ADVERTISEMENT

Fun during this dead period

Jhollenbeck41

Graduate Assistant
Nov 29, 2018
5,621
9,098
113
I want to have fun with this one. I think a lot of solid opinions and foreshadowing can come from this. Let's just say we had a "developmental" full back on the roster right now, someone who could grow into that role if for some reason Frost decided to do it. Do we have the personnel right now to run Osborne's option playbook in 2020 or 2021? Forget the shitty beer virus, let's act like the world is normal. Obviously not at an elite level yet, but just clean execution and understanding. Could we do it with what we have right now?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slantsflood7
no. we don't have a veer option QB on the roster.

those are made, not born, and need tens of thousands of reps to run that play, the crux of the offense, properly.
 
No. Not only do we not have the right pieces, we're philosophically upside down. (We're attempting to graft power onto a speed system). Another big disadvantage from the understanding standpoint is that virtually none of the guys on our roster came from a HS background where their offense was similar to Tom's. Which wasn't the case with pretty much any in-state recruit we had forever, and even a goodly number of out of state recruits.

We wouldn't be clean by any measure.
 
No. Not only do we not have the right pieces, we're philosophically upside down. (We're attempting to graft power onto a speed system). Another big disadvantage from the understanding standpoint is that virtually none of the guys on our roster came from a HS background where their offense was similar to Tom's. Which wasn't the case with pretty much any in-state recruit we had forever, and even a goodly number of out of state recruits.

We wouldn't be clean by any measure.
Couldn't you make the argument that spread offenses are everywhere so technically 95% of high school football are already getting ready for spread football in college?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slantsflood7
OK, I will play along and take the other side. I think we could make the change.

The option or veer as stated above requires the QB to read either the D tackle or end. What does the QB do in the spread? He reads the same. There is a read/mesh and a determination by the QB of what to do with the ball - turn it up or pitch it. I think any of the top 3 QB's could run this system. On top of that, it wasn't nearly has much option oriented under TO as it was under Solich so when people say option FB - I am not always certain what that means.

I watched Brook Berringer in HS and they didn't run option but he did OK in college running the Osborne O.

The biggest area is we would not need all the speed at WR we have now, we need better blockers.

Fundamentally, many aspects of football stay the same no matter what formation you line up in. Pass blocking doesn't all the sudden change from a spread to a power team. Pinning and pulling are still utilized - technique, use of hands and feet are base products no matter if WC, spread, power or even wishbone. I would say that there would need to be more emphasis on straight power blocking but I believe that has been a weak spot for several years for the Huskers. I have watched many of the old games and the techniques were not completely different, but the tenacity to get there is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: headcard
OK, I will play along and take the other side. I think we could make the change.

The option or veer as stated above requires the QB to read either the D tackle or end. What does the QB do in the spread? He reads the same. There is a read/mesh and a determination by the QB of what to do with the ball - turn it up or pitch it. I think any of the top 3 QB's could run this system. On top of that, it wasn't nearly has much option oriented under TO as it was under Solich so when people say option FB - I am not always certain what that means.

I watched Brook Berringer in HS and they didn't run option but he did OK in college running the Osborne O.

The biggest area is we would not need all the speed at WR we have now, we need better blockers.

Fundamentally, many aspects of football stay the same no matter what formation you line up in. Pass blocking doesn't all the sudden change from a spread to a power team. Pinning and pulling are still utilized - technique, use of hands and feet are base products no matter if WC, spread, power or even wishbone. I would say that there would need to be more emphasis on straight power blocking but I believe that has been a weak spot for several years for the Huskers. I have watched many of the old games and the techniques were not completely different, but the tenacity to get there is.
I agree, someone like Luke would be dynamite running the option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HominidHusker
Couldn't you make the argument that spread offenses are everywhere so technically 95% of high school football are already getting ready for spread football in college?

Sure but you are talking about Osborne's playbook. None of the guys have HS experience with that now
 
Sure but you are talking about Osborne's playbook. None of the guys have HS experience with that now
That's true. Obviously hypothetical here, let's say Frost makes the switch. Do we see high schools try to move that direction as well so create that pipeline from Nebraska high schools to Lincoln again?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slantsflood7
I agree, someone like Luke would be dynamite running the option.
What's his ideal weight then to run the option at an elite level in the Big 10? 205? He's listed at 6'2". For comparison purposes, Frazier's listed height and weight in 1995 was 6'2" 205. Adrian is 6'3" so 210 could be ideal there to run an effective option but thick enough to stay healthy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slantsflood7
I agree, someone like Luke would be dynamite running the option.

I think we're most set at the QB position. RB maybe because we have some good ones but in lieu of going four to five (or even 7) deep in all purpose backs like we did in the 90s we have a bunch of guys who are more situational. And then we bring in guys like wandale to work out of the backfield and such.

WR you need guys that can catch the ball and be willing to block. We probably already have that.

Line could make the transition to Milt style blocking pancake city but it'll take time. That's really the only thing about the original question...the understanding. In a year they could probably do it but it would be not natural in such a short time frame.
 
What's his ideal weight then to run the option at an elite level in the Big 10? 205? He's listed at 6'2". For comparison purposes, Frazier's listed height and weight in 1995 was 6'2" 205. Adrian is 6'3" so 210 could be ideal there to run an effective option but thick enough to stay healthy.

2AM weighted a lot more than 210 last year..

Luke McCaffery would be the better option QB in Osborne system.. Luke kind of reminds me of Gerry Gdowski.
 
2AM weighted a lot more than 210 last year..

Luke McCaffery would be the better option QB in Osborne system.. Luke kind of reminds me of Gerry Gdowski.
I know I'm saying if Adrian was an option QB in Osborne's system. if Frazier was 6'2" 205 then I feel like Adrian could get away with 210 being 6'3". Mobile and still hold up taking hits
 
I think we're most set at the QB position. RB maybe because we have some good ones but in lieu of going four to five (or even 7) deep in all purpose backs like we did in the 90s we have a bunch of guys who are more situational. And then we bring in guys like wandale to work out of the backfield and such.

WR you need guys that can catch the ball and be willing to block. We probably already have that.

Line could make the transition to Milt style blocking pancake city but it'll take time. That's really the only thing about the original question...the understanding. In a year they could probably do it but it would be not natural in such a short time frame.
Right. I honestly think it would look alright with a full off-season of developing it then going from there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slantsflood7
Right. I honestly think it would look alright with a full off-season of developing it then going from there.
can anyone name one successful veer QB who didn't run that play in high school?

the inside veer is the crux of the offense. Eric Crouch ran that play from the time he was 9-years old until he won the Heisman trophy.

one year is meaningless. TO's offenses had linemen and quarterbacks who had been familiar with the intricacies of that one single play for a minimum of 5 years before joining the Huskers.
 
can anyone name one successful veer QB who didn't run that play in high school?

the inside veer is the crux of the offense. Eric Crouch ran that play from the time he was 9-years old until he won the Heisman trophy.

one year is meaningless. TO's offenses had linemen and quarterbacks who had been familiar with the intricacies of that one single play for a minimum of 5 years before joining the Huskers.

I keep in touch with several HS coaches, from small schools through 5A with our largest being 6A in KS. These guys are coaching anywhere from the veer to the spread. All are teaching their QB's to read someone, tackle, DE., safety, it doesn't matter the O. They will also say that how much you give the QB to read depends on them and their ability to pick it up. One went from an assistant in HS to head JH and they generally do not teach the QB to read, just run the designated play. Reading takes time.

My point is what's the difference?

Here is one article that explains the veer concept http://www.coachwyatt.com/veerexplained.html Interestingly enough, a coach that I once hired who is now at a different school runs the veer and they rarely block the tackle to the true sense of what the veer is suppose to do and be.

Here is a short one with some clips that shows how the QB is reading the play side designated person, may be a DE bit still a read. http://www.spreadoffense.com/ssp/inverted_veer_frontside_read The spread does just what the word indicates, spreads people out and most articles will tell you that it requires less ability from your O linemen.

I use Brook as an example because I knew him in HS and he definitely did not play option FB in HS. On the other hand, not all HS QB's you see are necessarily making reads, they are running designated plays a lot of the time.
 
I keep in touch with several HS coaches, from small schools through 5A with our largest being 6A in KS. These guys are coaching anywhere from the veer to the spread. All are teaching their QB's to read someone, tackle, DE., safety, it doesn't matter the O. They will also say that how much you give the QB to read depends on them and their ability to pick it up. One went from an assistant in HS to head JH and they generally do not teach the QB to read, just run the designated play. Reading takes time.

My point is what's the difference?

Here is one article that explains the veer concept http://www.coachwyatt.com/veerexplained.html Interestingly enough, a coach that I once hired who is now at a different school runs the veer and they rarely block the tackle to the true sense of what the veer is suppose to do and be.

Here is a short one with some clips that shows how the QB is reading the play side designated person, may be a DE bit still a read. http://www.spreadoffense.com/ssp/inverted_veer_frontside_read The spread does just what the word indicates, spreads people out and most articles will tell you that it requires less ability from your O linemen.

I use Brook as an example because I knew him in HS and he definitely did not play option FB in HS. On the other hand, not all HS QB's you see are necessarily making reads, they are running designated plays a lot of the time.
good stuff here, thanks for sharing.

I think in year 1 it would be a lot of, if not exclusively, designated calls instead of reads simply because it takes so much live fire for a QB to become comfortable with his reads, assuming they haven't had years of experience coming in. identifying those reads and making them at the line of scrimmage versus 3-4 yards deep in the shotgun also takes a lot of getting used to. and that would severely limit what makes that offense so hard to defend.
 
good stuff here, thanks for sharing.

I think in year 1 it would be a lot of, if not exclusively, designated calls instead of reads simply because it takes so much live fire for a QB to become comfortable with his reads, assuming they haven't had years of experience coming in. identifying those reads and making them at the line of scrimmage versus 3-4 yards deep in the shotgun also takes a lot of getting used to. and that would severely limit what makes that offense so hard to defend.

Absolutely true. But then how many HS QB's come into a college situation already prepared for everything they will see?
 
  • Like
Reactions: John_J_Rambo
can anyone name one successful veer QB who didn't run that play in high school?

the inside veer is the crux of the offense. Eric Crouch ran that play from the time he was 9-years old until he won the Heisman trophy.

one year is meaningless. TO's offenses had linemen and quarterbacks who had been familiar with the intricacies of that one single play for a minimum of 5 years before joining the Huskers.
You're 100% right but that simply just doesn't exist right now so I was just going off of what we've seen so far when Frost has pulled it of the playbook. I thought Adrian looked okay running it against Ohio State and I thought Luke did well too running it against Maryland.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slantsflood7
You're 100% right but that simply just doesn't exist right now so I was just going off of what we've seen so far when Frost has pulled it of the playbook. I thought Adrian looked okay running it against Ohio State and I thought Luke did well too running it against Maryland.
they did look fine running a scripted, called-in-the-huddle set of 6 or so plays as a wrinkle ohio clearly wasn't prepared for, I agree.
 
No worries. Our high powered swing pass attack will take the country by storm.

Also when we hand off in Shotgun, and our running back runs sideways as fast as possible.

It just has husker power written all over it.
 
you asked the question, sorry if you don't like my answer
You're right, that's a good point. I guess what I was trying to say in a weird sort of way that maybe I didn't actually type out was that, back in the 90s, opponents had an idea of what we were going to run but we were so good at it that it didn't matter, they weren't going to stop it. So while I understand that Ohio State probably wasn't prepared for that, but why can't the same concept apply? If Frost were to ever make the switch, why can't we just get so good at it again, that even if we're playing Ohio State, or Michigan, or Wisconsin, or Iowa, that they can't stop it again because we're that good at it? I guess that's what I was getting at.
 
You're right, that's a good point. I guess what I was trying to say in a weird sort of way that maybe I didn't actually type out was that, back in the 90s, opponents had an idea of what we were going to run but we were so good at it that it didn't matter, they weren't going to stop it. So while I understand that Ohio State probably wasn't prepared for that, but why can't the same concept apply? If Frost were to ever make the switch, why can't we just get so good at it again, that even if we're playing Ohio State, or Michigan, or Wisconsin, or Iowa, that they can't stop it again because we're that good at it? I guess that's what I was getting at.
we could be, just not anytime soon.
 
You're right, that's a good point. I guess what I was trying to say in a weird sort of way that maybe I didn't actually type out was that, back in the 90s, opponents had an idea of what we were going to run but we were so good at it that it didn't matter, they weren't going to stop it. So while I understand that Ohio State probably wasn't prepared for that, but why can't the same concept apply? If Frost were to ever make the switch, why can't we just get so good at it again, that even if we're playing Ohio State, or Michigan, or Wisconsin, or Iowa, that they can't stop it again because we're that good at it? I guess that's what I was getting at.

I guess it depends. So good at it that you can't stop it is pretty rare. Wisconsin should be at that level by now and they are clearly not. Bama has been like that in some years mostly because of the talent gap between them and whoever they are playing.

Oregon I think is the closest example to that in their heyday being on the front edge of a newer offense and playing that tempo game.

Nebraska is unlikely to have a talent gap of most teams we care to beat. I think the uniqueness of option football has somewhat receded because so many teams run option concepts in a spread now.

I do think if we got to that level it'd be awhile for sure. Toms offense is still unique enough to matter but to get back to the kinds of hardware we want to win it required elite athletes.

And if you have elite athletes it probably doesn't matter what you run at that point. Pick what you want folks to write about you in social media and run that.
 
I guess it depends. So good at it that you can't stop it is pretty rare. Wisconsin should be at that level by now and they are clearly not. Bama has been like that in some years mostly because of the talent gap between them and whoever they are playing.

Oregon I think is the closest example to that in their heyday being on the front edge of a newer offense and playing that tempo game.

Nebraska is unlikely to have a talent gap of most teams we care to beat. I think the uniqueness of option football has somewhat receded because so many teams run option concepts in a spread now.

I do think if we got to that level it'd be awhile for sure. Toms offense is still unique enough to matter but to get back to the kinds of hardware we want to win it required elite athletes.

And if you have elite athletes it probably doesn't matter what you run at that point. Pick what you want folks to write about you in social media and run that.
Sure, but I'd like to play devil's advocate in the fact that I've seen old videos and have seen numerous times where teams ran our option plays under center too. Exhibit A being The Miracle Catch game, saw Mizzou do it quite a bit. So you could argue that it wasn't completely uncommon of an offense at that time either? I'd also like to argue that in major college football today, I believe Iowa and Wisconsin are probably the only teams still running power football out of the I-Formation. So, all we have to do is be better than them, right? In my opinion, we're on a level playing field with Iowa right now, maybe even in 2019, and only need one more off season to be on a leveling playing field with Wisconsin. At that point, it's all mental going forward to beat those teams.
 
Sure, but I'd like to play devil's advocate in the fact that I've seen old videos and have seen numerous times where teams ran our option plays under center too. Exhibit A being The Miracle Catch game, saw Mizzou do it quite a bit. So you could argue that it wasn't completely uncommon of an offense at that time either? I'd also like to argue that in major college football today, I believe Iowa and Wisconsin are probably the only teams still running power football out of the I-Formation. So, all we have to do is be better than them, right? In my opinion, we're on a level playing field with Iowa right now, maybe even in 2019, and only need one more off season to be on a leveling playing field with Wisconsin. At that point, it's all mental going forward to beat those teams.

Not sure how old you are, but if The Miracle Catch game is old to you, you almost have to be a youngin.

I'm only 38 and there's plenty of folks here who will scold me for being young because I never saw any 70's games in person. I remember watching that Flea Kicker game with my family very vividly. We sure as shit should have lost that game.

Corby Jones was fire that night. That's really all that can be said about that. Even in that era of football Tom's offense was unique but you did have quite a few teams incorporating more athletic QB's even if they couldn't top to bottom replicate NU's entire playbook and physicality.

But the prevailing thought was that you didn't have to, you just needed an athletic enough guy back there to wreak havoc and have the defense account for an extra runner in situational purposes. No one really wanted an option offense, they just wanted that extra little wrinkle.
 
I'd also like to argue that in major college football today, I believe Iowa and Wisconsin are probably the only teams still running power football out of the I-Formation. So, all we have to do is be better than them, right?

I think what you are missing the boat on is the exponential curve it takes to do something really well, or to perform in that top handful of percent.

In a pinch, we could trot out a walk-on FB, have Luke or AMart run a few pitches after taking a snap from center and attempt to look like teams of old, but generally in the near term we'd be kludgy and may well shoot us in the foot. We might beat a bunch of also ran teams and a middling (some years good, some not) team like Iowa, but we won't beat Wisconsin and the higher echelon teams until our 90's offense had quite a bit of polish on it...and elite athletes.

Frost has talked about it, so has TO....it takes thousands and thousands of reps to make sure that an option pitch is a reliable play. Running the ball constantly isn't a good deal when your pseudo passes in your option plays are putting the ball on the turf regularly. So every QB that comes through the program has going to have to be taught how to do it more or less in this day and age, and then spend a billion reps getting it down to a staple.

There was one year where Dan Alexander literally could not hold onto the football. We had an insane amount of fumbles. That was the worst feeling in the world even if we were still out-talenting most teams we faced.

And its a philosophy thing. Frost has talked about this at length in interviews. If he was going to coach anywhere and bring the Oregon system with him, he couldn't just take these X pages out of the playbook and then build a whole different something around it. It was a system, we recruit these types of players, we lift this way, we condition this way, we practice this way, we do all the things this way. Speed was at the center of it, not power. So people that thought he was going to come in here and just reinvent the 90's and put a little Oregon wrinkle on it I think had their head in the sand from what the man has said in the last 5 years or so.

Its still experimental, this idea of whether he can graft power onto an essentially speed based system. TO's system was more or less all encompassing like Oregon's, but everything philosophically was built around a power ideal, and sort of shifted to encompass more speed as time went on and we kept losing the big ones.

Scott Frost came from an offense where we ran 80% of the time and powered it down peoples throats. His first official action on campus was to kill the FB. A switch back to the TO system of old would require a 180 type of turn and much time to perfect not just to beat Iowa, but to be at the level folks want to see Nebraska perform at.

Scott's now three years into his system, we've more or less bought what we've bought. He could bring out more power looks for situations but I highly highly doubt he "starts over".
 
can anyone name one successful veer QB who didn't run that play in high school?

the inside veer is the crux of the offense. Eric Crouch ran that play from the time he was 9-years old until he won the Heisman trophy.

one year is meaningless. TO's offenses had linemen and quarterbacks who had been familiar with the intricacies of that one single play for a minimum of 5 years before joining the Huskers.

Yah as you can tell from my posts in this thread, I whole heartedly agree with this.

I remember being at Omaha North (like a million years ago now) when Crouch was a senior at Millard North. I think we played them in the first round of the State playoffs, must have been 1996 then.

I knew he was good, but in person, just blew me away. Guy was straight up untackleable. North had a good defense back then too, Top 5 in the state if I remember. He hung 63 points on us, I think we got 7.
 
  • Like
Reactions: John_J_Rambo
No. Not only do we not have the right pieces, we're philosophically upside down. (We're attempting to graft power onto a speed system). Another big disadvantage from the understanding standpoint is that virtually none of the guys on our roster came from a HS background where their offense was similar to Tom's. Which wasn't the case with pretty much any in-state recruit we had forever, and even a goodly number of out of state recruits.

We wouldn't be clean by any measure.

Well that's bullshit. He asked if we have a fullback that we could develop, and of course we could run Osborne's offense. I wouldn't reccomend it, however.
 
I think what you are missing the boat on is the exponential curve it takes to do something really well, or to perform in that top handful of percent.

In a pinch, we could trot out a walk-on FB, have Luke or AMart run a few pitches after taking a snap from center and attempt to look like teams of old, but generally in the near term we'd be kludgy and may well shoot us in the foot. We might beat a bunch of also ran teams and a middling (some years good, some not) team like Iowa, but we won't beat Wisconsin and the higher echelon teams until our 90's offense had quite a bit of polish on it...and elite athletes.

Frost has talked about it, so has TO....it takes thousands and thousands of reps to make sure that an option pitch is a reliable play. Running the ball constantly isn't a good deal when your pseudo passes in your option plays are putting the ball on the turf regularly. So every QB that comes through the program has going to have to be taught how to do it more or less in this day and age, and then spend a billion reps getting it down to a staple.

There was one year where Dan Alexander literally could not hold onto the football. We had an insane amount of fumbles. That was the worst feeling in the world even if we were still out-talenting most teams we faced.

And its a philosophy thing. Frost has talked about this at length in interviews. If he was going to coach anywhere and bring the Oregon system with him, he couldn't just take these X pages out of the playbook and then build a whole different something around it. It was a system, we recruit these types of players, we lift this way, we condition this way, we practice this way, we do all the things this way. Speed was at the center of it, not power. So people that thought he was going to come in here and just reinvent the 90's and put a little Oregon wrinkle on it I think had their head in the sand from what the man has said in the last 5 years or so.

Its still experimental, this idea of whether he can graft power onto an essentially speed based system. TO's system was more or less all encompassing like Oregon's, but everything philosophically was built around a power ideal, and sort of shifted to encompass more speed as time went on and we kept losing the big ones.

Scott Frost came from an offense where we ran 80% of the time and powered it down peoples throats. His first official action on campus was to kill the FB. A switch back to the TO system of old would require a 180 type of turn and much time to perfect not just to beat Iowa, but to be at the level folks want to see Nebraska perform at.

Scott's now three years into his system, we've more or less bought what we've bought. He could bring out more power looks for situations but I highly highly doubt he "starts over".

I stopped reading halfway. Too much is wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jflores
Well that's bullshit. He asked if we have a fullback that we could develop, and of course we could run Osborne's offense. I wouldn't reccomend it, however.

I wouldn't either, but I would argue the difference in makeup between a typical TO team and our team now, is more than a pretend developmental FB away.
 
I think what you are missing the boat on is the exponential curve it takes to do something really well, or to perform in that top handful of percent.

In a pinch, we could trot out a walk-on FB, have Luke or AMart run a few pitches after taking a snap from center and attempt to look like teams of old, but generally in the near term we'd be kludgy and may well shoot us in the foot. We might beat a bunch of also ran teams and a middling (some years good, some not) team like Iowa, but we won't beat Wisconsin and the higher echelon teams until our 90's offense had quite a bit of polish on it...and elite athletes.

Frost has talked about it, so has TO....it takes thousands and thousands of reps to make sure that an option pitch is a reliable play. Running the ball constantly isn't a good deal when your pseudo passes in your option plays are putting the ball on the turf regularly. So every QB that comes through the program has going to have to be taught how to do it more or less in this day and age, and then spend a billion reps getting it down to a staple.

There was one year where Dan Alexander literally could not hold onto the football. We had an insane amount of fumbles. That was the worst feeling in the world even if we were still out-talenting most teams we faced.

And its a philosophy thing. Frost has talked about this at length in interviews. If he was going to coach anywhere and bring the Oregon system with him, he couldn't just take these X pages out of the playbook and then build a whole different something around it. It was a system, we recruit these types of players, we lift this way, we condition this way, we practice this way, we do all the things this way. Speed was at the center of it, not power. So people that thought he was going to come in here and just reinvent the 90's and put a little Oregon wrinkle on it I think had their head in the sand from what the man has said in the last 5 years or so.

Its still experimental, this idea of whether he can graft power onto an essentially speed based system. TO's system was more or less all encompassing like Oregon's, but everything philosophically was built around a power ideal, and sort of shifted to encompass more speed as time went on and we kept losing the big ones.

Scott Frost came from an offense where we ran 80% of the time and powered it down peoples throats. His first official action on campus was to kill the FB. A switch back to the TO system of old would require a 180 type of turn and much time to perfect not just to beat Iowa, but to be at the level folks want to see Nebraska perform at.

Scott's now three years into his system, we've more or less bought what we've bought. He could bring out more power looks for situations but I highly highly doubt he "starts over".
Well, you got me. Lol I have no ammo to come back to that with. I liked the summary. I find that stuff fascinating.
 
Not sure how old you are, but if The Miracle Catch game is old to you, you almost have to be a youngin.

I'm only 38 and there's plenty of folks here who will scold me for being young because I never saw any 70's games in person. I remember watching that Flea Kicker game with my family very vividly. We sure as shit should have lost that game.

Corby Jones was fire that night. That's really all that can be said about that. Even in that era of football Tom's offense was unique but you did have quite a few teams incorporating more athletic QB's even if they couldn't top to bottom replicate NU's entire playbook and physicality.

But the prevailing thought was that you didn't have to, you just needed an athletic enough guy back there to wreak havoc and have the defense account for an extra runner in situational purposes. No one really wanted an option offense, they just wanted that extra little wrinkle.
I'm only 27. So to give that context, Crouch's 2001 Heisman season is the first one where I actually have memories of watching it. Glimpses, not even the whole thing. I remember the 41 reverse against Oklahoma, the run against Mizzou, and the national title game against Miami. The way I was brought up, it was just expected and known that Nebraska was elite, we we won a lot of games every year, and we were either in the national championship game or in the 2nd place bowl game essentially every year. So when we lost in 2001 to Miami, I remember saying to myself on the way home from my Aunt and Uncle's house that night, where we watched it, that "it's fine, we'll be back next year." We never made it back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: John_J_Rambo
re-watching some old games while working from home. Eric Crouch vs. Tee Martin right now. Shoot I'd even take that level of an option offense right now if it ever happened again to start out. Crouch is a stud in that offense
 
  • Like
Reactions: scarletred
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT