WHY oh WHY Shotgun on 4th & inches?

[MadRat]

Martinez cannot run the spread option. He's consistently telegraphed his handoffs. But hey, a good coach would see his own team weaknesses.

For the record, the rules govern how many can be in the backfield. You can have 10 on the LOS if you so chose. But nobody would do something so dense. Nebraska S&C knows who the strongest players are in many ways. If we need speed, S&C can tell Frost. If he needs brute power, S&C knows those players. If he needs to be told how to form a Rhino or Jumbo group at this stage, Frost was never ready to be HC. Dunning–Kruger effect.

 

[aztonick]

Oregon was able to establish a spread run first offense - Frost helped with that. I think that can work in the Big 10 (OSU does it) but you have to have the players and coaches to do it.

He has been unable as head coach to replicate Oregon's O at Nebraska. Combo of bad recruiting decisions and his offensive assistants. There also is something not quite right with culture/game day "winner's attitude".

Trev is facing a tough decision. Firing is going to hurt (T.O. among those against it). But continuing to be a losing program will kill the golden goose. Hopefully they get the hire right - but clearly between the decision makers and those interested.......we've struggled to get it right post T.O.

Frost was the WR coach when all of that Oregon stuff was implemented. He wasn't part of putting it together.

 

[Pavlov's Dog]

Hey Madrat- everyone on this board fits the Dunning-Kruger effect. It's just some are on opposite sides. heheh
(sometimes I think I know more than I do)

 

[redfred]

I think the shotgun has a place, but 4th and inches isn't it. This offense is dysfunctional. I don't have any idea what they're doing, and I think often times neither do they. I can't speak specifically to the play in question, but nothing surprises me about this offense any more.

 

[Pavlov's Dog]

I thought Lubick was brought in to run the offense. Did he call that play or did HCSF? If it was Frost, why is Lubick there?
If it was Lubick, why is Lubick there?

 

[valiantsailor]

I thought Lubick was brought in to run the offense. Did he call that play or did HCSF? If it was Frost, why is Lubick there?
If it was Lubick, why is Lubick there?

He is the OC and Frost is the HC and as such, ilke Frank Solich at al will always override his underlings in critical situation if there is disagreement. Again, the Dunning-Kruger effect, in psychology, a cognitive bias whereby people with limited knowledge or competence in a given intellectual or social domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence in that domain relative to objective criteria or to the performance of their peers or of people in general.

 

[valiantsailor]

I think the shotgun has a place, but 4th and inches isn't it. This offense is dysfunctional. I don't have any idea what they're doing, and I think often times neither do they. I can't speak specifically to the play in question, but nothing surprises me about this offense any more.

If you look at the play in the Michigan game where AM fumbled away the football, its apparent, that Frost or Lubick, wanted the first down yardage + instead of using the old adage, move the chains baby. Unfortunately, our tempo was very bad (as usual) and they allow the 2nd best defense in the country to set up and blow up the play. Frost is very consistent in his inability to remember the important stuff. Get the first down and live another set of downs. This is a big play offense not a grind um out type whether we the underlings like it or not.

 

[Pavlov's Dog]

Hey VS, I'm confused. Were you referring to me, HCSF, Lubick, or a combination of all three that you characterized as falling under Dunning-Kruger? Heheh

 

[redfred]

Frost is very consistent in his inability to remember the important stuff. Get the first down and live another set of downs. This is a big play offense not a grind um out type whether we the underlings like it or not.

I wonder if Scott doesn't remember what most of us consider important, simply because he doesn't consider it important. We knew what we getting with Scott when he was hired. He made no effort to hide the fact he was a "big play" offense guy, and a "bend but don't break", and "get the turnover" defensive guy. Many, such as myself, found his methods distasteful, but were willing to overlook them because he seemed the antithesis of Riley. I personally didn't mind Riley as a person, just not as a coach. While Riley's style was more to my liking, I just never felt Mike had the backbone to weather the big time. With his recent success in tow Scott looked like the second coming. I was more than willing to overlook the simple fact that Scott was a very young and inexperienced head coach........one of the major criteria that I had on my coaching wish list initially. Also, sloppy, but explosive, seemed like a good idea at the time.

I reiterate what I've been saying for some time......I think when all is said and done, Scott will be a good coach. My fear is that he has dug such a deep hole that he won't be able to get out of it here.

I wish Scott were coming in next year, with a fresh start, and no baggage. How much effort does one think he would put into special teams.....or crisp error free play.........or a reliable back up qb......or parting ways with assistant coaches that are putting a burden on the rest of the coaches...........or getting too close to some players and coaches that he can't make the hard calls?

But he isn't coming in fresh next year without preconceived ideas. We know his likes and dislikes, and we're afraid change isn't in his character. He's going to be attacked on a lot of fronts, and unless he wins three games (maybe two) down the stretch I don't know if he has enough ammo to win the day.

 

[valiantsailor]

We the underlings don't care what he does as long as he brings home the bacon, a WIN and a winning season productive season. We are the eve of 4 unproductive losing seasons. Frost has made it impossible for us to stay positive with all the errors and mistakes with his teams. Every year is the same old promises and then missed opportunities to change and produce. The clock is ticking and Frost is almost out of ticks.

 

[HuskerVotary]

I wonder if Scott doesn't remember what most of us consider important, simply because he doesn't consider it important. We knew what we getting with Scott when he was hired. He made no effort to hide the fact he was a "big play" offense guy, and a "bend but don't break", and "get the turnover" defensive guy. Many, such as myself, found his methods distasteful, but were willing to overlook them because he seemed the antithesis of Riley. I personally didn't mind Riley as a person, just not as a coach. While Riley's style was more to my liking, I just never felt Mike had the backbone to weather the big time. With his recent success in tow Scott looked like the second coming. I was more than willing to overlook the simple fact that Scott was a very young and inexperienced head coach........one of the major criteria that I had on my coaching wish list initially. Also, sloppy, but explosive, seemed like a good idea at the time.

I reiterate what I've been saying for some time......I think when all is said and done, Scott will be a good coach. My fear is that he has dug such a deep hole that he won't be able to get out of it here.

I wish Scott were coming in next year, with a fresh start, and no baggage. How much effort does one think he would put into special teams.....or crisp error free play.........or a reliable back up qb......or parting ways with assistant coaches that are putting a burden on the rest of the coaches...........or getting too close to some players and coaches that he can't make the hard calls?

But he isn't coming in fresh next year without preconceived ideas. We know his likes and dislikes, and we're afraid change isn't in his character. He's going to be attacked on a lot of fronts, and unless he wins three games (maybe two) down the stretch I don't know if he has enough ammo to win the day.

Fair take.