admo

LOL they're called outliers LOL! I'm not all about throwing statistics out there without background. LOL yeah I hear ya. I do think this D has better talent this year and agree with you that these guys will improve as they get more reps and settled in.

Nebraska did not plan on Wyoming running the ball as much as they did. Which nobody would if you have watched the Wyoming offense at all in the last couple years. You could see for much of the first quarter the defense was not respecting the run what so ever and Wyoming did a great job of getting matchups they wanted when they wanted to run the ball. It came down to Wyoming's gameplan more than Nebraska's ability to stop the run. In the second half they stuffed a lot more runs and only allowed minimal gains except maybe a couple plays. Pretty much every team can run on us. Bo's scheme is ripe to be run on, that's why we frequently get the ball shoved down our throats by teams that aren't even good at running the ball. It's not really gameplan. A team sees it's very easy to run on us so they continue to do so. Totally false. It was sloppy line play and poor LB/DB play. In the first quarter VV was rushing up the field without regard to where the ball carrier was going and the LBs and DBs were just tacking poor angles on their flow, or not keeping leverage on their blockers. VV and the others settled more as the game went on. If you take away the longs runs from Smith and their running back, I think they were both crappy plays on our part, they only average about 4.5ypc, not that great but better the the 7.3 listed for the game. Like I said in another thread the QB runs don't bother me so much because they're are going to happen and we've proven in the past that unless he's a freak athlete we'll be fine. What's totally false? Bo's scheme is weak against the run. How he thinks he can win in the run game when we are outnumbered by 2 is pure delusion. He could cheat the numbers game when we had Suh, but he can't anymore. He needs to commit to stopping the run with more players in the box specifically up the middle. The only years we've been good against the run was 2008-2009 (Suh). We'll be soft against the run until he changes his philosophy and commits to stopping the run. Nebraska's Rush defense rank nationally 2008 21st 2009 9th 2010 63rd 2011 64th 2012 90th 2013 94th (currently) Soft against the run? You would be correct. Commit to stopping the run? I'm all for that. It's highly unlikely that a full commitment to heavy pass coverage will take a back seat in strategy. That's why we see a lot of nickel and dime coverage with just 5 or 6 in the box. Exploiting that with pistol set formation and running the ball seems to be fortunate theme. Works even better with a mobile QB.

Nebraska did not plan on Wyoming running the ball as much as they did. Which nobody would if you have watched the Wyoming offense at all in the last couple years. You could see for much of the first quarter the defense was not respecting the run what so ever and Wyoming did a great job of getting matchups they wanted when they wanted to run the ball. It came down to Wyoming's gameplan more than Nebraska's ability to stop the run. In the second half they stuffed a lot more runs and only allowed minimal gains except maybe a couple plays. Pretty much every team can run on us. Bo's scheme is ripe to be run on, that's why we frequently get the ball shoved down our throats by teams that aren't even good at running the ball. It's not really gameplan. A team sees it's very easy to run on us so they continue to do so. Totally false. It was sloppy line play and poor LB/DB play. In the first quarter VV was rushing up the field without regard to where the ball carrier was going and the LBs and DBs were just tacking poor angles on their flow, or not keeping leverage on their blockers. VV and the others settled more as the game went on. If you take away the longs runs from Smith and their running back, I think they were both crappy plays on our part, they only average about 4.5ypc, not that great but better the the 7.3 listed for the game. Like I said in another thread the QB runs don't bother me so much because they're are going to happen and we've proven in the past that unless he's a freak athlete we'll be fine. LOL no you can't take away those runs because, they really did happen. It is averaged in for a reason. Just because WYO did not score on those two runs, they did score a touchdown on each drive that they occurred on. That's fourteen points and those runs were a big part of it. Got to average it in unfortunately.

11) any thoughts as to why they were getting like 8-9 yds a pop in the ground game? That worries me, alot. Yes. In the first half, MLB Santos was pretty much out on an island. We played nickel & dime mostly with 2-high safeties. In the second half we brought one of the safeties up into the box to help against the run. Not every play though. WYO then adjusted by running when they saw Jackson stay back, and passed when he move up into the box. The corners played soft press. Also when Smith broke his long run in the second quarter, there was absolutely no one in the middle of the field. Same thing for the RB in 1st quarter. In the third quarter we got a big break when they snapped the ball over Smith's head. The inside screen was there with the left half of the field empty. He didn't have enough time to recover and make the throw. That cost them 7 points if not 3.

Me. Looked like Santos was thinking too much...while Bando did that some, not nearly as much. Lets be honest... The only reason Santos is playing that position is because he knows the defense the best. He sucks there in comparison to his more natural OLB position. If Bando takes over do we see Santos move to OLB? I wouldn't think so......Santos would become what we call "depth" Pretty good depth to have this year. It's only one game. After the UCLA game we should know a lot more.

Based on his comment about it, I'd say Pelini thought Bando outplayed Santos. I thought Santos looked a little stiff out there and somewhat hesitant.

LOL yeah I'll bet it was crazy. I thought it was a good exciting game to watch and was glad about the win. WYO played lights out and younger Huskers will have learned a lot from this type of game. It's almost a win-win.

Had it recorded and watched it again as well. There does appear to be more talent this year on D. Also comes with inexperience and growing pains. I can live with that. The part I did not understand is the formation and strategy behind it. Lining up 4-2-5 with one of the two LB positions being a safety. It was Mo Siesay, then replaced by Gerry. This formation and strategy is more helpful with deep throws. It does nothing much to stop the running game or allow QB pressure. When WYO ran motion, a LB followed, leaving 4 lineman and one LB to cover runs between the tackles. The middle of the field is offered up. That's a lot of responsibility for those 5 guys. WYO either ran right up the middle for good yardage or threw the ball to the open space where the LB was run off. I just don't understand that philosophy.

Do I need to read thru the first two pages or is this an onslaught of hate? I don't know, but I think he is aight. Him, Fowler, Reece and Pollack are entertaining enough for my Thursday nights and Saturdays. Just have a hard time with Mark May, and glad Pollack replaced Craig James.

. Cause he's that good. Best RB this university has signed in over a decade IMO. He doesn't tear his ACL he's a 5 star no questions asked...and he doesn't come here. This is my opinion, not only based off film of the way he runs the ball and his skill set, but also his work ethic, and freakish strength. That's encouraging since I rarely follow recruiting. I hope you are right about his ability and all that. The article from the link states that it was a family decision with the coaches. So I take it at face value. Nothing wrong with redshirting day one with all our backs healthy and good to go, even if he has the most potential of all our RBs.

They look awesome! Much respect - ready for some swag to build up each week throughout the season.

Agree. If they falter, then remove blackshirts on an individual basis. It was a good discussion / thread Good move by Bo and JP. As they said, these guys earned them and epitomize what the tradition means. The rest are up for grabs. GBR!

I wouldn't get your hopes up, Rex did about the same as the other backs he just saw more touches. I honestly don't know what to think since he was the 5th back out, at this point unless he stands out in the next few games there's a good chance he could get cut. He won't be cut. He signed a 4 year contract for a little less than $2.3 mil. I agree that he won't be featured out of the crowded backfield this year, and unless there are significant injuries, at best he will get garbage duty on occasion. He might see some punt returns, but mostly special teams work in his rookie season. The Bengals signed him right away. So they know he is worth investing in and seeing what they can get out of him in the next few years. Keep the faith up,,,I'm sure Rex does.

Great stuff guys. Very well said by all, and civilized. Thanks guys. I'm sure we can all agree that no one will lose sleep over this either way. But it does sounds like getting the Blackshirts before the start of the season this year would be ideal for so many reasons. 1HuskerFan: If the season begins and you're starting D, you should get a blackshirt. Pride has been know to win games at times JJHusker1: I say motivate the first teamers by handing them out at beginning of season and make them individually fight to hold onto that starter status. mnhusker: Maybe it would strengthen the unit when the players and coaches all know that they will define what a black shirt is as a team each week Creighton Duke: I definitely think that they should be handed out before the season. I think is a motivator in itself. Handing them out before the season starts with the implication that they can be lost at any time, I think is the way to go. Hercules: I'd prefer a return to the old tradition. If you're on the #1 Defense, you wear a Blackshirt. You're expected to perform like a Blackshirt from day one, not starting halfway through the season Frida's Boss: whomever earns them in camp deserves to have it in his locker ...its up to the player to continue to earn that shirt ...tough for it to have any value if no one hs them huskerjack23: I think they should be given out early to motivate those who didn't make the starting 11. Then they'll push the starters to keep it. STL Husker: They earn it by beating out the other guys at the position to be a starter. It's motivation for the 2nd and 3rd string guys to beat him out for it. Once they put on that blackshirt there is a responsibility to live up to the tradition and legacy. I think the motivation of living up to the legacy is greater than the motivation of earning a blackshirt. One is an individual accomplishment and the other is how the defense plays as a whole. knapplc: (the whole opinion speaks highly of itself) - there's no consistency. The criteria for earning them doesn't seem set in stone The Maudfather: refering to knapplc-This. So much this. kchusker_chris: It puts more emphasis on those practices as well, because those are what are ultimately going to determine if you get that blackshirt BigRedBuster: They then can have the attitude of...."I have my Blackshirt, now I'm going to go show the world why I got it and do everything I can to keep it." St. Paul Husker: Give them out at the start of the season and give this young defense an identity, momentum, pride, etc. What's the worst that could happen that hasn't already happened to your defense before? tmfr15: refering to St.Paul Husker: Sounds good to me. Mr. Accountability: giving Blackshirts before the season would be the ultimate unification in giving these guys the swagger and motivation to come together as one unit. ....Give these guys a bit of an edge and swagger to start the year. Get it out of the way-so to speak. You have to believe that the way it is, the guys play with blackshirts on their mind, week in-week out.

Hey Rob... football fanatics (collegefootballstore) has some. They do not come with the pole. But you should be able pick one up at a hardware store or even walmart etc. Check this link out http://www.collegefootballstore.com/COLLEGE_Nebraska_Cornhuskers_Flags_And_Banners for some ideas. I think you are looking more specifically for something like this: http://www.collegefootballstore.com/COLLEGE_Nebraska_Cornhuskers_Flags_And_Banners/Nebraska_Cornhuskers_28x40_Championship_Banner_Flag

I remember DeJuan Groce back there during that time. He was free to be a beast on returns.

Thanks for the reminder. After just checking to DVR it, I just realized that its HBO and not on NFL network. That sucks. I'll miss it.

Good civilized discussions. I don't really want to put it on the coaches, because I believe a coach's job is to teach, motivate, and help develop. The players will earn their spots and the coaches will know who the starters are. Blackshirts going into game 1, that's pretty good motivation.

Thanks for the opinions so far. I agree with both views (actually three). They might not be dominate enough, or solid enough week in and week out. With ups and downs type of play. I definitely don't considerate it as a "just-because" trophy. I like the idea that the starters would earn it going into game one, thus becoming the blackshirts defense and building off of it each week after that. They definitely haven't played like past traditional "vaulted blackshirt" defense as the TV crew would say. But I do think some pride comes with it when you wear them in practice day in and day out. I don't know. Maybe they won't get them at all this year? I still lean towards the start of the season as a good idea though.

I am wondering what everyone thinks about the idea of our coach handing out the Blackshirts at the start of the season, this year? In all fairness, it's a young and pretty inexperienced unit. I think it would be pretty neat thing to do, and let them be the Blackshirts no matter what happens. Something different, something that used to be traditional and honored. Might even have a huge impact on how the defense rallies together and builds a toughness throughout the year. I know it can be a touchy topic, and a lot of it comes from very high expectations of earning it and all. I just don't think there is a better precise time to hand them out. At least for this season, all I'm saying is that I think it would be ideal at the start and let them get going out of the gate so that when the UCLA game rolls in, there will be no uncertainty or question - we are the BLACKSHIRTS Defense. Thoughts? And I could be alone in this so try be somewhat nice.

LOL that all sounds fun - you guys got it made in the shade. I'd be doing the same. But instead I usually have to ask one of the bartenders if they could put the Huskers game on one of the LCDS. Usually its the only non-texas team game playing. But I still BS with everyone as if they were buds, just not Husker buds. I don't get crap if I do wear a Husker tshirt or hat. But sometimes its just easier to lay low and watch the game closely with a beer. And if we get beat bad, I'll get a text from some friends to come over and drink it off lol.

What exactly can be done to the South Stadium besides putting skyboxes at the top? I know some people would want a balcony added, but I think that would be a terrible idea. The South Stadium already goes so far up and away from the field, that's the last place that more seats should be added. I would be in favor of a row of skyboxes, but that's about it. I kind of wish the TV camera angle was a bit closer to the action, like the SEC games. You see a little less field and don't feel like you are watching the game from way up in the stadium.

The offense has a lot of talent at the skill positions. For some reason or another, it seems to me that our offense has trouble keeping up when we allow a lot of points. I don't know why that is. In other words, we need to win the shootouts with our offense. In the Georgia game we seemed to be neck and neck against their offensive production for most of the game. A lot of good teams give up points, but their own offense outduels their opponent for the win. Maybe I'm alone in this thinking, because it can't just be on the defense. Not these days. Sort of seems like if the defense collapses, the offense struggles to match points. I just hope if we give up 35 or 45 or (gulp) even 55, the offense should be just as capable and talented enough to still win by 3. And I would be fine with that. So when I look at our skill players in this thread, and their experience, it makes me see how capable and able we are to outduel a team in a high scoring game if should come to that. Just hasn't been the case so far. Correct me if I'm wrong, and it's cool. But I think there should be a little more pressure on this offense to put it on their shoulders and score a ton this year, instead of examining a young and inexperienced defense as rule of our success/failures.

It's not a matter of what we "need", it's a matter of what is wanted. Regardless, what does the statement in red have to do with the statement in black? Fair point with the "need" vs "want." On a side note, there was no intended meaning behind the statement in black and red. I just used the red text color because it's Nebraska's main color. Anyway, I do think you hit the nail on the head in this discussion. I will concede that many of today's younger generation "want" these alternate uniform games. My point is I just don't think we as a program, based on our tradition and history need to go to these kind of efforts. If you want to compete for the youth you have to be appealing to them in any way you possibly can. You see a lot of the more "traditional" football powers have all had some sort of alt uni. It's not a since of selling out, but just keeping up with the times. Kids like new unis. Not all of them want to look like the huskers of the 60s and 70s. You have to adapt with the times. Not saying go all Oregon or Maryland, but have an option there to be able to market to a recruit. Nobody needs to compete for the youth. Until the youth has done something while they are still in their youth, nobody owes them anything. That's my opinion. Alternate uniforms are okay just for the fun of it. If that's once a year or every other year - okay fine. Cool. But no one needs to change sh#t for the youth.