Crazy crap Mark Banker says

Count 'Bility said:
Banker utilitizes a system that relies much more on the higher caliber athlete and player than what Bo did in terms of pass defense. Bo had a stop the pass first mentality, and put a lot of eggs in the coverage basket, and could make up for lack of skill with scheme. I always thought Bo was a good ten years ahead of his time with what he was doing with coverage concepts, it was just his lack of ability to teach as well as other things that hurt him. Bankers system on the other hand is a stop the run first mentality, which frankly in this sport, is and always will be the way you need to be. It's something that will never change. This puts added stress on the secondary. Do you think Curtis Cotton, Tyrone Byrd, Carmer, and Wilhite coulda covered and played the man up, on and island philosophy with the same amount of success as the Miles, Bookers, Velands, Browns, Minters, Williams, and Mosses? No. Those guys were better athletes and capable. Banker never had that caliber of player at Or St.

In the end, it's all about what your mindset is as a coach. Play a defense that leaves you susceptible to 400 yards on the ground, or one that leaves you susceptible to Joel Stave and Mitch Leidner throwing for over 300 yards. I'll take the latter every day in the week and twice on sunday, thank you very much.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting take considering many often claimed that Bo's defense only worked with elite-level athletes.

 
Mavric said:
Count 'Bility said:
Banker utilitizes a system that relies much more on the higher caliber athlete and player than what Bo did in terms of pass defense. Bo had a stop the pass first mentality, and put a lot of eggs in the coverage basket, and could make up for lack of skill with scheme. I always thought Bo was a good ten years ahead of his time with what he was doing with coverage concepts, it was just his lack of ability to teach as well as other things that hurt him. Bankers system on the other hand is a stop the run first mentality, which frankly in this sport, is and always will be the way you need to be. It's something that will never change. This puts added stress on the secondary. Do you think Curtis Cotton, Tyrone Byrd, Carmer, and Wilhite coulda covered and played the man up, on and island philosophy with the same amount of success as the Miles, Bookers, Velands, Browns, Minters, Williams, and Mosses? No. Those guys were better athletes and capable. Banker never had that caliber of player at Or St.

In the end, it's all about what your mindset is as a coach. Play a defense that leaves you susceptible to 400 yards on the ground, or one that leaves you susceptible to Joel Stave and Mitch Leidner throwing for over 300 yards. I'll take the latter every day in the week and twice on sunday, thank you very much.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting take considering many often claimed that Bo's defense only worked with elite-level athletes.
Click to expand...
I think Bo's defense needed elite DL guys for it to be successful. Banker's is almost the opposite.

 
Mavric said:
Count 'Bility said:
Banker utilitizes a system that relies much more on the higher caliber athlete and player than what Bo did in terms of pass defense. Bo had a stop the pass first mentality, and put a lot of eggs in the coverage basket, and could make up for lack of skill with scheme. I always thought Bo was a good ten years ahead of his time with what he was doing with coverage concepts, it was just his lack of ability to teach as well as other things that hurt him. Bankers system on the other hand is a stop the run first mentality, which frankly in this sport, is and always will be the way you need to be. It's something that will never change. This puts added stress on the secondary. Do you think Curtis Cotton, Tyrone Byrd, Carmer, and Wilhite coulda covered and played the man up, on and island philosophy with the same amount of success as the Miles, Bookers, Velands, Browns, Minters, Williams, and Mosses? No. Those guys were better athletes and capable. Banker never had that caliber of player at Or St.

In the end, it's all about what your mindset is as a coach. Play a defense that leaves you susceptible to 400 yards on the ground, or one that leaves you susceptible to Joel Stave and Mitch Leidner throwing for over 300 yards. I'll take the latter every day in the week and twice on sunday, thank you very much.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting take considering many often claimed that Bo's defense only worked with elite-level athletes.
Click to expand...
That, I think, is always the go-to excuse card(s)

 
teachercd said:
Mavric said:
Count 'Bility said:
Banker utilitizes a system that relies much more on the higher caliber athlete and player than what Bo did in terms of pass defense. Bo had a stop the pass first mentality, and put a lot of eggs in the coverage basket, and could make up for lack of skill with scheme. I always thought Bo was a good ten years ahead of his time with what he was doing with coverage concepts, it was just his lack of ability to teach as well as other things that hurt him. Bankers system on the other hand is a stop the run first mentality, which frankly in this sport, is and always will be the way you need to be. It's something that will never change. This puts added stress on the secondary. Do you think Curtis Cotton, Tyrone Byrd, Carmer, and Wilhite coulda covered and played the man up, on and island philosophy with the same amount of success as the Miles, Bookers, Velands, Browns, Minters, Williams, and Mosses? No. Those guys were better athletes and capable. Banker never had that caliber of player at Or St.

In the end, it's all about what your mindset is as a coach. Play a defense that leaves you susceptible to 400 yards on the ground, or one that leaves you susceptible to Joel Stave and Mitch Leidner throwing for over 300 yards. I'll take the latter every day in the week and twice on sunday, thank you very much.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting take considering many often claimed that Bo's defense only worked with elite-level athletes.
Click to expand...
That, I think, is always the go-to excuse card(s)
Click to expand...
But there is truth to it. Go and look at Bo's most successful years, whether it be here or LSU. He had outstanding DL and it paid dividends in the back 7. Banker's defense is the opposite. It was mentioned when he got hired that his defense is very similar to what Michigan State runs. If you look at their defense, they have had outstanding DBs and LBs that play on an island.

 
Stumpy1 said:
teachercd said:
Mavric said:
Count 'Bility said:
Banker utilitizes a system that relies much more on the higher caliber athlete and player than what Bo did in terms of pass defense. Bo had a stop the pass first mentality, and put a lot of eggs in the coverage basket, and could make up for lack of skill with scheme. I always thought Bo was a good ten years ahead of his time with what he was doing with coverage concepts, it was just his lack of ability to teach as well as other things that hurt him. Bankers system on the other hand is a stop the run first mentality, which frankly in this sport, is and always will be the way you need to be. It's something that will never change. This puts added stress on the secondary. Do you think Curtis Cotton, Tyrone Byrd, Carmer, and Wilhite coulda covered and played the man up, on and island philosophy with the same amount of success as the Miles, Bookers, Velands, Browns, Minters, Williams, and Mosses? No. Those guys were better athletes and capable. Banker never had that caliber of player at Or St.

In the end, it's all about what your mindset is as a coach. Play a defense that leaves you susceptible to 400 yards on the ground, or one that leaves you susceptible to Joel Stave and Mitch Leidner throwing for over 300 yards. I'll take the latter every day in the week and twice on sunday, thank you very much.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting take considering many often claimed that Bo's defense only worked with elite-level athletes.
Click to expand...
That, I think, is always the go-to excuse card(s)
Click to expand...
But there is truth to it. Go and look at Bo's most successful years, whether it be here or LSU. He had outstanding DL and it paid dividends in the back 7. Banker's defense is the opposite. It was mentioned when he got hired that his defense is very similar to what Michigan State runs. If you look at their defense, they have had outstanding DBs and LBs that play on an island.
Click to expand...
Every elite defense relies on high caliber players, it's why Bo's defense was successful in '03 and th first 3 seasons while HC. He failed during the transition to the B1G, which was no small task, but then he used the excuse of how hard it is to recruit Nebraska to defend his defense and team's overall struggles.
 
BIG ERN said:
NUinID said:
Count 'Bility said:
Banker utilitizes a system that relies much more on the higher caliber athlete and player than what Bo did in terms of pass defense. Bo had a stop the pass first mentality, and put a lot of eggs in the coverage basket, and could make up for lack of skill with scheme. I always thought Bo was a good ten years ahead of his time with what he was doing with coverage concepts, it was just his lack of ability to teach as well as other things that hurt him. Bankers system on the other hand is a stop the run first mentality, which frankly in this sport, is and always will be the way you need to be. It's something that will never change. This puts added stress on the secondary. Do you think Curtis Cotton, Tyrone Byrd, Carmer, and Wilhite coulda covered and played the man up, on and island philosophy with the same amount of success as the Miles, Bookers, Velands, Browns, Minters, Williams, and Mosses? No. Those guys were better athletes and capable. Banker never had that caliber of player at Or St.

In the end, it's all about what your mindset is as a coach. Play a defense that leaves you susceptible to 400 yards on the ground, or one that leaves you susceptible to Joel Stave and Mitch Leidner throwing for over 300 yards. I'll take the latter every day in the week and twice on sunday, thank you very much.
Click to expand...
Spot on man. I know a lot will cringe and think it is blasphomy, but in many ways, Banker speaks a lot like Charlie MicBride If you have ever really listened to McBride back in the day, which I did as a player going to camps and as a coach going to camps he has the same sarcastic matter of fact way of speaking. Not saying it is exactly the same, but Mcbride alsways had a lot of colorful things in his speach that could boarder on the egde of crazy when talking about players and things going on with the defense. Again not comparing the 2 coaches in ability or scheme just the way they speak.

Now with that said, everyone considers McBride a defensive god, but up until about 1993 he was not thought of that way by many Nebraska fans. There was many that thought TO needed to move in another direction, that the game had passed him by, just like many were thinking that about TO. This was being said when NU had had some great defenses under McBride and usually had pretty good ones. I more thing, when McBride was hired, in 1979 I believe, it wasn't a popular hire. He came to NU from Wisconsin. Wisconsin in 1979 was terrible, how could NU hire a coach from a terrible school.

If he fails, everyone who doesn't like him can gloat and say they were right, but give him a chance to see what he can do.
Click to expand...
He came into a better situation, but McBride was light years ahead of Banker. Below are his first 5 seasons as DC and points allowed per game in the nation.

3rd

4th

8th

16th

1st
Click to expand...
Note what I bolded in my statement. NU pretty much always had good to great defenses under McBride, but it was geared to stop Big 8 heavy run defenses not the more wide open offenses of Miami and FSU. That is why many thought it was outdated.

 
teachercd said:
Mavric said:
Count 'Bility said:
Banker utilitizes a system that relies much more on the higher caliber athlete and player than what Bo did in terms of pass defense. Bo had a stop the pass first mentality, and put a lot of eggs in the coverage basket, and could make up for lack of skill with scheme. I always thought Bo was a good ten years ahead of his time with what he was doing with coverage concepts, it was just his lack of ability to teach as well as other things that hurt him. Bankers system on the other hand is a stop the run first mentality, which frankly in this sport, is and always will be the way you need to be. It's something that will never change. This puts added stress on the secondary. Do you think Curtis Cotton, Tyrone Byrd, Carmer, and Wilhite coulda covered and played the man up, on and island philosophy with the same amount of success as the Miles, Bookers, Velands, Browns, Minters, Williams, and Mosses? No. Those guys were better athletes and capable. Banker never had that caliber of player at Or St.

In the end, it's all about what your mindset is as a coach. Play a defense that leaves you susceptible to 400 yards on the ground, or one that leaves you susceptible to Joel Stave and Mitch Leidner throwing for over 300 yards. I'll take the latter every day in the week and twice on sunday, thank you very much.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting take considering many often claimed that Bo's defense only worked with elite-level athletes.
Click to expand...
That, I think, is always the go-to excuse card(s)
Click to expand...
So so much of that anymore.

 
Stumpy1 said:
teachercd said:
Mavric said:
Count 'Bility said:
Banker utilitizes a system that relies much more on the higher caliber athlete and player than what Bo did in terms of pass defense. Bo had a stop the pass first mentality, and put a lot of eggs in the coverage basket, and could make up for lack of skill with scheme. I always thought Bo was a good ten years ahead of his time with what he was doing with coverage concepts, it was just his lack of ability to teach as well as other things that hurt him. Bankers system on the other hand is a stop the run first mentality, which frankly in this sport, is and always will be the way you need to be. It's something that will never change. This puts added stress on the secondary. Do you think Curtis Cotton, Tyrone Byrd, Carmer, and Wilhite coulda covered and played the man up, on and island philosophy with the same amount of success as the Miles, Bookers, Velands, Browns, Minters, Williams, and Mosses? No. Those guys were better athletes and capable. Banker never had that caliber of player at Or St.

In the end, it's all about what your mindset is as a coach. Play a defense that leaves you susceptible to 400 yards on the ground, or one that leaves you susceptible to Joel Stave and Mitch Leidner throwing for over 300 yards. I'll take the latter every day in the week and twice on sunday, thank you very much.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting take considering many often claimed that Bo's defense only worked with elite-level athletes.
Click to expand...
That, I think, is always the go-to excuse card(s)
Click to expand...
But there is truth to it. Go and look at Bo's most successful years, whether it be here or LSU. He had outstanding DL and it paid dividends in the back 7. Banker's defense is the opposite. It was mentioned when he got hired that his defense is very similar to what Michigan State runs. If you look at their defense, they have had outstanding DBs and LBs that play on an island.
Click to expand...
I think the actual answer is every defense (and offense for that matter) works better with better players and not as well with lesser players. People like to throw the "elite" in there to make it sound like more of a pronounced difference than it actually is.

 
MattyIce said:
Man, you guys bashing him are complete fools.

Sure, let's talk tons avout his OSU defenses, which we actually know nothing about.

How about let's talk about his defense from last year, which improved as year went.
Click to expand...
Seeing how that secondary couldn't stop a HS girls powderpuff QB the first half of the season, improvement was inevitable.
 
yeah yeah. Everyone knows how bad the pass defense was. bla bla bla. Yet no one has the brains or ambition to think about why, and what has happened since to hopefully remedy this. No one wants to consider the circumstances while using the past as a reason to have no hope for something all while ignoring adjustements for the future. The 2015 pass defense was terrible. So by default every pass defense for the next umpteen years under Banker's watch will be terrible. This is the dumbass default some of you live by.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top