Steady Improvement??

[formerfan]

If you want to ignore it that their line blew holes in NUs Dline, thats fine. But it raised a red flag.

For the game they ending up getting 2.5 yards per carry. That isn't very good and I'll take a defense that gives that up any day of the week.

Agreed, however, it had alot to do with the sacks. The turnovers had a huge effect on the game. If Wake wouldnt have turned the ball over and kept it close, they could have run their offense how they wanted. When they got into a hole, they had to throw, which went away from their strengths.

 

Im gonna watch the game again, but from what I saw last night, our Dline got pushed around quite abit against the run in the first half. I think you would agree with that?

Okay, so basically you're saying that if our defense sucked they would be able to play better on offense? Uhmm, okay.. sure, but our defense doesn't suck.. so what's your point? The turnovers were a result of our defense dominating their offense, suppose that our defense played at the same level but, didn't create those turnovers.. that still doesn't make their offense move the ball on us....

Let me simplify it...WFs Oline was opening up pretty big holes early, consistently. If they would not have dug themselves a hole early and were forced to go away from their strengths, I think that we may have witnessed a little different ballgame.

 

Like I said, if you want to ignore the fact that the Dline got pushed around by a "small" Oline, so be it. But its a problem that could come back to bite NU in the ass later.

[NamelessHusker]

Bernard said: Our defense is nowhere near as good as 03 either imo as we haven't played a good offense yet. WE haven't played a good team in general yet.

 

Before you can take a step forward, you have to take a step backwards. Let's travel back in time to 2003 and figure out this "defense" you are pointing to

 

NU 2003 Schedule and results (REGULAR SEASON):

NU 17 - Oklahoma 7 (Oklahoma St final season record 9-4 and bowl game)

NU 31 - Utah St 7 (Utah St final season record 3-8 and NO bowl game)

NU 18 - Penn St 10 (Penn St final season record 3-9 and NO bowl game)

NU 38 - So. Miss 14 (S. Miss final season record 9-4 and bowl game)

NU 30 - Troy 0 (Troy final season record 6-6 and NO bowl game)

NU 21 - Missouri 41 (Missouri final season record 8-5 and bowl game)

NU 48 - Texas A&M 12 (Texas A&M final season record 4-8 and NO bowl game)

NU 28 - Iowa St 0 (Iowa St final season record 2-10 and NO bowl game)

NU 7 - Texas 31 (Texas final season record 10-3 and bowl game)

NU 24 - Kansas 3 (Kansas final season record 6-7 and bowl game)

NU 9 - Kansas St 38 ( Kanss St final season record 11-4 and bowl game/ Big 12 Champs)

NU 31 - Colorado 21 ( Colorado final season record 5-7 and NO bowl game)

 

Record of NU vs teams that did not go to a bowl game: 7-0

Record of NU vs teams that went to bowl games: 2-3

Record of NU vs teams with losing season: 6-0

 

 

In 2003, we had 5 sacks in the first 2 games. In 2005, we have 16 sacks in 2 games. In 2003, we intercepted 4 balls, in 2005 we have 4 as well. In 2003, NU defense allowed 14 points in the first 2 games, in 2005 NU has allowed only 10 points. In 2003, NU defense allowed 421 yards in the first 2 games. 2005 defense has allowed only 390 yards in the first 2 games. Care to explain how 2005 is doing better then 2003, yet you are confident in 2003?

 

Our defense in 2003 was blown out in the 3 losses to Texas, Kansas St and Missouri. I love when people keep pointing to 2003 because we only had 2 meaningful wins that year against Oklahoma St and So. Miss and even then, Oklahoma St was coming into Lincoln not knowing what to expect from Barney Cotton, so i shouldn't really count it, but i did.

 

Formerfan said: The oline was bad last night.

 

Sorry but that's not true. There are guys doing their jobs and their are guys not doing their job, so to blame the whole line is not fair. I have already mentioned this in another thread. The only guy who seems to be consistently pushed and moved around is Cornelius Thomas. Take him out, you solve some of the problem. Our other problem on offense is J.B Phillips who sucks at blocking, but with Herian out, not much you can do about it. Once Herian comes back (and i hope he does not decide to redshirt since he will be coming back and play only half a season, whereas if he waits till next year, he can play a whole season) you won't see Phillips on the field at all. Callahan already knows we have a problem with blocking with a certain Tight End. He mentioned it on the Callahan show. He did not point a finger at who, but looking at film, it's obvious which TE he was talking about.

 

Formerfan said: Taylor didnt look any better than Dailey did last year, was just lucky that he didnt have more picks

 

Taylor has thrown 3 interceptions in 2 games. Dailey threw 7 in 2 games last year. So i would say yes, Taylor is better at knowing where to throw then J.D is. Joe Dailey didn't have Cornelius Thomas on the line blocking for him last year, Zac does. J.D has Matt Herian catching balls, Zac doesn't (If anyone doesn't think Herian will make a difference when he comes back, wait and see). And as far as luck? Well then you can play that game with J. D and say he was lucky he didn't have more picks last year then his notrious 19 picks.

 

Formerfan said: WFs Oline was opening up pretty big holes early, consistently

Someone call Callahan and tell him to fire Dennis Wagner and hire Wake Forest's Offensive line coach since we can't seem to open up holes

[NU fan in Denver]

Taylor didnt look any better than Dailey did last year, was just lucky that he didnt have more picks.

I disagree as much as someone can disagree.

 

1. Taylor doesn't make a fraction of the dumb throws Dailey did. He knows when a guy is open and when he isn't. Dailey never seemed to grasp this concept.

 

2. Taylor looks much much more comfortable in the pocket than Dailey ever did. You ever seen Dailey do his happy feet move?

 

Yes, you have a case in the numbers department. However, watching the game you can't tell me than Taylor isn't any better than Dailey.

Taylor throws alot of dumb passes when he's getting rushed. He should of had about 5 or 6 passes picked last game against wake.

He should have also had five or six more completions. Our receivers have to start catching the ball!!!

[StuckinChicago]

They averaged 2.5 yards per carry. There two time all acc runningback must really suck if he averages that many yards a carry with gaping holes to run though.

[BigRedSmitty]

You know I keep hearing that the West Coast Offense is better than the option. I am wondering, is it better, or more popular. With the option we had much better stats, and dominating performances. The other teams came in cocky, and left tired and worn out. Teams are happy now because they aren't getting the crap beat out of them, which tells me the Huskers are not as intimidating. What I have read and heard about the Maine game, does not impress me. One writer said the old Huskers would have put Maine away in the 2nd Quarter. We are winning SOME games, however there hasn't been 1 dominating performance with this BETTER offense. I am still hearing about former Huskers, who ran the option. I know we lost games with the option, but we also won with the option, and won pretty handily. There are a lot of teams using the West Coast Offense, so I wonder if it is better or more popular.

[BigRedSmitty]

Whoever said you can turn it over more is full of it. Turnovers kill you, just ask Ohio State. They had 1 turnover against Texas, and it cost them the game. Chad Pennington had I believe 5 against the Chiefs, and our old friend Joe Dailey, who isn't even in Lincoln anymore, lost his job in part because he was prone to the turnover bug. Turnovers are bad, but if that is a stat you want to win, then seasons like last season are going to happen more often.

[StuckinChicago]

You're right. Ten years ago, the option was as good, if not a better offensive scheme in college football. Three years ago, however, it was no longer the best system. Football is an ever evolving sport. No one runs the flying V anymore, but at one point, it was the most dominating offense in football. I think you can always say that smashmouth football can be successful, just look at Wisconsin, but the way in which you run it has changed. The option play doesnt work on a consistant basis anymore, so we hired someone to implement a new offense that is proven and can work in more modern times. If we had gone out and hired a Barry Alvarez, or even a Houston Nutt, who we did try to get, we would have still relied heavily on the run and maybe would have been successful with that system, but the best coach available, after we had some turn us down, in the mind of Pederson, was Bill Callahan, who has his own offense that is unique and involves a blend of smashmouth football, short, intermediate, and deep passes, and is ultimately predicated on balance. It has worked before at other places, and many currently good college teams, such as USC, or LSU or Auburn, run very similar offenses. It hasnt worked to its potential at Nebraska yet, but remember, only two of the starters on offense in the first two games were guys that Callahan brought in to implement his system, and alot of the older players have never played in a system like this in their life, and some even are lacking the neccessary skills to be entirely successful in this system. The true test of Callahan's offense will not happen for another couple of years, when he has players that grew up playing this kind of offense and are uniquely suited to play in this kind of offense. Until then dont expect anything more than flashes of brilliance. Just look to the other college teams, who are running the exact same plays, and executing them, and think about the potential that that offense holds for us here in Nebraska.

[Hunter94]

You know I keep hearing that the West Coast Offense is better than the option. I am wondering, is it better, or more popular. With the option we had much better stats, and dominating performances. The other teams came in cocky, and left tired and worn out. Teams are happy now because they aren't getting the crap beat out of them, which tells me the Huskers are not as intimidating. What I have read and heard about the Maine game, does not impress me. One writer said the old Huskers would have put Maine away in the 2nd Quarter. We are winning SOME games, however there hasn't been 1 dominating performance with this BETTER offense. I am still hearing about former Huskers, who ran the option. I know we lost games with the option, but we also won with the option, and won pretty handily. There are a lot of teams using the West Coast Offense, so I wonder if it is better or more popular.

ok, can you imagine trying to run the option with this half-ass O line? give me a break!!

 

 

hunter

[formerfan]

 

 

 

 

In 2003, we had 5 sacks in the first 2 games. In 2005, we have 16 sacks in 2 games. In 2003, we intercepted 4 balls, in 2005 we have 4 as well. In 2003, NU defense allowed 14 points in the first 2 games, in 2005 NU has allowed only 10 points.  In 2003, NU defense allowed 421 yards in the first 2 games. 2005 defense has allowed only 390 yards in the first 2 games. Care to explain how 2005 is doing better then 2003, yet you are confident in 2003?

 

Our defense in 2003 was blown out in the 3 losses to Texas, Kansas St and Missouri. I love when people keep pointing to 2003 because we only had 2 meaningful wins that year against Oklahoma St and So. Miss and even then, Oklahoma St was coming into Lincoln not knowing what to expect from Barney Cotton, so i shouldn't really count it, but i did.

 

To assume that one unit is better than the other at this time is pointless. We'll see which unit is better but wait until the end of the year to make comparisons. Its too early to tell how good this unit is, after just 2 games.

 

Formerfan said: The oline was bad last night.

 

Sorry but that's not true. There are guys doing their jobs and their are guys not doing their job, so to blame the whole line is not fair. I have already mentioned this in another thread. The only guy who seems to be consistently pushed and moved around is Cornelius Thomas. Take him out, you solve some of the problem. Our other problem on offense is J.B Phillips who sucks at blocking, but with Herian out, not much you can do about it. Once Herian comes back (and i hope he does not decide to redshirt since he will be coming back and play only half a season, whereas if he waits till next year, he can play a whole season) you won't see Phillips on the field at all. Callahan already knows we have a problem with blocking with a certain Tight End. He mentioned it on the Callahan show. He did not point a finger at who, but looking at film, it's obvious which TE he was talking about.

 

And if you watched the billy c show you could also clearly see that the line isnt getting it done. Sure Phillips is missing blocks. But like the previous week, if ONE guy misses a block, the whole play can be blown up. Certain plays its the C, others its the LT, then its the TE, then its the LG, then its the FB. They are not playing well together as a unit, Zatechka said it on Harrahs last night.

 

Formerfan said: Taylor didnt look any better than Dailey did last year, was just lucky that he didnt have more picks

Taylor has thrown 3 interceptions in 2 games. Dailey threw 7 in 2 games last year. So i would say yes, Taylor is better at knowing where to throw then J.D is. Joe Dailey didn't have Cornelius Thomas on the line blocking for him last year, Zac does. J.D has Matt Herian catching balls, Zac doesn't (If anyone doesn't think Herian will make a difference when he comes back, wait and see). And as far as luck? Well then you can play that game with J. D and say he was lucky he didn't have more picks last year then his notrious 19 picks.

 

Yep, Dailey did throw more INTs, but he also had more TDs, yards, and a better completion percentage. Zach has also had quite a few passes broken up. And JD only had Herian for a few games last year, lets not forget. Didnt you just go through the enitre first half and "diagnose" every play?? And you couldnt see some of the problems?? Or are the only problems due to a couple of WRs and a TE??

 

Formerfan said: WFs Oline was opening up pretty big holes early, consistently

Someone call Callahan and tell him to fire Dennis Wagner and hire Wake Forest's Offensive line coach since we can't seem to open up holes

 

As of right now, Wake has a better OL unit than NU does. More physical.

 

 

Dude, if you want to pretend that its all roses and everything is just perfect with NUs offense, then you really are as incompetent as you seem. There are obviously problems with this offense. Last years unit was playing better at this time of the year, compared to this years unit. I guess that YOU have all the answers huh??

 

Just because I say black, does not mean that you have to say white. You consistently make yourself look bad, very bad.

 

Hey, when there are no clouds in the sky, its normally a light blue color

 

Are you gonna dispute that too

[formerfan]

They averaged 2.5 yards per carry. There two time all acc runningback must really suck if he averages that many yards a carry with gaping holes to run though.

Actually, Barclay averaged 5.5 per carry, the 2.5 as a team was due more to sacks. When your safety (Bullocks) leads the team in tackles, and youre playing against a team that primarily runs, its not a good sign.

 

As I watched a tape of the game, it wasnt quite as bad as it appeared in person. There were still quite a few big holes, especially early. But the different perspectives were interesting.

[DaveH]

When your safety (Bullocks) leads the team in tackles, and youre playing against a team that primarily runs, its not a good sign.

I disagree on the bad sign part. Yes, it's a sign that you were getting some gaps for him to run in, but playing a team like Wake who is going to try to run the ball and do it alot, I would expect the strong saftey to get in on some run stoppage.

 

Sure, we need to have the defensive line and LB's take care of the running game, but when the saftey has to be smelling run all the way, and you got a guy like Bullocks it isn't too suprising he is in on a lot of the tackles.

[Pedro Guerrero]

On a lot of plays Bullocks was playing close to the line. He blitzed a few times also. Mike Brown was our leading tackler a few years from the safety spot. I think he plays the run and comes up and hits people.

 

On th D-Line topic I think Ola should play more then Adams. He seems to make plays when he is in the game.

[hoyamannn]

On a lot of plays Bullocks was playing close to the line. He blitzed a few times also. Mike Brown was our leading tackler a few years from the safety spot. I think he plays the run and comes up and hits people.

 

On th D-Line topic I think Ola should play more then Adams. He seems to make plays when he is in the game.

Give me Ola over LeKevin, personally.

 

About Bullocks leading in tackles, it's usually a LB or S that leads a team in tackles. Never does one of the front 4 lead, they usually have to take care of an O-lineman and free up a LBer for the tackle.

[rocketlb]

As I watched a tape of the game, it wasnt quite as bad as it appeared in person. There were still quite a few big holes, especially early. But the different perspectives were interesting.

 

I noticed the same thing as I rewatched the game at home also.

[formerfan]

On a lot of plays Bullocks was playing close to the line.  He blitzed a few times also.  Mike Brown was our leading tackler a few years from the safety spot.  I think he plays the run and comes up and hits people.

 

On th D-Line topic I think Ola should play more then Adams.  He seems to make plays when he is in the game.

Give me Ola over LeKevin, personally.

 

About Bullocks leading in tackles, it's usually a LB or S that leads a team in tackles. Never does one of the front 4 lead, they usually have to take care of an O-lineman and free up a LBer for the tackle.

You guys could be right about Bullocks.

 

As far as Ola, I noticed that he played very well. Was in on alot of tackles, chased a guy or two down from behind. I was thinking the same thing.

 

I also thought that Rucker should have started over Kelsey back in 97, but once he did get starts, he didnt seem to make as many plays as he did coming off the bench. Some guys just respond better to different situations.