A different perspective

[Huskurz]

being worst in the nation with turnovers.... its will be hard for any defense to compensate for that.

 

Our problem isnt talent, its leadership and developement. There are other schools with equal or less talent than us, that do more with it. They dont have the facilities we have or the fan support we have here.

 

Sorry, but our blowouts comes down to nothing more than poor coaching.

 

+1

[kchusker_chris]

being worst in the nation with turnovers.... its will be hard for any defense to compensate for that.

 

Our problem isnt talent, its leadership and developement. There are other schools with equal or less talent than us, that do more with it. They dont have the facilities we have or the fan support we have here.

 

Sorry, but our blowouts comes down to nothing more than poor coaching.

 

Name one school that has consistently less talent than Nebraska that has averaged more than 9.5 wins the last 5 years and played in 3 championship games.

 

Wisconsin

 

touche

 

Although, technically they've only played in 2 championship games

i'd throw virginia tech in there. you got pretty detailed w/ the numbers though so not sure if they fit perfectly.

[NUinID]

being worst in the nation with turnovers.... its will be hard for any defense to compensate for that.

 

Our problem isnt talent, its leadership and developement. There are other schools with equal or less talent than us, that do more with it. They dont have the facilities we have or the fan support we have here.

 

Sorry, but our blowouts comes down to nothing more than poor coaching.

 

Name one school that has consistently less talent than Nebraska that has averaged more than 9.5 wins the last 5 years and played in 3 championship games.

 

Wisconsin

 

touche

 

Although, technically they've only played in 2 championship games

i'd throw virginia tech in there. you got pretty detailed w/ the numbers though so not sure if they fit perfectly.

 

I wouldn't say Wisconsin or Va. Tech has less talent than Nebraska. For what Wisconsin likes to do offensively they are very talented in the O-line and RB. They are also very talented in the D-line and LB spots on defense.

They are a run oriented play action passing offense their O-linemen are perfectly suited for that offense. They have great RBs. There talent offensively is very similar to what NU had until Callahan came to town. It fits their system perfectly. Those linemen would be no good in Oregon offense, they wouldn't be all that great in WVA offense either.

 

Va Tech is down this year but across the board they are usually very talented on the defensive side of the ball and usually have great RB.

[QMany]

being worst in the nation with turnovers.... its will be hard for any defense to compensate for that.

 

Our problem isnt talent, its leadership and developement. There are other schools with equal or less talent than us, that do more with it. They dont have the facilities we have or the fan support we have here.

 

Sorry, but our blowouts comes down to nothing more than poor coaching.

 

Yeah, so I could take your opinion ... or his:

"It was a great gameplan," P.J. Smith said. "We didn't finish the plays. Everything they did, we practiced."

[Blackshirt96]

Even if we clean up all turnovers, this defense is Cosgrovian. There's no getting around that.

but at other times this season they were downright dominant. the UCLA 2nd half adjustment (against a good offense even). Wisconsin 1.0. Iowa (even though the offense sputtered all day). Minnesota (obviously). Michigan. etc.

 

here's our rush defense breakdown. (2007 in ())

 

185 (77)

344 (236)

148 (313)

31 (188)

56 (134)

371 (195)

180 (317)

95 (359)

238 (364)

151 (218)

87 (108)

108 (277)

539

 

2012: 194/game

2007: 232/game

 

They are absolutely sporatic. Are they exposed? Outcoached? How do you give up 56 yards one week (to the same team that just hung 539 on us) and then allow 371 and 68 points the following week? That can't be entirely talent. Can't be entirely scheme can it? What's different? I don't believe that the Ohio State rushing attack was that much more talented than Wisconsin the week before. Call me as confused as Bo. The difference is I won't deny there is issues that need fixed however. At least in 2007 they were consistently bad but not occasionally epically bad.

 

at home: 107/game

away: 297/game

You also have to look at the difference in teams. The Big Ten is a run first conference & the Big 12 was the complete oppisite. It would be like bragging about keeping Wisconsin to 101yds passing. Its a great stat but doesn't tell the whole story.

[gobiggergoredder]

I'm still struggling why people are so focused on running D being the only problem. Is it because they were gashed by Wisky? I don't care what the stats say, Gino Smith would put up 5 bills against this D. I actually think the secondary (except Stafford) is pretty decent. NO pass rush makes everyone look bad.

[NUance]

It seems like everyone always wants to simplify our blowout games to only one cause: We got out coached. Or the defense sucks. Or the players gave up. Or the injuries killed us. Or the refs sucked. Or we just had a lot of bad breaks. Or the other team was just much better and exposed us. I suspect both our blowout losses were a combination of several of these variables. Some of these things we can fix. Some are just a rub of the green.

[Blackshirt96]

It seems like everyone always wants to simplify our blowout games to only one cause: We got out coached. Or the defense sucks. Or the players gave up. Or the injuries killed us. Or the refs sucked. Or we just had a lot of bad breaks. Or the other team was just much better and exposed us. I suspect both our blowout losses were a combination of several of these variables. Some of these things we can fix. Some are just a rub of the green.

Agreed. You can make a case for just about all of these things.

[NUinID]

It seems like everyone always wants to simplify our blowout games to only one cause: We got out coached. Or the defense sucks. Or the players gave up. Or the injuries killed us. Or the refs sucked. Or we just had a lot of bad breaks. Or the other team was just much better and exposed us. I suspect both our blowout losses were a combination of several of these variables. Some of these things we can fix. Some are just a rub of the green.

Agreed. You can make a case for just about all of these things.

 

I think it was a combination of a lot of those things listed. It is not just one thing. Nebraska got out game planned for sure. Injuries were a killer. Turnovers early were a killer. Wisky played great. In the end we did give up a little defensively.

[skersfan]

I think in honesty Wisconsin is the better team. Their record does not show the improvement they made. I think what we played Saturday was a great team and if they can hold it together will give Stanford a very tough game. Talent wise they are not Alabama, but they play within their system very well.

 

I thought we would lose the game, just not the way we did. We have a lot of problems, but it all starts with the head coach. He has to see the problems, fix the problems and develop a system so the problems once corrected do not raise up again. Bo just does not have the experience yet to do all this. I hope we see improvement in the Bowl game. I am not expecting a win, but hoping for being respectable.

 

I honestly feel we will have more problems next year, the defense is going to be worse no question. I do not think the offense can put up enough numbers to overcome the defensive play.

[Duke Silver]

I'm one of those people that has been a sun shiner. I've always been a Bo supporter. I went to the game, and left stunned, just trying to figure out what was going on. It wasn't until today that I had what could be a useful insight. What if we're framing this completely wrong. We knew that our D was bad this year, that wasn't really a question. Losing Dennard, Crick, and David and having no amazing underclassman or Juco's come in to replace them was going to be ugly. Do I blame Bo for the bad talent around at the moment at the upperclassman level? Yes and no, I don't think he recruited great his first year or two, but there was also the usual attrition and people not playing out. So we could still frame it as his fault.

 

My question is this, what if Bo's been coaching lights out all season and Wisconsin/tOSU were just games where coaching could not overcome? This team could have been the running equivalent of Okie State (when they were really bad) and instead they went 10-3 despite having huge holes at two defensive levels. This is essentially the flipside of the 09 team. I think that if Bo ever has a team without holes (doesn't need to be amazing, but without holes) it'll be a team in the national championship conversation.

 

Take it for what you want, this could just be the ramblings of a sleep deprived person.

You're seriously going to say this defense is bad overall?