games. We've proven that we can recruit good backs and linemen, and solid receivers. My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

Why am I right/wrong? What do all of you think gives us the best opportunity to have the best offense year in and year out?

You're wrong. If I'm not mistaken we just spent the better part of 4 years proving that.

As far as what would work best, probably whatever the option would've evolved too if we wouldn't have gotten rid of it, it'd have been unique for both recruiting and teams facing us to defend, and the power running game was a thing of beauty.

Explain...

We installed a massive-playbooked west coast offense, installed the terminology, and tried to compete with the USC and ND and everyone else for pure pocket passers (everyone recruits those guys, there aren't many of them). Of the QB's we had that were more pocket passer one was a gamer, Zac Taylor. Ganz was too but he wasn't supposed to ever start, and he was a gamer because he was just quick enough and smart enough with his legs to extend plays and drives.

We just spent the last 2 years trying to deprogram all of that from the team for a reason.

 

[GMoose]

Since we derailed the "QB depth thread" with our engaging QB debate, I'll start one here asking which style does everyone think gives us the best chance to win? All things considered - region, recruiting, whatever you think affects it.

My argument (as you may have read) is that a pro style offense gives us the best chance to win the most games. We've proven that we can recruit good backs and linemen, and solid receivers. My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

Why am I right/wrong? What do all of you think gives us the best opportunity to have the best offense year in and year out?

You're wrong. If I'm not mistaken we just spent the better part of 4 years proving that.

As far as what would work best, probably whatever the option would've evolved too if we wouldn't have gotten rid of it, it'd have been unique for both recruiting and teams facing us to defend, and the power running game was a thing of beauty.

Explain...

The Callahan era...

Which had some very good offenses? If we had the 08 offense two years ago we are national champions. Last year we would have been 13-1.

EDIT: Let me add I'm not saying Callahan was here in 08 :facepalm: , but it was his players with his coordinator

The 2008 offense wasn't a pro-style offense. It also played some absolutely terrible defenses in the Big 12. 2008 Oklahoma's offense was better than ours - in fact they tore through the conference and broke the 1983 Nebraska team's scoring record. They then scored a whopping 14 points against Florida - who won the national championship with a spread option offense and a QB who was not a pocket-passer.

Callahan's offenses also weren't as good as some remember them. They were just better than Cosgrove's horrific defenses.

They were more pass heavy, which is sort of the root of my view. And the 2006 and 2007 offenses were 14th and 9th.

 

[GMoose]

Since we derailed the "QB depth thread" with our engaging QB debate, I'll start one here asking which style does everyone think gives us the best chance to win? All things considered - region, recruiting, whatever you think affects it.

My argument (as you may have read) is that a pro style offense gives us the best chance to win the most games. We've proven that we can recruit good backs and linemen, and solid receivers. My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

Why am I right/wrong? What do all of you think gives us the best opportunity to have the best offense year in and year out?

You're wrong. If I'm not mistaken we just spent the better part of 4 years proving that.

As far as what would work best, probably whatever the option would've evolved too if we wouldn't have gotten rid of it, it'd have been unique for both recruiting and teams facing us to defend, and the power running game was a thing of beauty.

Explain...

We installed a massive-playbooked west coast offense, installed the terminology, and tried to compete with the USC and ND and everyone else for pure pocket passers (everyone recruits those guys, there aren't many of them). Of the QB's we had that were more pocket passer one was a gamer, Zac Taylor. Ganz was too but he wasn't supposed to ever start, and he was a gamer because he was just quick enough and smart enough with his legs to extend plays and drives.

We just spent the last 2 years trying to deprogram all of that from the team for a reason.

You're ignoring the results though. Callahan's 4 year stint produced 2 good passing QBs (Ganz and Keller) and one really good one (Taylor). Two years of his offenses were top-15. NU was Ganz's only BCS conference offer, next to Ball St. and EMU. Zach Taylor didn't have any BCS conference offers other than NU either. Keller was the exception, but he didn't even cut it at ASU. We did ok without the guys ND and USC recruited.

 

[Hercules]

Since we derailed the "QB depth thread" with our engaging QB debate, I'll start one here asking which style does everyone think gives us the best chance to win? All things considered - region, recruiting, whatever you think affects it.

My argument (as you may have read) is that a pro style offense gives us the best chance to win the most games. We've proven that we can recruit good backs and linemen, and solid receivers. My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

Why am I right/wrong? What do all of you think gives us the best opportunity to have the best offense year in and year out?

You're wrong. If I'm not mistaken we just spent the better part of 4 years proving that.

As far as what would work best, probably whatever the option would've evolved too if we wouldn't have gotten rid of it, it'd have been unique for both recruiting and teams facing us to defend, and the power running game was a thing of beauty.

Explain...

The Callahan era...

Which had some very good offenses? If we had the 08 offense two years ago we are national champions. Last year we would have been 13-1.

EDIT: Let me add I'm not saying Callahan was here in 08 :facepalm: , but it was his players with his coordinator

The 2008 offense wasn't a pro-style offense. It also played some absolutely terrible defenses in the Big 12. 2008 Oklahoma's offense was better than ours - in fact they tore through the conference and broke the 1983 Nebraska team's scoring record. They then scored a whopping 14 points against Florida - who won the national championship with a spread option offense and a QB who was not a pocket-passer.

Callahan's offenses also weren't as good as some remember them. They were just better than Cosgrove's horrific defenses.

They were more pass heavy, which is sort of the root of my view. And the 2006 and 2007 offenses were 14th and 9th.

In 2006, the best teams we played were Oklahoma, Auburn, and USC. We scored 7, 14, and 10 points respectively. That's not much different than the results our offense had last year with a beat-up QB. In 2007, we lost to Missouri 41-6. We lost to Oklahoma State 45-14. We lost to Texas A&M 36-14. We squeaked by a weak Wake Forest team, 20-17. Again, the offensive results in big games were not particularly good. Neither of those offenses were that good, but defense in the Big 12 at that time was particularly weak, and they got blown out often enough they could score some garbage points (76-31 loss to Kansas, 65-51 loss to Colorado, etc.)

 

[redblooded]

Since we derailed the "QB depth thread" with our engaging QB debate, I'll start one here asking which style does everyone think gives us the best chance to win? All things considered - region, recruiting, whatever you think affects it.

My argument (as you may have read) is that a pro style offense gives us the best chance to win the most games. We've proven that we can recruit good backs and linemen, and solid receivers. My point, it's going to be easier to come across a Joe Ganz or Greg McElroy than a Taylot Martinez or Tyrod Taylor. It's easier to find those guys, especially in the midwest, rather than speed guys that are more than likely from SEC country.

Why am I right/wrong? What do all of you think gives us the best opportunity to have the best offense year in and year out?

You're wrong. If I'm not mistaken we just spent the better part of 4 years proving that.

As far as what would work best, probably whatever the option would've evolved too if we wouldn't have gotten rid of it, it'd have been unique for both recruiting and teams facing us to defend, and the power running game was a thing of beauty.

Explain...

We installed a massive-playbooked west coast offense, installed the terminology, and tried to compete with the USC and ND and everyone else for pure pocket passers (everyone recruits those guys, there aren't many of them). Of the QB's we had that were more pocket passer one was a gamer, Zac Taylor. Ganz was too but he wasn't supposed to ever start, and he was a gamer because he was just quick enough and smart enough with his legs to extend plays and drives.

We just spent the last 2 years trying to deprogram all of that from the team for a reason.

You're ignoring the results though. Callahan's 4 year stint produced 2 good passing QBs (Ganz and Keller) and one really good one (Taylor). Two years of his offenses were top-15. NU was Ganz's only BCS conference offer, next to Ball St. and EMU. Zach Taylor didn't have any BCS conference offers other than NU either. Keller was the exception, but he didn't even cut it at ASU. We did ok without the guys ND and USC recruited.

I'm not ignoring the results, in a league thought of as all offense no defense, in the weakest division in that league we were getting absolutely killed by most every good team we played and fighting 3rd stringers in the 4th quarter scoring points in garbage time because we were blown out in the first 2-3 quarters. If that offense was as good as some people like to imagine it was, those games would have been shootouts against KU, Mizzou, maybe USC. They weren't. They were shootouts against Dan Hawkins and Ron Prince coached teams and against perennial powerhouses like Ball State.

The stats for Callahan's offenses are misleading and inflated, both because the state of defense in the big 12 and our sissy non-conference under Pederson.