DE/LB

[B.B. Hemingway]

It definitely looked like we blitzed more than usual this game and I don't think it's a bad thing. I saw a handful of times (at least) when the blitz effectively stopped a SMU run.

 

If we continue to blitz a lot throughout the season, then the coaching staff must have a lot of confidence in the secondary (lets hope that is the case).

[Chaddyboxer]

It definitely looked like we blitzed more than usual this game and I don't think it's a bad thing. I saw a handful of times (at least) when the blitz effectively stopped a SMU run.

 

If we continue to blitz a lot throughout the season, then the coaching staff must have a lot of confidence in the secondary (lets hope that is the case).

I believe the secondary will be NEB's defensive strong-point.

[B.B. Hemingway]

It definitely looked like we blitzed more than usual this game and I don't think it's a bad thing. I saw a handful of times (at least) when the blitz effectively stopped a SMU run.

 

If we continue to blitz a lot throughout the season, then the coaching staff must have a lot of confidence in the secondary (lets hope that is the case).

I believe the secondary will be NEB's defensive strong-point.

 

Agreed. They were not tested against S. Miss, but I do believe that they will respond when they are. UCLA should test them this weekend.

[RedRedJarvisRedwine]

It definitely looked like we blitzed more than usual this game and I don't think it's a bad thing. I saw a handful of times (at least) when the blitz effectively stopped a SMU run.

Not to disagree completely with you Chaddy but in my semi drunken stupor I thought we should have run blitzed more! I thought we only brought blitzes on like 3rd and longs! Which I believe they had a decent 3rd down percentage till maybe the fourth quarter! You're right though, a few times later in the game they tried running for first downs on third and long and happen to run into our pass blitz! Maybe we were alot more vanilla in our defensive packages than we thought! Hopefully that is the case.

[Jskers95]

Start of conference play - I say we blitz 5 out of 6 plays, and every play for the entire first quarter. get em rattled early, then our weak DL won't matter, they'll be 1/2 second slower the rest of the game. the D played solid when we were blitzing, played like sh!t when we contained.

This might be the worse idea ever

haha - since our "contain" philosophy has proven so effected over the last 20ish games?

This isn't NCAA 13.

[The Dude]

Start of conference play - I say we blitz 5 out of 6 plays, and every play for the entire first quarter. get em rattled early

Get 'em rattled, or give them a half dozen easy TDs off screens or slants. Seems like a good game plan.

[Chaddyboxer]

It definitely looked like we blitzed more than usual this game and I don't think it's a bad thing. I saw a handful of times (at least) when the blitz effectively stopped a SMU run.

Not to disagree completely with you Chaddy but in my semi drunken stupor I thought we should have run blitzed more! I thought we only brought blitzes on like 3rd and longs! Which I believe they had a decent 3rd down percentage till maybe the fourth quarter! You're right though, a few times later in the game they tried running for first downs on third and long and happen to run into our pass blitz! Maybe we were alot more vanilla in our defensive packages than we thought! Hopefully that is the case.

I thought I saw some blitz's on 1st and 2nd downs as well when I re-watched the game....I'll check again though b/c I am always game to watch the Huskers. hehe

[Blackshirts007]

You know, right now the only thing im worried about is getting pressure on McElroy

[IvabigN]

Start of conference play - I say we blitz 5 out of 6 plays, and every play for the entire first quarter. get em rattled early, then our weak DL won't matter, they'll be 1/2 second slower the rest of the game. the D played solid when we were blitzing, played like sh!t when we contained.

 

not sure if anyone mentioned this but we blitzed at least two times into a screen play, had it not been for the dropped passes both plays were looking like TD's-

[bshirt]

Doesn't it seem like we have had a hard time putting together a good offense, and a good defense in the same year? Bo's 1st year we had a great offense, and mediocre defense. 2nd and 3rd years we had great defenses and were dreadful on offense. Last year we were mediocre on both. It would be nice if we could put two units (offense/defense) together that were both really good in the same year.

 

2010 was a "dreadful" offense? Sure, it caved in after Tmart's injuries but for the year is was wayyyyyy better than 2009.

[Blackshirt316]

 

Why was our D-line so far off the ball against South'n Miss? At times it looked like they were lining up a good 6 feet or so off the LOS. Pause the above vid at the 1:18 mark and you'll see what I mean.

 

 

They played back off the ball a bit because we had no idea what kind of plays Southern Miss was going to run. Playing back a bit gave them a bit more time to let plays develop in front of them so they could digest things they maybe hadn't practiced for better before they had to react to the play. So while maybe they gave up 2-3 extra yards here or there on a few plays, we likely wouldn't have given up the big play on D if Southern Miss would have gone with a lot of trickery.

 

Bo even said they were really expecting Southern Miss to come at them with some really crazy stuff and had to adjust and play more conventionally in the second half.

[Blackshirt316]

Here are they key rushing numbers for USM (not including sack numbers):

 

In the 1st half they ran the ball 22 times for 130 yards (5.9ypc)

In the 2nd half they ran the ball 23 times for 86 yards. (3.7ypc)

 

BUT

41 of those 132 first half rushing yards were given up on the first drive when our guys were basically guessing.

That opening drive USM ran it 6 times for 41 yards (6.8ypc) and ended with a punt with 10:13 left in the first quarter.

 

Take that opening drive out and the D gave up 175 rushing yards on 39 carries. (4.4ypc) over the final 49:87 of play.

 

I'll take that every day of the week when the team is flying blind in terms of preperation.

[Blackshirt316]

Sorry, Double Post

[Blackshirt316]

It definitely looked like we blitzed more than usual this game and I don't think it's a bad thing. I saw a handful of times (at least) when the blitz effectively stopped a SMU run.

 

If we continue to blitz a lot throughout the season, then the coaching staff must have a lot of confidence in the secondary (lets hope that is the case).

I believe the secondary will be NEB's defensive strong-point.

 

 

I believe we have a top 15, possibly even top 12 pass defense this season. Run D I expect more in the 30-35 area nationally.

 

But as I was watching tape and going over the stats I put up above, we may be better than I thought in run support, but we'll have to see.

[NUance]

Why was our D-line so far off the ball against South'n Miss? At times it looked like they were lining up a good 6 feet or so off the LOS. Pause the above vid at the 1:18 mark and you'll see what I mean.

 

They played back off the ball a bit because we had no idea what kind of plays Southern Miss was going to run. Playing back a bit gave them a bit more time to let plays develop in front of them so they could digest things they maybe hadn't practiced for better before they had to react to the play. So while maybe they gave up 2-3 extra yards here or there on a few plays, we likely wouldn't have given up the big play on D if Southern Miss would have gone with a lot of trickery.

 

Bo even said they were really expecting Southern Miss to come at them with some really crazy stuff and had to adjust and play more conventionally in the second half.

Yeah, that makes sense. You can see we're lined up way back from where we usually are. And I figured there was a reason for it.