TheSker

It would fit any opinion who would like to send Pelini packing.

This is an interesting thought. What if he didn't type the first sentence...."just before he fired Callahan" and just mentioned it about coaching in general. What would you think then? TO did talk to Pelini about this subject.......TO had experience with his job as head coach being called for at Nebraska.

TO told Callahan exactly how he could keep his job. It was simple. Win out. Pelini has no losing seasons.....in fact nothing short of 9 wins and no missed bowls. End of story. You literally addressed zero of my points. You had one point and it's been discussed plenty. We've given up points and yards in marquee games. We know.

Or substitute Akron?

TO told Callahan exactly how he could keep his job. It was simple. Win out. Pelini has no losing seasons.....in fact nothing short of 9 wins and no missed bowls. End of story.

I agree.......Callahan comparisons are way off base.

I think Pelini knows the issues. He mentioned his three game disappointment in the offense in his post game presser. The way to fix them is going to be through experience of our youth, continued personnel decisions at each position and strong recruiting.

I would agree also

I believe your memory serves correct......and one of the reasons I want Pelini to stay is because I think recruiting has greatly improved. We still have some positions of need though.

I think there are probably some arguments against the current scheme as far as reducing the amount of man coverage we use. It was amazing when Gomes, Amukumara, Dennard and Hagg were flying around, and could blanket everyone on the field. But I don't think we have the personnel in the secondary right now to blanket everybody in man coverage, and I'm guessing that using more zone would be more effective in stopping the big play, and in stopping the run game. However, when it comes to playing the run in those pictures Foreman and Benning posted? That has nothing to do with scheme, because you're not going to find a scheme that makes up for the defensive line making mistakes or getting worked. First of all, maybe Gomes and company were more effective because opposing coaches have watched film and figure out how to beat Bo's scheme. Second, maybe the DL appears to get bat because they are coached to play pattycake instead of rush like wild men. Or maybe part of the reason Gomes and company were more effective is because they were more talented.....thus their entrance into the NFL. Check out our NFL draft history since 1990. If you need help, I have a year by year breakdown. Got it. All we need is NFL caliber players at every position and the problem is solved. That would be true. Our DL in '95 included both Peter bros, Wistrom and Tomich......all NFL talent.

Good point. I'm pretty sure you can send Jay Foreman a message to let him know.

That's fine. As of 3:30 pm Mountain Time he's still the head coach as far as I know. I won't be leading any efforts for his dismissal. I would like to see a few positions replaced.....maybe it will happen over the next few games. I'm disappointed in quarterback play and the veterans on the DL.

Wistrom.......nothing like a DE with a motor and championships at every level.

What do you mean? Our coaches are not asking that dlineman to lose that one on one battle and allow himself to get hooked. At some point the players do have to put forth the effort to fight through some things. That's a one on one matchup and that guy got destroyed. Every defensive player isn't going to win every battle. The scheme has to work even when some players get beat. Then I should have been able to play DT in college if I just found the right scheme. I weigh 210.

I think there are probably some arguments against the current scheme as far as reducing the amount of man coverage we use. It was amazing when Gomes, Amukumara, Dennard and Hagg were flying around, and could blanket everyone on the field. But I don't think we have the personnel in the secondary right now to blanket everybody in man coverage, and I'm guessing that using more zone would be more effective in stopping the big play, and in stopping the run game. However, when it comes to playing the run in those pictures Foreman and Benning posted? That has nothing to do with scheme, because you're not going to find a scheme that makes up for the defensive line making mistakes or getting worked. First of all, maybe Gomes and company were more effective because opposing coaches have watched film and figure out how to beat Bo's scheme. Second, maybe the DL appears to get bat because they are coached to play pattycake instead of rush like wild men. Or maybe part of the reason Gomes and company were more effective is because they were more talented.....thus their entrance into the NFL. Check out our NFL draft history since 1990. If you need help, I have a year by year breakdown.

There is another option. I certainly would not call our players stupid. I don't think our players are stupid either. I blame the scheme. Well that Jay Foreman communication indicated scheme was fine, which I agree with. I think we lack physical ability at a few positions, and Pelini is addressing it.

I agree we do not have a scheme issue. I do think we have a talent issue. It's being addressed, but is not fully addressed yet. I think two of the more glaring examples may be a Gregory in place of Meredith and Bando in place of Compton. Gregory and Bando are simply more physically gifted than their predecessors from last season. I dont the talent issue is as dire as you comment makes it seem-my interpretation anyway. Because outside of the CCG last year, every game we've lost and even the ones we've been blown out in since joining the big 10, we've shown to be competitive enough to compete at the top lever for significantly more than just a blip of the game. It's a mental issue. One little thing goes wrong, and heads go down. And then the avalanche begins. No one finds the will to step up on stop it. And this is the whole works from coaches to player to everyone. You can go back through every loss since joining the Big 10 and see that we've had the talent to win those games. We just dont have the mentality. Granted the first couple classes lacked talent necessary and the developement and depth has been widely debated, But I never felt like we were so outclassed in the talent category that it couldnt be overcome with a tough mindset. That's missing too, and that's how these losses are happening. I'm more disturbed by this lack of intensity than I would ever be of schematic issues. All we here is how these guys would run through a wall for Bo and the coaches and each other. Well, we dont want them to run through wall, just the other team. And for some reason they just dont do that much. I do agree with the mental/psychological aspect as well.....and I'm in line with your thinking. Though yes, I do think there are two teams we had a large talent gap with......Wisky and Ohio State. I think there was more talent equality in the Big 10 in the middle of the league. I think it's why Urban Meyer called everyone out on recruiting. I think continued recruiting will solve a lot. The mental part and the killer instinct are vital also. That's why I'm so disappointed in Martinez as a leader.

There is no scheme available for a MLB who can't shed blocks

I agree we do not have a scheme issue. I do think we have a talent issue. It's being addressed, but is not fully addressed yet. I think two of the more glaring examples may be a Gregory in place of Meredith and Bando in place of Compton. Gregory and Bando are simply more physically gifted than their predecessors from last season.

Or in UCLA's case.....half the length of the field.

I agree.....with one cautionary exception. I think we'll see improvement from the young guys, but not the veterans. The veterans are what they are. The changes in personnel will make more of a difference, and they will be year over year. Two examples, Meredith and Compton. They were what they were, but Bando and Gregory are immediate improvements. I'm pretty sure Compton was our leading tackler last season and my guess he would be our lowest statistical leading tackler in recent years. He could simply not shed blocks the way he needed to in order to get to the ball carrier. As much as we microscope our defense, I like that Pelini mentioned that this offense has been disappointing each of the three games this season. I completely agree with your Martinez assessment. Good athlete. Not a leader.

If only there were drills where players work on tackling . . . . Bo needs to own that getting his players to execute his gameplan is as much his job as making the gameplan. Same excuse last year - poor tackling and execution. Eight seniors graduate, new players, more poor tackling and execution. The common thread is the coaching. I agree, except it's recruiting and not x's and o's. Recruiting falls squarely on Pelini, but I think he has done a good job of focusing on recruiting the past couple of classes.

Thus the term spread offense, designed specifically to create one on one matchups and big space.

There is another option. I certainly would not call our players stupid.

TM's strength is his speed. If he isn't the fastest guy on the field, then he is not an effective QB. Very much agreed