McKewon: It's time for Bo to shake things up

[Eric the Red]

McKewon is my favorite writer by far. Another well-spoken, coherent article. Read it! Every single point is well made. And he even gives me a personal shout-out:

 

In 2009, after NU lost to Texas Tech and Iowa State in successive weeks, Pelini put the offense on lockdown to protect it from itself. That move, maligned it was by the three Shawn Watson defenders lurking on the Interwebs, kept the Huskers' season from crashing hard into the rocks.

 

Best writer for a few years now....also my roommate in college for a few years.

[Count 'Bility]

I'm starting to flip like a politician on this whole blackshirt thing. I may be starting to see the light. College football is a lot about psychology. I used to just let Bo do it his way by earning it on the field, but I'm starting to see it the other way. I think the starters earn them by winning the starting job. If the starters have their blackshirts, maybe it gives them the extra swag they need. Instead, I'm wondering if they're playing wondering if no matter what they do, it wont be good enough. And let's face it, the blackshirt tradition can be a big recruiting tool, but if a recruit sees that he might not get to get one until week 11 of his senior year, then all mystique may be taken out of it.

 

As far as personel, we saw some shakeups for Arkansas St., but then Zaire was injured. and I'm betting that the veterans may have upped their game during practice, and let's face it, they upped against Wisconsin as well. Well now it's time to set the young talent loose. If they cant handle the scheme, then it needs simplified so they can. I agree that all positions need re-opened to substance not knowledge, becasue the knowledge aint getting us anywhere.

 

I agree with your assessment of the Blackshirts. When Bo first messed with the tradition, I thought it was good. Earn the Shirts. Then it was like 11 Blackshirts to like 15 and then like 23 guys get them. Tradition over.

 

I like the idea of going back to getting them prior to the first game. get some swagger. Let them step up and become respected and feared leaders of the team. I am unsure who was more frightened of Jason Peter, our guys or the other teams!

 

The changes he mentioned are ones that IMO, can be implemented with minimum effort. Especially during the bye week.

 

Read on another board that the next week or two will determine if BO is more concerned with winning or being "right"...........

 

The game is a little different than it used to be also. Very few defenses play/start only 11 guys anymore. I'm perfectly fine with handing out 15 or however many guys contribute heavily on defense. It would be stupid if Whaley and Evans contributed equally on defense but only one got a blackshirt.

 

But this whole thing is way over-analyzed. I almost guarantee that the blackshirts are one of the last things on the players' minds. If they're not, then they need to focus and check where their head's at, because they have bigger things to worry about.

 

The blackshirt tradition at this point is all about pleasing the fans that are old enough to hold them sacred. I care about them as well, but I think it would be a joke for our current defense to have them at this point. It's one of the worst defenses we have seen in Nebraska history (still not as bad as the Callahan years, but still bad) and to hand them out to these guys right now would be a bad move IMO.

I disagree. But that is fine. The Blackshirts concept is all over the place and used in marketing as well. It is synonymous with Nebraska football. The players do think about this and now I'm starting to agree with the thought that this tradition has been tempered a bit.

[JTrain]

Pretty reasonable. McKewon usually is. I don't have a lot of faith that Bo will humble himself enough to make really positive changes during this season. Hopefully I'm wrong.

[JTrain]

I'm starting to flip like a politician on this whole blackshirt thing. I may be starting to see the light. College football is a lot about psychology. I used to just let Bo do it his way by earning it on the field, but I'm starting to see it the other way. I think the starters earn them by winning the starting job. If the starters have their blackshirts, maybe it gives them the extra swag they need. Instead, I'm wondering if they're playing wondering if no matter what they do, it wont be good enough. And let's face it, the blackshirt tradition can be a big recruiting tool, but if a recruit sees that he might not get to get one until week 11 of his senior year, then all mystique may be taken out of it.

 

As far as personel, we saw some shakeups for Arkansas St., but then Zaire was injured. and I'm betting that the veterans may have upped their game during practice, and let's face it, they upped against Wisconsin as well. Well now it's time to set the young talent loose. If they cant handle the scheme, then it needs simplified so they can. I agree that all positions need re-opened to substance not knowledge, becasue the knowledge aint getting us anywhere.

 

I agree with your assessment of the Blackshirts. When Bo first messed with the tradition, I thought it was good. Earn the Shirts. Then it was like 11 Blackshirts to like 15 and then like 23 guys get them. Tradition over.

 

I like the idea of going back to getting them prior to the first game. get some swagger. Let them step up and become respected and feared leaders of the team. I am unsure who was more frightened of Jason Peter, our guys or the other teams!

 

The changes he mentioned are ones that IMO, can be implemented with minimum effort. Especially during the bye week.

 

Read on another board that the next week or two will determine if BO is more concerned with winning or being "right"...........

 

The game is a little different than it used to be also. Very few defenses play/start only 11 guys anymore. I'm perfectly fine with handing out 15 or however many guys contribute heavily on defense. It would be stupid if Whaley and Evans contributed equally on defense but only one got a blackshirt.

 

But this whole thing is way over-analyzed. I almost guarantee that the blackshirts are one of the last things on the players' minds. If they're not, then they need to focus and check where their head's at, because they have bigger things to worry about.

 

The blackshirt tradition at this point is all about pleasing the fans that are old enough to hold them sacred. I care about them as well, but I think it would be a joke for our current defense to have them at this point. It's one of the worst defenses we have seen in Nebraska history (still not as bad as the Callahan years, but still bad) and to hand them out to these guys right now would be a bad move IMO.

 

It's a recent construct that the Blackshirts are handed out for a certain level of production. As I understand it, McBride almost always gave them out to the starting defense. They didn't have to be great, or even good. It just showed that they were the best 11-12 defenders on the team.

[walksalone]

Open up every defensive job. With athleticism and fundamentals

 

I think that should be done on both sides of the ball...

[JTrain]

[Undone]

And who might these playmakers be? Cupboards are pretty bare on defense.

And you know this how? You must attend practice.

 

Typical response. Let's break it down, okay? Our current starters DO NOT MAKE PLAYS. Don't agree with that statement? Then make a case against it. The 63 points the other team put up Saturday night makes it pretty clear that they don't.

 

So that leaves us with only two options:

 

1. Our underclassmen are "worse" than our starters, which confirms that the state of our recruiting that got us to where we are now was atrocious.

 

2. Our underclassmen actually are capable of "making plays" to a higher capacity than our starters. In which case, Bo is screwing us by not playing them.

 

Which is it?

[lo country]

And who might these playmakers be? Cupboards are pretty bare on defense.

And you know this how? You must attend practice.

 

Typical response. Let's break it down, okay? Our current starters DO NOT MAKE PLAYS. Don't agree with that statement? Then make a case against it. The 63 points the other team put up Saturday night makes it pretty clear that they don't.

 

So that leaves us with only two options:

 

1. Our underclassmen are "worse" than our starters, which confirms that the state of our recruiting that got us to where we are now was atrocious.

 

2. Our underclassmen actually are capable of "making plays" to a higher capacity than our starters. In which case, Bo is screwing us by not playing them.

 

Which is it?

 

Scary, scary thought.

 

Another poster stated that Stoops does not recruit anyone that cannot contribute immediately. He doesn't recruit kids with the intention of giving them a RS or "developing" through a year or two. Bo and Co need this approach. To date your D has given up the 2nd most yrds EVER (because UCLA) to a knee and the top 3 in points against. For the record, OSU ran 32 LESS PLAYS than UCLA.

 

Things can't, IMO, get worse by burning shirts and getting the younger kids in. It builds depth and the future. Some will argue to keep the status quo as we still have a shot to win the division. Cally had his "burn the boats" catch phrase, I say burn the shirts! We have two weeks to practice with them and see if Bo and Co can get them ready.

[VectorVictor]

I'm starting to flip like a politician on this whole blackshirt thing. I may be starting to see the light. College football is a lot about psychology.

 

And during the 1990s, we had one of the best Sports Psychologists helping the team, and we lost him during the early 2000s to retirement during Frank's reign, if memory serves.

 

You're right that there is a lot of psychology that goes into college football...or sports...or life in general. I wonder if we have another sports psychologist on staff, and if we're using that resource to its full extent...or if that resource is doing an adequate job?

[huskered17]

Lets not just look at the players. Why did the coaches change up from the pressure they were putting on Wilson in that first quarter? It was working, the kids were playing like they did in the second half of the Wis game. I think we have all seen it by now, no lead is safe. You are going to get beat every once in awhile. You don't have to panic, and stop what was working. The coaches opened up the flood gates, by changing the way the kids had started off. They were confident, they were into it, they were steam rolling through OSU 0-line. After that you could see we were being undone by their coaches decisions

 

GBR!!!

[tattooedhusker]

Lets not just look at the players. Why did the coaches change up from the pressure they were putting on Wilson in that first quarter? It was working, the kids were playing like they did in the second half of the Wis game. I think we have all seen it by now, no lead is safe. You are going to get beat every once in awhile. You don't have to panic, and stop what was working. The coaches opened up the flood gates, by changing the way the kids had started off. They were confident, they were into it, they were steam rolling through OSU 0-line. After that you could see we were being undone by their coaches decisions

 

GBR!!!

 

Agreed

[junior4949]

IMO, the first thing to go is the two gap scheme ran by the DL. Too much time is spent by the DL being held up by blocks rather than shedding them trying to figure out where the ball is going. There's two problems with this. First, we don't the right guys to run the two gap. It almost takes an NFL ready DL to do this. Second, a lot of offenses are so quick striking that by the time the DL determines where the ball is going it's too late. I don't think our DL is as untalented as they look. They just need to let loose. The second thing we need to do defensively is put the slow plodding LB's where they belong: on the bench. Replace them with players like Stafford, smaller faster players. On offense, it's pretty simple: take care of the football. Our offense can be very good, but they can't lead the nation in turnovers.

[Guy Chamberlin]

Lets not just look at the players. Why did the coaches change up from the pressure they were putting on Wilson in that first quarter? It was working, the kids were playing like they did in the second half of the Wis game. I think we have all seen it by now, no lead is safe. You are going to get beat every once in awhile. You don't have to panic, and stop what was working. The coaches opened up the flood gates, by changing the way the kids had started off. They were confident, they were into it, they were steam rolling through OSU 0-line. After that you could see we were being undone by their coaches decisions

 

GBR!!!

 

We opened with a good defensive game plan and intensity. It was Braxton Miller who made the adjustment. We simply didn't have the athletes to stop him, regardless of scheme.

 

In fairness, Braxton Miller is pretty damned good.

 

 

 

In other news, UCLA's Brett Hundely who looked so good against us threw 4 interceptions against Cal last week.

[junior4949]

I'd venture to guess it was Urban Meyer that made the adjustment rather than Braxton Miller. Meyer was more than likely hoping he could beat us without his QB taking a pounding running the rock. When he found himself down 17-7, he turned his stallion loose. Little did he know by Miller becoming the entire offense that he wouldn't take a beating at all. In a lot of cases, he never even got touched.

[zoogs]

I believe it was our gameplan. Braxton was being stifled all day - but when he ripped one for 70 yards, we got scared on defense and tried to just keep him in check.