BOurNe sUpremacy

Don't see a single post here where someone is claiming to be a better DC than Bo Pelinin...just that his defenses aren't as great as we thought they were. I think Bo brought a lot of inovation to the league from the NFL...some ahead of the curve stuff. Now the rest of the coaches are catching up and Bo has shown an inability to take his game to the next level. Whether it's due to hiring underlings instead of proven people to be his coordinators (fresh perspective is not a bad thing) I don't know....don't claim to know. But his teams are consistently sloppy and that's a reflection on the coach. His teams take plays off and often don't play hard for 4 quarters...that's probably again the coach. Again, doesn't take a proven DC to see the poor habits his players have had for 5 years. Habits that have cost us games many times... In other words, you don't have to be a musician to know when a song is bad.

Ouch

Nebraska wasn't Nebraska and Wyoming wasn't Wyoming in 1994? How many years has it been since we could line up and blow someone, almost anyone off the ball? 18 yrs. I guess we haven't been Nebraska for some time, eh?

Too bad they couldnt get the push for that 1/2 yd in the 4th, when we most needed it. Dang! Naw, they did a respectable job, but we're talking Wyo here, the team that was near last last year in rush D. Watch the game. We had the first down, but for some reason the forward progress was never called and the ball was allowed to be stripped out. The call was a fumble recovery, not a to on downs. Oh, so that was the fumble, I couldn't figure out where the fumble was in the game. I dunno, didn't look like he had it to me when I watched the game. I'm also scratching my head as to why a QB sneak was called when anything but a QB sneak would've been a better call. You don't rely on Taylor Martinez to make the play in that situation. but it appeared to me he did have the first down, hence he did make the play. The whistles were not blown and 2 guys-2-ripped the ball from him. Wyoming loaded up 9 guys on our 6 at the line of scrimmage and stuffed it pretty good as usually happens on them kind of plays. There was nothing unusual there. Ok, here's the deal, we're Nebraska, at least we're supposed to be, and they are Wyo. We should not even be having this conversation as we--Nebraska--should have been able to steamroll them 4-5 yds off the ball and leave no doubt about making the conversion. Thats the way I see it and that's why I made that initial comment.

sry, laner

laner, sry

Too bad they couldnt get the push for that 1/2 yd in the 4th, when we most needed it. Dang! Naw, they did a respectable job, but we're talking Wyo here, the team that was near last last year in rush D. Watch the game. We had the first down, but for some reason the forward progress was never called and the ball was allowed to be stripped out. The call was a fumble recovery, not a to on downs. Oh, so that was the fumble, I couldn't figure out where the fumble was in the game. I dunno, didn't look like he had it to me when I watched the game. I'm also scratching my head as to why a QB sneak was called when anything but a QB sneak would've been a better call. You don't rely on Taylor Martinez to make the play in that situation. P.S., I am choosing to not watch a replay of the game. Think I'll just try and put it in the past, though there were some great plays on the offensive side of the ball.

agree

As of now, I have UCLA penciled in as a loss. Then, god help us, we should be a.o.k. up until the jNU game, where, from there on out it's anybody's guess from what I saw of our D last night. MN looks like it could be a real struggle . Our D is a serious work in, well, I am hesitant to use the word, "progress". Answer one question for me: Last year, our starters knew the defense in and out. (thats why they were starting.) and sucked. This year, our defense knows about 75% of what those guys knew detail wise, communication wise, etc. and that 75% is being pretty generous. What do you think will happen as the players get more accustomed to the speed of college football, get better at communicating, and they start to understand all of the little intricacies of the defense, to where to they "master" it? Do you think they'll stay the same? Get better? Get worse? One would think they would get better, as athletes, individually. As for the team play of the D in particular, I make no claims of consistent improvement--there is substantial evidence to the contrary. Like I have been echoing here and elsewhere, Bo Pelini's version of the Huskers is a crap shoot and all the meltdowns and boneheaded, inconsistent play that never gets "fixed" forms the basis of my answer here. I'm playing the coaching card, mostly, in other words. Pelini gets out coached on a regular basis.

blip, laner

As of now, I have UCLA penciled in as a loss. Then, god help us, we should be a.o.k. up until the jNU game, where, from there on out it's anybody's guess from what I saw of our D last night. MN looks like it could be a real struggle, though. Our D is a serious work in, well, I am hesitant to use the word, "progress".

The whole "scolding" thing is a group think sickness, er, I meant to say, "phenomenon" that exists on all Husker boards/blogs. No can escape it, though I did note that this very own HB site has a quarantined thread for those deemed or considering of themselves as "negative nellies"(i.e., the realists). I'm a free speech kinda guy, so whatever, peeps gotta deal with it, I guess. I'll try not to hurt anybody--honest.

How do you figure? Last year's D had more experience, lots of it. In fact, they experienced giving up 70 and 45 points, respectively, in the last 2 games, the former of which was probably the most important game of their lives. 1200+ yds, in 2 games, yea, they experienced that. So, the cliche idea that "oh, the D(or team) is just going to get better and better, day by day..." yada yada, well, it ain't necessarily so. that would be logical, but we got worse last season.......not better. Huh? They were topsy turvy, bipolar, mercurial, as per usual, hanging on for dear life in most games they theoretically should have put away by the 3rd qtr. You dont know what you;re going to get with this team from one series to the next: a 3 play 80 yd scoring drive, a 3 and out, 3 false starts in a row in November, stuffed by Wyo on 4th and 0.5 yds, TMart Hail Mary pick when the game is supposedly in the bag, etc. They had the "must win out" ultimatum which sort of looked like it worked, then blamo, the CCG meltdown. No, this team is a crap shoot, you can rely on them about as much as you can rely on a cat coming home when you call it. Jekyll, Hyde. It's who Bo is and unless he goes thru one of those head transplants they are working on these days(he could afford it), well, it's who he--and the team--is going to be. Get used to it.

How do you figure? Last year's D had more experience, lots of it. In fact, they experienced giving up 70 and 45 points, respectively, in the last 2 games, the former of which was probably the most important game of their lives. Some of those guys are on this very team now, still, and they are playing, and they have, you know, "The Experience". 1200+ yds, in those 2 memorable outings, as if it were only yesterday--oh wait... Yea, they experienced that too. So, the cliche idea that "oh, the D(or team) is just going to get better and better, day by day, one foot in front of the other, think positive..." yada yada, well, it ain't necessarily so. Wasn't it after the GA game that Bo said something to the effect, "Yea, this proves we can hang with the best in the country, we're just about there..." etc. '09/'10 was the "We're BACK" mantra flying all over. Guess they failed to specify what we were "back" to, where "there" is. News flash: we are not back. In case ya hadn't noticed. And last night's showing gives serious pause for reflection--which, for anyone with some street savvy and common sense, should take all of a NY second. 600 yds, the new normal. I mean, they used to give that much up only when the game mattered, now, what the hell, let the Wyos of the world in on the fun, why be selfish, come one, come all. Oh, they're gonna "fix us" you know, like they've been doing the last 5 years, "fixing us". Well, this "fix us" deal is apparently akin to the worst Home Depot handy man style repair job nightmare cuz guess what, "we", "it" ain't fixed yet. Still needs fixed. Who knows, maybe by "fixing us" they mean "neutering"(like a dog)because it sure looks that way to me. We ain't got no "balls". I'd give a nickel to anyone in the neighborhood of Lincoln, NE, to crash Bo's Monday press conference and rig up one of those spring loaded boxing gloves that is activated whenever he utters the terms "fix us" such that it punches him directly in the face. Seriously, I'd love to see that. Ok, 2 nickels, deal. "Fix us" POW!

we've been waiting for that for 5 yrs now. imo, it's not going to happen. what we see is what we get and what we are going to get: sloppy.

Sorry bro', that's all I needed to read. Nothing personal. Ok, scratch that, bring in Freud, Skinner, Pavlov, Pavlov's dog, Jung, Old, Ed Bernays, Bueller, anybody, I don't give a crap, but make this team play better dagnabbit!

1-8 on third down conversions. That means when we were getting into scenarios to get off the field, WE GOT OFF THE FIELD. A defense that is getting "pushed around" doesn't do that. Good lord Here is an article from last year on the topic. http://www.omaha.com.../708119859/1707 - our issue has continued to be GETTING OFF THE FIELD. Which, for the first time in a long, long time, we actually did! For instance, last year USM completed 50% of their 3rd conversions against our D. So, yeah, I'd say us using Gregory as a drop end has helped us get off the field. Cutesy stuff that works, I guess. I'm not sure how we are getting owned when our D actually did a good job getting off of the field? Yeah they had a big fourth quarter, but once again, we wanted to fix our issues on third down and it appears we have taken steps to do that. Sheesh. Ok, the house burned down, but my bathtub was saved. Thats basically what you are saying here.

So your saying that the players this year are not anymore talented then they were last year because of the yards they allowed? Kinda doesnt matter if they are giving up the same amounts of yards, does it? The proof is in the pudding, talent or no talent. Kinda does matter because there is a thing called "room for improvement" because they are so young and inexperienced. You think these players will get worse as they get more experience? Learn the scheme better? The issue last year is we KNEW the scheme, we WERE experienced, because we WEREN'T young, and yet we sucked. This year we did poorly BECAUSE we don't KNOW everything about our scheme and we AREN'T experienced and we are YOUNG. We have the athletes in place now. It's about getting them experienced. What I'm saying is, it doesn't appear to matter during Bo's epic D meltdowns--talent and/or experience need not apply. The sh&t is going to happen regardless and that's coaching. 600+ yds, great way to kick off a new season. Kind of makes one question the alleged talent level, or football IQ, or both. I think it's mostly the coaching though. It should never happen at NE, not with the resources they put into the program.

Wouldn't surprise me t'all if that happened. Also, WTF were they doing putting Gregory @ LB last night, what was that all about? He was, like, running with receivers. He wasn't technically a linebacker. He was a drop end. They use him as a decoy and bring a blitz from the other side, and if I recall correctly it worked decently on the plays they used it. He also doesn't "run" with a receiver man to man. He drops into a zone defense. It was a new wrinkle they were working on. EDIT - The point of it is to make the QB have to think about what he was doing and in the end, if they throw short routes they'll have to key on him at one point or another to see if he drops back or if he is rushing them, which makes the QB rush through his progressions. Whatever it was, I dont like it. I mean, he's supposed to be a DE and last time I looked we REALLY need a good one of those, like you know, ON the line. Because you know nothing about defense. Or trying to confuse QBs into making mistakes. Or using players to your advantage. Versatility, its a good thing. If you don't see the obvious advantages of making people gameplan for certain looks, then I really don't think you understand the defensive side of the ball. Its all about maximizing your advantages. Having a DE that can run with a TE in coverage allows for us to send "more exotic blitzes" that are more likely to be successful. Its not like we did it all game long, good lord. Here's what I KNOW. Fricking WYOMING put up fracking 600+ yds on us and nearly pulled off the upset of my lifetime vs Big Red, K? Thats all I need to know. The sh&t aint working and putting RG @ at 'roving DE' is just more smoke and mirror, cutesy Bo b.s. We dont have the mojo on the d front to even not get owned by l'il ol' Wyo, and thats sad, so he's just bullsh@tting his way around. Did Brett Smith look confused last night?

yea, pretty straight forward. all this 'tendencies" and "concepts" mumbo jumbo is mostly b.s. in my book. if you are not punching their guy in the face harder than he is you, well, you lose. It's football, well, it used to be football, but with the Kenny Bell and soon be Randy Gregory rules, it's all patty cake now.

Wouldn't surprise me t'all if that happened. Also, WTF were they doing putting Gregory @ LB last night, what was that all about? He was, like, running with receivers. He wasn't technically a linebacker. He was a drop end. They use him as a decoy and bring a blitz from the other side, and if I recall correctly it worked decently on the plays they used it. He also doesn't "run" with a receiver man to man. He drops into a zone defense. It was a new wrinkle they were working on. EDIT - The point of it is to make the QB have to think about what he was doing and in the end, if they throw short routes they'll have to key on him at one point or another to see if he drops back or if he is rushing them, which makes the QB rush through his progressions. Whatever it was, I dont like it. I mean, he's supposed to be a DE and last time I looked we REALLY need a good one of those, like you know, ON the line.

Those guys scare the crap out of everyone. Thats why most offenses that can recruit a decent dual threat QB, end up starting the dual threat QB over the guy who can't extend plays with his leg. And also, if you're comparing QBs, Maxwell is a horrible example. Maxwell vs. Brax or Geno? The better equivalent would be Aaron Murray or AJ McCarron in comparison to them. Oh ok, uh Murray punked us too, right, like bad, made us look silly, in fact. I'll add that to my list. He sure did. Proving that a GOOD pro style QB is still a very dangerous thing. As a matter of fact, I'd rather face Denard Robinson than Aaron Murray any day of the week and twice on Sunday. We don't have an answer for a pro style QB that can tear apart our secondary (which is our perceived strength, is it not?). We can do different things to contain dual threat QBs. Look at Denard, Colter last year. I'd rather face Whatshisname Maxwell with our D, and nothing more. Wow, I just had a flashback to Russell Wilson 2 yrs ago, make it STOP!

I expect them to get better, they ARE greener than a summer's day on the D side, muchos youth. I just don;t expect it real soon AND I dont think BO has much of a clue about defending a spread offense, or at least, the defenders we have can;t seem to hang with it. Wow, this 'quote tag matching thing is a total pain in the ass. Havent figured it out yet.

Too bad they couldnt get the push for that 1/2 yd in the 4th, when we most needed it. Dang! Naw, they did a respectable job, but we're talking Wyo here, the team that was near last last year in rush D.

Those guys scare the crap out of everyone. Thats why most offenses that can recruit a decent dual threat QB, end up starting the dual threat QB over the guy who can't extend plays with his leg. And also, if you're comparing QBs, Maxwell is a horrible example. Maxwell vs. Brax or Geno? The better equivalent would be Aaron Murray or AJ McCarron in comparison to them. Oh ok, uh Murray punked us too, right, like bad, made us look silly, in fact. I'll add that to my list.