BOurNe sUpremacy

I'm just stating facts about the 4 qtr outcome of the game. I think the prudent fan is now preparing him/her self, psychologically, for 8-4.

What you called "prudent" I'd call "pessimistic". We can still go undefeated - doesn't seem likely but it's possible.

Undefeated? Yea, anything's possible. Not probable, though, IMO. I hope that's not too 'pessimistic' for you.

I agree. The talent is there. Lots of it. Young guys and inexperienced. Just need game reps and each week should be an improvement. Play fast and physical, react without over thinking.

Did Michael Rose play? If not, why not?

 

Let me first say it seems odd you are engaged in debate here and you don't know if Rose played. But the answer to your why or why not question is LBs playing time in the Wyoming game had much to do with the ability to defend the passing game.....that according to Pap.

Whats Rose's #?

Come on back to the shed so i can lite you up some more. Stand your ground, dont block me like a 2 year old.

Maybe you could direct me to a block fx, if there is one....or, I'll just skip reading your stuff, thats easy enough.

Huskers 45

So Miss 20

Rush 350

Pass 225

I agree. The talent is there. Lots of it. Young guys and inexperienced. Just need game reps and each week should be an improvement. Play fast and physical, react without over thinking.

Did Michael Rose play? If not, why not?

 

Let me first say it seems odd you are engaged in debate here and you don't know if Rose played. But the answer to your why or why not question is LBs playing time in the Wyoming game had much to do with the ability to defend the passing game.....that according to Pap.

Whats Rose's #?

I agree. The talent is there. Lots of it. Young guys and inexperienced. Just need game reps and each week should be an improvement. Play fast and physical, react without over thinking.

Did Michael Rose play? If not, why not?

 

Wasnt making it personal, you said above "im a star guy" And that makes sense to me, your a stat and star guy. Why is that a bad thing to point out? It's who you are after all.

From an earlier post:

its blatantly obvious by your posting you have no idea whats going on, then you go on and admit it, yet spout off acting like you know something about football, when in reality, you looked at the score and the yards givin up and jumped to conclusions. Maybe before stating your opinion publicly you would, you know, actually watch how the game unfolded ONCE let alone two or three times, to see what really happened before you make stupid comments and make yourself look ignorant.

I'm willing to look the other way..

http://www.tunnelwalkofshame.com/

 

Its almost like I wrote this....Smart dude

 

That’s it. 5 minutes. A dozen plays - half of which didn’t include our defense. Sure, we can’t draw a lot of conclusions from this series of hypotheticals. But here’s one thing I know: had Nebraska won that game 44-21, nobody would be worried at all. At all. “21 points and 475 yards isn’t terrible. They’ve got some real play-makers. For the first game, that was pretty good.” But no. We watched a 5-minute implosion that nearly resulted in disaster and the narrative instantly became, “This defense is doomed! Fire Bo Pelini! Murder John Papuchis!”

Well, that didnt happen, the score was 37-34, we gave up 600+ yds, and dropped 4 spots in the polls, are sitting #113 in defense. 475 doesnt sound that great either. Anyway, I havent been a 'fire Bo' guy, but there are meltdowns and you never know when they are going to happen, like at the end of the year when one would've assumed progress. I predict 8-4 and a serious hotseat for Bo scenario at the end of the reg season. Not trying to be negative, not saying I want that to happen, because I don't, just the way it looks to me after the 1st game.

 

Your certainly entitled to your opinion. We go 10-2 easily. 11-1 if we get by UCLA. You would be a "star gazzer" thats fits your personality and posting to a T.

Keep making it personal and Knapp sends you to the Shed, k? I'm just stating facts about the 4 qtr outcome of the game. I think the prudent fan is now preparing him/her self, psychologically, for 8-4.

And if Eve had never eaten that apple we'd still be running around naked in a forest, eating figs and having sex without shame.

Haha, my gf Eve and I were doing that just the other night--in pagan-like fashion, oh yea!

The proliferation of the mobile QB, who is able to also pass, is what makes the spread defenses so hard to defend. McBride was able to send Wistrom and company off the edges and attack Wuerfel because the QB was a statue. Without the fear of the QB taking off and run at any time, the defenses were able to attack more freely. With today's mobile QB's who can also throw, it's so much easier for them to move around in the backfield and make a pass to an open receiver down field. Smith from Wyoming did that countless times last week. Defenses today, have to play more contain/coverage, try to get pressure with their front 4, and try to limit the big plays in the secondary.

Another example involving a Smith was in 1997.....a championship year for us. We destroyed Peyton Manning and the Vols in the bowl game, but Brad Smith gave our defense fits in that Missouri game (the Flea Kicker game).

It was Corby Jones for Missouri in 1997, but it's exactly the same point. Smith destroyed Pelini's defense in the 2003 NU-Mizzou game.

Chase Daniels destroyed him in '08.

 

However Pelini's defense destroyed Gabbert in '09 and '10.

Suh

And I thought we were talking about mobile QBs, no?

http://www.tunnelwalkofshame.com/

 

Its almost like I wrote this....Smart dude

 

That’s it. 5 minutes. A dozen plays - half of which didn’t include our defense. Sure, we can’t draw a lot of conclusions from this series of hypotheticals. But here’s one thing I know: had Nebraska won that game 44-21, nobody would be worried at all. At all. “21 points and 475 yards isn’t terrible. They’ve got some real play-makers. For the first game, that was pretty good.” But no. We watched a 5-minute implosion that nearly resulted in disaster and the narrative instantly became, “This defense is doomed! Fire Bo Pelini! Murder John Papuchis!”

Well, that didnt happen, the score was 37-34, we gave up 600+ yds, and dropped 4 spots in the polls, are sitting #113 in defense. 475 doesnt sound that great either. Anyway, I havent been a 'fire Bo' guy, but there are meltdowns and you never know when they are going to happen, like at the end of the year when one would've assumed progress. I predict 8-4 and a serious hotseat for Bo scenario at the end of the reg season. Not trying to be negative, not saying I want that to happen, because I don't, just the way it looks to me after the 1st game.

And what upsets me the most is now I can't go talking smack anymore on Northwestern's and KState's boards after the lackluster win.

Makes alotta sense, yea. But I don't think we want to be responsible for revisiting the recruiting issue, the guys who like stars, the guys who hate 'em and love a 'walk on's heart'...blah blah blah. No, we dont wanna go there.

 

It doesn't have to turn into a stars issue. Here's a recruiting trail example I'll use from two Pelini era recruits at LB..."Hi Will Compton, you have some good high school numbers at the LB position.....let me ask you, what's your time in the 40 and the 100?".........fast forward four years later....."Hi Josh Banderas, you have some good high school numbers at the LB position.....let me ask you, what's your time in the 40 and the 100?".

Not sure I follow you there, Sker. ? Banderas is supposed to be better than Compton, right?

Bando is faster, so his chances of being better than Compton at LB are good.....and the point is it doesn't have to be a star discussion.

I'm a star guy, so I dont think I could avoid it.

I see some posts about the McBride defense attacking the spread defenses, punishing the QB, etc. Yes, we all love those glory days, but there is a huge difference between now and then. The proliferation of the mobile QB, who is able to also pass, is what makes the spread defenses so hard to defend. McBride was able to send Wistrom and company off the edges and attack Wuerfel because the QB was a statue. Without the fear of the QB taking off and run at any time, the defenses were able to attack more freely. With today's mobile QB's who can also throw, it's so much easier for them to move around in the backfield and make a pass to an open receiver down field. Smith from Wyoming did that countless times last week. Defenses today, have to play more contain/coverage, try to get pressure with their front 4, and try to limit the big plays in the secondary.

 

That's true about mobile quarterbacks. For the most part, I think a mobile QB leans on running instincts to make plays than make accurate throws all game. I would prefer to keep a mobile QB frustrated by holding him under 50 yards rushing, and forced to make plays passing the ball. Braxton Miller for example. Denard Robinson another. If they have to beat us through the air, then I take those chances. The real tricky ones are guys like Brett Smith of WYO, UCLA's Brett Hundley, and Michigan's Devin Gardner. They are pretty accurate passers that can also extend drives and make some plays with their feet. It's not an easy job to say the least.

I really hope that Michigan does the stupid thing and tries to make Gardner a pro-style QB, in a "West Coast Offense". Their offense would be lethal if they stayed with the spread option game that they ran under Denard. But, Bourges is a WCO guy, so that's what he will do with Gardner.

Uh, MI scored 59 the other day, right? I think they are ok.

What, banned for an opinion? yea, wouldn't surprise me on a Husker board, I dont mean this Hukserboard in particular. I think we're seriously looking at an 8-4 reg season finish at this point and hope we play a MAC team in the bowl--and no, not the good one either.

That's better than 2007, where we went 5-7.

 

 

And I'm done, because Knapp is getting pissed.

Well, 7-5 isnt outta the question. Best case scenario, 9-3, reg season, provided they get their act together.

The proliferation of the mobile QB, who is able to also pass, is what makes the spread defenses so hard to defend. McBride was able to send Wistrom and company off the edges and attack Wuerfel because the QB was a statue. Without the fear of the QB taking off and run at any time, the defenses were able to attack more freely. With today's mobile QB's who can also throw, it's so much easier for them to move around in the backfield and make a pass to an open receiver down field. Smith from Wyoming did that countless times last week. Defenses today, have to play more contain/coverage, try to get pressure with their front 4, and try to limit the big plays in the secondary.

Another example involving a Smith was in 1997.....a championship year for us. We destroyed Peyton Manning and the Vols in the bowl game, but Brad Smith gave our defense fits in that Missouri game (the Flea Kicker game).

It was Corby Jones for Missouri in 1997, but it's exactly the same point. Smith destroyed Pelini's defense in the 2003 NU-Mizzou game.

Chase Daniels destroyed him in '08.

Makes alotta sense, yea. But I don't think we want to be responsible for revisiting the recruiting issue, the guys who like stars, the guys who hate 'em and love a 'walk on's heart'...blah blah blah. No, we dont wanna go there.

 

It doesn't have to turn into a stars issue. Here's a recruiting trail example I'll use from two Pelini era recruits at LB..."Hi Will Compton, you have some good high school numbers at the LB position.....let me ask you, what's your time in the 40 and the 100?".........fast forward four years later....."Hi Josh Banderas, you have some good high school numbers at the LB position.....let me ask you, what's your time in the 40 and the 100?".

Not sure I follow you there, Sker. ? Banderas is supposed to be better than Compton, right?

I Agree. It doesn't matter how many blitzes were called. This scheme stinks and needs to be changed to an attacking run stopping style.

I think until we get a dominating DL that can blow up the other guy, it's all just smoke and mirrors.

Obviously you have to have the talent to run any scheme.

Exactly my point. When a team has an outstanding defense, do you remember the scheme they ran, or do you remember the players who made it happen?

 

 

Both.

Seriously, I'm having deja vu back to '07 and the "Coz Dialogues". Same ol', same ol'. They're gonna get it fixed, you know they are.

If we end up having a good season, nothing like the 2007 meltdown. Can we ban you?

What, banned for an opinion? yea, wouldn't surprise me on a Husker board, I dont mean this Hukserboard in particular. I think we're seriously looking at an 8-4 reg season finish at this point and hope we play a MAC team in the bowl--and no, not the good one either.

Hey, check this out, highspeed:

 

Total Defense NCAA Week 1

113 114 115 116 117

 

 

We are in some good company, oh yea! Helluva showing for the 1st game of the year, I can see why Bo feels 'relaxed'(deluded) after watching the game film.

 

I know, we're the only team that has young players on D, all the top teams are fully loaded. And it was Wyoming, you know, they're good!

 

 

Let me know when you actually watched the second half of the game. You admitted you dont know what happened in the second half. So keep throwing your stats out there, your just proving to everyone you dont have a clue. Stats dont tell the whole story, We dropped in AP poll because 99% of voters did not watch the game, kind of like you, they see the stats and dont understand what happened. Im not spinning or making excuses. The reality of the situation is this. If the offense scores instead of calling a QB sneak, or throwing an INT, or getting a 3rd a 4 with 2 minutes to go, we give up 14 less points and almost 200 less yards. Watch how the last 6 minutes unfolded. If our offense does its job we go up by 24 with 5 minutes left. Instead they get a 4th down stop get momentum and with 2 good throws they are with in 3 points. Our offense again has a chance to end the game and we cant get a first down. So we give them the ball back with a minute to go...they get about 25 yards with the game on the line.

 

 

 

Our offense had THREE chances to hold the ball or score to put the game out of reach. Due to conservative play calling (admitted by Beck), that didnt happen. The defense is a big work in progress , but iwasnt as bad as the yards and points indicated. Our offense does its job, just one out of three times and the game is well out of reach. This put the defense is a bad postion, ie...giving them the ball at midfield with 6 minutes to go after an INT, when we were driving, in the red zone, ready to put the game out of reach up 24. Final score should have been 40-21 with a FG 44-21 with a TD and the games over.

 

Score of the OSU Buffalo game was 40-20. Espn headline...OSU rolls buffalo.

Dude, we're talking about Wyoming here, I'm not going to sit around ruminating over game film trying to break down what happened, unless somebody wants to pay me I kinda gestalted the thing while watching it and trying not to laugh. Oh, the hype leading into the game about the D 'talent'. Yea, k. After 4 qtrs of football in '13, not 2 qtrs, not 1 qtr, 4 full qtrs, we are near last in the country in D. I hope they get better.

Fortunately, the O provided some real entertainment.

Obviously you have to have the talent to run any scheme.

Exactly my point. When a team has an outstanding defense, do you remember the scheme they ran, or do you remember the players who made it happen?

 

 

Both.

Seriously, I'm having deja vu back to '07 and the "Coz Dialogues". Same ol', same ol'. They're gonna get it fixed, you know they are.

 

I doubt many people said that about Cosgrove. That guy was pure idiot and had never fielded a competent defense in his life. Bo and Co. have.

So how come there is more than a little stir on the boards right now about, "we gotta pony up more $ and hire a good DC? Which I think is hilarious considering Bo is supposed to be that guy.

Obviously you have to have the talent to run any scheme.

Exactly my point. When a team has an outstanding defense, do you remember the scheme they ran, or do you remember the players who made it happen?

 

 

Both.

Seriously, I'm having deja vu back to '07 and the "Coz Dialogues". Same ol', same ol'. They're gonna get it fixed, you know they are.

 

If they recruited the guys who can get it done, it will be fixed. If they didn't recruit the guys who can get it done, it won't be fixed.

Makes alotta sense, yea. But I don't think we want to be responsible for revisiting the recruiting issue, the guys who like stars, the guys who hate 'em and love a 'walk on's heart'...blah blah blah. No, we dont wanna go there.

Obviously you have to have the talent to run any scheme.

Exactly my point. When a team has an outstanding defense, do you remember the scheme they ran, or do you remember the players who made it happen?

 

 

Both.

Seriously, I'm having deja vu back to '07 and the "Coz Dialogues". "It's the scheme, no it's the players, it's the coaches, players, and scheme, it's the fans--they're outta position. No wait, we put them in the wrong position. Oh, the LBs, they take bad angles, oh, if they could only wrap up they had the guy, why can't they tackle...you dont know defense, I know defense and I say they gotta get outta the peso, no the dime, or was that a nickel--penny for your thoughts, we gotta put Gregory @ CB, did you see how he ran with those WRs?" Etc.

Same ol', same ol'. They're gonna get it fixed, honest they will, they keep sayin'...

Dont have to spin anything, its blatantly obvious by your posting you have no idea whats going on, then you go on and admit it, yet spout off acting like you know something about football, when in reality, you looked at the score and the yards givin up and jumped to conclusions. Maybe before stating your opinion publicly you would, you know, actually watch how the game unfolded ONCE let alone two or three times, to see what really happened before you make stupid comments and make yourself look ignorant.

Yea, you remind me of that guy in red I sparred a few weeks back.

 

 

Cmon, you dont have to Einstein or even half awake watching that game to know the defense sucked. "Oh, we had 2 'good' qtrs of D' but then blew up again in the 4th. That's Pelini's M.O. But hey, you keep tellin' yourself, keep spinnin' it, keep rewatching the game and adjusting the stats you make yourself feel good about it. I hope UCLA goes easy on us and keeps it under 70--for your sake.

 

 

Your a little chinese guy? Well that makes sense, they typically have never watched much football.

Hey, check this out, highspeed:

Total Defense NCAA Week 1

113 Nebraska 114 Ohio 115 Oregon St. 116 Nevada 117 New Mexico St.

http://www.ncaa.com/...rent/team/22/p3

We are in some good company, oh yea! Helluva showing for the 1st game of the year, I can see why Bo feels 'relaxed'(deluded) after watching the game film.

I know, we're the only team that has young players on D, all the top teams are fully loaded. And it was Wyoming, you know, they're good!

Dont have to spin anything, its blatantly obvious by your posting you have no idea whats going on, then you go on and admit it, yet spout off acting like you know something about football, when in reality, you looked at the score and the yards givin up and jumped to conclusions. Maybe before stating your opinion publicly you would, you know, actually watch how the game unfolded ONCE let alone two or three times, to see what really happened before you make stupid comments and make yourself look ignorant.

Yea, you remind me of that guy in red I sparred a few weeks back.

Cmon, you dont have to Einstein or even half awake watching that game to know the defense sucked. "Oh, we had 2 'good' qtrs of D' but then blew up again in the 4th. That's Pelini's M.O. But hey, you keep tellin' yourself, keep spinnin' it, keep rewatching the game and adjusting the stats you make yourself feel good about it. I hope UCLA goes easy on us and keeps it under 70--for your sake.

McKewon was on USC this afternoon, and he and Severe were saying that the D blitzed quite a bit, but the blitzes were uneffective.

Pretty good description of the bowl game too.

I've never seen Bo's blitz's to be effective, they always wiff or get picked up by the RB and what not.

Sometimes Pelini's blitzes are ineffective. It's about talent.....Demorrio Williams for example had some memorable blitzes. That's why speed is crucial at the LB spot. We didn't have speed or talent there the past couple of seasons. That's recruiting, and yes it's on Bo. Charlie McBride went from hot seat to a legend because of on field talent.

Yea, LD comes to mind.

Addison, it's perfectly acceptable to take out outliers/anomalies as a separate way to analyze data. If a running back runs 25 times a game for 100 yards, but one of those runs was for 75 yards, that means the other 24 runs netted only 25 yards total (slightly over a yard per play). So yes, an "average" includes all the data, but if you really look at the data (in my scenario) you see that the running back really struggled save one play.

 

There's nothing wrong with that analysis as long as you don't discount other forms of data. Hell, even professional statistical analysts look at data without outliers or pure averages. True averages can be very misleading.

So in other words it's fine to be very optimistic by the fact that the final 6 or so minutes of ridiculous nonsense is covering up a decent body of work by the defense (or the whole team for that matter) the other 54 minutes of the game, yes?

I thought our body of work the 1st half was bad, regardless of 'pure' or 'impure' averages. I thought we were getting owned from the get go. The 3rd quarter was probably better, but I probably didnt notice cuz of the PTSD from the 1st half.. The interception in their redzone seemed to change the momentum greatly as we were sitting on a comfy lead and I actually cant recall the events leading to their 2 quick scores in the 4th, except they involved some long passes with some huge breakdowns in the 2ndary. The 4th qtr was kind of a blur to me.

 

This is funny, pretty much admitting you have no idea what you are talking about.

Oh ok, well Big Red nearly had an epic, historic loss for the ages. Aaaand, we dropped 4 spots in the polls after this "illustrious" performance, you know, a win. Maybe you can spin that one, big guy..