First: None of this, "Nice first post" type responses from anyone. I'm a long time listener, first-time caller in a sense.
When watching the game with the Nebraska Alumni group out here, I openly questioned why NU was running shotgun on 3rd and 1 in the first half. Nobody said a word to me. I then asked later in the half why on 3rd and 14, in the shotgun once again, a play-action pass was called. Nobody responded.
Martinez thew the ball 20 times. I get that you want the defense to think pass when they see shotgun, then maybe do a draw or something, but 3rd and 1? If Mike Riley or Bo Pelini would've called this, this board would have lit up. Play-action on 3rd and 14 out of shotgun to try and fool the linebackers? Again, I didn't see anyone on this board say anything about it. Advanced apologies if I missed it.
Not being a negative-nancy or throwing any coaches under the bus; just sound fundamental football says these aren't high-efficiency plays.
Please, now feel free to blast away at me.
First: None of this, "Nice first post" type responses from anyone. I'm a long time listener, first-time caller in a sense.
When watching the game with the Nebraska Alumni group out here, I openly questioned why NU was running shotgun on 3rd and 1 in the first half. Nobody said a word to me. I then asked later in the half why on 3rd and 14, in the shotgun once again, a play-action pass was called. Nobody responded.
The shotgun allows the QB a better vantage point than being under center to not only assess where a potential threat is coming from, but it also takes the pressure off of making a handoff when the QB is moving and the RB is moving at a higher rate of speed. How often do you see a fumbled handoff from the shotgun? The QB is always assessing the defense from a better vantage point, and the QB only needs to become comfortable with receiving the ball one way.
The shotgun also allows the RB to be able to easier assess where a hole is opening up and adjust to it (they aren't worrying about receiving the handoff and adjusting to the hole at the same time; they more easily receive the ball, then have time to assess the opening hole).
Think about it...the RB can take off in any direction with little adjustment required, because they aren't sprinting toward the line. Sure, there is more momentum from the RB moving towards the line, but there is less time to adjust to where a hole may be opening up. In many ways it simplifies receiving the ball for the RB, and allows them more time to assess the opening hole.
I think this has been the complaint of NFL coordinators...that college RBs coming out of spread systems have problems of adjusting to receiving the ball from under center, because they are given less time to adjust to where the hole opens up. They don't have to think as quickly in a spread system,
There is also a quad-threat in essence...based on the stance of the QB always facing forward...of throwing the ball, handing it off to the receiver in jet motion, handing it off to the RB or running himself. I guess coordinators think that the multiple options outweigh the defense knowing that receiving the ball under center generally indicates the ball being run to a certain hole in short yardage. Especially when the I-formation is being implemented. With zone blocking, holes can open up all over the place, and the shotgun allows RBs to adjust more easily than receiving a handoff from a QB under center.
Martinez thew the ball 20 times. I get that you want the defense to think pass when they see shotgun, then maybe do a draw or something, but 3rd and 1?
That's the point... it's just as easy to pass or run out of the shotgun, and it gives the QB a much better vantage point to make that determination for audibles too. He can assess if the box is stacked, and make changes accordingly. Is it better to try running an Isolation play to the 1 or 2 hole against an 8 or 9-man front than throwing a 1- yard slant? Maybe not.
If Mike Riley or Bo Pelini would've called this, this board would have lit up. Play-action on 3rd and 14 out of shotgun to try and fool the linebackers?
A fake to a RB doesn't try to fool the LBs, but it does indeed hold them in their position in the box for a split second, which is all that is needed to open up a throwing lane to the WRs.
Again, I didn't see anyone on this board say anything about it. Advanced apologies if I missed it.
Not being a negative-nancy or throwing any coaches under the bus; just sound fundamental football says these aren't high-efficiency plays.
You're thinking with an old-school mindset coming from watching I-formation with a FB and I-Back in the backfield...instead of thinking that multiple options out of the shotgun may actually pose more of a threat to a defense than taking the ball from under center. I get it; it would make sense that running the ball with momentum would increase the chances of picking up a yard, but I think spread coordinators think the multiple options from the shotgun pose as much of a threat to a defense.
I always wanted us to run the Oklahoma offense under Stoops, because they ran out of spread formations with the shotgun, and out of I-formation with the QB under center. It was truly a multiple offense.
Please, now feel free to blast away at me.
