blkshrtz Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 He did not play this week any reasons why? Injury or not understanding the defensive schemes? Quote Link to comment
I am I Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Good question. if he was healthy, why keep a guy whose played 3 yrs of college ball on the sideline? he can't be worse or slower or more unknowledgeable than the Frosh we played? he must have been hurt. Quote Link to comment
blkshrtz Posted September 3, 2013 Author Share Posted September 3, 2013 Ya I'm thinking injury also, hopefully this gets answered in pelini's weekly press conference Quote Link to comment
Warrior10 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 We played Dime. In dime his position isn't on the field. Quote Link to comment
whateveritis1224 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 We played Dime. In dime his position isn't on the field. Ditto, he was not playing because he's not the dime linebacker. Saw him a couple of times running down on kickoff coverage. No problems, just not in position to play on D because we were in dime the entire game. Quote Link to comment
Danimal Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Disagree with decision to stay in dime. We need more run help and I get tired of seeing our one LB get run-off with motion. Zaire needs to be in there. Quote Link to comment
EZ-E Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Disagree with decision to stay in dime. We need more run help and I get tired of seeing our one LB get run-off with motion. Zaire needs to be in there. Do you line up LBs on WRs then when they go five wide???? Quote Link to comment
MLB 51 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Disagree with decision to stay in dime. We need more run help and I get tired of seeing our one LB get run-off with motion. Zaire needs to be in there. Do you line up LBs on WRs then when they go five wide???? No. You can play nickel and use man-man coverage though. Then you have 2 LB's on the field. Surprised we didn't see that type of formation. Quote Link to comment
Danimal Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Disagree with decision to stay in dime. We need more run help and I get tired of seeing our one LB get run-off with motion. Zaire needs to be in there. Do you line up LBs on WRs then when they go five wide???? I said I disagree with STAYING in dime. Of course we have to use it it but it didn't have to be our base defense. Quote Link to comment
EZ-E Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Disagree with decision to stay in dime. We need more run help and I get tired of seeing our one LB get run-off with motion. Zaire needs to be in there. Do you line up LBs on WRs then when they go five wide???? No. You can play nickel and use man-man coverage though. Then you have 2 LB's on the field. Surprised we didn't see that type of formation. You'll never see Bo play without at least one high safety. Quote Link to comment
Army_Allen Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Disagree with decision to stay in dime. We need more run help and I get tired of seeing our one LB get run-off with motion. Zaire needs to be in there. Do you line up LBs on WRs then when they go five wide???? No. You can play nickel and use man-man coverage though. Then you have 2 LB's on the field. Surprised we didn't see that type of formation. You'll never see Bo play without at least one high safety. Then in that case go with that nickel with Gerry as a hybrid S/LB and let him disguise himself as an lb before dropping into deep coverage using a press man to give him time to get there. Quote Link to comment
zoogs Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 I didn't watch the game but the radio broadcast made it seem like they were running 4WR sets quite frequently. Wouldn't the dime be the appropriate counter to that? Quote Link to comment
MLB 51 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 I didn't watch the game but the radio broadcast made it seem like they were running 4WR sets quite frequently. Wouldn't the dime be the appropriate counter to that? Appropriate, yes, but not a necessity. As Army_Allen stated, you could use Gerry as hybrid and disguise him as LB. Quote Link to comment
NUance Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 We probably stayed in dime due to Wyo's hurry up offense. Not a lot of personnel changes during that game. Quote Link to comment
lo country Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Disagree with decision to stay in dime. We need more run help and I get tired of seeing our one LB get run-off with motion. Zaire needs to be in there. Do you line up LBs on WRs then when they go five wide???? No. You can play nickel and use man-man coverage though. Then you have 2 LB's on the field. Surprised we didn't see that type of formation. You'll never see Bo play without at least one high safety. That is what he announcers said Wyoming was keying in on. Depending on 1 or 2 safeties deep, they knew which plays to run. Seems if Bo is committed to this, can't he disguise our coverages better? Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.