Brewsters OC Coco?

Donate To GopherHole
B

Bayfieldgopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
9,046
Reaction score
1,549
Points
113
Brewster sold out 100% to Dunbars Susy Spread playground offense. He highlighted Dunbar as a main star in his cast of the best coaching staff in college football. The spread and Dunbar were highly touted and would resurrect Gopher football. But he and Brewster's two star DC's are now gone after two years. Now he has pledged to bring in a killer shot hire to help repair an ailing and weak offense.

I think its clear what type of D Brewster wants; tough, aggressive, make big plays, mix it up, have an attitude, etc. An image of Brewsters personality and philosophy of how football should be played. I think he and Roof were on the same page. But Dunbar and Brewster weren't even in the same book. Now Brewster wants some thing different. After two years, Brewster finally wants an O like his D. Enter Coach Davis. And I agree with that 100%.

Brewster hired a guy who knew one thing; the spread. Dunbar was a specialist. Nothing more. A guy who was not confident in coaching offensive football.

In Brewsters revolving quest to establish an effective offense, we will now see another outstanding hire come in and share the work hand in hand with Coach Davis. I expect to see a well rounded and experienced football coach who is capable of implementing an effective offense; not just the spread. A football coach and not a specialist.

If this sounds a bit cynical, maybe so. I have not been impressed with Brewsters blotched attempts on the offense side. Brewster needs to get to the point where "his" team resembles "his" personality and philosophy when we have the ball. I believe Davis is a lot like Brewster. We need another.
 

Not all Dunbar's fault

I've said it before and I'll say it again: this was not all Mike Dunbar's fault. People keep using the term "Suzy Spread" to insinuate that it was some kind of pansy-ass offense that is incapable of running the ball. In fact, Dunbar had several 1,000 yard rushers at both Northwestern and Cal. If I had to diagnose the problems on offense this season, it would be:

1) Offensive line
1a) Offensive line
1b) OFFENSIVE LINE
2) True freshman starting at RB
3) Dunbar's unwillingness to adapt his system to fit the players (sound like anyone else in MN?)
4) Dunbar's play calling (i.e., one-back shotgun on 3rd and 1)
5) Lack of skill players to fit a spread system

As you can see, I'm not holding Dunbar blameless. The offense was putrid through most of the season, and someone has to take the fall. However, I think things would've turned out quite differently with a full season of Bennett and Decker.

I do like the firing of Dunbar and I'm looking forward to a hybrid between the Mason and new guy's offenses.
 

I thought Dunbar's spread offense was innovative...... in 2002.

He failed to let his playcalling evolve and it became stale and predictable. I have no problem with the spread as long as it keeps defenses guessing (which it was designed to do), but once they've figured it out, then it becomes ineffective.

That is why I liked the former Gophers' offensive scheme of zone blocking and running - it was just as effective when the defense knew it was coming than when they didn't (although it was unable to keep up when we were behind by 10 or more points).

Anyway, that's my opinion.
 


dpodoll68 said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again: this was not all Mike Dunbar's fault. People keep using the term "Suzy Spread" to insinuate that it was some kind of pansy-ass offense that is incapable of running the ball. In fact, Dunbar had several 1,000 yard rushers at both Northwestern and Cal. If I had to diagnose the problems on offense this season, it would be:

1) Offensive line
1a) Offensive line
1b) OFFENSIVE LINE
2) True freshman starting at RB
3) Dunbar's unwillingness to adapt his system to fit the players (sound like anyone else in MN?)
4) Dunbar's play calling (i.e., one-back shotgun on 3rd and 1)
5) Lack of skill players to fit a spread system

As you can see, I'm not holding Dunbar blameless. The offense was putrid through most of the season, and someone has to take the fall. However, I think things would've turned out quite differently with a full season of Bennett and Decker.

I do like the firing of Dunbar and I'm looking forward to a hybrid between the Mason and new guy's offenses.
Click to expand...


Remember playing Northwestern earlier this decade and thinking....wow, what a crazy offense. Now you see it every time you flip a channel. Dunbar was a bad hire and there's reason Cal didn't blink when he left.
 


Prior to the season, it was obvious to me and others that the OL would be the Achilles Heel of this team. It would seem to me that Dunbar would have made an attempt to adjust especially since we did not have a very strong running game early on. But all we saw was the spread, except the PAT against Wisky where Weber lined under center. And the KU game of course.

Now. Maybe Dunbar did some experimenting in practice and no one heard about it. Even if we would have failed in attempting to establish some type of a power running game, I would have had some satisfaction in that. But we didn't thus I have coined Dunbars offense as Susy Spread.

There comes a time in most games where getting a yard or two is critical. I would always favor seeing a power type formation in those situations. Line em up and see who does the job. But I am an old fashioned mind and I really don't like or appreciate what the spread offers.

With the advent of outdoor football around the corner, I hope Brewster and his minions make a concerted effort to make power football more than just an after thought and diversion from the Spread.
 

My pre season analysis was that the offense would be worse and people scoffed. I said A) The O Line will be weak B) We'll miss Wheelright big time. 3) Our running game would be worse after losing Pinnix/Valentine.

Where's the 'pat myself on the shoulder' icon?
 

All you had to do was be around some of the practice sessions ( St. Johns) As I sat in the stands and mingled close to field as I could get I wondered, you have two church mouses out there ( Dunbar and Meyer) and several roaring tigers. ( Brewster and the rest of the ass't coaches) Is that going to work out in the grand scheme of things? It didn't.
 

Broken Plan

Those 1000 runners came when Dunbar's method was new and innovative. Number three was the biggest problem, for it even accounts for 1-1b, at least to a degree.

dpodoll68 said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again: this was not all Mike Dunbar's fault. People keep using the term "Suzy Spread" to insinuate that it was some kind of pansy-ass offense that is incapable of running the ball. In fact, Dunbar had several 1,000 yard rushers at both Northwestern and Cal. If I had to diagnose the problems on offense this season, it would be:

1) Offensive line
1a) Offensive line
1b) OFFENSIVE LINE
2) True freshman starting at RB
3) Dunbar's unwillingness to adapt his system to fit the players (sound like anyone else in MN?)
4) Dunbar's play calling (i.e., one-back shotgun on 3rd and 1)
5) Lack of skill players to fit a spread system

As you can see, I'm not holding Dunbar blameless. The offense was putrid through most of the season, and someone has to take the fall. However, I think things would've turned out quite differently with a full season of Bennett and Decker.

I do like the firing of Dunbar and I'm looking forward to a hybrid between the Mason and new guy's offenses.
Click to expand...
 



This continues to absolutely amaze me...

For the life of me I can't figure out why some people just are incapable of comprehending some basic fundamentals of football. Plain and simple:

YOU CANNOT WIN IN FOOTBALL WITH FRESHMEN AND SOPHOMORES ON THE OFFENSIVE LINE, LACK OF EXPERIENCE, PERHAPS SOME LACK OF SKILL, AND NOT TO MENTION A ROTATING DOOR AT VIRTUALLY EVERY ONE OF THE OFFENSIVE LINE POSITIONS!

Why is this so hard for some to understand? This offense was doomed from the start this year because the Gophers started around 10-11 different guys on the offensive line, most were freshmen and sophomores, redshirt or not, hardly any starting experience or Big Ten experience.

You need three things on the offensive line to be successful; skill, continuity, and experience. You could almost argue the Gophers had NONE of these this year. Not bagging on the guys themselves, they can't help it if they're young and inexperienced.

Brewster and Dunbar were not completely at fault with the offensive woes this year but I would put 80-90% of the inability to consistently move the ball on our O-line issues. The Gophers could have had Dan Marino under center, Walter Payton running the ball, and Rice and Moss at WR and this offense would have had significant issues.

I'm not saying the schemes and playcalling were right or wrong, just that it's IMPOSSIBLE to tell at this point (for the most part), considering our O-line issues.

Why is this so hard to understand.
 

Money, on the.

GGR is right and right on the money with this. If the offense is worth a damn you should be able to give away a lot and still run it with success.

UMD showed it right through their championship game. Back by QB meant run. RB in correct position meant run. Stop it if you can.

Go Gophers Rah said:
I thought Dunbar's spread offense was innovative...... in 2002.

He failed to let his playcalling evolve and it became stale and predictable. I have no problem with the spread as long as it keeps defenses guessing (which it was designed to do), but once they've figured it out, then it becomes ineffective.

That is why I liked the former Gophers' offensive scheme of zone blocking and running - it was just as effective when the defense knew it was coming than when they didn't (although it was unable to keep up when we were behind by 10 or more points).

Anyway, that's my opinion.
Click to expand...
 

To me, the problems were the following, IMO:

1. the OL. Very young and had not gelled. The reasons for this being number 1 are numerous. The biggest thing was after the Gophers lost to Northwestern, that one revealed the Gophers weakness at OL and set the template for other teams to know how to beat them. I believe it was either here or at the gophers scout site I mentioned that following the game (personal back slap injected here).

2. RBs. To many injuries and young.

3. When the spread was new and innovative, teams were not use to it. It was successful. It is no longer new! Teams have learned how to defend it! The offense needs tweaking so that it is not so predictable.

4. Weber needs confidence in receivers not named Decker

5. Following Knee injury/surgery, Weber was not the same QB. His throws were not as accurate and he was not quite as mobile.
 

One interesting point

McGopherFan said:
GGR is right and right on the money with this. If the offense is worth a damn you should be able to give away a lot and still run it with success.

UMD showed it right through their championship game. Back by QB meant run. RB in correct position meant run. Stop it if you can.
Click to expand...

The funny thing is, UMD ran a spread the year before, Bubba left, Neilson took back over, chucked the spread went back to power running, and obviously prospered. Am I saying that would have happened at the "U"? No, but the players were better suited for the run game and it worked. Schafke wasn't throwing every down and he had a great year numbers wise. I always been a fan of playing to your players power areas then changing the type of player you recruit to change systems. I guess I'm old fashioned.
 



Costa Rican Gopher said:
My pre season analysis was that the offense would be worse and people scoffed. I said A) The O Line will be weak B) We'll miss Wheelright big time. 3) Our running game would be worse after losing Pinnix/Valentine.

Where's the 'pat myself on the shoulder' icon?
Click to expand...


I'll give you the pat on the back when you can prove it. Seems to me I remember you saying it'll be the best ever and break all the records with our dominating OLine. Because mostly, dunbar is a genius.

At least that's how I remember it.:cool:
 


Dunbar didnt have good running games because his spread offense was new. He had good running games cause he was on much more talented teams.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom