Paps excited about D

[jsneb83]

Paps excited about D

And, anyone expect him to say anything differently? For his sake, I hope he is correct. But, I have my doubts! For me, Paps does not have the experience to run a top flight defensive unit at the college level. It is my opinion that he is in over his head. But then, that is JMO. The proof will be in the pudding.

Quote from Paps, “Whatever they turn out to be in the next two or three years, it’s whatever we’re able to develop them into.” That folks, is the scary part. We seem to not have any development program. We are always hanging our hats on hopefuls that "might" be the next diamond in the rough. However, it appears to me we lack the ability to establish a constant flow of players on the defensive side of the ball. Our line backing group last year was a prime example. The Will Compton's of this world do not cut it in big time college football.

I hope the coaching staff sticks to what they have been saying about putting the best "athletes" on the field. (Although, that can also be seen as a sign of weakness.) Telling a young kid right out of HS that he should be prepared to play is a bit ominous. I would much rather have a few mistakes by guys who can recover and still make a play, rather than mistakes by folks who simply have no speed or limited athletic ability.

So, I will keep as optimistic as possible, for the time being. First game not too far down the road.

Wow. Did you think of that all by yourself?

Shut up, Brent.

 

[Branno]

Paps excited about D

And, anyone expect him to say anything differently? For his sake, I hope he is correct. But, I have my doubts! For me, Paps does not have the experience to run a top flight defensive unit at the college level. It is my opinion that he is in over his head. But then, that is JMO. The proof will be in the pudding.

Quote from Paps, “Whatever they turn out to be in the next two or three years, it’s whatever we’re able to develop them into.” That folks, is the scary part. We seem to not have any development program. We are always hanging our hats on hopefuls that "might" be the next diamond in the rough. However, it appears to me we lack the ability to establish a constant flow of players on the defensive side of the ball. Our line backing group last year was a prime example. The Will Compton's of this world do not cut it in big time college football.

I hope the coaching staff sticks to what they have been saying about putting the best "athletes" on the field. (Although, that can also be seen as a sign of weakness.) Telling a young kid right out of HS that he should be prepared to play is a bit ominous. I would much rather have a few mistakes by guys who can recover and still make a play, rather than mistakes by folks who simply have no speed or limited athletic ability.

So, I will keep as optimistic as possible, for the time being. First game not too far down the road.

Wow. Did you think of that all by yourself?

You have a specific comment about what I wrote?

The optimistic as possible line got me chuckling, after all the negativity.

 

[EZ-E]

I like speed, but our problem with the D isn't the linebackers or secondary. It's the D-line, and it all starts with that. That's the problem as i see it.

I Rewatched a ton of games this weekend. You'd be surprised. We weren't as bad as people want to make us out to be on our DL.

Our linebackers and safety play just wasn't there.

 

[The King]

I like speed, but our problem with the D isn't the linebackers or secondary. It's the D-line, and it all starts with that. That's the problem as i see it.

I Rewatched a ton of games this weekend. You'd be surprised. We weren't as bad as people want to make us out to be on our DL.

Our linebackers and safety play just wasn't there.

This.

Couldn't count how many times we were in position to make the play, but either A) failed to do so due to lack of speed or B) failed to do so because we didn't use proper (or even, basic) tackling techniques.

TBH, I'm surprised a certain #3 and to a lesser extent #45 and #42 were still playing to end the season. I know at one point coaches thought about just feeding some players to the wolves because they were getting a little, fed up with it. (None of our current coaches will really go out and say it, as they are all fairly politically correct (notice: Raymond, Corey - gone) but at some point its up to the players to make plays and less on the coaches to teach them. (Coaching is very important, but there is only so much coaching you can do - if you put people in the right place, and they aren't athletic enough to succeed, then...well...so be it.)

 

[EZ-E]

I like speed, but our problem with the D isn't the linebackers or secondary. It's the D-line, and it all starts with that. That's the problem as i see it.

I Rewatched a ton of games this weekend. You'd be surprised. We weren't as bad as people want to make us out to be on our DL.

Our linebackers and safety play just wasn't there.

This.

Couldn't count how many times we were in position to make the play, but either A) failed to do so due to lack of speed or B) failed to do so because we didn't use proper (or even, basic) tackling techniques.

TBH, I'm surprised a certain #3 and to a lesser extent #45 and #42 were still playing to end the season. I know at one point coaches thought about just feeding some players to the wolves because they were getting a little, fed up with it. (None of our current coaches will really go out and say it, as they are all fairly politically correct (notice: Raymond, Corey - gone) but at some point its up to the players to make plays and less on the coaches to teach them. (Coaching is very important, but there is only so much coaching you can do - if you put people in the right place, and they aren't athletic enough to succeed, then...well...so be it.)

Surprisingly enough, we got pushed around the most against Iowa.

 

[Mavric]

I like speed, but our problem with the D isn't the linebackers or secondary. It's the D-line, and it all starts with that. That's the problem as i see it.

I Rewatched a ton of games this weekend. You'd be surprised. We weren't as bad as people want to make us out to be on our DL.

Our linebackers and safety play just wasn't there.

This.

Couldn't count how many times we were in position to make the play, but either A) failed to do so due to lack of speed or B) failed to do so because we didn't use proper (or even, basic) tackling techniques.

TBH, I'm surprised a certain #3 and to a lesser extent #45 and #42 were still playing to end the season. I know at one point coaches thought about just feeding some players to the wolves because they were getting a little, fed up with it. (None of our current coaches will really go out and say it, as they are all fairly politically correct (notice: Raymond, Corey - gone) but at some point its up to the players to make plays and less on the coaches to teach them. (Coaching is very important, but there is only so much coaching you can do - if you put people in the right place, and they aren't athletic enough to succeed, then...well...so be it.)

This x1000

I hate to keep picking on our safties last year but they were really below what I hoped. Stafford at least made a few plays here and there but overall they couldn't even make the routine plays on a regular basis (e.g., Smith trying to tackle B. Miller several times and coming up with nothing but air; Stafford trying to defend the Jet Sweep). And at some point your players have to be able to hold on to the ball and catch a punt - you can only work on those things so much. I'm not absolving the coaches of everything, but you have to have guys make some plays for you.

 

[MLB 51]

I like speed, but our problem with the D isn't the linebackers or secondary. It's the D-line, and it all starts with that. That's the problem as i see it.

I Rewatched a ton of games this weekend. You'd be surprised. We weren't as bad as people want to make us out to be on our DL.

Our linebackers and safety play just wasn't there.

This.

Couldn't count how many times we were in position to make the play, but either A) failed to do so due to lack of speed or B) failed to do so because we didn't use proper (or even, basic) tackling techniques.

TBH, I'm surprised a certain #3 and to a lesser extent #45 and #42 were still playing to end the season. I know at one point coaches thought about just feeding some players to the wolves because they were getting a little, fed up with it. (None of our current coaches will really go out and say it, as they are all fairly politically correct (notice: Raymond, Corey - gone) but at some point its up to the players to make plays and less on the coaches to teach them. (Coaching is very important, but there is only so much coaching you can do - if you put people in the right place, and they aren't athletic enough to succeed, then...well...so be it.)

This x1000

I hate to keep picking on our safties last year but they were really below what I hoped. Stafford at least made a few plays here and there but overall they couldn't even make the routine plays on a regular basis (e.g., Smith trying to tackle B. Miller several times and coming up with nothing but air; Stafford trying to defend the Jet Sweep). And at some point your players have to be able to hold on to the ball and catch a punt - you can only work on those things so much. I'm not absolving the coaches of everything, but you have to have guys make some plays for you.

This. Oh God , this says it all.

We might over come the ST mistakes but, giving up big plays on D killed us.

 

[EZ-E]

I like speed, but our problem with the D isn't the linebackers or secondary. It's the D-line, and it all starts with that. That's the problem as i see it.

I Rewatched a ton of games this weekend. You'd be surprised. We weren't as bad as people want to make us out to be on our DL.

Our linebackers and safety play just wasn't there.

This.

Couldn't count how many times we were in position to make the play, but either A) failed to do so due to lack of speed or B) failed to do so because we didn't use proper (or even, basic) tackling techniques.

TBH, I'm surprised a certain #3 and to a lesser extent #45 and #42 were still playing to end the season. I know at one point coaches thought about just feeding some players to the wolves because they were getting a little, fed up with it. (None of our current coaches will really go out and say it, as they are all fairly politically correct (notice: Raymond, Corey - gone) but at some point its up to the players to make plays and less on the coaches to teach them. (Coaching is very important, but there is only so much coaching you can do - if you put people in the right place, and they aren't athletic enough to succeed, then...well...so be it.)

This x1000

I hate to keep picking on our safties last year but they were really below what I hoped. Stafford at least made a few plays here and there but overall they couldn't even make the routine plays on a regular basis (e.g., Smith trying to tackle B. Miller several times and coming up with nothing but air; Stafford trying to defend the Jet Sweep). And at some point your players have to be able to hold on to the ball and catch a punt - you can only work on those things so much. I'm not absolving the coaches of everything, but you have to have guys make some plays for you.

This. Oh God , this says it all.

We might over come the ST mistakes but, giving up big plays on D killed us.

Looking at a few things here and there, I realized Sean Fisher really wasn't ever out of position and always played the technique asked of him, but there were times that I believe it's time to be a football player and go make plays.

 

[Danimal]

I don't know if Paps should have said he was worried instead of excited. I'm worried that a great offense will be pushed, to have to put up 30-40+ pts a game, just to squeak out a win. I don't understand how our defense fell off so quick. Granted we changed conferences, but we still were supposedly recruiting top playmakers, that should have been able to make the switch. The speed thing doesn't make that much sense, with our trouble in the B1G, as it was a given on this board that the B1G was always a slower conference, than any of the top four conferences. We recruited the D for Big-12 type offenses. We had the speed for them........GBR!!!

We just had to many misses and busts in recruiting and it came home to roost. Bo didn't get stupid all of a sudden, the scheme works with the right players, we failed to bring those players in.

 

[Goal-line]

Paps excited about D

And, anyone expect him to say anything differently? For his sake, I hope he is correct. But, I have my doubts! For me, Paps does not have the experience to run a top flight defensive unit at the college level. It is my opinion that he is in over his head. But then, that is JMO. The proof will be in the pudding.

Quote from Paps, “Whatever they turn out to be in the next two or three years, it’s whatever we’re able to develop them into.” That folks, is the scary part. We seem to not have any development program. We are always hanging our hats on hopefuls that "might" be the next diamond in the rough. However, it appears to me we lack the ability to establish a constant flow of players on the defensive side of the ball. Our line backing group last year was a prime example. The Will Compton's of this world do not cut it in big time college football.

I hope the coaching staff sticks to what they have been saying about putting the best "athletes" on the field. (Although, that can also be seen as a sign of weakness.) Telling a young kid right out of HS that he should be prepared to play is a bit ominous. I would much rather have a few mistakes by guys who can recover and still make a play, rather than mistakes by folks who simply have no speed or limited athletic ability.

So, I will keep as optimistic as possible, for the time being. First game not too far down the road.

Wow. Did you think of that all by yourself?

You have a specific comment about what I wrote?

I can point out 3 things right off the start that are ridiculous. I'll leave it at that.

What I posted is the naked truth. If you have something you want to contribute, other than dodging the issue, then do so. Otherwise, keep you insulant comments to yourself.

 

[Count 'Bility]

Paps excited about D

And, anyone expect him to say anything differently? For his sake, I hope he is correct. But, I have my doubts! For me, Paps does not have the experience to run a top flight defensive unit at the college level. It is my opinion that he is in over his head. But then, that is JMO. The proof will be in the pudding.

Quote from Paps, “Whatever they turn out to be in the next two or three years, it’s whatever we’re able to develop them into.” That folks, is the scary part. We seem to not have any development program. We are always hanging our hats on hopefuls that "might" be the next diamond in the rough. However, it appears to me we lack the ability to establish a constant flow of players on the defensive side of the ball. Our line backing group last year was a prime example. The Will Compton's of this world do not cut it in big time college football.

I hope the coaching staff sticks to what they have been saying about putting the best "athletes" on the field. (Although, that can also be seen as a sign of weakness.) Telling a young kid right out of HS that he should be prepared to play is a bit ominous. I would much rather have a few mistakes by guys who can recover and still make a play, rather than mistakes by folks who simply have no speed or limited athletic ability.

So, I will keep as optimistic as possible, for the time being. First game not too far down the road.

Wow. Did you think of that all by yourself?

You have a specific comment about what I wrote?

I can point out 3 things right off the start that are ridiculous. I'll leave it at that.

What I posted is the naked truth. If you have something you want to contribute, other than dodging the issue, then do so. Otherwise, keep you insulant comments to yourself.

OK then.

1) Paps not having the experience? Paps not having the experience is incorrect for one. He's been with Bo since the beginning of time. He knows Bo's system and philosophies probably better than Bo does. This is better than bringing in some outsider and having a clash of egos so to speak. Also, Bo runs the defense. This has been over-hammered numerous times. If watching the interaction of Bo and Paps (and before, Carl) on the sideline doesnt make this obvious, the you really do NOT pay attention to anything important. Maybe someday this will not be case, and maybe it shouldnt even be the case now, that is up for debate. But as of now, it is what it is.

2) No player development? What do you expect? Chicken salad out of chicken sh#t? I'm sorry, but the last two years the defense has really lacked necessary talent to be the unit it needs to be. As far as player development goes, look on the offensive side of the ball. Look at Bo's first 3 years of defense. There's been plenty of development. Just not enough talent from the first few recruiting classes. Again, this horse is already dead to.

3) You being optimistic. This is comical. I nor anyone on this board has ever seen it and still dont. Goal-line optimism is a laughable concept.

There, that's my 3 disagreements right of the top, and sadly so, it negates about 98% of your thoughts.

 

[Saunders]

Quote from Paps, “Whatever they turn out to be in the next two or three years, it’s whatever we’re able to develop them into.” That folks, is the scary part. We seem to not have any development program.

Ndamukong Suh

Prince Amukamara

Philip Dillard

Matt O'Hanlon

Larry Asante

Eric Hagg

Jared Crick

etc...

Those guys were nothing before Bo came. The staff can develop talent, when they have it. We're paying for the sins of the 2008 - 2010 classes.

 

[kchusker_chris]

Quote from Paps, “Whatever they turn out to be in the next two or three years, it’s whatever we’re able to develop them into.” That folks, is the scary part. We seem to not have any development program.

Ndamukong Suh (cally recruit)

Prince Amukamara (cally recruit)

Philip Dillard (cally recruit)

Matt O'Hanlon (cally recruit)

Larry Asante (cally recruit)

Eric Hagg (cally recruit)

Jared Crick (cally recruit)

etc...

Those guys were nothing before Bo came. The staff can develop talent, when they have it. We're paying for the sins of the 2008 - 2010 classes.

"Can develop talent - when they have it." Huh? So like David? Do you think LD was developed, or already had it? I'd say he already had it. I don't want to take anything away from the development of these players under Bo, but we don't know what they would have been under Cally either. They were young, and Bo got them in their prime. You can't really say this about anyone that he's recruiting and had 5 years to work with though, which is unfortunate.

I'd say Eric Hagg is probably the best example. Don't think he'd be playing in the NFL without Bo and his Peso scheme...then again we have no real way to know that.

All I know is, Bo has not been able to replicate the same development of his recruited players, as he had with Cally's players. It's early. We'll see. But basically 3-4 classes were duds on the defensive side. We'll see how the next 2 or 3 pan out...but you can't blame us for being skeptical with his track record of talent on the D. Do you think he did a good job developing Stafford? Or Rome? Or A. Green? Or E. Martin? Or Cooper? All guys that IMO had a higher ceiling than they reached under Bo.

 

[knapplc]

Here are the headlines we'll see about the defense during Fall Camp:

Papuchis: Rebuilding defense "swimming in it"

Papuchis eager to show athleticism of young defense

Papuchis disgusted as defense has poor showing in scrimmage

Papuchis says refocused defense ready for Wyoming

It's mostly head games for the team. They're going to tell the press what they want the defense to see in the press. The press will regurgitate it because that's all they can do, and the players will see it in print as well as hear it from the coaches.

I don't get too worried/excited about these articles this point in the year.

 

[whateveritis1224]

Quote from Paps, “Whatever they turn out to be in the next two or three years, it’s whatever we’re able to develop them into.” That folks, is the scary part. We seem to not have any development program.

Ndamukong Suh (cally recruit)

Prince Amukamara (cally recruit)

Philip Dillard (cally recruit)

Matt O'Hanlon (cally recruit)

Larry Asante (cally recruit)

Eric Hagg (cally recruit)

Jared Crick (cally recruit)

etc...

Those guys were nothing before Bo came. The staff can develop talent, when they have it. We're paying for the sins of the 2008 - 2010 classes.

"Can develop talent - when they have it." Huh? So like David? Do you think LD was developed, or already had it? I'd say he already had it. I don't want to take anything away from the development of these players under Bo, but we don't know what they would have been under Cally either. They were young, and Bo got them in their prime. You can't really say this about anyone that he's recruiting and had 5 years to work with though, which is unfortunate.

I'd say Eric Hagg is probably the best example. Don't think he'd be playing in the NFL without Bo and his Peso scheme...then again we have no real way to know that.

All I know is, Bo has not been able to replicate the same development of his recruited players, as he had with Cally's players. It's early. We'll see. But basically 3-4 classes were duds on the defensive side. We'll see how the next 2 or 3 pan out...but you can't blame us for being skeptical with his track record of talent on the D. Do you think he did a good job developing Stafford? Or Rome? Or A. Green? Or E. Martin? Or Cooper? All guys that IMO had a higher ceiling than they reached under Bo.

Cooper and Green are still at the school, unless you're talking with Aaron, who was playing on offense. Martin couldn't get LB down mentally, and really came to form as a DE (should he have been moved to DE before is another question).