Keep the improved defensive recruiting in mind

[gobiggergoredder]

I saw a stat over the last week or two how many true freshman played on Top 10 teams. I wish I could find it. There are a ton.

 

If our defensive talent is that poor and our recruits are that good......Where are they?

 

Edit...We're not Alabama, I get that. But here is a nugget.

[The Dude]

I don't know if it was Garrison or Cotton or both that has worked with Long, Choi & Jackson, but whoever it was desirives a lot of credit. All three were walkons & performed solid this year.

Barney was coaching the centers and guards, and Garrison was coaching the tackles and tight ends, until the centers and guards started playing well. Then we decided Garrison was the one working with them all along.

[Blackshirt96]

Knowing the calls & reads is very important in his scheme. A missed read in this scheme can lead to big gains. That is why you will normaly see players who understand the scheme over players with natural talent. The key is to have your most talented players understand it & have the next in line learning it.

[The Dude]

Knowing the calls & reads is very important in his scheme. A missed read in this scheme can lead to big gains. That is why you will normaly see players who understand the scheme over players with natural talent. The key is to have your most talented players understand it & have the next in line learning it.

The problem with this is, the slow, nonathletic guys who supposedly "know the calls and reads" seem completely lost half the time.

 

I'd rather have superior athletes who are also lost half the time.

[kchusker_chris]

So we didn't have the players the second time around, but we did the first time around when we got it done?

 

All of those teams have out recruited and performed us on a regular basis. TO pulled in great classes actually...

No he didn't...............this has been talked about to death on this board before you ever joined. Use the search function to find those threads.

 

Tom's teams were usually in the 10-20 range in SuperPrep. I'd take that w/ Bo's classes today. I used the search function and found a number of thread discussing this. One in particular in regards to this article where Sipple talks about how Osborne just downplays his quality classes. Everyone likes to think that we had these Boise type classes that we were winning NCs with - but that couldn't be further from the truth.

 

The class of 1990 was ranked 10th by SuperPrep, but only 34th by the National Recruiting Advisor and 41st by Tom Lemming. The class of 1991 was ranked 28th by SuperPrep. However, Osborne did have a top-10 class in 1992 (Tommie Frazier, Toby Wright, Mike Minter, Chris Dishman, et al) — it was ranked fifth by Max Emfinger and 10th by Tom Lemming.

The 1993 class was ranked 18th by SuperPrep, and the 1994 group 22nd by Lemming and 20th by SuperPrep.

So, you get the idea.

 

http://journalstar.c...96d440babc.html

[Undone]

The problem with this is, the slow, nonathletic guys who supposedly "know the calls and reads" seem completely lost half the time.

 

I'd rather have superior athletes who are also lost half the time.

 

Exactly. Which is why I was confused as to why Santos wasn't put in by the middle of the 2nd quarter. It's my opinion that he's shown more speed than Whaley & Fisher. I don't think it's a tough call to say he would have helped on those sweeps.

[junior4949]

What I don't understand about our LB's is the fact that some of the best to ever play for NU were smaller faster guys like Farley, Williams, David, etc. Why do we have to consistently play these bigger slower guys like Compton, Fisher, and Whaley? IMO, we need to scrap the two gap system for the DL and get a lot more speed at the LB position.

[kchusker_chris]

...going back farther...

 

83' was a top 10 class according to Lemming, (produced 2 all-americans)

84' was in the top 15. 16 of 17 letter including all-american Neil Smith

85' was a spectacular class with 3 top 100 recruits and the class was widely considered a top 5 along with Penn State. Taylor/Thomas end up as All-Americans.

86' included Roger's son who was a top 35 player. when was the last time we had one of those?

87' almost had Nebraska again in the top 10 according to Emfinger, landing the #1 QB in the nation (mickey joseph). One thing to point out about this class is 19 of 22 signees earned letter. Osborne didn't miss much.

88' was ranked 10th. 20 of 26 earn letters.

89' finished 7th/11th. Trev Alberts/Will Shields are all-americans 18 of 23 letter.

[bournehusker]

When a team runs the same play out of four different sets and averages 10.8 yards per carry and you cannot stop it, that is not simply fixed by putting a faster or younger or different guy in the game. It is fixed by adjusting your defensive look to take that play away. Every time we did exactly that they shifted to inside running game and completely man handled our dline. Part of it was we were completely unprepared coaching wise and the orther part of it is that we lack both the athletes and the Passion that husker players of old played with. There are 50 things wrong and to fix them all will require better more experienced coaches, better more experienced recruiters, and better more developed athletes. Once if ever that happens then slowly over a season or two a team will build a mean nasty we can't be beat attitude. Until that happens I would expect much the same problems we have seen over the last 5 seasons.

[HuskerT]

When a team runs the same play out of four different sets and averages 10.8 yards per carry and you cannot stop it, that is not simply fixed by putting a faster or younger or different guy in the game. It is fixed by adjusting your defensive look to take that play away. Every time we did exactly that they shifted to inside running game and completely man handled our dline. Part of it was we were completely unprepared coaching wise and the orther part of it is that we lack both the athletes and the Passion that husker players of old played with. There are 50 things wrong and to fix them all will require better more experienced coaches, better more experienced recruiters, and better more developed athletes. Once if ever that happens then slowly over a season or two a team will build a mean nasty we can't be beat attitude. Until that happens I would expect much the same problems we have seen over the last 5 seasons.

I think you're half right, scheme obviously had something to do with it, but most of the time it just looked like guys were getting out ran to the corner. Mainly Fisher and Whaley.

[junior4949]

What I typically saw was guys there but they just took the wrong angle. They had a trick play that was some sort of end around. They had two guys out there, the ball carrier and one blocker. We had three guys out there, and they all missed because they took the wrong angle. Either we underestimated Wisconsin's speed or our guys are just overly confident in their own speed. Whatever the reason, we for the most part took horrible angles all game long.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

^^^^This..............it was horrible to watch the angles they were taking.

[Blackshirt96]

Knowing the calls & reads is very important in his scheme. A missed read in this scheme can lead to big gains. That is why you will normaly see players who understand the scheme over players with natural talent. The key is to have your most talented players understand it & have the next in line learning it.

The problem with this is, the slow, nonathletic guys who supposedly "know the calls and reads" seem completely lost half the time.

 

I'd rather have superior athletes who are also lost half the time.

To say that the defense was lost lost half of the time is probably pretty far off. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying there was not times where the players were lost. College Football is just as much mental as it is physical. Throwing a young player into the lions den is not always a good idea. Osborne's teams rarly played a underclassman. Most of the defensive & offensive lineman were brought in kinda small & not ready to play. They would disapear for a couple seasons only to reapear larger & ready to go. High school football get these kids a lot more physically ready then they did back in those days & you will see more underclassman playing these days, but they are not all mentally ready to go. As far as skilled postions go NU plays a lot of their younger talent. ie Bell, Turner, Abdullah, Heard, Cross, Janovich, Burkhead & Martinez all played as FR/RS FR. I'm sure there are others but those are the ones off the top of my head.

[Blackshirt96]

...going back farther...

 

83' was a top 10 class according to Lemming, (produced 2 all-americans)

84' was in the top 15. 16 of 17 letter including all-american Neil Smith

85' was a spectacular class with 3 top 100 recruits and the class was widely considered a top 5 along with Penn State. Taylor/Thomas end up as All-Americans.

86' included Roger's son who was a top 35 player. when was the last time we had one of those?

87' almost had Nebraska again in the top 10 according to Emfinger, landing the #1 QB in the nation (mickey joseph). One thing to point out about this class is 19 of 22 signees earned letter. Osborne didn't miss much.

88' was ranked 10th. 20 of 26 earn letters.

89' finished 7th/11th. Trev Alberts/Will Shields are all-americans 18 of 23 letter.

I won't disagree that Osborne had some good classes, but he had quite a few more luxary's that coaches today don't have. Schollarship limits & partial qualifiers are two really big ones. Nebraksa was also on the leading edge of strengh & conditioning, which most have caught up. TV has really pushed college football to another level. There are more teams getting national coverage then there was 20 years ago, so telling a recruit that if he goes to Boise St he wont be on TV, but if he walks on at NU & works hard. He could play for a team that gets national coverage doesn't work anymore.

 

Comparing a recruiting class or a coach 20 years ago to a class or coach today is apples to oranges.

[kchusker_chris]

Knowing the calls & reads is very important in his scheme. A missed read in this scheme can lead to big gains. That is why you will normaly see players who understand the scheme over players with natural talent. The key is to have your most talented players understand it & have the next in line learning it.

The problem with this is, the slow, nonathletic guys who supposedly "know the calls and reads" seem completely lost half the time.

 

I'd rather have superior athletes who are also lost half the time.

To say that the defense was lost lost half of the time is probably pretty far off. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying there was not times where the players were lost. College Football is just as much mental as it is physical. Throwing a young player into the lions den is not always a good idea. Osborne's teams rarly played a underclassman. Most of the defensive & offensive lineman were brought in kinda small & not ready to play. They would disapear for a couple seasons only to reapear larger & ready to go. High school football get these kids a lot more physically ready then they did back in those days & you will see more underclassman playing these days, but they are not all mentally ready to go. As far as skilled postions go NU plays a lot of their younger talent. ie Bell, Turner, Abdullah, Heard, Cross, Janovich, Burkhead & Martinez all played as FR/RS FR. I'm sure there are others but those are the ones off the top of my head.

they weren't "lost" - the knew exactly where they were going: to the end zone 2 steps behind a Wisconsin rusher.