huskerjack23

It's a bad idea sure but it comes from a place of frustration of the day to day bullcrap in Washington. It really is angering that the politicians aren't working in the right vain that we intended by electing them (instantly campaigning for reelection, putting lobbyists and special interests ahead of the people, etc.)

I completely understand. But let's think of something that doesn't infringe on our rights, but strengthens them.

Thanks for the complements.

 

Easy now Dutch, lets not put the cart before the horse. I got something for you. Actually a few somethings, if more than one turns out the way I drew up.

 

The first two looks were what I thought the team would be most likely to do (minus maybe a detail or two) in the event they did make a change and include black. After all this is an away game (it's possible for a color vs color uni matchup but white is the highly probably choice) and we are talking about a pretty conservative part of the county. I can see the team wanting to make a change for this game but not wanting to make it too drastic or as Simple says, the conservative option. This too is Adidas we are talking about and not nike. Not that Adidas doesn't do crazy stuff but they are less known for going out on a limb. So keeping that in mind, they were just a logical option. All black unis for an away game just doesn't have that high of probability and I don't think they would completely abandon the red (as a stripe or not) for each part of the uniform.

 

But it can happen so I have been drawing up some ideas for all-black options and I will include a black helmet in the first two. I was going to have a black helmet in them anyway as an extra couple of looks but put them aside in the interest of time last night. I will try to work on and finish them tonight. If you have any ideas to try, post them and I can try them out.

 

Who knows, if they do decide to make a change maybe they just do a complete redesign for a black uni (maybe not Maryland like) but along the lines of the Pro-Combat style. Adidas does after all go head to head with Nike and could use Nebraska as their platform. OR maybe Wisconsin is in the redesign rumor mill too. As we have seen in the past when one team uses the pro combat style, both teams tend to do it. Anyone heard anything about a new Wisconsin look? Maybe I can fake something and spread it?

Adidas gave Tennessee black uniforms a couple of years ago and they looked terrible. I'm not saying I don't want Nebraska to try it, but I certainly hope they use care when designing the uniforms.

I learn that Tmart is not as bad as I thought, as he is not turning the ball over quite as much as I anticipated.

 

Also, that I should have appreciated Marvin Sanders when he was here.

Taylor has made a massive improvement in the area of finding open receivers. It seemed like he found them more often than not. He forced some balls to Kinnie for sure, but his crappy throwing motion bailed him out (throwing high on curls is advantageous with a tall receiver)

The problem was, the kid was throwing off of his back foot the entire game. I could give a rat's ass about his arm motion, but if he's not putting his hips and his legs into it, we aren't getting accuracy or full strength out his throws.

Beck needs to emphasize to Taylor how well he's getting the ball to open receivers, but not actually getting the ball to them, and why it's not getting there. His damn footwork. Practice that this week, and we'll see improvements. I believe in our QB's coach this year. It could happen.

The defense is another thing entirely.

The coverage map went from big 12 country to big ten country. Even the little things about the conference switch make me giddy

I'm in the agreement that the concerns are mostly with 3 and outs and lack of execution.

I'm of the opinion, though, that as an offensive coordinator, they should be calling plays in order to set up preferable situations that can be exploited for big plays.

If you listened to Taylor at the press conference, it sounded like they observed tendencies out of Fresno that could be exploited by the deep pass, and that's exactly what happened.

Just for an example, don't murder me here, take the west coast offense. Offense designed for a quarterback that didn't have good arm strength. Short pass plays, designed for yards after catch. The 49ers of the 80's and 90's were juggernauts on offense. The Eagles are now tearing it up.

The play may not be designed for the end zone, but with playmakers, the end zone is a play away.

Another one of the lost great Huskers of the Callahan era. He was a favorite and deserves more recognition.

There was indication in practice leading up to Fresno from a couple of guys in a couple of areas that showed we had problems heading into the game. Guys listen to people tell them how good they are, and sometimes they need to get smacked around and get shown that you have to go out there and play. That's what makes this game great. You're only as good as your last snap. Hopefully our guys learned that.

 

We didn't play with an edge Saturday. That's obvious.

 

There was one running play that hurt us, but there were lots of other problems. Poor technique. Didn't play with NEAR the standard that we've established around here.

 

This is what bothers me about the teams we put out under Pelini.. Why don't we play like with passion? Is it because our style of defense doesn't lend itself to playing like wild men? Back under McBride we did more blitzing and basically beat the hell out of the opposing QB for 4 quarters. Is it a lack of leadership holding others accountable? It just doesn't seem like the team is fired up. Look at the way they were acting on the sidelines. We were in a close game and I saw a lot of smiling and joking around, which is bothersome.

This is what I've always missed about those teams. When "get after somebody's ass" was actually something that the defense did. Not anymore. I feel like if Pelini really wanted to do this 2 gap nonsense, he should just recruit to a 3-4 style, and get huge bodies on the line.

I'd say he should go back to a McBride style defense for the personnel he has. People flying to the ball, flying to the QB, and wreaking effin havoc. If the secondary is as good as he says it is, then why the hell not?

I'm starting to think that the offense IS TO's offense but replacing the singleback, undercenter sets with pistol sets. Pistol sets allow easier passing lane reads and read option plays.

 

I wasn't saying his opinion was correct, I said it was valid. Just like everyone else has a valid opinion, regardless of whether they interact personally with members of the NU staff and team or not. I was commenting more on your dismissive tone, which struck a nerve with me.

 

Eric Crouch won one of the most disputed Heisman trophies in the last 25 years. That's a fact. His body of work in '01 was in no way the equivalent of Tommie's in '95 or even Suh in '09. Eric had some great highlight plays, won some big games, and was without question one of the best cfb players in '01. Was he the best? I don't know. Enough Heisman voters thought he was for him to win the award, so I don't think you can completely disregard that. He sure as hell was a better player than Dahrran Diedrick. I was with you on Kelsay, but Diedrick? C'mon man.

 

The one thing we actually agree on here is whether Eric carried the team or not. I don't think leaders of that magnitude traditionally flirt with quitting on the team when they aren't anointed the starter at ANY point in their career. Guys on the team take note of that sort of thing, naturally. Can someone rebound from that to become a strong enough leader to "carry a team on his back?" I'm skeptical. And you clearly don't think so.

 

Congratulations on the age of your mentality. Your parents must be very proud. (J/k )

Ummmmm.....show me where I said Diedrick was a better player than Crouch. I think if you read what I wrote... . I said Kelsey was better but that Brown and Diedrick were nearly as important as Crouch was on offense and then explained why Diedrick was important. In fact I think I even (let me read back, yeah I did) stated "It was a solid team that year but there really weren't any guys you could say were heads and shoulders above the rest of them."

 

Don't twist my words by trying to state I said there were better offensive players than Crouch.

Fair enough. You did in fact say that an argument could be made for Josh Brown or Diedrick being nearly as important as Crouch in our offense in '01. I read it as "as important," which is not what you wrote.

 

I still don't think it was close. Pure athlete, game-breaking potential on our offense in '01 that you had to specifically game plan for? That belonged to Eric alone. No one was fretting over Brown or Diedrick any more than they usually would for any starter. If I was a betting man, I'd wager that every single DC that faced Nebraska that year specifically focused on how to take Eric Crouch out of the game to make guys like Brown and Diedrick be the ones to beat them. (Don't give me the "every team specifically focuses on the QB" rebuttal, either. We've both seen plenty of games where the defensive game plan is to make the other teams QB beat them through the air.)

 

Eric Crouch is Nebraska's all-time leader for total offense, for a storied program that ranks 4th all time in victories. That's enough for me to believe that he was the most important player on that '01 offense by a wide margin, and I really don't think you could make a strong argument otherwise.

Nor would I try.

Why are you arguing then?

By the way, I didn't mean carrying a team in the leadership standpoint but in putting up numbers and scoring sense. So, if that's the misunderstanding, I'm sorry.

In that sense, it is a fact. In the sense that you describe, you know better than I certainly so I can't really comment.

Wisconsin will make adjustments, they very well could play only 1 true linebacker vs "fast" teams and have 6 DB's out there. Heck, thats what NU does.

This, all the way.

They probably played base the whole game, unless it was passing situations.

If Nebraska wants to get speed on the field, Wisconsin might be able to match it with nickel/dime personnel. What's gonna be really advantageous for the Huskers will be Kyler Reed and a split backfield of Burkhead or Green or Abdullah or a slot like Turner. A personnel grouping that keeps Wiscy in their base or takes them out will be advantage Nebraska.

Crick's good, but I don't think he's quite on Suh's level. I guarantee he'll be a finalist for a lot of trophies this year, but I don't think the Heisman will be one of them.

Couldn't agree more. You don't have to completely change your game plan for this guy. Suh was a freak and should have won it hands down. But I guess if you have to see a lineman get it for the body of Suh's work it might as well be Crick. I mean Crouch owes his Heisman to Tommie getting the shaft.

 

Yeah, it had nothing to do with his body of work as a football player... He was the most dangerous football player on the offensive side of the ball period when he won the Heisman.

Lets not rewrite history. Crouch only inched out being the best guy on our team that year. If the voting wouldn't have been split in the Southwest area between Grossman and Dorey, Crouch wouldn't have gotten it.

I feel like a terrible fan right now, who would've been the next best guy on the team? I honestly don't remember that year beyond the terrible losses and the OU game.

Overall I would say Kelsay was better and did more for the team. He was a monster that year 52 tackles at end with 5 qb sacks and 17 stops for a loss. Nationally no one knew much about that guy and made it to a second all American. On offense you could argue that Josh Brown or Darin Diedrick were very close to being as important as Crouch that year. Brown finished 3rd in scoring behind both those other two guys. And Dietrick lead the team in rushing and yards per carry (for more than 100 touches) even though he played in one less game and was banged up much of the year. (Thinking back Craver and Groce were solid as well). It was a solid team that year but there really weren't any guys you could say were heads and shoulders above the rest of them.

Those are some great stats, but not MVP of the entire team stats. Especially when the defense turned into a sieve the last two games of the season.

These guys were completely solid and Kelsay is still in the NFL, highly paid as well, but Crouch had to put the entire team on his back (the defense and Solich's play calls were factors in that), and he came through.

That was a Heisman season, no doubt.

Crick's good, but I don't think he's quite on Suh's level. I guarantee he'll be a finalist for a lot of trophies this year, but I don't think the Heisman will be one of them.

Couldn't agree more. You don't have to completely change your game plan for this guy. Suh was a freak and should have won it hands down. But I guess if you have to see a lineman get it for the body of Suh's work it might as well be Crick. I mean Crouch owes his Heisman to Tommie getting the shaft.

 

Yeah, it had nothing to do with his body of work as a football player... He was the most dangerous football player on the offensive side of the ball period when he won the Heisman.

Lets not rewrite history. Crouch only inched out being the best guy on our team that year. If the voting wouldn't have been split in the Southwest area between Grossman and Dorey, Crouch wouldn't have gotten it.

I feel like a terrible fan right now, who would've been the next best guy on the team? I honestly don't remember that year beyond the terrible losses and the OU game.

I'm a bit skeptical. Raymond sounds like he doesn't think it was a great way to teach the DBs, but who led the nation in pass defense?

I took it a different way. He was just saying that it's not always a viable technique to be overly aggressive. Going one on one with the guy in front of them, the Huskers' DB's are more physical than most but it only takes one to get burned and lose because they didn't have anything else on which to lean.

That's where proper footwork, techniques, and strategies come in. I for one buy into that concept and the more coaching and development the players have, the better.

I was JUST coming to post this exact thread. My title was going to be, "Wouldn't this look good on the mantelpiece?"

 

 

Here's the pic:

 

Nothing traditional about that thing. Generic is more apt

The same one from last year.

Ugh. I stared at that picture of that kid too long, his eyes made me really dizzy and now I can smell sound.

The perfect line for your avatar, I read it in Ron Swanson's voice.

Holgorsen ran it at Okie State in order to get one on one matchups for the WR's. Catching the defense in wrong personnel grants this formation a great no huddle wrinkle.

Corey raymond said justin blatchford is working as the number 1 nickel-back. Andrew green is also confirmed as the number 2 corner

Green in front of Ciante? huh?

I really and truly believe Texas is doing itself a giant disservice with its unabashed arrogance. Texas has a lot of built in advantages, but they also act in such an imperious manner that there can be no confusion as to their intentions: take as much as they can, as fast as they can, and disregard any impact their actions have on any other institution as irrelevant.

 

People like Larry Scott have long memories. And that is a small fraternity, that of conference commissioners. (With clout.) Super conferences are the future. It is going to happen. And I think Texas will be stunned, STUNNED, at the reception they receive when the big CFB re-organization happens and divides things quite clearly into the haves and have-nots.

 

The reality is, Texas is a gigantic pain in the ass to deal with, and they wear their arrogance like it's a holy medal. They have also stepped on some toes, most notably Scott. People like Jim Delaney, Mike Slive, they saw the way Texas operated during the Pac-16 discussions. Universities like Florida, Ohio State, FSU, USC, Nebraska, Michigan, LSU, Oklahoma...these are all big time universities with huge prestige levels, and none of them are even close to being as insufferably conceited and crookedly self-serving as Texas. When it comes time to decide who you want to work with, who you want to live with...who wants or needs Texas when their actions have proven incontrovertibly that they will screw over anyone and everyone to get whatever they want?

 

I envision a future where Texas faces consequences they did not foresee.

Well said! +1

But you're right about rare dropback passing, in the sense that the passing consisted of more half rollouts and full rollouts, just to utilize the quarterbacks legs, making the defense respect him as a running option.

 

Which is good, because Taylor has shown, both last season and in the Spring Game, that he can hit receivers in stride on the rollout (contrary to a commonly-held belief last year). If he buttons up the ugliness of his passing game and is even a tiny bit improved, we'll be OK there.

This is all total hypothesis though.

Beck also worked at Kansas with fat arsed Mark Mangino who comes from Oklahoma, working under Mike Leach. The coaching tree has air raid tendencies as well. You might see this kind of stuff too. This is high percentage passing with again more screens.

I honestly don't know where he'd skew based on highlights of Kansas, but I'll keep watching.

What I don't understand is why someone doesn't just look in this guy's effing past to see what his offenses are well versed in, what he likes to do?

 

IIRC, when he was a high school coach, he ran the flexbone option. Most flex coaches use run and shoot passing tendencies. Maybe we could watch some Kansas film, to see what kind of routes he likes.

 

It's not gonna be exact but I bet you get pretty damn close.

 

My guess: Read-option oregon stuff marries run and shoot passing. Shot in the dark with suspect knowledge, but it feels right considering Nebraska's past, Beck's past and what Beck has been saying about the offense so far.

 

 

If this is the case, all we need to do is look at Navy and Army as they both have run or are running flexbone. This also makes sense from what we've seen in practice videos thus far. If we do run the flexbone, that means our passing game is going to consist of a crapload of screens and playaction passes. Drop back passing in the flexbone is a rarity iirc.

I'm totally not saying that it would be an exclusive flex offense at all. I'm just saying that we'd know more of the passing concepts that he'd use (run and shoot) because when the run and shoot was being first developed, the flex was a similar formation to original formation used (Singleback - Double Slot).

But you're right about rare dropback passing, in the sense that the passing consisted of more half rollouts and full rollouts, just to utilize the quarterbacks legs, making the defense respect him as a running option.

What I don't understand is why someone doesn't just look in this guy's effing past to see what his offenses are well versed in, what he likes to do?

IIRC, when he was a high school coach, he ran the flexbone option. Most flex coaches use run and shoot passing tendencies. Maybe we could watch some Kansas film, to see what kind of routes he likes.

It's not gonna be exact but I bet you get pretty damn close.

My guess: Read-option oregon stuff marries run and shoot passing. Shot in the dark with suspect knowledge, but it feels right considering Nebraska's past, Beck's past and what Beck has been saying about the offense so far.

What are better sites for national sports coverage? ESPN and Fox are shiite

34 is a great transition considering the 2-gap style the Pelini's have instituted. Does that mean Camstache is in a 2-point and rushing from that stance, dropping in coverage because I don't think we have the LB depth to run it.

I'm not the least bit worried about the defense. I think it all comes down TMart. If he can stay healthy and be true leader we'll run the table!

If he's back to full force like the coaches say he is, I'd say that the season is down to the offensive line, staying consistent and keeping our QB's back off the grass.