TheSker

If Bo doesn't get this figured out this year, and we have the same problems and mistakes throughout this season and into next, he's going to find out how Cosgrove felt circa 2007.

Pretty big talk considering what Pelini has accomplished. Feel free to let me know when Pelini has a losing season and (or even "or") misses a bowl.

Shawn Watson's offenses were pretty good three of the four years he was our Offensive Coordinator and he was shown the door. A winning or losing record isn't the only reason a coach may be let go or encouraged to move on.

Coordinators are a different ballgame than head coaches. In addition to his W-L record, Pelini runs a good program, and Eichorst is a smart guy. You want problems......try revisiting 2003. I've got confidence we are nowhere ready to do that.

If Bo doesn't get this figured out this year, and we have the same problems and mistakes throughout this season and into next, he's going to find out how Cosgrove felt circa 2007.

Pretty big talk considering what Pelini has accomplished. Feel free to let me know when Pelini has a losing season and (or even "or") misses a bowl.

What BP didn't anticipate was that spread team playing as well as they did.

I think what Pelini didn't anticipate was Martinez committing two turnovers, which might be the most anticipatible thing in football. I'm being sarcastic of course, but this offense needs to hum early and often. The defense had severe talent issues the past two seasons (which is on Pelini) and early indications show improvement in talent level.

To date, I have not seen a change or the fixes.

You might have missed the Wyoming game.....the mashed potatoes are in the microwave.

Not sure where else to post this. Some extended highlights of the defense for those of us without BTN.

 

 

Some good stuff here and some good sets we saw in the second half. Anyone notice that once Smith ran for that long one up the middle we changed the way we defended the five wide set? Instead of our LB shifting with the RB, our outside DE (Either Moss or Gregory don't believe it was ever McMullen or Ankrah) shifted outside and they would guard the RB until he ran his drag pattern across to the MIKE? That really helped secure the middle of the field from a five wide set.

 

Are you accusing our coaching staff of making defensive adjustments?

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?

We didn't play lights out on defense at all all game except a brief time in the third. they ran on us at will the entire game and Smith doesn't throw that crummy pass in the endzone, or the hb/wr pass doesn't happen (both in great field position), are we really saying our D played well all game?

 

He didn't say "lights out". Unless my vision is bad, it says "decent body of work". But it sounds like you saw us playing some "lights out" defense for a brief time in the third.

my guess is Charlie would rather take an ass whoopin' than be part of this...

My guess is Charlie remembers well when his job was being called for and is enjoying being retired.

Not sure where else to post this. Some extended highlights of the defense for those of us without BTN.

They said SJB's pick on Brett Smith ended Smith's streak of over 180 pass attempts without an interception.

And what brought about these 5 minutes? Turnovers. Something that has been hanging around this team for years.

I would agree. It's what comes with a high risk/high reward quarterback on offense and a lack of generating them on defense.

Yea, anything's possible. Not probable, though, IMO.

Actually, the "probability" would be that we win at least 9.

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.

Listening to BP talk about the game and the way he is talking has really put me in a better frame of mind about the game. He is almost talking like he knows something we don't. Damon Benning said almost as much if you listen to the USC pod cast.

Even with the busts, I think what we can take away is the ability and athleticism. Two specific examples.......the first is Gregory actually getting to the quarterback. Yes, it was technically a penalty and not a sack, but he got there. Sacks from the DE spot have been horribly absent the past couple of seasons. The other is Gerry disrupting that pass. Gerry had the speed to get there and just as importantly, didn't whiff. The past couple of seasons, we whiffed a lot or couldn't get off blocks. It will also be nice to have DTs who don't get blown 3 yards off the LOS.

Looks like you are having a discussion with yourself.

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.

 

Oops, thank you for that correction.....it was Corby in '97 for Mizzou.

 

It's not like Mizzou ran up and down the field on our D. They didn't even hit 400 total yards in that game.

They got in the endzone enough to put up 38 points.

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.

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.

 

Oops, thank you for that correction.....it was Corby in '97 for Mizzou.

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?".

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).

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.

 

 

And that's why this defense was so effective in 2009. You had a freak of nature in Suh who couldn't be blocked, or if you wanted to stop him you dedicated so many linemen to him that Crick, Camstache or Allen could get to the QB..

I think our DL in 2009 was Turner, Suh, Crick and Allen. In my opinion, Meredith never put up the numbers you need from that DE spot once he started.

That's why I'm on about Zaire Anderson in other posts/threads. He looks like some of our old LBs, he has shown that kind of aggression, and he should have a chance to put that on display.

He will. Pap said Anderson didn't play because he struggles in the passing game.

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?

I'm not posting this to bash Bo's defenses nor to roll in memories of the 90s. I want to know more about the differences.

I think there's one significant difference and we'll see if Pelini is going down the right road now. It's talent level. Take the DL for example from that mid 90's crew. Peter bros, Tomich, Wistrom each made it to the next level. Crick and Suh did the same for Pelini......and Pelini might have even looked better that season with more productive DEs. Xs and Os are important....Jimmys and Joes are more important.

They were getting pushed around by friggin Wyo.

Based on Pelini's comments, I think we'll see them let Valentine loose a bit more now. With Valentine the unknowns were his in game conditioning and how he'd do at game speed once things went live. I think Pelini and Pap were pleased. Randle needs to step it up, but he may just not be physically able to and I'm certain Pelini and Pap will use a lot of depth at that position. It's still better than Stein and Meredith, neither of whom are natural DTs....both undersized to play DT. They got pushed around.

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.