Riley Says Defensive Plan was Fine, Execution Wasn't

[ColoradoHusk]

4 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Since you didn't seem to be able to come up with any examples of when he did talk Xs and Os, I'll give you one where he was specifically asked about it and said nothing.

 

Post-game interview at Purdue.  was specifically asked "what happened on that last play?"  His answer has nothing to do with the last play.

 

Starting at 2:42:40

 

 

Damon Benning commented this early in the season, but Riley seems to watch games like an observer, rather than a coach.  While he is able to discuss the specific TD play call the next day in his press conference, he wasn't involved in the play call at the time, so he was basically left to being an observer on the play.  I understand he's a CEO of a coach, but he takes his hands-off approach to in-game coaching to an extreme.

[I.M. OLD]

On 10/19/2017 at 0:37 PM, GBRFAN said:

 

Those must have been the seasons after he recruited all those 5* players - oh wait most of those recruits were 3* players.  Now i'm confused - he can't develop, so how did they become NFL talent?????

Plenty on NFL talent out there that came from nowhere. The statement that he is so great at molding talent bewilders me. He coached how many years, and "developed" how many players out of thousands of kids.

[GBRFAN]

On 10/20/2017 at 9:27 PM, ebohnart said:

To say it's solely a player issue is a cop out. Some of these players he's had for 3 years, and you're telling me he couldn't figure out how to show them what to do in 3 years? My biggest problem with Riley is that I understand he has a system he wants to introduce and a new defense he wants to implement, but think back to the bowl game against UCLA.

 

That, in my opinion, was our best game. Riley geared the offensive game plan to the talent he had and they executed it so well. Why he strayed from that I'll never know. If we are to be patient and give Riley time, then he cannot continue to ram a game plan down player's throats who weren't recruited for that and expect them to excel. There had to be a balance between the path he wants to take, and the players he currently has.

 

He found the balance against UCLA, but then threw that out the window. This is not solely a talent issue, even Pelini recruited better than NIU and they still beat us. Which, yet again, brings us down to the larger issue: the inability of this coaching staff to develop players and to grow. The stagnation in this program is frustrating as a Husker fan.

 

Or maybe it came down to the fact that UCLA had a terrible front 4 and MR exposed that.   Just because you can overpower a PAC10 team upfront doesn't guarantee that you can go into the BigTEN and do the same.  Pretty sure if our OL was dominating that MR would use a game plan similar to UCLA - hope you can see that Purdue DL is better then UCLA.  I'm not at all saying that we should not try and improve the power running game, however it is not there right now.

[Mavric]

7 minutes ago, GBRFAN said:

Or maybe it came down to the fact that UCLA had a terrible front 4 and MR exposed that.   Just because you can overpower a PAC10 team upfront doesn't guarantee that you can go into the BigTEN and do the same.  Pretty sure if our OL was dominating that MR would use a game plan similar to UCLA - hope you can see that Purdue DL is better then UCLA.  I'm not at all saying that we should not try and improve the power running game, however it is not there right now.

 

Most of our "struggles" in the running game are due to playcalling.  Yes, UCLA had a poor front and we took advantage.  But that same year Wisconsin had the #4 rushing defense in the country in yards per attempt (3.1) and we ran the ball really well against them (37 carries for 196 yards, 5.3 ypa).  Michigan State had the #24 YPA defense (3.62) and we ran the ball against them (36 carries for 179 yards, 5.0 ypa).  So even that year when we were trowing it a lot was not because we COULDN'T run it.  It was because we often chose not to.

 

This year, Wisconsin is #12 in the country at 3.1 YPA and we had good success when we chose to run the ball (25 carries for 117 yards, 4.7 ypa - not counting  a POB sack late).  And that was with our third-string RB.  And all of that is before you take into account what KIND of running plays are being called and what FORMATIONS we are running out of and how predictable we are.  

 

So I don't at all buy the story that we can't run.  We just put ourselves in bad spots and choose to do other things.

[Igetbored216]

5 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Most of our "struggles" in the running game are due to playcalling.  Yes, UCLA had a poor front and we took advantage.  But that same year Wisconsin had the #4 rushing defense in the country in yards per attempt (3.1) and we ran the ball really well against them (37 carries for 196 yards, 5.3 ypa).  Michigan State had the #24 YPA defense (3.62) and we ran the ball against them (36 carries for 179 yards, 5.0 ypa).  So even that year when we were trowing it a lot was not because we COULDN'T run it.  It was because we often chose not to.

 

This year, Wisconsin is #12 in the country at 3.1 YPA and we had good success when we chose to run the ball (25 carries for 117 yards, 4.7 ypa - not counting  a POB sack late).  And that was with our third-string RB.  And all of that is before you take into account what KIND of running plays are being called and what FORMATIONS we are running out of and how predictable we are.  

 

So I don't at all buy the story that we can't run.  We just put ourselves in bad spots and choose to do other things.

I agree. I'm so sick of hearing the "we can't run" bull. No, we choose not to. I swear Langsdorf calls obvious run plays, or motions the offense in tight, so that the run gets stuffed. Then he can point at these plays and say that he tried to run, but it wasn't working. 

 

This staff is not interested or not patient enough to make a concerted effort to establish the run game. 

[I.M. OLD]

Until we have a well coached/ coached at all, offensive line, we will need Walter Peyton to have a running game.

[Big Red Commie]

Blah blah, Cosgrove said the same thing, they all say the same thing.

 

The real question is, "WHY", they aint ex`cutin`?  Cuz bad coaches, thats why.

[ebohnart]

On 11/1/2017 at 10:24 AM, GBRFAN said:

 

Or maybe it came down to the fact that UCLA had a terrible front 4 and MR exposed that.   Just because you can overpower a PAC10 team upfront doesn't guarantee that you can go into the BigTEN and do the same.  Pretty sure if our OL was dominating that MR would use a game plan similar to UCLA - hope you can see that Purdue DL is better then UCLA.  I'm not at all saying that we should not try and improve the power running game, however it is not there right now.

 

Doesn't change the fact that Pelini recruited better than NIU and they still beat us. Also doesn't change the fact that he does not develop talent. Also doesn't change the fact that this program is stagnant and we in all likelihood will not have a bowl game this year. If you're fine with fighting to become bowl eligible, that's on you. I personally am tired of watching a .50 win coach and watching him coach a .50 team.