Bring Out The Gimp Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 I hate to admit it, but I agreed with Mussberger and Danielsen...I just don't understand the 3 man rush on Pitt's last drive! It just didn't seem to make sense since we were only up by 1 point. It seemed like we were basically giving them a shot at a field goal to win the game! Did anyone agree with the 3 man rush? Quote Link to comment
DaveH Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 I didn't agree with the prevent defense we were playing. That defense is designed to not give up the big play, but they had time to march down the field, as they did, to get a field goal. I could see if maybe if we hit that FG, but other wise, no. I say you go for the throat. Quote Link to comment
mcrooks7 Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 I hate to admit it, but I agreed with Mussberger and Danielsen...I just don't understand the 3 man rush on Pitt's last drive! It just didn't seem to make sense since we were only up by 1 point. It seemed like we were basically giving them a shot at a field goal to win the game! Did anyone agree with the 3 man rush? Oh yeah! We've discussed it on other posts, but the prevent defense is crap! Nothing good ever comes from using it. They simply had to hold the Pitt O for a minute thirty (just like they had all game long), and instead the coaches decision was to move into a prevent to keep from allowing a big pass play... oops. Nevermind, it happened anyway. Prevent style D only prevents teams from winning. Quote Link to comment
TheKiD Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 I didn't agree with the prevent defense we were playing. That defense is designed to not give up the big play, but they had time to march down the field, as they did, to get a field goal. I could see if maybe if we hit that FG, but other wise, no. I say you go for the throat. Agreed. I think if we would have kept the pressure on, with how loud the stadium was. No way they would have even gotten into FG range. Quote Link to comment
Red Snow Sword: Husker Sentinel Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 yeah, especially since our pass rush was doing pretty well go blackshirts! they are best when aggressive, I would think, and not playing "safe" Quote Link to comment
Pedro Guerrero Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Prevent style D only prevents teams from winning. Except for yesterday. We won. I thought they should of rushed four but that's just me. Quote Link to comment
DaveH Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Prevent style D only prevents teams from winning. Except for yesterday. We won. I thought they should of rushed four but that's just me. Agreed Quote Link to comment
mcrooks7 Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Prevent style D only prevents teams from winning. Except for yesterday. We won. I thought they should of rushed four but that's just me. Agreed Too true, but how lucky were we, eh? That could have gone a very different way very easily. Quote Link to comment
DaveH Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Prevent style D only prevents teams from winning. Except for yesterday. We won. I thought they should of rushed four but that's just me. Agreed Too true, but how lucky were we, eh? That could have gone a very different way very easily. Yes, and if we hadn't had eleventy billion penalties we might have scored 21 points. What if? Quote Link to comment
mcrooks7 Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Please. The prevent D is not a whatif kinda thing. Because of the prevent D, Pitt DID march down into field goal position, and screwed up two chances in a row to win the game. This is not a what if, this is a poor choice of defensive play. Our D had stopped almost everything in the air up to that point playing normally, why change the system then? Sorry, I cannot, and will not, agree with you on this point. Thank God we were as lucky as we were. It wont happen again. Quote Link to comment
Touchdown Tommie Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 The prevent D is CRAP. Any coach who lays down and stops the consistent rush they are getting is out of his mind. They could not stop Carricker and Wali. On the other hand, if BC would have kept the 4-man rush and they would have scored, we all would be asking why he didn't use the prevent D. It is kind of a catch 22 and you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. At least we won yesterday. Quote Link to comment
mcrooks7 Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 But, the likelyhood of them scoring with the 4 man was a lot less than with that of the 3 man. Yet, you are right. At least we won. No matter how pitifully. I just hope and pray improvement is in sight. Quote Link to comment
gamecocks Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 I don't mind the three man line but we needed to bring McKeon or Bradley up the middle or around the edge to put more pressure on. Keep Palko guessing rather then move the team down the field. Quote Link to comment
Eric the Red Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 You can criticize it to death, but who won? Technically did it work? It was still a tough kick..47 yard field goal?? Is this a chip shot? Quote Link to comment
junior4949 Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Speaking of the (if) scenario, if Taylor gets sacked in the end zone like he probably should have been we lose by 1. If Pitt hits just one of the 3 field goals they missed, we lose by 2. There were a lot of if's for both teams. Luckily, the ball bounced in our favor this time. But hey, at least we can recruit. 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.