huKSer Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Lots of good news, especially on the offensive side. Any glaring position weaknesses? Yes the D was vanilla on play choice, but was the effort there? I would like other people's opinions, especially those people who were in attendance. Quote Link to comment
huskerguy Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I would say the secondary didn't look very good. Mostly because it didn't seem like any of them were turning around to find the ball especially when LaTravis was lobbing up some pretty high passes. Quote Link to comment
Enhance Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I'm not sure it's fair to really speculate whether or not there is a weakness, because the guys who were playing together may not even be starters next fall. The defense has to build some chemistry working together before they can really be a great defense. From what I saw on Saturday, however, I would say that the secondary is our weak spot (like it has been the past two years). Once we get all our starters on the same d-line and they can start causing problems, our secondary won't look so lost. Offensively, we still don't have that explosive aspect to our offense. I saw some statistic from last year that said we had somewhere between 10-15 plays that went for more than 40 yards. When you are busting out 60-70 offensive plays a game, only 10-15 of those being 40+ yards is pretty lackluster. Hopefully with better run blocking, Paul back, and Helu at full speed, we will have that explosive threat. Who knows, maybe one of our other generally unproven receivers might be that big time threat. Quote Link to comment
Husker Richard Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I would say the secondary didn't look very good. Mostly because it didn't seem like any of them were turning around to find the ball especially when LaTravis was lobbing up some pretty high passes. yea, dennard also dropped a few gimme interceptions, right in the bread basket. Quote Link to comment
hack Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Any glaring position weaknesses? yes, but only to kryptonite. Quote Link to comment
carlfense Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Going into the game I expected the receivers to be the weakness, but I was proven completely wrong. It looks like we have some serious talent at WR. I know it was only a spring game, but Antonio Bell looked outstanding and Chris Brooks looks like a totally different player. Add in the TE's as targets and I don't think anyone can call it a weakness anymore. After the game my primary concern (and I suppose I should have expected it) is our offensive line. It looks like we have the ability at the skill positions, but our mixed offensive lines (albeit going against a mixed defensive line) got handled at times by the defense. Also, a few blitzes were not picked up. Luckily, these guys have a summer and fall camp to improve and come together as a team. Quote Link to comment
RedDenver Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Going into the game I expected the receivers to be the weakness, but I was proven completely wrong. It looks like we have some serious talent at WR. I know it was only a spring game, but Antonio Bell looked outstanding and Chris Brooks looks like a totally different player. Add in the TE's as targets and I don't think anyone can call it a weakness anymore. After the game my primary concern (and I suppose I should have expected it) is our offensive line. It looks like we have the ability at the skill positions, but our mixed offensive lines (albeit going against a mixed defensive line) got handled at times by the defense. Also, a few blitzes were not picked up. Luckily, these guys have a summer and fall camp to improve and come together as a team. I agree on this. And I'd emphasize how good the TE's looked!!! I'll also add that our LB's looked average with a few good plays and a few bad plays/missed tackles. The RB's also looked pretty good; we've got some depth there. Quote Link to comment
BIGREDFAN_in_OMAHA Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I say 6th stringer Cammack splitting potential starters Asante and West for a touchdown was a bit troubling. Quote Link to comment
Enhance Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I say 6th stringer Cammack splitting potential starters Asante and West for a touchdown was a bit troubling. Quote Link to comment
RedDenver Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I say 6th stringer Cammack splitting potential starters Asante and West for a touchdown was a bit troubling. The way I look at the secondary is this: The secondary was abysmal in 2007. They got better and were only bad at the beginning of 2008. They got better over the season and were only below average by the Gator Bowl. They've gotten better and were average for the spring game. (Plus the defense was in the base 4-3 all game even when the offense had 3+ receivers.) So if you're looking for a dominant defense, then the secondary is indeed very troubling. But if you're looking for improvement, then there were some positive signs. Quote Link to comment
Enhance Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I say 6th stringer Cammack splitting potential starters Asante and West for a touchdown was a bit troubling. The way I look at the secondary is this: The secondary was abysmal in 2007. They got better and were only bad at the beginning of 2008. They got better over the season and were only below average by the Gator Bowl. They've gotten better and were average for the spring game. (Plus the defense was in the base 4-3 all game even when the offense had 3+ receivers.) So if you're looking for a dominant defense, then the secondary is indeed very troubling. But if you're looking for improvement, then there were some positive signs. To add to that, a secondary can only be good if a d-line is talented. Our d-line was average at the beginning of 2008, but when Suh stepped up the whole line stepped up, and our secondary started to look better because they were pressuring the quarterback more effectively. Quote Link to comment
Micheal Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 ya if i was to really say anything about weaknesses id probablly mention the secondary, true, we don't know who the starters are yet, but from last year we know that its unproven. hopefully itll be figured out this year and we can get where we need to be in the defensive secondary...GO BIG RED! Quote Link to comment
Vince from ShamWOW Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 The Defensive Ends seem a little slow and their push wasn't exactly stellar. I'm basing this on the radio broadcast, and the few times their names were called and the few comments by the radio team. Quote Link to comment
carlfense Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 The Defensive Ends seem a little slow and their push wasn't exactly stellar. I'm basing this on the radio broadcast, and the few times their names were called and the few comments by the radio team. Temper that somewhat based on the fact that around 80% of the running plays were between the tackles making it a bit harder for the DE's to get to the ball carrier. Quote Link to comment
huskerbatt52 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 The Defensive Ends seem a little slow and their push wasn't exactly stellar. I'm basing this on the radio broadcast, and the few times their names were called and the few comments by the radio team. I agree. We'll need a couple of guys to step up at D-End. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.