husker_rob

This is a really good breakdown, IMO. We'll be playing with fire if we allow TA to throw the ball a lot (I like him, but he's young and has been making mistakes against B1G Ds). I don't see us shutting down their run, only because we haven't really shown a lot to get me excited. Hopefully, we can slow them down and not get gashed too much; at least, just slow down the attack and get a stop here and there. But our defense just hasn't been very physical thus far, and I'm not too hopeful. Love your statement about scheming. We do have a lot of talent on the field, but they're young and unpredictable. They're gonna be prone to getting rattled in that big-time environment. We haven't played very well in big-time road games lately, but there has to be a first time someday. So that home-field advantage is pretty huge. They ARE beatable, like you say. But it's gonna be a really tough matchup for us.

I look forward to seeing the disappearing act. I think there are actually more than a few Texas fans that wouldn't mind seeing that happen, oddly enough.

Very cool thing to say ... happy to hear that, especially since we haven't really been on our "A game" since we joined (it's been a while since we've seen that). I LOVE playing the likes of Michigan, Ohio St, Wisconsin, Penn St, and Michigan State. Heck, I even think the Iowa game will be pretty cool over the long term, given the amount of crap each side likes to talk about the other (nice to be able to finally see it on the field). These are some of the most classic college-football schools in the history of the sport, and I think it's an upgrade to be able to play them every year. However, I don't care for the addition of Maryland and Rutgers, only because it dilutes what I considered to be the major draw in the first place -- seeing the big-time matchups. Finally, since someone threw out OU in this thread ... if we somehow restored an OU game every year (if in our division) AND we still got to play a B1G schedule, I honestly don't think there would be anything I'd be left wanting. I will not hold my breath, however. Too good to be true (for me ... I realize many would not agree with that).

Thanks. I'll do that. Saw some comments about it in other threads, and I really need to watch.

+1. Probably a mixture of a few things. But an FCS opponent can't be understated. My guess is that we won't be having this same discussion after playing Michigan. Never really learn much after an FCS game.

Agreed. Schemes are nothing more than Xs and Os strategy, and there are no shortage of ways to draw Xs and Os to stop offenses or, conversely, to attack defenses. They all have their strengths and weaknesses. The problem is that we're not coaching robots and execute Xs and Os. We're coaching human beings. We've heard for the last few seasons that it's not the scheme, it's the execution (ie, players). Time and time again, collapse after defensive collapse, it's the players, not the scheme. So.... what exactly are our coaches waiting for in seeing if our players might connect a little better when implementing a different Xs and Os scheme? 700 yards in a game? 80 points against us? 5 consecutive TD drives? I would argue we could have seen any of these things already at the hands of Wisconsin or Ohio St if they wanted to do so. Our current mix of scheme and personnel isn't working, and hasn't worked, for quite some time. We keep waiting for the right personnel. It's getting old watching the same result.

Agreed. Started frequenting this board more as my primary a couple months ago, and I like that people can actually discuss and disagree with others without getting ugly. The Bo argument isn't black and white. He has done some truly remarkable things. On the other hand, it's not hard to argue that we're still not disciplined, physical, or competitive (in Prime Time) team in Year 6, and that responsibility probably does not fall solely on the players. Anyway, well done, Huskerboard. I also enjoy the creativity and sense of humor of the posters here. The gif responses can be very funny and appropriate at times, and no other Husker board even comes CLOSE to that (I mean, it's SHOCKING that the other board doesn't seem to have a sense of humor).

I don't think it's so obvious that one can blindly say "Bo's system works." We haven't seen it "work" in a loooooooooong time. Specifically, it hasn't "worked" since we had an absolute physical freak up front that no offensive line was capable of blocking and most QBs weren't even capable of out-running. If we did a blind statistical display two defenses at Nebraska, I don't honestly know that we'd be able to pick out which was Bo and which was Cosgrove. Yet one is pure villain in this fan base, and the other is beloved to some degree (mostly because we all remember him fondly rescuing us in 2003). The system relies on a controlled 4-man rush that will only get to the QB if he decides to hold onto the ball for 7 seconds while staying stationary in the pocket. All that has to happen is perfect communication and coverage on receivers by our LBs and DBs for those same 7 seconds. It's the defensive equivalent of the Run and Shoot. It's needlessly complicated, and the players fit the system, not the other way around. How many times does it need to be exposed in prime time for us to ask, maybe we just need a simple defense that focuses on being physical and is fundamentally sound?

Don't wanna draw too many conclusions before the big games occur. Cautiously optimistic at this point.

My 1995 season tickets in student section were behind someone who smoked a tree in the stadium. So, yeah, I can vouch for that. lol

Great thoughts here about potential classy moves we could take before the game. You guys rock.

Thought Kenny Bell was a real difference maker on special teams, and we needed all the field position he could provide. Not a game ball necessarily, but rather just recognizing a guy who always gives his all.

Pretty well sums it up.

Maybe they need to mic our band into the speakers. When I went to Michigan a couple years ago for the game we shall not speak of, there was NEVER a problem hearing their band, as it came through the speakers. I dunno. Just an idea. It can be a little artificial if not done correctly, but I've had a hard time hearing the band in other parts of the stadium too (only hearing the drum beat mostly).

Can you imagine the disaster that would have ensued if our player hadn't tripped up that defender that grabbed the ball? Was a WHOLE lot of running room ahead. Again, issues with discipline and ball security -- running back running out of bounds on our last drive to save Wyoming a timeout and Martinez almost allowing a disastrous fumble return.

Any perceptible difference in noise? I'm interested in the possibility that the taller stadium (and more people, obviously) will result in a more intimidating environment. I'm guessing most people would have been yelling as loud as possible on Wyoming's last drive, so just looking for observations. The deck itself looks like something I would buy tickets for the next time I'm in town. I'm attracted to the shorter lines and (hopefully) more room -- I personally love the video-game like birds-eye perspective.

Exactly one defensive lineman has excelled in Pelini's scheme since taking over at Nebraska. One. One of the most freakishly dominant athletes the game has known. So, as long as we have about 4 of those athletes on our team at any one time, I think we'll see this scheme work out just fine.

I had the same picture in my head -- same play. Times have changed.

I'm not sure what Gregory could have possibly done differently. The QB ducked into it. Didn't like the call either, but at least we did something positive to get those 15 yards (closest he was sacked all night).

Color me impressed. Well done, Mr. Newby!

I remember seeing Randle a couple times in on tackles (need to re-watch). Valentine looks like a giant out there, someone who should be able to clog the middle like we need. I was also impressed with him, although there were times he looked gassed, so Pelini's comments about conditioning came to mind. I was very impressed with him overall -- a LOT of promise there for a very young guy. Gregory. Wow. His motor doesn't stop, does it? He could be special.

Wyoming showed up to play, and you could tell they believed they could come away with a victory. As discouraged as I was during the Spring Game (horrible defense again), I interpreted Bo's uncharacteristic aura of optimism this fall as a reason to be hopeful that he was seeing something completely different in our closed fall practices. More promise or not, the fact is that we just surrendered another top-10 yardage game. So, I didn't see a heck of a big difference in our defense (it had bright spots, but just overall I didn't see much different). And our offense seemed to just be going through the motions, as if they watched all the same Fall Preview shows that crowned them the best offense in the Big Ten and "the only thing that can stop this offense is this offense." Seemed to be over-confident. Those were simply my observations, obviously. Very subjective. To sum: I give Wyoming a lot of credit -- they came to win, and they damn near pulled it off. I'm really hoping that they didn't get our A-game, though.

Seemed like at least a few series after that injury, he was handing off to the left with his right arm. Obviously was in a lot of pain. Arm just seemed to hang from his body at times, like there wasn't any strength in it. Seems like the kind of injury that might be nagging a lot through the year (continual contact). Martinez has certainly proved he's tough, but it looks like something to keep an eye on. As was pointed out, at least it's on his left.