Defensive guru status

[Hammerhead]

I knew Red would have the biggest sh#t stain in his pants over this one.

 

Whatever you say kiddo.

 

 

 

Good to see I'm not the only one here who isn't trying to ride EZ's jock...

 

As for anyone who brings up Pelini's experience in the NFL, two words for you: Bill Callahan. He even coached in a Super Bowl, y'know.

[TheSker]

I'm seeing lots things on defensive that can be built on. Some things are actually quite impressive when you realize the age of the young man executing it.

Husker Mike's column is good and indicates some of these same bright spots on the defensive side of the ball. He mentioned 3 defensive players of concern which I would agree with and wouldn't be surprised if their number of snaps decreases during the season. Those three are Ankrah, Green and Santos. Three defensive players who have solid upsides are Gregory, Gerry and Jean-Baptiste. Pelini and Pap will look for the right combination to get this defense on track.

[funhusker]

Total Defense though 1 game means nothing without looking at opponents

 

Southern Miss played Texas State

and Texas State = Wyoming

 

Also don't forget Southern Miss lost to Texas State.

 

[GBRrodney]

whether it was earned in the past or not is a thing for debate. I could buy an argument that says it was somewhat earned in the past. I could also buy the argument that it was not. That is a tough call.

 

As to whether Bo is a defensive guru now... that is not up for debate. the answer is emphatically... NO. We have to follow where the data leads... and the data is in on this one... Bo's recent teams have been far, far, far removed from what could be objectively described as "well coached." A guru he may at one time have been... but the game evolves and that was then and this is now... he is no defensive guru now.

 

This seems entirely reasonable. Bo learned most of his defensive philosophy while in the NFL for eight years. I don't know that he innovated much on any of the basic concepts. When I think of terms like guru or genius in the context of football, I think of great innovation. So I probably wouldn't go that far with Bo. He understood the concepts very well and had the right type of personality to coach defensive players. Combine those with the the amount of talent he had to work with in 2003, and you had the perfect storm for great defensive results. Same goes for 2009 and 2010. But when the talent isn't great, his defenses run into big problems. And he's very stubborn about the way he does things. I envision his output like this:

 

 

From what I've heard, the big boosters wanted him back in 2008 and TO didn't have much of a choice. This may or may not be true, but it would make sense to me. The boosters emotions are no different than any of the fans', and Bo was very popular because he was the last string holding together our decades of proud tradition that had started to crumble between 2000 and 2007. I remember being at the 2000 Alamo Bowl and listening to everyone chant "We want Bo!". It may not have been the most logical desire, but it made sense from an emotional perspective. Bo's personality fit here and Frank hired him, so (in a minor way) he was the last viable link to Frank, Tom and Bob. Since Frank had already been fired, the fans wanted to hold onto whatever remaining link they could. They didn't want to see an outside hire with a whole new staff to break the 40-year continuity that was so rare in college football.

 

After Callahan was fired, those emotions from the Alamo post-game came rushing back, and the powers that be were set on Bo. As a head coach, he was entirely unproven-- literally had never been in the position at any level. So it was a risky hire. But maybe he was the best available. I don't know. The results have been better than Callahan but still mixed. With great talent his defenses can be scary. With average talent, they can be scary bad. We all laugh at Cosgrove as the epitome of a clueless defensive coordinator, but several of Bo's games have matched or exceeded Cosgrove's worst. We can't ignore that. And Bo's assistant hires have not been home runs by any amount of Kool-Aid.

 

I'm not drawing any grand conclusions from any of this, but it's safe to say that 2012 is not where we want to be. And what we saw against Wyoming is not where we want to be. Maybe Bo has lots of potential for change and improvement. Maybe not. All we can do is wait and see, and hope. And get in lots and lots of ridiculous arguments about it on the internet.

 

Great post. I think it would be crazy to fire Bo right now. But I think it would be even more crazy to accept this as the status quo for another season or two. So if the 2014 season ends and we haven't seen measurable improvement, I think it'll be time to pull the trigger. 9 or 10 wins with a blowout loss or two, an upset loss to a team we shouldn't lose to, multiple games where we give up 600+ yards and the sense that the coaching staff is consistently overmatched and outcoached are not sustainable at Nebraska.

 

Defense: Talent / playmakers or player development/coaching?

 

When Bo's scheme has worked best was when he has had good / great play makers at the 3 levels of the defense:

1) D-lineman that can stop the run. (Suh, Crick, Steinkuler)

2) LB or nickel back that can make plays in space. (Lavonte David)

3) a lock down corner. (Amukamara , Dennard)

 

I haven't seen one for a couple of years. The result of not having a playmaker at any level of the defense has been 600+ yard defensive performances. It has been painful to watch. Any OC seems to be able to devise a plan to move the ball with ease against the scheme.

 

I do see promise in the D-lineman, I see them getting better. I am not sure they can stop the run covering two gaps while getting double teamed, but they sure look good. They pass the eye test so it doesn’t seem to be a lack of talent which points towards scheme or player development.

 

I see promise in the LBs, they are fast but they seem to be out of position and I saw a couple of times where they took terrible angles and trailed the play. This appears to be a lack of experience. If they never improve over the course of the year then it points back to player development or coaching.

 

Lock down corner. Jean-Baptiste or Mitchell seem to be close, but the CBs allowed what looks to be a possession receiver from both Wyoming and Wisconsin catch 10 plus balls against us. Georgia completed passes at will. Talent or player development / coaching?

 

It might be a problem with the scheme or a lack of talent/playmakers or it might be that the scheme doesn’t work without playmakers. So, it seems to me that if you don’t have the players to run the scheme, then change the scheme so these guys can perform.

 

My 2 cents: The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result each time. I hope the coaching staff changes something before I go crazy.