Maxconvert

Good point, although I would expect Purdue to be pulling the upset using its efficient passing game--not shutting down Braxton Miller

Right, because all those years Osborne was piling up 1 or 2 loss seasons and Nebraska lived in the Top 5, he was racking up top 5 recruiting classes?

I'm glad to hear this too, but like someone posted earlier, we heard this jazz after UCLA too, and we still have the same starting LBs and safeties as we did for the debacle. Also--news flash--a guy named Charlie McBride, who also happened to coach defense at Nebraska, figured out that you need to replace slow bulk with speedto stop athletic offenses. And he did that, like, 20 years ago. Our staff is just figuring this out now??

You're right, but I would have loved to just hold him to one long run. We gave up multiple long runs.

People can yell at me all they want for saying this, but if we hadn't made the stupid decision to fire Solich after the man was just beginning to make major changes to his offensive and defensive coaching staff, I think you would have seen a perenial top-20 Husker squad at least since then. We may not have gotten the flashy 5-star Harrison Becks of the world, but with Bo at D-coordinator and Marvin Sanders, as well as what looked like what was an evolution to more passing in the traditional Solich run-option offense, we would have looked much more like Kansas State in their heyday.

So far after almost an entire half, Purdue leading 13-7 over Ohio State in Columbus. OSU only has 50 total yards rushing, and Braxton Miller has been held to 6 yards rushing on 5 carries and only 52 yards passing. Clearly, Purdue's defense decided to "execute" today, right Bo? Maybe Bo should be sending his assistants to Purdue University to learn how to stop a running qB?

Exactly. The obvious problem is that a coach who thrives on and is passionate about defensive complexity, expects his players to have the same interest, intellectual expertise, and passion to do the same. There are always players out there who have the mind of a coach and end up going into coaching after they get done playing ,but most players don't have that perspective. Of course if you ask Bo why the QB ran for 70 yards or found a wide open tight end streaking down the field, he would immediately explain the schematic breakdown. Expecting players to carry the same expertise is a recipe for disaster a lot of the times. And if a player is struggling to get down all the various reads, then has to deal with a new formation or motion that he hasn't seen on film, well you can imagine the time he's going to waste trying to figure out what's going on. The great ones can make up for that delay with their athleticism, otherwise it's time lost.

Bingo!!! The "we have no talent" line is really just an easy excuse for poor results. And it would make a lot more sense if, for example, our signing class national rankings fell from top 5 to the top 50 range over the time Bo has been here, but that also hasn't happened. As much as people want to talk about "Bo winning with Callahan's awesome recruits", Callahan only had a single class that was top 10, and many of the high-star signees then didn't pan out, such as Harrison Beck.

Yes good points, but I was not just talking about recruiting...or have we given up on the concept that coaches should be able to coach up the players they already have? Of course, you could bring in some Mack Brown type of guy who doesn't know jack about Xs and Os but knows how to charm the pants off 5-star recruits, and win that way, but Bo's always had this "defensive guru" rep and you would think his position coaches would know a thing or two about teaching defense. On the question of size, our interior line seems a little underweight, but I wouldn't exactly call the 6'6 Steinkuhler undersized. Our DEs are actually oversized, if anything. My point is that yes, this year's line doesn't exactly contain the Wistroms, Suhs, and Alberts, but it has enough athleticism to manage more than it has this year. I wouldn't exactly call them a "recruiting mess"

Great link--thanks! Interesting that they list QB scrambles as a specific weakness of the pattern-matching zone schemes...we've certainly seen plenty of that with Bo's defenses. It does seem like a complicated zone for players to execute, which is probably part of the complicated system reasons/excuses Bo gives all the time for not playing younger players. Seems to me that back when Marvin Sanders was DB coach, especially the time Solich was HC and Bo was DC, that our secondary was MUCH more ball-hawking and got a lot more picks. Were we more of a spot-dropping zone coverage scheme then? Finally, since Bo was a former safety at Ohio State himself, it seems like his strength and interest has really been on secondary coverage schemes. I was hoping that bringing in Kaczenski from Iowa would give us quality D-line schemes, but it only seems minimally better than last year. And I'm not sure what the hell is going on with the LBs and safeties. That could be a different thread entirely, especially safety play--TONS of mind-boggling plays from PJ Smith and Stafford this year, like the play against Wisconsin when Stafford was trying to tackle an intended receiver with the ball in the air instead of giving over the top pass coverage help, and the multiple times when safeties that were supposed to be providing over the top coverage were nowhere in the picture.

Related question--what are thoughts on what you would have done differently, schematically, against OSU? (Before someone gets huffy about being an armchair coach remember that's the point of being on a football BBS) My thoughts: 1) continue different blitzes throughout the game--delayed blitzes from Compton, zone blitzes, nickelback blitzes, line stunts 2) Spy on Miller on every play, with spy duties rotating between LBs so OSU couldn't figure out who to lead block on designed QB runs 3) Mix up coverages to confuse Miller--cover 2 zone, man-2, robber, zone blitzes with DEs dropping into coverage, etc 4) Rely more on the strength of the defense--the corners. When OSU lined up with 4 wideouts, put Mitchell, Green, Evans, and Seisay/Jean-Baptiste in 1 on 1, use single deep safety over the top, and use the remaining 2 LBs in blitzes or containment on Miller and RB Other than great athleticism, from my admittedly limited understanding of covering running QBs, you want to pressure them and make them beat you with pinpoint passing, which is usually not their strength. No matter how fast or mobile a QB is, if they're worried about pressure and having to throw on the run, they're usually gonna be less effective than if they have time to read multiple WRs and then take off if nobody's open. The main criticism of Bo's scheme against OSU is that they seemed too concerned with taking away OSU's receivers, but...NEWS FLASH...OSU's passing game isn't exactly Joe Montana and Jerry Rice. We should instead have taken our chances with limited coverage against their WRs, and instead tried to target Miller.

Have we truly been using a LB or safety to spy on mobile Qbs this year? I don't think so, but I haven't reviewed enough game tape to know for sure.

Offensive MVP--Kenny Bell. Ameer Abdullah a close second Defensive MVP--Eric Martin. Josh MItchell a close second.

So you're saying the secret formula was getting Carl Pelini laid or able to watch porn? That's certainly an original theory

Very true. But our D has had trouble against "running" qbs much less slippery than Braxton Miller--like Jake Locker. Locker is yet another example of a different type of runner because of his size. Cam Newton too. Those are big bodied QBs that weren't afraid of contact, so being shifty wasn't needed. They were fast, but could also put a shoulder down and knock you backwards for extra yards. Okay, but if we're only gonna be good at stopping straight-line runners like T-Mart, it's not gonna amount to a hill of beans. There are almost no other "running" qbs that are fast but also small and not shifty

Sorry, I have to disagree that DB talent is the problem. Evans, Jean-Baptiste, Josh Mitchell, and Green aren't as good as Dennard and Amukamara in their prime, but they're not that far off. IMO these guys, especially Josh Mitchell, have been one of the few that have played well for the D this season. Add to that Mohammad Seisay, who was ranked as the best JUCO CB in the nation when we signed him. On the other other hand, our safety play has been downright putrid. Poor safety play, D-line play, and OLB play has been the downfall of this year's D.

Very true. But our D has had trouble against "running" qbs much less slippery than Braxton Miller--like Jake Locker.

Yes but my point was that with Bo's expertise and having seen running QBs for multiple years now, we should also be among the "good" teams that can stop them.

Great point--don't these guys scrimmage against T-Mart and Beck's spread-option attack in practice? Does T-Mart also go nuts with 80 yard runs every 5th play in scrimmage??

Great question. I know it's popular to say things like "Callahan's recruited talent" and "Suh was a once in a lifetime player", but these are just excuses. Suh was a special player, but there's players close to his caliber on top defenses EVERY YEAR. The best players in the 09 defense were Amukamara, Dennard, Hagg, Gomes, and Suh--over those, only Amukamara and Suh are consistent NFL starters now. Last year we had one of the best LBs in memory in Lavonte David (who is already starting for the Bucs) and yet we still had a crap defense much of the year. My guess is that it's a mix of constant shuffling among defensive coaches (Carl Pelini, yearly turnover at secondary coach, etc). I think having to learn Bo's complicated "system", plus mixing in a constant shuffle of new subsystems every year, has really got players confused. As a result, Bo leans heavily on the most senior players who have been in the various "systems" the longest, rather than using guys who have the best physical talent. In short, our development of players on defense the last few years has been a complete disaster.

But against teams that are supposedly good, Shoelace can't run as much. Look at the Notre Dame game this year--he had a ton of runs, 26, but only gained a total of 90 yards. If you take out his longest run of 20 yards (we would have loved to have Braxton Miller's longest run be only 20 yards last week!), his average is only 2.8 yards per run. He had zero TDs and 4 picks.

yes, but most of those things are true about all option attacks with a speedy QB...extra person to cover, undisciplined play leads to big gain, etc. But we all know how option attacks have basically gone extinct except for Ga Tech and Navy. Spread option is the rage now, but it's not as if it's a guarantee to a top offense--Florida looked like crap running it last year. In general it's not the spread option or option attack that Bo has struggled with, it's been a running qb in ANY type of offense. With Miller last week, our focus should have been on limiting his time and room to run, and force him to read confusing coverages and try to make pinpoint throws. We may still have lost, but it would have been less likely, and would have been something like 30-27 instead of the embarrassing ass-kicking we got instead.

Sorry--new here. Although running qbs are still the kryptonite for Bo, so it's not like problem is being solved

Dunno about using 5 lbs without burning redshirts, but DEFINITELY need to shake up the Compton-Whaley-Fisher starting trio. That trio has sucked much of the year. Keep Compton in the middle to stuff runs between the tackles, but we desperately need SPEEEEEED on the edges. What the hell has happened to Santos, who we heard so much about in the offseason? And I think we've already played the freshman Rose once, so why not use him more? Are we just gonna waste his potential redshirt year but playing him in only a handful of plays like we did with Quincy Enunwa??

My first post...first of all, just wanna say I'm glad to see a large free site like this one. Huskermax with its paid registration system, u just end up with the same 15 guys talking about the same stuff over and over. Anyway, it's been known for a long time that Bo has had trouble covering for running qbs. Why is this the case? We all saw how he was able to create a defense that was able to stifle the spread, fun-n-gun attacks in the Big 12. Why all the difficulty in scheming to take away a running qb? My own theory--and I'm far from an ex-coach or anyone with any inside knowledge--is that Bo is too obsessed with man coverage or the matchup-zone system that he uses, which from my understanding is really a man-system disguised as a zone on the pre-snap read. This is why we keep seeing slow-footed LBs like Compton and Whaley trying to spring downfield and cover a speedy slot WR in the UCLA and OSU games. The advantage to using conventional zone coverages is that if the qb takes off to scramble (or in a design QB run like we've seen a lot this year), the entire defensive back 7 sees it. In man, nobody sees it except for maybe one LB and a safety. And the way our safeties are playing this year, seeing it doesn't mean they're gonna even come close to stopping it! I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts on this, especially people with more X and O knowledge than me. Of course if you're gonna use zone pass coverages, u also have to have the ability to get to the QB otherwise the WRs will find gaps in the zone and exploit them. But to me, it makes a lot more sense to use a mixture of standard zone, matchup zone, man coverage with blitzes, zone blitzes, and a QB spy at times that varies between LBs or safeties so that the QB can't figure it out. I think someone with Bo's defensive expertise shouldn't be struggling with running qbs as much as we have.