Great article...sadly!

[Guy Chamberlin]

I'm going to say 90% of what he writes is pretty much crap. I'm not trying to give Dick, I mean Dirk, any more run, but there are some questions that have to be asked.

 

What is our identity? Are we going to pound the rock and play great D? Are we going to run a spread mixing pass and run with a bend but don't break defense?

 

When I was younger, hell when we all were younger, we knew what we were going to see. Stifling defenses and an offensive juggernaut that by the 3rd quarter had the opposing D sucking wind, crying for it's mother. That was orchestrated by one of the all time great college coaches. Is Bo that coach? We're still finding out, and I'm not so sure if he's not trying to do the same.

 

I know that the college football landscape has changed, and that what worked 20 years ago, probably won't work as well now due to kids athletic abilities just being insane. But that's where you have to find your niche, and the ability to adapt, improvise and overcome. It's pretty obvious where the weaknesses are, but does Bo have the will and desire to make those changes? If not, then there will probably be more frustration, but if he does fix what is broken, then he's got a chance...

 

I sometimes forget the wide age ranges on this board. I don't consider myself old, but I vividly remember a time in Husker football where we were more of a paper tiger than anything else. Sure, we played decent defense and wore opposing defenses down against inferior opponents. However, we got our butts handed to us several times to teams as good or better than us. Had the internet been around back then, Charlie McBride's name would have popped up a lot. I'd say he was as despised as Cosgrove was.

 

I'm not sure what most fans opinion is on when our run really started, but I have always felt it started in the 93' season. When we took Florida State down to the wire in the bowl game I really started to believe. Before that, there really wasn't much to believe in. The 91' squad accomplished a feat that no other bowl eligible Husker team had accomplished. They failed to score even a single point in the bowl game. The 90' squad lost to every single opponent we played that was ranked. The teams we did beat were pretty bad. The Big 8 in those days were pretty bad. There wasn't a team in the Big 8 that we beat that year that even had a winning record. The last two games we played that year we lost 10-45 and 21-45.

 

TO and staff pinpointed our problem which was lack of team speed. They upgraded talent and speed which is what led to our run. Maybe we're in the process of doing that now. I'll have to see to believe.

 

Yep. The beatdowns to Miami and Ga. Tech taught Osborne that the old ways -- which he'd practiced for 20 years -- were not going to cut it against Top 10 opponents, and that's when he started recruiting for defensive speed. I'd say we're in the same position, and hoping Pelini has the same takeaway.

[Guy Chamberlin]

What is our identity? Are we going to pound the rock and play great D? Are we going to run a spread mixing pass and run with a bend but don't break defense?

 

When I was younger, hell when we all were younger, we knew what we were going to see. Stifling defenses and an offensive juggernaut that by the 3rd quarter had the opposing D sucking wind, crying for it's mother. That was orchestrated by one of the all time great college coaches. Is Bo that coach? We're still finding out, and I'm not so sure if he's not trying to do the same.

 

I know that the college football landscape has changed, and that what worked 20 years ago, probably won't work as well now due to kids athletic abilities just being insane. But that's where you have to find your niche, and the ability to adapt, improvise and overcome. It's pretty obvious where the weaknesses are, but does Bo have the will and desire to make those changes? If not, then there will probably be more frustration, but if he does fix what is broken, then he's got a chance...

Very well thought out, and well written post. I think the part of your discussion that I underlined & bolded is one of the main areas of focus for this program this offseason. +1

 

Just want to note that you can pound the rock in a spread offense, too, which is what we did to good effect this year. With a better defense, we won't need to play as much catch up football either.

[nebraskafaninwi]

I can summarize all of this in one simple sentence......Win and the rest takes care of itself.

 

Notre Dame has been laughed at for a long time. Now they put together a run to the national title game and people view them differently. Shocking, I know.

 

Oregon is flashy because they are winning. If they start losing games if their current head coach leaves for the NFL, they are not longer as sexy. Shocking, I know.

 

Alabama is flashy right now because they are the top program in the country. When Saban leaves they will not be as flashy.

 

In the SEC, it will likely be Arkansas as the flashy team in the coming seasons.

 

Everything is cyclical.

 

When Nebraska starts winning conference championships again the history will be what people will talk about and how passionate the fans are. That is what would become the new flashy thing to talk about on ESPN.

[Guy Chamberlin]

When does Husker Basketball get its turn?

[junior4949]

I can summarize all of this in one simple sentence......Win and the rest takes care of itself.

 

Notre Dame has been laughed at for a long time. Now they put together a run to the national title game and people view them differently. Shocking, I know.

 

Oregon is flashy because they are winning. If they start losing games if their current head coach leaves for the NFL, they are not longer as sexy. Shocking, I know.

 

Alabama is flashy right now because they are the top program in the country. When Saban leaves they will not be as flashy.

 

In the SEC, it will likely be Arkansas as the flashy team in the coming seasons.

 

Everything is cyclical.

 

When Nebraska starts winning conference championships again the history will be what people will talk about and how passionate the fans are. That is what would become the new flashy thing to talk about on ESPN.

 

You really think Brett Bielema takes Arkansas to the promised land?

[MichiganDad3]

That article is written by Dirk who is a dick who is wildly critical of Bo. I'll consider the source.

I won't disagree with you about Dirk's personality or how he goes about his business. I especially think more often than not his attitude towards Bo and the program at press conferences tarnishes his trade profession. Two years ago I thought the article that he wrote about Martinez before the Ohio State game was one of the un-classiest pieces of journalism that I had ever read.

 

With that being said, I am one that is willing to look at "both sides of the coin" so to speak, and I will give credit where credit is due. This current article that Dirk has written about Nebraska needing to find its identity again and a new edge was both spot on & fair.

 

Nebraska does need to find an identity that meshes with the culture of this state & it's national fan base. I think a great starting point for the coaches can be summed up in one word: PHYSICAL!

 

I couldn't help but cringe when I watched the Rose Bowl game this year of both the Wisconsin offense & Stanford Offense running power football. Minus the option it was eerily similar to the smash-mouth type of running we used to dish out to opponents week-in & week-out. Some of the zone blocking and pulling guard power-o's and iso plays the other night were a thing of beauty.

 

Am I saying this is what Nebraska needs to get back to? Not necessarily. Do we need to go back to an all old-school offense and continually run the option out of the I-formation? No. I wish we could, but we can't because the speed of the game has changed too much in the last 20 years. It can be apart of our offense, but I don't think it can be THE offense.

 

I think the weapons that Tim Beck has coming back next year on offense can prove to be a really dangerous offense...pertaining they do a better job of holding onto the ball. So if I were the coaching staff I would not change the offense too much next season. I would suggest keeping the hurry-up no huddle, but scale back the number of drop back passes we do each game. Another suggestion would be to keep many of the plays the same, but instead of having 4 or 5 wide receivers spreading the field out, I would take out 2 receivers and replace them with TE's. This would allow the running game to have more of a physical edge, it also gives immediate extra blockers for Taylor when he needs it.

 

The biggest overhaul that Nebraska MUST make is on the defensive side. In your 4 losses when your offense is average at least 30+ points a game, normally that should be good enough to win. When your defense in those 4 losses is giving up an average of 52+ points per game and an average of over 500+ yards that isn't just a defensive problem...it's a catastrophe! Most Husker fans have another word for it: Unacceptable.

 

I completely agree with what Tom Shatel wrote the other day when he said if your scheme is too complicated and has too big of a learning curve in order to get your young talent onto the field, "then get rid of the curve."

 

Defensive scheme should be the #1 focus of this coaching staff this offseason. I know Bo trusts his current scheme, but the numbers speak for themselves. When he doesn't have NFL talent on that side of the ball his above average defensive players struggle, where in another simplified scheme they would more than likely thrive playing at a faster speed and with a higher degree of confidence.

 

If Bo is the "defensive genius" that many tagged him with years ago, then he will keep the things that he likes about his current scheme, but will also simply other parts of the scheme so that his players can play faster and with that higher degree of confidence...not just in the scheme, but with themselves.

 

In closing, I usually have a hard time agreeing with much of what Dirk Chatelain has to write, but this time around I will give credit where credit his due. He is spot on. Nebraska must find it's new edge.

 

The defense has been on a downward trend for 3 years. Three of the worst 8 defensive performances in NU's history occurred this year. NU couldn't even slow down a reasonable offense. These are signals that something is wrong with the defense. Bo must make changes or 10 wins will be the best NU achieves and 5 or six loss seasons will be sprinkled in. Solich & Callahan broke many great Husker streaks; consecutive winning seasons, consecutive bowls, etc. The only thing left is the sellout streak. If this streak ends it is because fans will not tolerate blowout losses, and will be accompanied by loss of booster money.

[MichiganDad3]

This is the most important point he makes in my opinion:

 

A staff of assistant coaches that never left, creating an environment not only conducive to great game management, but talent development.

 

Good coaches can build talent. We used to bring in walk-on linemen and mold them into All-Americans by the time they were seniors. But those assistants didn't have aspirations of being head coaches elsewhere. I think the assistants we have now are talented, but they need experience and that takes time. If we keep these coaches, we could be great again, but it;s going to be years down the road.

those guys were developed with state-of-the-art strength and psychological programs as well as nutrition, of which EVERYONE is doing now.

 

I know I hamper on this a lot but it's just the way I see it. Our run in the 90's was great, but it was lightning in a bottle. The first results of revolutionizing the off-field intangibles of college football. Everyone has caught up or surpassed us in these categories and now 9-10 wins and no conference or national championships for nebraska is what we have.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is that for once I agree with Dirk. Nebraska needs to find that niche or spark that we can sell and lean on. The playing field is getting more and more level each year, WAY more so than Osborne ever had to contend with.

I never understood why NU shared this information. This info should have been kept as secret as possible.

[MichiganDad3]

Is it too simple just to say that our defense needs to get a lot better?

 

That'll do it.

[MichiganDad3]

Well for a few years stretch, in the mid 90's anyway, our backups were probably the 2nd best team in the nation. Just read "Unbeatable" by Henry Cordes. I learned a bit more about the amount of reps, intensity, and depth development that took place in an Osborne practice. According to the book, we were outrageously outworking every other team by almost a factor of four times. If that is even close to accurate, that is just insane but also would explain how we competed so well with supposedly inferior incoming talent.

 

I believe it. How often did a 2nd or 3rd stringer come in and screw up? Almost never. The backups just kept the machine running smoooooth.

[MichiganDad3]

I'm going to say 90% of what he writes is pretty much crap. I'm not trying to give Dick, I mean Dirk, any more run, but there are some questions that have to be asked.

 

What is our identity? Are we going to pound the rock and play great D? Are we going to run a spread mixing pass and run with a bend but don't break defense?

 

When I was younger, hell when we all were younger, we knew what we were going to see. Stifling defenses and an offensive juggernaut that by the 3rd quarter had the opposing D sucking wind, crying for it's mother. That was orchestrated by one of the all time great college coaches. Is Bo that coach? We're still finding out, and I'm not so sure if he's not trying to do the same.

 

I know that the college football landscape has changed, and that what worked 20 years ago, probably won't work as well now due to kids athletic abilities just being insane. But that's where you have to find your niche, and the ability to adapt, improvise and overcome. It's pretty obvious where the weaknesses are, but does Bo have the will and desire to make those changes? If not, then there will probably be more frustration, but if he does fix what is broken, then he's got a chance...

 

I sometimes forget the wide age ranges on this board. I don't consider myself old, but I vividly remember a time in Husker football where we were more of a paper tiger than anything else. Sure, we played decent defense and wore opposing defenses down against inferior opponents. However, we got our butts handed to us several times to teams as good or better than us. Had the internet been around back then, Charlie McBride's name would have popped up a lot. I'd say he was as despised as Cosgrove was.

 

I'm not sure what most fans opinion is on when our run really started, but I have always felt it started in the 93' season. When we took Florida State down to the wire in the bowl game I really started to believe. Before that, there really wasn't much to believe in. The 91' squad accomplished a feat that no other bowl eligible Husker team had accomplished. They failed to score even a single point in the bowl game. The 90' squad lost to every single opponent we played that was ranked. The teams we did beat were pretty bad. The Big 8 in those days were pretty bad. There wasn't a team in the Big 8 that we beat that year that even had a winning record. The last two games we played that year we lost 10-45 and 21-45.

 

TO and staff pinpointed our problem which was lack of team speed. They upgraded talent and speed which is what led to our run. Maybe we're in the process of doing that now. I'll have to see to believe.

 

Agree with the poor defense comment. TO's offenses had a tendency to sputter against top defenses too, however, the past 2 years are different. NU has taken multiple beatings against average teams. The past two years have been much worse than any of TO's years.

[walksalone]

I'm going to say 90% of what he writes is pretty much crap. I'm not trying to give Dick, I mean Dirk, any more run, but there are some questions that have to be asked.

 

What is our identity? Are we going to pound the rock and play great D? Are we going to run a spread mixing pass and run with a bend but don't break defense?

 

When I was younger, hell when we all were younger, we knew what we were going to see. Stifling defenses and an offensive juggernaut that by the 3rd quarter had the opposing D sucking wind, crying for it's mother. That was orchestrated by one of the all time great college coaches. Is Bo that coach? We're still finding out, and I'm not so sure if he's not trying to do the same.

 

I know that the college football landscape has changed, and that what worked 20 years ago, probably won't work as well now due to kids athletic abilities just being insane. But that's where you have to find your niche, and the ability to adapt, improvise and overcome. It's pretty obvious where the weaknesses are, but does Bo have the will and desire to make those changes? If not, then there will probably be more frustration, but if he does fix what is broken, then he's got a chance...

 

I sometimes forget the wide age ranges on this board. I don't consider myself old, but I vividly remember a time in Husker football where we were more of a paper tiger than anything else. Sure, we played decent defense and wore opposing defenses down against inferior opponents. However, we got our butts handed to us several times to teams as good or better than us. Had the internet been around back then, Charlie McBride's name would have popped up a lot. I'd say he was as despised as Cosgrove was.

 

I'm not sure what most fans opinion is on when our run really started, but I have always felt it started in the 93' season. When we took Florida State down to the wire in the bowl game I really started to believe. Before that, there really wasn't much to believe in. The 91' squad accomplished a feat that no other bowl eligible Husker team had accomplished. They failed to score even a single point in the bowl game. The 90' squad lost to every single opponent we played that was ranked. The teams we did beat were pretty bad. The Big 8 in those days were pretty bad. There wasn't a team in the Big 8 that we beat that year that even had a winning record. The last two games we played that year we lost 10-45 and 21-45.

 

TO and staff pinpointed our problem which was lack of team speed. They upgraded talent and speed which is what led to our run. Maybe we're in the process of doing that now. I'll have to see to believe.

 

I remember those loses too. Those would sting because there it was, national tv game, and us spitting the bit when everyone would be watching. One of the ones that bothered me was 91, I think it was a Thursday night game against Wash in lincoln where we got handled and lost by a couple scores

 

That stretch of the late 80's, very early 90's were rough..

[walksalone]

Just want to note that you can pound the rock in a spread offense, too, which is what we did to good effect this year. With a better defense, we won't need to play as much catch up football either.

 

Very true, but whatever formation you want to pound the rock from (myself I prefer the "I"), you've got to recruit with that offensive set in mind

[lo country]

I'm going to say 90% of what he writes is pretty much crap. I'm not trying to give Dick, I mean Dirk, any more run, but there are some questions that have to be asked.

 

What is our identity? Are we going to pound the rock and play great D? Are we going to run a spread mixing pass and run with a bend but don't break defense?

 

When I was younger, hell when we all were younger, we knew what we were going to see. Stifling defenses and an offensive juggernaut that by the 3rd quarter had the opposing D sucking wind, crying for it's mother. That was orchestrated by one of the all time great college coaches. Is Bo that coach? We're still finding out, and I'm not so sure if he's not trying to do the same.

 

I know that the college football landscape has changed, and that what worked 20 years ago, probably won't work as well now due to kids athletic abilities just being insane. But that's where you have to find your niche, and the ability to adapt, improvise and overcome. It's pretty obvious where the weaknesses are, but does Bo have the will and desire to make those changes? If not, then there will probably be more frustration, but if he does fix what is broken, then he's got a chance...

 

The thing that made us great was what you described above. Solid, butt kicking D and an offense that would run it down your throat. Nothing you could do to stop it. The D actually became stifling when we truly went after speed. To beat a dead horse, McBride said they went after 3 things in this order: Speed, ability to tackle and size. Speed and the fundamental skill of tackling trumped size. Look no further than David to see this effect.

 

Watching Ou and A&M is like night and day compared to our D. Plays on the ball in the air, speed and an uncanny ability to tackle in space and not miss.

 

Ultimately until we become great at the basics, ie tackling, penalties and ball control we are doomed. An average athletic team with sound basics, IMO will always beat a superior athletic team that misses tackles, blocks, gets penalties and turns the ball over. The NU teams of old were not stacked with modern day 5 star kids. They were sure tacklers and played to the best of their abilities and were sound in the basics.

 

The bolded above is a look at Bama, ND, Wisky, SC, Stanford etc.... Solid D, pound the ball and run you into submission.

[lo country]

Just want to note that you can pound the rock in a spread offense, too, which is what we did to good effect this year. With a better defense, we won't need to play as much catch up football either.

 

Very true, but whatever formation you want to pound the rock from (myself I prefer the "I"), you've got to recruit with that offensive set in mind

 

Not a recruiting guru, but could part of our issue on O and D to a degree is trying to recruit a jack of all trades and a master of none. Can a great bulldozer also be great in a passing O, a spread O, asked to pull on toss plays, zone read option etc.......Our O is very multiple, but do we also suffer for that which has improved ie OL play suffers?

[walksalone]

I'm going to say 90% of what he writes is pretty much crap. I'm not trying to give Dick, I mean Dirk, any more run, but there are some questions that have to be asked.

 

What is our identity? Are we going to pound the rock and play great D? Are we going to run a spread mixing pass and run with a bend but don't break defense?

 

When I was younger, hell when we all were younger, we knew what we were going to see. Stifling defenses and an offensive juggernaut that by the 3rd quarter had the opposing D sucking wind, crying for it's mother. That was orchestrated by one of the all time great college coaches. Is Bo that coach? We're still finding out, and I'm not so sure if he's not trying to do the same.

 

I know that the college football landscape has changed, and that what worked 20 years ago, probably won't work as well now due to kids athletic abilities just being insane. But that's where you have to find your niche, and the ability to adapt, improvise and overcome. It's pretty obvious where the weaknesses are, but does Bo have the will and desire to make those changes? If not, then there will probably be more frustration, but if he does fix what is broken, then he's got a chance...

 

The thing that made us great was what you described above. Solid, butt kicking D and an offense that would run it down your throat. Nothing you could do to stop it. The D actually became stifling when we truly went after speed. To beat a dead horse, McBride said they went after 3 things in this order: Speed, ability to tackle and size. Speed and the fundamental skill of tackling trumped size. Look no further than David to see this effect.

 

Watching Ou and A&M is like night and day compared to our D. Plays on the ball in the air, speed and an uncanny ability to tackle in space and not miss.

 

Ultimately until we become great at the basics, ie tackling, penalties and ball control we are doomed. An average athletic team with sound basics, IMO will always beat a superior athletic team that misses tackles, blocks, gets penalties and turns the ball over. The NU teams of old were not stacked with modern day 5 star kids. They were sure tacklers and played to the best of their abilities and were sound in the basics.

 

The bolded above is a look at Bama, ND, Wisky, SC, Stanford etc.... Solid D, pound the ball and run you into submission.

 

I cannot +1 that enough.

 

Fundamentally sound football with good but not great players will always cause problems for whoever your opponent is. And that's what is lacking. Until those ways are gone back to, it may be awhile before the program becomes a team that people fear and respect.

 

I wish I knew where they could start though? Recruiting, improving the fundamentals, I don't have an answer...