Diaco - mistakes in loss to Wisconsin are correctable

[Undone]

13 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

Gotta have a full game of good football. Tired of the (x amount of quarters talk). Oregon hung 42 points in ONE HALF. I know we changed schemes with average talent, but I haven't been impressed with Diaco thus far. 

Obviously a full game of good football is better than two quarters of good football. 

Is the guy better than banker? Not sure yet. I'll have an opinion after we play the last six games.

[Isle of View]

So he couldn't tell during the 30+ straight runs that he had the D lined up wrong?

[Thanks_Tom RR]

1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

Isn't Diaco placing the blame on the coaches when he says it was play calling problem? But you'd rather he blame the players in public? Can't win scenario. And that's before considering what he says to the media may not be exactly what he's telling the players.

I would rather he address the actual problem, a problem that has plagued the program for multiple years and coaching staffs. He may be too new to the Husker program to realize the systemic problems, so he looks at the film and says what is wrong with the scheme. However, you have players that fill the gaps but miss the tackle, allow blockers to hold their blocks, or are in position to make a play but can't get it done. That is a player effort/mentality problem, not a scheme or player talent problem. This game highlights those deficits, and it feels like a missed opportunity to not hold the players accountable. Simply as that.

[zero_blitz]

Just my $.02 but here's why I think Diaco has a point.  This is Taylor's big run right before halftime.  Wiscy comes out in 11 personell (1 back, 1 TE), but instead of being in-line, Fumagali is split out in a two point stance.  We went with a four lineman front here, but for some reason we called the strength opposite of Fumagali. 

 

Based on how the play unfolds, it seems we would have been in better position with the strength called to Fumagali, instead of away from him.  Having the defensive tackle on the play side lined up on the outside shoulder of the guard (3-technique) , instead of shaded over the center, could have potentially forced Taylor to cut the play back, or bounce it outside where we had extra defenders.

 

Pre Snap Wide

 

Pre Snap Tight

Shifting Thomas and Davis each one man over to the left would have put us in a better position.  I'm hoping this is one of the mistakes Diaco was referring to.  Typically this is how four man fronts are called, with the three technique to the TE side. Fumagali being split out may have been a reason for the strength being called away, or it could have just been mis-read.  Either way, we would have been in a much stronger position to be successful had it been called the other way.

 

Ball is snapped, defense starts to flow, Thomas #97 was orignally lined up on the outside shouler of the center, and the center is starting to cross his face, leaving Thomas in the wrong gap.

 

Weber #49 reads run and attacks the guard to fit in the B gap. Meanwhile Thomas #97 has been out gapped, and is now fighting to get back across the centers face.

 

Thomas is never able to get back to his gap, Taylor hits the hole with Dedric young being the only player left on the second level, but he’s cut off by the tackle and not able to get to the ball.   Taylor is now 1on 1 with Williams #24

 

Already at a severe disadvantage, Williams takes a poor angle, and gets beat

 

And it's off to the races from there.

 

I do believe there may be some merit to what Diaco had to say.  If we had the three technique to the TE side on this play, I do believe Taylor would have been forced to either cut back or bounce to the outside, either of those options would have most likely led to him beong stopped at some point prior to reaching the end zone.  But instead, he was able get through the hole and to the third level of the defense WITHOUT EVER MAKING A SINGLE CUT!!  He literally ran at the same angle until he reached the sideline, that certainly didn't do Williams any favors.  

 

We certainly still have issues on D.  Mid way through the third we were out of gas up front, and Wiscy just had their way with us from that point.  But it's definitely a different ball game if it's 10-7 at halftime with Nebraska having the momentum. 

[suh_fan93]

Disco should get back in the elevator.  Unreal.

 

 

 

[Mavric]

Nice breakdown @zero_blitz

 

I'll have to watch the play a little more to know for sure.  One thing I will comment on is the way the LBs are coached that sure didn't help of this play.  If they ILBs read run to their side, I have repeatedly seen them immediately sprint forward to fill a gap.  I'm sure that's the gap they are supposed to be responsible for but it seems like they are often running themselves out of the play.  Against a zone blocking scheme, all that happens is the back finds a different gap in the zone and runs there instead.  But now that the ILBs have committed to a specific gap - running right into a block - they are now unable to scrape to the ball if the runner goes to a different gap.

 

I can understand wanting to be gap sound but we seem to basically sacrifice pawns pretty easily.  We don't make it very tough to block us when we run into the blocker instead of making them find us.  I would think any offense would take that 1-for-1 trade all day.

[InOmaha]

Good analysis.  The problem is in the 4th quarter how many Nebraska players were on the ground not getting up after plays?  They were definitely out hit by a tougher Wisconsin offense on the last two drives.  They were leaving Husker bodies strewn around the field on multiple plays.  I'd have to go look at it but I remember the feeling it seemed like every other play when Wisconsin got past the 50.

[MichiganDad3]

9 hours ago, observer3 said:

https://www.landof10.com/nebraska/nebraska-ohio-state-wisconsin-stats

 

“If you’re a fierce competitor, you don’t like sitting here at 3-3,” he said.

But he said his defense didn’t get “beat up, pushed, around or mauled” in Nebraska’s 38-17 loss to the Badgers.
“That did not happen,” Diaco told reporters Tuesday night. 

 

“Every single play is correctable. Not players. It was plays, and the plays are correctable. You can’t help but be encouraged, I would think. I was encouraged. I mean, [I was] disappointed, I don’t want to minimize that for Husker nation, disappointed, but encouraged for the future.”

 

I am always encouraged when my TOP is less than 2 minutes in the 4th quarter and the opposition didn't throw a single pass. Why wouldn't you be? The D had lots of reps.

[Roger Dorn]

3 hours ago, zero_blitz said:

Just my $.02 but here's why I think Diaco has a point.  This is Taylor's big run right before halftime.  Wiscy comes out in 11 personell (1 back, 1 TE), but instead of being in-line, Fumagali is split out in a two point stance.  We went with a four lineman front here, but for some reason we called the strength opposite of Fumagali. 

 

Based on how the play unfolds, it seems we would have been in better position with the strength called to Fumagali, instead of away from him.  Having the defensive tackle on the play side lined up on the outside shoulder of the guard (3-technique) , instead of shaded over the center, could have potentially forced Taylor to cut the play back, or bounce it outside where we had extra defenders.

 

Pre Snap Wide

 

Pre Snap Tight

Shifting Thomas and Davis each one man over to the left would have put us in a better position.  I'm hoping this is one of the mistakes Diaco was referring to.  Typically this is how four man fronts are called, with the three technique to the TE side. Fumagali being split out may have been a reason for the strength being called away, or it could have just been mis-read.  Either way, we would have been in a much stronger position to be successful had it been called the other way.

 

Ball is snapped, defense starts to flow, Thomas #97 was orignally lined up on the outside shouler of the center, and the center is starting to cross his face, leaving Thomas in the wrong gap.

 

Weber #49 reads run and attacks the guard to fit in the B gap. Meanwhile Thomas #97 has been out gapped, and is now fighting to get back across the centers face.

 

Thomas is never able to get back to his gap, Taylor hits the hole with Dedric young being the only player left on the second level, but he’s cut off by the tackle and not able to get to the ball.   Taylor is now 1on 1 with Williams #24

 

Already at a severe disadvantage, Williams takes a poor angle, and gets beat

 

And it's off to the races from there.

 

I do believe there may be some merit to what Diaco had to say.  If we had the three technique to the TE side on this play, I do believe Taylor would have been forced to either cut back or bounce to the outside, either of those options would have most likely led to him beong stopped at some point prior to reaching the end zone.  But instead, he was able get through the hole and to the third level of the defense WITHOUT EVER MAKING A SINGLE CUT!!  He literally ran at the same angle until he reached the sideline, that certainly didn't do Williams any favors.  

 

We certainly still have issues on D.  Mid way through the third we were out of gas up front, and Wiscy just had their way with us from that point.  But it's definitely a different ball game if it's 10-7 at halftime with Nebraska having the momentum. 

+1 Very solid breakdown and

I agree with what Diaco was saying regarding play set up with alignment and run fits and appreciate he didn't blame players and tried to provide some encouragement.

 

Also, the game would've been much different if it had been 10-7 UWor even 10-3 Neb (taking away the pick 6 and adding the Drew Brown FG) at half and the 2nd half would've gone much differently. 

[krc1995]

9 hours ago, HuskerJax said:

The d actually did a really good Juno up until the 4th quarter. I put the blame on the offense, they couldn’t sustain any drives in the second half. The defense was on the field almost the entire 4th quarter. They were gassed.I am actually encouraged by the defense, they are playing more aggressive and are holding points down (when the are allowed a rest). They have actually shown improvement. I’m not sure what is going on with the offense, that’s where the hottest part of the dumpster fire is

probably shouldn't have punted in the 4th with like 6 minutes left (can't remember the exact time).  Enough blame to go around- coaches, receivers, and kalu and L.jackson.  We knew ahead of time that the margin for error was tight- but that offensive crap before half(even though it turned out ok) and the punt in the 4th, were really indicative of coaches not know what the hell is going on.  I think the coaching on D was solid, but it comes down to player execution which really is on the player themselves.  

[grandpasknee]

I like the notion he sees things that can be fixed. Wonder if he needs this refresher on how to fix things

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo3uxqwTxk0

[Jeremy]

Holding on the center, and Webber over-pursued.

 

The alignment of the defense simply was wrong. They also had 21 and 12 personnel a lot, which gives them 7 blockers for our 7 guys in the box. It's going to be very hard to stop a team like Wisconsin if you let them go hat on hat, because that's exactly what they want. The teams that beat them make them PASS the ball. Banker, for all his flaws, made Wisky do that last year, and Gerry got 2 picks. 

 

When Gordon went for 408, Pelini did basically the same thing that Diaco did last night. I don't get when a guy is paid as much as he is doesn't understand simple football math.

 

If they're going to go old school and run it 30 times in a row, we should go old school and break out the 52 eagle and put the strong safety in the box, too. It isn't rocket science - you aren't going to stop the run if they have a blocker for every defender.

[Thanks_Tom RR]

15 hours ago, Roger Dorn said:

+1 Very solid breakdown and

I agree with what Diaco was saying regarding play set up with alignment and run fits and appreciate he didn't blame players and tried to provide some encouragement.

 

Also, the game would've been much different if it had been 10-7 UWor even 10-3 Neb (taking away the pick 6 and adding the Drew Brown FG) at half and the 2nd half would've gone much differently. 

Or you look at this play and say 97 doesn’t shed his block and gets put on the inside shoulder of the center, and 24 has an open field tackle and takes a poor angle. Like I said, the players are not shedding blocks and missing tackles. It is easy to look at the outcome of the play and design a defense to counter, but hindsight is not available during the game. Rather than expecting Diaco to scheme perfectly against an offense suiting every play, you have to look at the effort of the players. Or at least don’t ignore that component.

[The Dude]

Then why didn't he correct them?  Saying it's correctable after the fact is too late.

 

It's not only Diaco, I'm just tired of these coaches who continually fail to make in-game adjustments, then try to paint some self-serving picture of future success.  

[observer3]

It is the first year under Diaco's system.   It was expected to take some transition time to reach peak performance.

 

I do think that it is believable that more improvement can/will be made over the season - although there may be a VERY rough patch in the timeline in the form of the Ohio St game. 

 

(The mistake from the Wisconsin game are still on Diaco and the defense, talk of getting better aside).