H2h

My point being that we are again likely to have at least 2 walk-ons starting on the Oline.

 

If they're the best players then I have no problem with that. Choi and Long played really well for the most part last season.

I agree with you. I was responding to the other poster who seemed to be stating the O-line wasn't good because 2 or 3 walk-on's were starting and that the O-line would improve this year. Even though 2 or 3 walk-on's are again likely to be starting.

except last year remember how deep we were on the D-Line at this point? that was going to be our strength. we're always deep this time of year. so is every other team. i just can't judge this team right now - or get hopeful for this season based on something like that. it just changes to quickly - and under Pelini it seems to be an almost every-year thing when it comes to the trenches.

 

i do think this offseason is a little rougher than most. at least for me. there were a few times last season where i realized what it must feel like to be a KU football fan. it was that bad. that embarrassing. but i don't think we can judge this team or Pelini too much until after this season - and maybe not even until after the next. Until then it's just all talk and speculation. The "process" he'd been working on had to seriously be altered the last couple years with the move to the B1G. we'll see where it leads us...some will be full of hope and faith, others like myself skeptics. but the games will still be played on saturdays, and the world goes round. ahh the off-season.

 

Well, "maybe" the Dline but losing Crick basically all year took a lot of wind out of that sail.

 

But the Oline was, as usual, on a huge band-aid and needing walkons everywhere. Some of the games we even had to start two or three walkons IIRC. So it's reasonable to say that situation should start to improve this year. Now, is that enough of a difference to project we'll see better results? Maybe. I don't know. I like our chances though.....

 

Choi and Long? The same 2 walk-ons that are likely to be starters this year?(Long was a walkon, right?)

 

Last year we started 3 former walk-ons along the OL Caputo, Choi, and Long.

My point being that we are again likely to have at least 2 walk-ons starting on the Oline.

except last year remember how deep we were on the D-Line at this point? that was going to be our strength. we're always deep this time of year. so is every other team. i just can't judge this team right now - or get hopeful for this season based on something like that. it just changes to quickly - and under Pelini it seems to be an almost every-year thing when it comes to the trenches.

 

i do think this offseason is a little rougher than most. at least for me. there were a few times last season where i realized what it must feel like to be a KU football fan. it was that bad. that embarrassing. but i don't think we can judge this team or Pelini too much until after this season - and maybe not even until after the next. Until then it's just all talk and speculation. The "process" he'd been working on had to seriously be altered the last couple years with the move to the B1G. we'll see where it leads us...some will be full of hope and faith, others like myself skeptics. but the games will still be played on saturdays, and the world goes round. ahh the off-season.

 

Well, "maybe" the Dline but losing Crick basically all year took a lot of wind out of that sail.

 

But the Oline was, as usual, on a huge band-aid and needing walkons everywhere. Some of the games we even had to start two or three walkons IIRC. So it's reasonable to say that situation should start to improve this year. Now, is that enough of a difference to project we'll see better results? Maybe. I don't know. I like our chances though.....

Choi and Long? The same 2 walk-ons that are likely to be starters this year?(Long was a walkon, right?)

We've been a 20-25ish team (some years worse). So if the rankings are in any way truely reflective of our team, then you'd expect this.

 

I think it's important to note our best year (2009) was also our best defense. As much as people want to put all of these on the offense, the defense is more often to blame IMO. 2008. 2009 V.Tech, 2010 Oklahoma game, South Carolina, etc. With even a marginally effective defense we win those 3 games, and a number of others up there. (others like A&M are on the offense however)

 

That's why Bo has consistently won his 9 games - because he hasn't had a pathetic defense. Last year was rough, but not as bad as some of these years in the last decade...or other teams like Michigan recently. Bo should always get his 9 wins because of this. You can have a great offense and mediocre defense and only win 8. But have an above average defense and it takes a pretty bad offense to keep you from 9 - as we've proven unfortunately .

 

Our defense played their asses off agaisnt OU in 2010. Go back and watch the game, they were the reason we could have won that game. Lets not forget that they basically put 7 points on the board for us, returning an interception inside the OU 5 yard line. You can't protect a 17 point lead for the entire game agaisnt an offense as good as OU's was that year.

they didn't have to protect a 17 point lead for an entire game - just half the game.

We were up 17 with 12+ minutes to go in the 2nd quarter. We were only up 3 at half, and our offense produced a whopping 0 points the rest of the way. Hard to win when you don't score in the 2nd half.

We've been a 20-25ish team (some years worse). So if the rankings are in any way truely reflective of our team, then you'd expect this.

 

I think it's important to note our best year (2009) was also our best defense. As much as people want to put all of these on the offense, the defense is more often to blame IMO. 2008. 2009 V.Tech, 2010 Oklahoma game, South Carolina, etc. With even a marginally effective defense we win those 3 games, and a number of others up there. (others like A&M are on the offense however)

 

That's why Bo has consistently won his 9 games - because he hasn't had a pathetic defense. Last year was rough, but not as bad as some of these years in the last decade...or other teams like Michigan recently. Bo should always get his 9 wins because of this. You can have a great offense and mediocre defense and only win 8. But have an above average defense and it takes a pretty bad offense to keep you from 9 - as we've proven unfortunately .

Our defense played their asses off agaisnt OU in 2010. Go back and watch the game, they were the reason we could have won that game. Lets not forget that they basically put 7 points on the board for us, returning an interception inside the OU 5 yard line. You can't protect a 17 point lead for the entire game agaisnt an offense as good as OU's was that year.

if we have 2 more seasons in a row like last - it will be a very different tenure for Bo than it was for Frank. Frank had a rough season and turned it around. Other than the number of wins, I don't even see a comparison between the two situations. Things were on the upswing when Frank got let go. He'd just proven his hire for DC was a home-run. Bo will have had essentially 5 straight years where nothing got better (or worse) despite changing coordinators and staff. If we are still losing a game or two we shouldn't, getting blown out by the only elite teams we play - but still getting 9 wins I don't think Bo will have a lot to back his argument to stay. Bo made his changes last year and this. He'll get 2 to see if that pays off. 9 wins with 4, hard fought losses would help his argument that his changes are starting to pay dividends. 9 wins with 3 blowouts and a home-loss to a team you should have beat will not be enough however. Everyone just looks at the number 9 - but there's more to it than that.

Agreed. People get too caught up on the final number, it's how you got there, I dare say its the process.

It's interesting that generally people think the offense was the strength of our team, and think the defense was awful.

The stats say the opposite. Total defense rank is 37th and scoring defense is 42nd. But stats can say whatever you want them to say to support your argument.

I think this worrying about who will spell or sub for Rex next season is a moot point. According to Bo Pelini Nebraska ran the ball 68% of the time last season and he said that was too much. He wants a more balanced style of offense. It sounds good in theory assuming that our wide receivers can actually hang onto the ball once it hits them in their hands.

 

Well, I don't see it as that ironclad Bo wanting to be just like everybody else "balanced". Just where did he say that 68% is too much? Heck, TO's teams used to run the ball 80% of the time and all they won was lots of games, conferences & national championships. Darn good thing we wouldn't want to do that.

 

Wherever Bo said that, I hope it was taken put of context or at a weak moment for him. It would be a suicidal move, imo, going back to copying everyone else being "balanced". NU can't stand toe to toe with USC, Texas, Bama, LSU, etc, etc recruiting for the same type of offense for any consistent time basis (at all).

 

Hope it's a rumor only.

 

 

exactly, it would take a bigtime passer and productive receivers.........we don't have either.

 

True.

 

But we've got an experienced qb that runs like a scalded dog, a great rb and we'll almost certainly see improvement in our Oline this year (quite possibly a "lot"). Having our OC, WR & OLine coaches not in their 1st year should help too. Lastly, after three straight years of dropping passes all over the place it's always possible one or two of our wrs learn how to catch the ball. I'm not betting the ranch on that of course but you never know.

 

On that side of the ball I like our chances.

Why will our Oline almost certainly improve? Because we have young players who had 4 stars next to their names?

I don't see why people think the offense will greatly improve either, we lost 3 starters on the O-line.

 

 

Point being....healthy this offensive line should be much improved (especially for Big10 style of play) this year.

I guess I'll ask why you think the line will be improved? Obviously if the line can stay healthy that would be great, but an O-line staying healthy all year hasn't happened to this team in just about forever. But who's going to step up and make this line better? We've pretty much only seen Long, Moore, Sirles, Choi, and Rodriguez get game action. To think were just going to plug in a center who's bigger and the problem will be fixed is wishful thinking to me. But other than the names I listed, have you seen anyone else play on the line? That's why I don't think it's just some guarantee that the line will be an upgrade from last year.

I don't see why people think the offense will greatly improve either, we lost 3 starters on the O-line.

I think some people are putting the stars ahead of production as far as our young talent at RB. What was so impressive about them during the season that leads you to believe they'll be stars? I think they all looked small, and sure they can put on weight, but are they going to keep there speed and elusiveness? I just feel its a bit presumptious to believe we have great depth at RB right now. Not saying they won't be great, just too early to tell.

I'll be shocked if Ben Cotton doesn't get drafted after his SR year. His blocking alone will get him a look, and he seemed to catch just about everything thrown at him this year IMO.

Agree. He's got the size (which is 50% of the NFL evaluation, see: Paul, Niles) It's not Ben's fault our offense is designed in such a way that limits his usefulness. If we were still WC he'd probably have 400+ yards. Instead he gets 15 balls thrown his way all season. Every one of which seems to be a crucial 3rd and long. I can remember a few catches this year in 3rd and long situations where Ben kept the drive going by taking a shot over the middle catching a ball that got there late.

Absolutely agree. He was taking big shots and still bringing the ball in. Big grabs too like you mentioned.

I'll be shocked if Ben Cotton doesn't get drafted after his SR year. His blocking alone will get him a look, and he seemed to catch just about everything thrown at him this year IMO.

Warrior I understand I'm not going to change your opinion on Big 10 defenses, but after seeing South Carolina, where does that defense stack up in the big 10 in your eyes?

Sorry about just now getting back to ya, but I would put South Carolina in the top tear of the Big 10 if not the top. Don't get me wrong, they have their weaknesses as we exposed in the first half. But as far as an overall defense they would pry be at the top, not just in the Big 10 but in the country.

Warrior I agree with your assessment. Footballs weird. If we just capitalize on our opportunities in the first half we're probably on here today saying how their defense wasn't as good as advertised. But their defense made game changing plays, so their reputation prevails.

Ha thanks man, long-long-long time lurker. And i used to be far more anti-martinez than i currently am. He didn't cost us a game this year, except maybe Wisconsin but I don't think our defense was gonna keep us competitive anyway.

I agree Hanc and i admit that I oversimplified it. But as you are a coach, when the other team blows assignments, you expect your team to make them pay for it dont you? I'm not saying they weren't good plays by Taylor, just that they are plays he should be expected to make when the opportunity is right there. And he did make them, so credit to him, I just didn't see it as carrying the team on his back as another poster suggested. Thats all.

Between 3 defenders? No. He put the ball over 3 defenders running 2 yards behind Enunwa. A 2 yard gap is wide open in college football. And yes i would have mentioned that he threw to the wrong guy, but points is points no matter how you get it.

Ohio State missed assignments, Taylor made them pay. And then Rex finished them off. 3 Touchdowns out of the diamond courtesy of blown assignments by the defense had a significant factor in us winning the game, but your right i oversimplified.

Warrior I understand I'm not going to change your opinion on Big 10 defenses, but after seeing South Carolina, where does that defense stack up in the big 10 in your eyes?

No you just saw Enunwa wide open, and Aaron Green wide open out of the backfield. And a hole that you could have driven a truck through on the run. It was far more of a schematic advantage than the players making some jaw dropping plays, no?

The stats said Penn State was one of the best defenses in the Big 10. Even with "not being ready to play" as an excuse, hard to imagine that defense holding up in the big 12 when Houston had their way with them.

And nobody on the Nebraska offense carried the team to victory against Ohio State. Lavonte David and the diamond formation did. Ohio State wasn't ready for it, and couldn't stop it.

People can put out any stats they want to back up an opinion. Quit the crap about Big 10 defenses being better than last years big 12 defenses. When the offenses in the big 10 are is inept as they were this year, of course the conferences defenses are going to be good statistically. Throw the top 2 Big 10 defenses into a big 12 schedule and their ranking is going to suffer dramatically.

After seeing Carnes for all of 10 plays this year, the one thing that I can say with confidence is that the kid has an arm. No other distinctions can be made about him from what I saw.

As for Turner playing QB, again I think we can all agree we learned almost nothing. What I saw though was certainly a kid that would be a nightmare to try to keep in the pocket and bring down for sacks. And when you have a below average O-line on pass protection, a guy like that can do wonders.

For being a "mobile" QB, I think most agree Taylor is not a guy that buys time well, or even average. He's certainly made improvements this year, but he seems to lack the instinctual ability to get out of trouble in the pocket.

A players biggest leap is typically from year 1 to year 2 of game experience. Was that a big enough leap?