We need to stop handing out blackshirts at this point

[knapplc]

The one constant in those four games of 600 or more yards given up is Bo and the defensive coaching staff. So it's fair to point out.

[zoogs]

To a degree I think Bo's asked for it by changing the perception of the Blackshirt, from practice jerseys for the starting D, to a trophy of success. This really opens up to every performance that isn't utterly elite being held up to the question of, "Why are they handed out?"

 

But I don't know, this whole topic doesn't seem to be that relevant or meaningful to any woes we might be experiencing. To say the least

 

So what do u do when you dont have clear starters? Bo is trying to create competition and it doesnt work when you give everyone competing a blackshirt

 

When you don't have clear starters, the guy who for now has the job gets the shirt. And any day of the week he doesn't earn it, the next day the shirt gets taken away and goes to the other guy.

 

I for one am also glad that this game ended the way it did. I don't want anyone thinking they are bullet proof. It also should be very motivational as well.

 

I'm with EZ on this, in that it has to be a given that these weaknesses existed. The team came a break here or there away from winning handily and that sense of invincibility. So from that standpoint, it's good that this happened in a game that's over and done with and a W.

 

I also agree with knapp, et. al., though, that this has just happened so much and there have been so...many... games where we've had to say, "Oh, whew, thank goodness for that." It's not good.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

The one constant in those four games of 600 or more yards given up is Bo and the defensive coaching staff. So it's fair to point out.

 

Yes, but the team isn't Bo.

[Enhance]

The one constant in those four games of 600 or more yards given up is Bo and the defensive coaching staff. So it's fair to point out.

 

Yes, but the team isn't Bo.

But, these are players and coaches put in place by him. If he isn't the person to go to first, then who is? Papuchis? How many times has he been accused of just being a figure head and Pelini actually calling the shots? About a dozen times a game.

 

I'm in agreement with knapp on most of what I've seen him post in here, and I've been iterating similar thoughts. Several performances giving up 600+ yards, major blowout losses. They've been a recurring theme. They're not outliers, they're not anomalies. They're themes. Take those horrible performances away, and you still have a team that, over the last few years, has been incapable of doing one of the most basic defensive tasks - stopping the run. We're beyond wake-up calls at this point. We just are. Period.

 

I think it's time we really have to start questioning their scheme/coaching, or umbrella, as I like to refer to it. We're making adjustments inside an umbrella, when it's looking more and more obvious that we need to just change our umbrella. I'm not saying we need to fire Pelini - far from it. He knows more than any of us do about defense. But with the knowledge, and the position he holds, comes a responsibility to fix problems. And every since about 2011, this defense has performed about the same. Blowouts and setting the worst kind of defensive records imaginable. And this isn't about too high of expectations, as someone suggested in another thread. It's about standards. I can handle bad defensive performances, but there is absolutely no reason Nebraska should ever give up 70 points or 600 yards of offense.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

The one constant in those four games of 600 or more yards given up is Bo and the defensive coaching staff. So it's fair to point out.

 

Yes, but the team isn't Bo.

But, these are players and coaches put in place by him. If he isn't the person to go to first, then who is? Papuchis? How many times has he been accused of just being a figure head and Pelini actually calling the shots? About a dozen times a game.

 

I'm in agreement with knapp on most of what I've seen him post in here, and I've been iterating similar thoughts. Several performances giving up 600+ yards, major blowout losses. They've been a recurring theme. They're not outliers, they're not anomalies. They're themes. Take those horrible performances away, and you still have a team that, over the last few years, has been incapable of doing one of the most basic defensive tasks - stopping the run. We're beyond wake-up calls at this point. We just are. Period.

 

I think it's time we really have to start questioning their scheme/coaching, or umbrella, as I like to refer to it. We're making adjustments inside an umbrella, when it's looking more and more obvious that we need to just change our umbrella. I'm not saying we need to fire Pelini - far from it. He knows more than any of us do about defense. But with the knowledge, and the position he holds, comes a responsibility to fix problems. And every since about 2011, this defense has performed about the same. Blowouts and setting the worst kind of defensive records imaginable. And this isn't about too high of expectations, as someone suggested in another thread. It's about standards. I can handle bad defensive performances, but there is absolutely no reason Nebraska should ever give up 70 points or 600 yards of offense.

 

I get that.

 

Team means players and coaches, though. With a new set of players could come a new result of the scheme currently being ran. The last two games of the three where we've given up 600+ yards could be because of a different set of reasons than the third game where we gave up 600+ yards. So yes, you could just sit there, look at the results of the last three games and a few of the games last season and call this a trend, but you would be ignoring a crucial part of the story: the team is compositionally different.

 

If by the UCLA game we hold them to 300 or so yards, a lot of this talk goes away. If we get gashed like we did against Wyoming, and we still see results similar to these down the road this year, then I'll agree with the idea that this is a troubling trend for Bo and the coaching staff.

[True2tRA]

The one constant in those four games of 600 or more yards given up is Bo and the defensive coaching staff. So it's fair to point out.

 

Yes, but the team isn't Bo.

But, these are players and coaches put in place by him. If he isn't the person to go to first, then who is? Papuchis? How many times has he been accused of just being a figure head and Pelini actually calling the shots? About a dozen times a game.

 

I'm in agreement with knapp on most of what I've seen him post in here, and I've been iterating similar thoughts. Several performances giving up 600+ yards, major blowout losses. They've been a recurring theme. They're not outliers, they're not anomalies. They're themes. Take those horrible performances away, and you still have a team that, over the last few years, has been incapable of doing one of the most basic defensive tasks - stopping the run. We're beyond wake-up calls at this point. We just are. Period.

 

I think it's time we really have to start questioning their scheme/coaching, or umbrella, as I like to refer to it. We're making adjustments inside an umbrella, when it's looking more and more obvious that we need to just change our umbrella. I'm not saying we need to fire Pelini - far from it. He knows more than any of us do about defense. But with the knowledge, and the position he holds, comes a responsibility to fix problems. And every since about 2011, this defense has performed about the same. Blowouts and setting the worst kind of defensive records imaginable. And this isn't about too high of expectations, as someone suggested in another thread. It's about standards. I can handle bad defensive performances, but there is absolutely no reason Nebraska should ever give up 70 points or 600 yards of offense.

 

I get that.

 

Team means players and coaches, though. With a new set of players could come a new result of the scheme currently being ran. The last two games of the three where we've given up 600+ yards could be because of a different set of reasons than the third game where we gave up 600+ yards. So yes, you could just sit there, look at the results of the last three games and a few of the games last season and call this a trend, but you would be ignoring a crucial part of the story: the team is compositionally different.

 

If by the UCLA game we hold them to 300 or so yards, a lot of this talk goes away. If we get gashed like we did against Wyoming, and we still see results similar to these down the road this year, then I'll agree with the idea that this is a troubling trend for Bo and the coaching staff.

 

UCLA was a top 25 team in the country in offensive yards per game last season averaging 466 per game. They had 647 total offensive yards saturday in their opener and scored 58 points. Now if I'm not mistaken they have a bye week to prepare for their week 3 game against us.

 

People want to talk about unrealistic expectations from this young defense. I'd say holding UCLA to 300 yards is about the most unrealistic comment I've heard yet.

 

You can expect it to get ugly. With you being a numbers guy I am shocked that you even made that comment. The odds are stacked against us, especially with that bye week. I counted this UCLA game as a loss before the season started and I am even more confident in that now after seeing their performance and ours.

 

One week at a time though, as I've always said, in my book if we just show improvement at this point it's all I can ask. We just haven't shown that we can get better as the year progresses. We can beat S. Miss and still lose to UCLA, but if we look like we are learning and fighting through the whole game then I'll be pleased with that. Never in my life have I heard some of the bullsh#t I've heard from this team already. The most disheartening things. First game of the year and you have guys giving half effort, quitting before the whistle, and even admitting that they let up and lost focus!? It's the first game of the year?! How the fuxk are you letting up or losing focus on the one f'ing thing you've been working all off season for!?

[Enhance]

I get that.

 

Team means players and coaches, though. With a new set of players could come a new result of the scheme currently being ran. The last two games of the three where we've given up 600+ yards could be because of a different set of reasons than the third game where we gave up 600+ yards. So yes, you could just sit there, look at the results of the last three games and a few of the games last season and call this a trend, but you would be ignoring a crucial part of the story: the team is compositionally different.

 

If by the UCLA game we hold them to 300 or so yards, a lot of this talk goes away. If we get gashed like we did against Wyoming, and we still see results similar to these down the road this year, then I'll agree with the idea that this is a troubling trend for Bo and the coaching staff.

You mention why this is so concerning to me, though. Compositionally, this is a new team, but it's a new team that makes the same mistakes. Last year, we were all filled with ideas of starting a young, more athletic defense over an experienced, less athletic defense because of how bad our performances were. Now that we're doing it, we're seeing no change in execution. I finally got to sit down and watch every play last night, and I still saw a flat d-line, non-existent linebackers and a secondary being asked to do way too much. I'm not saying we know or even I know what's wrong, but most of the evidence suggests that our defense simply doesn't know what it's doing.

 

If we can get better as the year goes on, I won't be that upset. I expected growing pains, just not ones of this magnitude. I can say with confidence we will not hold UCLA to 300 total yards. We just won't. I try to be optimistic but that this point I think we all have good enough reason to have doubts.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

I get that.

 

Team means players and coaches, though. With a new set of players could come a new result of the scheme currently being ran. The last two games of the three where we've given up 600+ yards could be because of a different set of reasons than the third game where we gave up 600+ yards. So yes, you could just sit there, look at the results of the last three games and a few of the games last season and call this a trend, but you would be ignoring a crucial part of the story: the team is compositionally different.

 

If by the UCLA game we hold them to 300 or so yards, a lot of this talk goes away. If we get gashed like we did against Wyoming, and we still see results similar to these down the road this year, then I'll agree with the idea that this is a troubling trend for Bo and the coaching staff.

You mention why this is so concerning to me, though. Compositionally, this is a new team, but it's a new team that makes the same mistakes. Last year, we were all filled with ideas of starting a young, more athletic defense over an experienced, less athletic defense because of how bad our performances were. Now that we're doing it, we're seeing no change in execution. I finally got to sit down and watch every play last night, and I still saw a flat d-line, non-existent linebackers and a secondary being asked to do way too much. I'm not saying we know or even I know what's wrong, but most of the evidence suggests that our defense simply doesn't know what it's doing.

 

If we can get better as the year goes on, I won't be that upset. I expected growing pains, just not ones of this magnitude. I can say with confidence we will not hold UCLA to 300 total yards. We just won't. I try to be optimistic but that this point I think we all have good enough reason to have doubts.

 

I don't get it--you expect a unit that has not played a single actual game together play like an elite defense? Then when they don't perform up to expectations in their (once again) very...first...game...together, we casually throw it off that they'll never get better?

 

I'm thinking we won't hold UCLA to 300 yards of offense, either, but this talk will go away or die down even if we hold them to 400 yards because most people are expecting quadruple digit totals, which is absurd.

 

By the way, I don't know how you can say you saw a flat defensive line--I'm pretty sure we forced Brett Smith to move around in the pocket on about 60% of the time they threw the ball. If when he started to move around we had any semblance of a linebacking unit, we would've racked up 4 or 5 sacks.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

The one constant in those four games of 600 or more yards given up is Bo and the defensive coaching staff. So it's fair to point out.

 

Yes, but the team isn't Bo.

But, these are players and coaches put in place by him. If he isn't the person to go to first, then who is? Papuchis? How many times has he been accused of just being a figure head and Pelini actually calling the shots? About a dozen times a game.

 

I'm in agreement with knapp on most of what I've seen him post in here, and I've been iterating similar thoughts. Several performances giving up 600+ yards, major blowout losses. They've been a recurring theme. They're not outliers, they're not anomalies. They're themes. Take those horrible performances away, and you still have a team that, over the last few years, has been incapable of doing one of the most basic defensive tasks - stopping the run. We're beyond wake-up calls at this point. We just are. Period.

 

I think it's time we really have to start questioning their scheme/coaching, or umbrella, as I like to refer to it. We're making adjustments inside an umbrella, when it's looking more and more obvious that we need to just change our umbrella. I'm not saying we need to fire Pelini - far from it. He knows more than any of us do about defense. But with the knowledge, and the position he holds, comes a responsibility to fix problems. And every since about 2011, this defense has performed about the same. Blowouts and setting the worst kind of defensive records imaginable. And this isn't about too high of expectations, as someone suggested in another thread. It's about standards. I can handle bad defensive performances, but there is absolutely no reason Nebraska should ever give up 70 points or 600 yards of offense.

 

I get that.

 

Team means players and coaches, though. With a new set of players could come a new result of the scheme currently being ran. The last two games of the three where we've given up 600+ yards could be because of a different set of reasons than the third game where we gave up 600+ yards. So yes, you could just sit there, look at the results of the last three games and a few of the games last season and call this a trend, but you would be ignoring a crucial part of the story: the team is compositionally different.

 

If by the UCLA game we hold them to 300 or so yards, a lot of this talk goes away. If we get gashed like we did against Wyoming, and we still see results similar to these down the road this year, then I'll agree with the idea that this is a troubling trend for Bo and the coaching staff.

 

UCLA was a top 25 team in the country in offensive yards per game last season averaging 466 per game. They had 647 total offensive yards saturday in their opener and scored 58 points. Now if I'm not mistaken they have a bye week to prepare for their week 3 game against us.

 

People want to talk about unrealistic expectations from this young defense. I'd say holding UCLA to 300 yards is about the most unrealistic comment I've heard yet.

 

You can expect it to get ugly. With you being a numbers guy I am shocked that you even made that comment. The odds are stacked against us, especially with that bye week. I counted this UCLA game as a loss before the season started and I am even more confident in that now after seeing their performance and ours.

 

One week at a time though, as I've always said, in my book if we just show improvement at this point it's all I can ask. We just haven't shown that we can get better as the year progresses. We can beat S. Miss and still lose to UCLA, but if we look like we are learning and fighting through the whole game then I'll be pleased with that. Never in my life have I heard some of the bullsh#t I've heard from this team already. The most disheartening things. First game of the year and you have guys giving half effort, quitting before the whistle, and even admitting that they let up and lost focus!? It's the first game of the year?! How the fuxk are you letting up or losing focus on the one f'ing thing you've been working all off season for!?

 

I'm shocked that you read my comment as saying I think we will hold UCLA to 300 yards. The word if preceded that statement. But I guess we can just ignore that, too.

[True2tRA]

I don't think I took it that way at all, but whatever. I understood you said "if", I was just stating there is no "if"......there is a "not gonna f'ing happen"

[Enhance]

I don't get it--you expect a unit that has not played a single actual game together play like an elite defense? Then when they don't perform up to expectations in their (once again) very...first...game...together, we casually throw it off that they'll never get better?

 

I'm thinking we won't hold UCLA to 300 yards of offense, either, but this talk will go away or die down even if we hold them to 400 yards because most people are expecting quadruple digit totals, which is absurd.

 

By the way, I don't know how you can say you saw a flat defensive line--I'm pretty sure we forced Brett Smith to move around in the pocket on about 60% of the time they threw the ball. If when he started to move around we had any semblance of a linebacking unit, we would've racked up 4 or 5 sacks.

I never said I expected them to play like an elite defense, nor did I insinuate such claims. That'd be absurd given their experience. Not a single person on this board is claiming that either, at least from what I've seen, so that's a poor assumption to make. Again, it's the body of work over the last three years. Yes, this is a "new" defense, but they're making the same mistakes that we made last year and the year prior. I'm more than willing to let the coaches work on this and figure things out, so I haven't thrown in the towel. But, Saturday's performance supplies legitimate evidence for concern on the season.

 

As for the line, their job is more than just applying QB pressure. It's also stopping the run by either a) shedding the block and making the tackle b) preventing the linemen from getting to the second level and freeing up the linebackers to make a play. That is one of the areas we're really struggling, and have for years. It's a problem for the whole front seven.

 

Again, I'm not expecting a great defense and I haven't insinuated such ideas. But, we have the talent on this defense, even if it is young, to avoid giving up 600 yards of offense.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

I don't get it--you expect a unit that has not played a single actual game together play like an elite defense? Then when they don't perform up to expectations in their (once again) very...first...game...together, we casually throw it off that they'll never get better?

 

I'm thinking we won't hold UCLA to 300 yards of offense, either, but this talk will go away or die down even if we hold them to 400 yards because most people are expecting quadruple digit totals, which is absurd.

 

By the way, I don't know how you can say you saw a flat defensive line--I'm pretty sure we forced Brett Smith to move around in the pocket on about 60% of the time they threw the ball. If when he started to move around we had any semblance of a linebacking unit, we would've racked up 4 or 5 sacks.

I never said I expected them to play like an elite defense, nor did I insinuate such claims. That'd be absurd given their experience. Not a single person on this board is claiming that either, at least from what I've seen, so that's a poor assumption to make. Again, it's the body of work over the last three years. Yes, this is a "new" defense, but they're making the same mistakes that we made last year and the year prior. I'm more than willing to let the coaches work on this and figure things out, so I haven't thrown in the towel. But, Saturday's performance supplies legitimate evidence for concern on the season.

 

As for the line, their job is more than just applying QB pressure. It's also stopping the run by either a) shedding the block and making the tackle b) preventing the linemen from getting to the second level and freeing up the linebackers to make a play. That is one of the areas we're really struggling, and have for years. It's a problem for the whole front seven.

 

Again, I'm not expecting a great defense and I haven't insinuated such ideas. But, we have the talent on this defense, even if it is young, to avoid giving up 600 yards of offense.

 

Got it. I probably didn't intend to insinuate that you thought they should play like an elite defense. I was more than likely just sick of the whole why aren't they good or they'll never be good stuff floating around here.

[Chaddyboxer]

Speaking of the blackshirts....

I alluded to this earlier before the season started....but I could see Ankrah losing some PT and being beat out by either Mcmullen or Moss. The two young DE's looked more impressive in the first game.

[Enhance]

Got it. I probably didn't intend to insinuate that you thought they should play like an elite defense. I was more than likely just sick of the whole why aren't they good or they'll never be good stuff floating around here.

Fair enough and no worries. That's why I've tried to buffer my remarks about the defense in most threads. Some comments have been a little over-the-top, that's for sure. It's important everyone remembers it's just week one, and we don't know what this defense is capable of. Naturally, we're all just a little disheartened by what we saw, but anything could happen moving forward.