**** What Did We Learn ****

[lo country]

Not to put down short side option, but anybody can put up pictures of stills and write some words under them. I don't buy that it conclusively determines what's wrong with the defense and what not. The other day I was reading one of these picture breakdowns of New England's passing offense, pinning a play on Brady that I specifically remember watching where his guy (Dobson) didn't get his head turned around until well after he made his break.

 

Even if that guy is pretty good at breaking down film, it only makes him better than you or me.

 

Not to say I'm not extremely concerned about the defense either. I'd be curious to see a discussion about the scheme and its weaknesses over here. I still feel it's primarily we're not getting near enough out of some positions on the field as we need to.

Not a knock on this board at all. It was just a good write up that made sense to me. And yes, if someone is breaking down film they are doing a better job then me.

[zoogs]

Oh, yeah, I didn't interpret it that way. Maybe you can ask for his permission to cross post?

[lo country]

Great read on the other Husker board. Guy named "short side option" does a great job breaking down our defensive woes. It is purely scheme. Once he breaks down the game film it is sad to see how easy it is to beat/gash our D. Even more disturbing our 3mill coach and staff can't see it.............or won't see it.

 

Really? Maybe he should go and be a coach--if he knows how terrible our scheme is. Please.

So you think our scheme is good? I do not think there is one person on this board praising its success. So we all call Bo stubborn, scheme is poor etc, but if another board posts the same thing their idiots? Really?

[lo country]

Oh, yeah, I didn't interpret it that way. Maybe you can ask for his permission to cross post?

Unsure about posting stuff from another board so I just referenced in a general manner. Read the one about OWH so I no longer post those links!

 

No worries. Thx

[zoogs]

Oh, I meant copy & paste and post it as a thread here. If he gives permission, of course.

 

I do think our scheme is fundamentally OK actually, mainly because I think Bo knows what the heck he's doing. To see all the horrible tackling is disheartening. As I think Paul was saying in the in-game thread we get a couple of guys to tackle the ballcarrier and they still manage to fall backwards four yards in the process. I think also I've seen #1 completely whiff on a couple of open field tackles every single game this year. Too many breakdowns and they don't seem to be communication related. Just plain bad football.

 

Speaking of breakdowns, I did see from another board a set of images from ... either the SM or UCLA game of TV stills, just post-snap, where everyone is in motion but Thad Randle is still in his stance. Late getting off the ball can be a big problem. I was trying to watch for that today. Then I realized I have no clue

[NUpolo8]

I learned, (well reinforced) that I'm done with Jamal Turner seeing significant reps.

[zoogs]

What did Jamal do?!? Not jump high enough on a tough fade in the corner when he was well covered?

[TheSker]

Speaking of breakdowns, I did see from another board a set of images from ... either the SM or UCLA game of TV stills, just post-snap, where everyone is in motion but Thad Randle is still in his stance. Late getting off the ball can be a big problem. I was trying to watch for that today. Then I realized I have no clue

 

Pelini's post game presser is pretty good in his discussion about what the defense needs. He talked about urgency and aggressiveness.

[suigeneris]

I learned, (well reinforced) that I'm done with Jamal Turner seeing significant reps.

 

He had a quiet game but nothing really bad jumped out at me, either. Was he loafing on his blocks or routes?

[HuskerNationNick]

After SDSU's first two drives, we made the right adjustments, it just didn't show as much as it should have because of the mental collapse of the defense. There were so many times we were hitting high, when we should have been hitting low. We missed a LOT of tackles on Zenner that should have stopped him with no gain, or little gain, but it went for 5+. Same goes for the first two big runs he had in the first two opening drives. The only disagreement I really had on the play calling, was having Santos cover Zenner. That is a mismatch all day long. I have liked Mitchell's attitude, but he is so small, he is getting beat on the edge. The kid has heart, but he adds an advantage for an offense and leaves us a little more vulnerable in the pass defense.

[HuskerNationNick]

...

 

+1 our pad level is not where it needs to be...that's on the coaches.

I am sure the coaches teach these kids to hit low, especially on larger RB's like Zenner, Zwinak and Weisman. From what I saw, it was mental breakdowns, and these kids went to just getting a tackle, forgetting the fundamentals. This is something the coaches need to stress more in this bye week.

 

On another hand, I think we will see more pressure against Illinois, and a more disguised defensive looks. The further we go in the season, the more "complicated" our defense will be. It just simply can't remain "simple" for the whole season. Its just to predictable at times, and I don't see Bo wanting to keep it that way.

Edited September 22, 2013 by zoogies
quote trimmed

[FriendlyLurker2007]

run the ball stop the run, win the game

[Enhance]

Offensively, this unit's biggest enemy is itself. In the first half, Armstrong threw two very well thrown touchdown passes that were dropped. And then turnovers killed drives. I also noticed Beck's play-calling was better, but he still had some what's-he-doing moments. Case in point - second Husker drive of the game, he calls a reverse play that gains maybe half a yard and then goes five wide the following play. SDSU is a team you could dominate in the trenches but they got cute. NU scored on the drive, so all is well that ends well, but I still didn't like those play calls.

 

Defensively, they're still really struggling in the front seven and it's just painful. They're not shedding blocks on the defensive line and they're letting wide receivers slash and gash 'em for 8-to-15 yard chunks. And they let a running back get 150+ yards on 15 carries? They lose the check down players in the backfield and leave some pretty wide gaps in the zone defense. Tackling, once again, was pretty bad. On a bright note - how about that SJB with his fourth INT of the season?

[HuskerNationNick]

Offensively, this unit's biggest enemy is itself. In the first half, Armstrong threw two very well thrown touchdown passes that were dropped. And then turnovers killed drives. I also noticed Beck's play-calling was better, but he still had some what's-he-doing moments. Case in point - second Husker drive of the game, he calls a reverse play that gains maybe half a yard and then goes five wide the following play. SDSU is a team you could dominate in the trenches but we got cute. We scored on the drive, so alls well that ends well, but I still didn't like those play calls.

I personally saw nothing wrong with Beck's play calling. It may not have been perfect, but have you EVER seen a perfectly called offense? I think your being WAY too nit-picky here. Had Bell NOT lost his footing, that drive would have went for positive yards, rather than no gain.

[MLB 51]

No offense to this year. But I think next year is going to be pretty kickass

Can you offend a year?

BC did a pretty good job of it.