Bo's Philosophy: Knowledge over Athleticism

[Husker Richard]

Why does Bo insist on starting the players that know the defensive system best over players that are more athletic but have less knowledge? I'm glad a player knows where he and the other 10 players are supposed to be on a given play, but it's worthless when said player(s) never makes the play. Put the best athletes on the field and let them play football.

 

A prime example:

Lavonte's first year. Bo continuously said that Lavonte didn't know the playbook very well and he was constantly out of position. How did that work out for us? Pretty darn well. All he did was make plays all over the field because he was a heck of an athlete.

 

Bo needs to wake up and realize that athleticism can trump playbook knowledge. Especially when said knowledgeable starters give up 648 yards. I believe we have better defensive talent riding the bench because they can't grasp the system. Put them in the game and see what happens.

[orhusker]

Couldn’t agree more with this. In CFB athletes>schemes. UCLA managed to create a playbook that got a ton of young talent on the field this year. Bo needs to simplify his playbook and put his athletes in position to make plays.

[gobiggergoredder]

I don't have any issues with what you are saying, but I'd like to know who these stallions are that are not on the field. Unfortunately, I'm not convinced they exist.

 

Lavonte David was coach speak. He played since day 1 (because of injury). I think this was just a situation where the coach didn't want a guy that just joined the team getting too much praise. Just my take.

[lo country]

Agree 100% amd have said the same about David numerous times as well as Bo playing knowledge over abilities.

 

Watching the ESPN pre-game (NFL) and they said that the Redskins coaching staff has pared down the playbook to the comfort level of RGIII. Now imagine that, a pro team, with time to practice for their full time job, pare down the playbook to allow their playmaker (great athlete) to contribute immediately.

 

Our scheme is too complicated ie only upperclassmen start and doesn't work without a DT like SUH. See all the comments ref the hailvarsity article on the 2 gap and McBride's thoughts.

 

Time for a change of schemes.

[zoogs]

Regarding your example, you can bet if we had someone like Lavonte now, they'd be playing.

 

Speed doesn't do you any good when you are five yards away from where you are supposed to be.

 

Regarding the claim that only upperclassmen are starting on defense, how about starting corner Josh Mitchell (So.), DT Chase Rome (So.), and the number of other defensive underclassmen (Harvey Jackson, or SJB - 2nd year in the program, or that redshirt freshman DT Kevin Williams, I think his name was)....

[MichiganDad3]

I agree with all the above comments. McBride's scheme was simple and opposing teams hated to face NU. It was pitiful watching slow players trailing 3 yards behind receivers last nigh; almost as bad as watching the D-line line up a yard off the LOS and then put no pressure on the QB.

 

At the half UCLA decided to pressure Martinez. Martinez didn't like it. I don't fault Martinez, I fault Bo for not pressuring UCLA's freshman QB relentlessly.

[TYMYSHOE]

this also makes me wonder about the offense and brion..

[Husker Richard]

I don't have any issues with what you are saying, but I'd like to know who these stallions are that are not on the field. Unfortunately, I'm not convinced they exist.

 

Lavonte David was coach speak. He played since day 1 (because of injury). I think this was just a situation where the coach didn't want a guy that just joined the team getting too much praise. Just my take.

 

 

Santos, Rose, Z Anderson, etc.

[gobiggergoredder]

I don't have any issues with what you are saying, but I'd like to know who these stallions are that are not on the field. Unfortunately, I'm not convinced they exist.

 

Lavonte David was coach speak. He played since day 1 (because of injury). I think this was just a situation where the coach didn't want a guy that just joined the team getting too much praise. Just my take.

 

 

Santos, Rose, Z Anderson, etc.

 

You have no clue whether these guys are any good or not. I hope you are right, but there is zero evidence that you are. This time last year everyone wanted Brion Carnes. When there are struggles, the Back ups are always the most popular.

[Fuzzy]

I have to pass out some +1s here. Its astonishing how some of you know Bo's defensive playbook and terminology. Its truly phenomenal, and for that i have to give you +1's for keeping it to yourselves. You guys clearly have a far greater understanding of the defensive playbook for the Huskers than most coaches in college football do, or else you wouldn't be stating the playbook needs to simplified.

 

And i have to agree with the comments that support we should start more talented players over players that know how the defense works. I think its on of the best solutions to our execution problem on defense, instead of executing better, lets just put 11 guys on the field and tell them to play football, don't even give them plays, just tell them, get to the QB, stop the run, cover the receivers. Its just football, its a simple game to win.

 

I mean how hard can it be to send out 2 LB's to cover a twin TE set. 4 receivers, lets just put out 4 CBs and 1 LB and hope to God they don't run the option because if they do, we are screwed.

 

But i am going on a rabble here, I don't know what Bo's defensive playbook looks like, nor do i know the terminology they use during the game. I am not that educated as most of the people in this thread, clearly you guys have the inside take on what type of plays and schemes the defense runs during games.

 

[Stumpy1]

I have to pass out some +1s here. Its astonishing how some of you know Bo's defensive playbook and terminology. Its truly phenomenal, and for that i have to give you +1's for keeping it to yourselves. You guys clearly have a far greater understanding of the defensive playbook for the Huskers than most coaches in college football do, or else you wouldn't be stating the playbook needs to simplified.

 

And i have to agree with the comments that support we should start more talented players over players that know how the defense works. I think its on of the best solutions to our execution problem on defense, instead of executing better, lets just put 11 guys on the field and tell them to play football, don't even give them plays, just tell them, get to the QB, stop the run, cover the receivers. Its just football, its a simple game to win.

 

I mean how hard can it be to send out 2 LB's to cover a twin TE set. 4 receivers, lets just put out 4 CBs and 1 LB and hope to God they don't run the option because if they do, we are screwed.

 

But i am going on a rabble here, I don't know what Bo's defensive playbook looks like, nor do i know the terminology they use during the game. I am not that educated as most of the people in this thread, clearly you guys have the inside take on what type of plays and schemes the defense runs during games.

 

Well apparently you never got the message about the game we played the other night...The so-called scheme and players really didn't do that hot. I'm sure no one here is claiming to be a coach or know it all when it comes to defense, but what we saw in that game was NOT defense.

[Bowfin]

I am not that educated as most of the people in this thread, clearly you guys have the inside take on what type of plays and schemes the defense runs during games.

 

 

Well then, let's get you up to speed:

1. We lost to a team that was not even ranked
   
2. While beating us, this unranked team racked up 650 yards of offense with a gimpy quarterback.
   
3. Our defensive line looked as if they were velcroed to the Bruins' freshman line.
   
4. Will Compton has made "throwing the bones" an object of derision and a sign of cluelessness.
   
5. The secret of tackling fundamentals seems to be taken to Tampa Bay when Lavonte David left.
   
6. Neither you nor I nor Bo has anything in any playbook to make a team more physical, more aggressive, stronger, or faster.
   

So now you know what the rest of us know...post accordingly...

[Husker Richard]

I don't have any issues with what you are saying, but I'd like to know who these stallions are that are not on the field. Unfortunately, I'm not convinced they exist.

 

Lavonte David was coach speak. He played since day 1 (because of injury). I think this was just a situation where the coach didn't want a guy that just joined the team getting too much praise. Just my take.

 

 

Santos, Rose, Z Anderson, etc.

 

You have no clue whether these guys are any good or not. I hope you are right, but there is zero evidence that you are. This time last year everyone wanted Brion Carnes. When there are struggles, the Back ups are always the most popular.

 

 

That may be true, but I find it hard to believe that our defensive effort could get much worse. Maybe these guys on the bench are hungry, desperate for an opportunity to prove themselves. Not complacent and lackluster like some of the current starters.

[MichiganDad3]

I have to pass out some +1s here. Its astonishing how some of you know Bo's defensive playbook and terminology. Its truly phenomenal, and for that i have to give you +1's for keeping it to yourselves. You guys clearly have a far greater understanding of the defensive playbook for the Huskers than most coaches in college football do, or else you wouldn't be stating the playbook needs to simplified.

 

And i have to agree with the comments that support we should start more talented players over players that know how the defense works. I think its on of the best solutions to our execution problem on defense, instead of executing better, lets just put 11 guys on the field and tell them to play football, don't even give them plays, just tell them, get to the QB, stop the run, cover the receivers. Its just football, its a simple game to win.

 

I mean how hard can it be to send out 2 LB's to cover a twin TE set. 4 receivers, lets just put out 4 CBs and 1 LB and hope to God they don't run the option because if they do, we are screwed.

 

But i am going on a rabble here, I don't know what Bo's defensive playbook looks like, nor do i know the terminology they use during the game. I am not that educated as most of the people in this thread, clearly you guys have the inside take on what type of plays and schemes the defense runs during games.

 

 

I bet the approach you describe would hold UCLA to less than 650 yards. Rice held UCLA to less yards than NU!

[robsker]

I am not that educated as most of the people in this thread, clearly you guys have the inside take on what type of plays and schemes the defense runs during games.

 

 

Well then, let's get you up to speed:

1. We lost to a team that was not even ranked
   
2. While beating us, this unranked team racked up 650 yards of offense with a gimpy quarterback.
   
3. Our defensive line looked as if they were velcroed to the Bruins' freshman line.
   
4. Will Compton has made "throwing the bones" an object of derision and a sign of cluelessness.
   
5. The secret of tackling fundamentals seems to be taken to Tampa Bay when Lavonte David left.
   
6. Neither you nor I nor Bo has anything in any playbook to make a team more physical, more aggressive, stronger, or faster.
   

So now you know what the rest of us know...post accordingly...

 

I am not that educated as most of the people in this thread, clearly you guys have the inside take on what type of plays and schemes the defense runs during games.

 

 

Well then, let's get you up to speed:

1. We lost to a team that was not even ranked
   
2. While beating us, this unranked team racked up 650 yards of offense with a gimpy quarterback.
   
3. Our defensive line looked as if they were velcroed to the Bruins' freshman line.
   
4. Will Compton has made "throwing the bones" an object of derision and a sign of cluelessness.
   
5. The secret of tackling fundamentals seems to be taken to Tampa Bay when Lavonte David left.
   
6. Neither you nor I nor Bo has anything in any playbook to make a team more physical, more aggressive, stronger, or faster.
   

So now you know what the rest of us know...post accordingly...

 

 

 

As to your point 6....

 

A simplified playbook whereby the players know what they are doing and know their assignments would make all the difference in the world. As it is now, on 60% or more of our plays NU players on D are not set up when the ball is snapped... they are frantically trying to figure out where to line up, barking at one another, and looking at the sidelines. In one stretch in the 3rd quarter, there were 4 consecutive plays where at least one NU defender was not even looking at the opposing offense when the ball was snapped. They have scheme and assignment issues that are huge. They look like a Middle School team out there... confused.

 

No one can be physical intense and fast unless they know their assignment. SIMPLIFY THE SCHEME!

 

Take Boise State's defense. I am almost certain that the NU players on defense are faster and stronger physically --- probably by a wide margin. Yet the BSU defense is quick, fast, intense, and physical. Why? Simple scheme. Clear communication. Everyone is lined up and knows their assignments and can hone in on intense and physical execution of the assignment. The BSU defense is vastly superior to the NU defense --- and they do this with much inferior players. Why? Coaching.

 

The NU defense is too complicated. Some of our finer athletes cannot remotely comprehend it and do not play. Others struggle and their focus is on what, why, and am I in the right place. The focus on physical and aggressive execution is not there... they are too busy yelling to one another asking what to do.

 

Players with a clear assignment are far, far, far faster and more physical than are the same players who are unsure about what to do. Simple as that.