NET Big Red Wrap-Up MSU - Jason Peter - Video

[teachercd]

Heck did they even face a spread team back in the mid-90's?

[Count 'Bility]

Heck did they even face a spread team back in the mid-90's?

Florida. But it still wasnt like it is now.

[NUpolo8]

 

 

I just watched it. Like I said in the shed thread, I agree with him on everything except the Gregory discussion and moving him around like we do. It's not a weakness. He's is just talented enough and versatile enough for us to do that to create mismatches and dictations. Greg McMullen and Avery Moss are not capable of playin the edge AND inside linebacker or a spinner technique in a 34. Gregory gives us that option, and his talent level creates a situation in which the offense has to account for him EVERY SINGLE PLAY. And when we're movin him around, it creates issues on the offense. And saturday night, we didnt move him around much. Which I find interesting as it fits in with the rest of the things we do really well but just threw out saturday night.

 

I agree with him about Gregory. Did we need to get cute with Wistrom, Tomich or Alberts? Nope.

Exactly. We didnt NEED to.

 

We apparently need to with Gregory. He's obviously more effective when being moved around than he is line up at a normal DE spot where, like I said, the offense can easily run away from him, double team him with the tacklel and a back/TE chippin, cut block the hell out of him. Movin him around, esp in obvious pass downs where he can delay blitz and pick his spots is great. Imagine if they did that stuff with Clowny. Gregory is a tremendous athlete for his size. His quickness allows for it and generates tremendous mismatches. Now a days football is about matchups and exploiting mismatches. it's just another thing with Peter about the good ole days...."ah just put your hand in the ground and be a badass and run everyone over". Does not work that way.

And that's the flaw in Peter's argument about that.

 

Yeah, they didn't need to do that in 97. There were what, 7 nfl starters on that defense? Gregory is the only one on the defense currently who's a sure fire nfl player.

 

Unless he's saying it's a talent issue that isn't being addressed, on it's face I don't have a problem lining Gregory up differently.

[Count 'Bility]

 

 

 

I just watched it. Like I said in the shed thread, I agree with him on everything except the Gregory discussion and moving him around like we do. It's not a weakness. He's is just talented enough and versatile enough for us to do that to create mismatches and dictations. Greg McMullen and Avery Moss are not capable of playin the edge AND inside linebacker or a spinner technique in a 34. Gregory gives us that option, and his talent level creates a situation in which the offense has to account for him EVERY SINGLE PLAY. And when we're movin him around, it creates issues on the offense. And saturday night, we didnt move him around much. Which I find interesting as it fits in with the rest of the things we do really well but just threw out saturday night.

I agree with him about Gregory. Did we need to get cute with Wistrom, Tomich or Alberts? Nope.

Exactly. We didnt NEED to.

 

We apparently need to with Gregory. He's obviously more effective when being moved around than he is line up at a normal DE spot where, like I said, the offense can easily run away from him, double team him with the tacklel and a back/TE chippin, cut block the hell out of him. Movin him around, esp in obvious pass downs where he can delay blitz and pick his spots is great. Imagine if they did that stuff with Clowny. Gregory is a tremendous athlete for his size. His quickness allows for it and generates tremendous mismatches. Now a days football is about matchups and exploiting mismatches. it's just another thing with Peter about the good ole days...."ah just put your hand in the ground and be a badass and run everyone over". Does not work that way.

And that's the flaw in Peter's argument about that.

 

Yeah, they didn't need to do that in 97. There were what, 7 nfl starters on that defense? Gregory is the only one on the defense currently who's a sure fire nfl player.

 

Unless he's saying it's a talent issue that isn't being addressed, on it's face I don't have a problem lining Gregory up differently.

 

And I'll get a step the other way and say that yes, it probably would benefit Randy a great deal if he did line up at the line and prove that's where he can play, but lets face facts. His size and athleticism is gonna get him drafted as on OLB in a 3-4 scheme anyway. So showing off his versatility is doing just as well.

[teachercd]

 

Heck did they even face a spread team back in the mid-90's?

Florida. But it still wasnt like it is now.

 

Good call!

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

 

 

I just watched it. Like I said in the shed thread, I agree with him on everything except the Gregory discussion and moving him around like we do. It's not a weakness. He's is just talented enough and versatile enough for us to do that to create mismatches and dictations. Greg McMullen and Avery Moss are not capable of playin the edge AND inside linebacker or a spinner technique in a 34. Gregory gives us that option, and his talent level creates a situation in which the offense has to account for him EVERY SINGLE PLAY. And when we're movin him around, it creates issues on the offense. And saturday night, we didnt move him around much. Which I find interesting as it fits in with the rest of the things we do really well but just threw out saturday night.

I agree with him about Gregory. Did we need to get cute with Wistrom, Tomich or Alberts? Nope.

Exactly. We didnt NEED to.

 

We apparently need to with Gregory. He's obviously more effective when being moved around than he is line up at a normal DE spot where, like I said, the offense can easily run away from him, double team him with the tacklel and a back/TE chippin, cut block the hell out of him. Movin him around, esp in obvious pass downs where he can delay blitz and pick his spots is great. Imagine if they did that stuff with Clowny. Gregory is a tremendous athlete for his size. His quickness allows for it and generates tremendous mismatches. Now a days football is about matchups and exploiting mismatches. it's just another thing with Peter about the good ole days...."ah just put your hand in the ground and be a badass and run everyone over". Does not work that way.

And that's the flaw in Peter's argument about that.

 

Yeah, they didn't need to do that in 97. There were what, 7 nfl starters on that defense? Gregory is the only one on the defense currently who's a sure fire nfl player.

 

Unless he's saying it's a talent issue that isn't being addressed, on it's face I don't have a problem lining Gregory up differently.

 

And I'll get a step the other way and say that yes, it probably would benefit Randy a great deal if he did line up at the line and prove that's where he can play, but lets face facts. His size and athleticism is gonna get him drafted as on OLB in a 3-4 scheme anyway. So showing off his versatility is doing just as well.

 

It's doing better because it's better for our defense!

 

It's one thing to sit around and call out our defense for being talent deficient or attitude deficient or whatever Peter thinks we are.

 

It's another to own that fact and do our best to compensate. We're not "hiding" a talent deficiency, we're getting the most out of the guys we have.

[NUpolo8]

I just watched it. Like I said in the shed thread, I agree with him on everything except the Gregory discussion and moving him around like we do. It's not a weakness. He's is just talented enough and versatile enough for us to do that to create mismatches and dictations. Greg McMullen and Avery Moss are not capable of playin the edge AND inside linebacker or a spinner technique in a 34. Gregory gives us that option, and his talent level creates a situation in which the offense has to account for him EVERY SINGLE PLAY. And when we're movin him around, it creates issues on the offense. And saturday night, we didnt move him around much. Which I find interesting as it fits in with the rest of the things we do really well but just threw out saturday night.

I agree with him about Gregory. Did we need to get cute with Wistrom, Tomich or Alberts? Nope.

Exactly. We didnt NEED to.

 

We apparently need to with Gregory. He's obviously more effective when being moved around than he is line up at a normal DE spot where, like I said, the offense can easily run away from him, double team him with the tacklel and a back/TE chippin, cut block the hell out of him. Movin him around, esp in obvious pass downs where he can delay blitz and pick his spots is great. Imagine if they did that stuff with Clowny. Gregory is a tremendous athlete for his size. His quickness allows for it and generates tremendous mismatches. Now a days football is about matchups and exploiting mismatches. it's just another thing with Peter about the good ole days...."ah just put your hand in the ground and be a badass and run everyone over". Does not work that way.

And that's the flaw in Peter's argument about that.

Yeah, they didn't need to do that in 97. There were what, 7 nfl starters on that defense? Gregory is the only one on the defense currently who's a sure fire nfl player.

Unless he's saying it's a talent issue that isn't being addressed, on it's face I don't have a problem lining Gregory up differently.

And I'll get a step the other way and say that yes, it probably would benefit Randy a great deal if he did line up at the line and prove that's where he can play, but lets face facts. His size and athleticism is gonna get him drafted as on OLB in a 3-4 scheme anyway. So showing off his versatility is doing just as well.

It's doing better because it's better for our defense!

 

It's one thing to sit around and call out our defense for being talent deficient or attitude deficient or whatever Peter thinks we are.

 

It's another to own that fact and do our best to compensate. We're not "hiding" a talent deficiency, we're getting the most out of the guys we have.

 

+1

[Street Novelist]

I can't disagree with anything he said. It comes down to balls and wanting to win more than anything in the world. I wonder though, is this a Nebraska problem or a societal problem? It seems kids don't want to work hard these days.

[ColoradoHusk]

You can't compare the offenses that Peter, Wistrom, Alberts faced against the offenses that are around today. The mobile QB that can throw has changed everything. Wistrom and Alberts used to pin their ears back and go for one spot towards the QB. Defenses can't really do that anymore.

 

Remember how Corby Jones lit up NU in '97. All he had to do was roll away from pressure, and make passes to wide open receivers. Does Peter forget that game?

[beanman]

You can't compare the offenses that Peter, Wistrom, Alberts faced against the offenses that are around today. The mobile QB that can throw has changed everything. Wistrom and Alberts used to pin their ears back and go for one spot towards the QB. Defenses can't really do that anymore.

 

Remember how Corby Jones lit up NU in '97. All he had to do was roll away from pressure, and make passes to wide open receivers. Does Peter forget that game?

Is Cook a mobile quarterback?

[Danny Bateman]

You sure you want to open up that can of worms in here SN? I see this thread getting derailed in a big way.

Haha... I think a lot of it is societal. And then I think some of it is Bo's coaching style... I believe he is a somewhat hands off coach that allows for some autonomy for players. He is going to teach them what to do, put them in a position to succeed, and then gives them some freedom to lead. So part of it could be that Bo is less in your face than McBride was, as ridiculous as that sounds.

[NUpolo8]

I can't disagree with anything he said. It comes down to balls and wanting to win more than anything in the world. I wonder though, is this a Nebraska problem or a societal problem? It seems kids don't want to work hard these days.

I don't doubt every last member of that team wants to win. With the exception of a select few, the willingness to put forth the effort required to win I'm quite sure is sorely lacking and has been for quite awhile.

 

And that includes some of the staff as well.

[Joe_5700]

 

 

I just watched it. Like I said in the shed thread, I agree with him on everything except the Gregory discussion and moving him around like we do. It's not a weakness. He's is just talented enough and versatile enough for us to do that to create mismatches and dictations. Greg McMullen and Avery Moss are not capable of playin the edge AND inside linebacker or a spinner technique in a 34. Gregory gives us that option, and his talent level creates a situation in which the offense has to account for him EVERY SINGLE PLAY. And when we're movin him around, it creates issues on the offense. And saturday night, we didnt move him around much. Which I find interesting as it fits in with the rest of the things we do really well but just threw out saturday night.

I agree with him about Gregory. Did we need to get cute with Wistrom, Tomich or Alberts? Nope.

 

Exactly. We didnt NEED to.

 

We apparently need to with Gregory. He's obviously more effective when being moved around than he is line up at a normal DE spot where, like I said, the offense can easily run away from him, double team him with the tacklel and a back/TE chippin, cut block the hell out of him. Movin him around, esp in obvious pass downs where he can delay blitz and pick his spots is great. Imagine if they did that stuff with Clowny. Gregory is a tremendous athlete for his size. His quickness allows for it and generates tremendous mismatches. Now a days football is about matchups and exploiting mismatches. it's just another thing with Peter about the good ole days...."ah just put your hand in the ground and be a badass and run everyone over". Does not work that way.

 

Why? Can't he beat his guy? I think you are missing the point. We didn't need to get cute with those guys because they beat their guy more times than not. Like Peter said if Gregory is that good he can beat the guy lined up across from him. How do you know he is more effective when moved around? Does he have more TFL or sacks when lined up in another position other than his own?

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

 

I just watched it. Like I said in the shed thread, I agree with him on everything except the Gregory discussion and moving him around like we do. It's not a weakness. He's is just talented enough and versatile enough for us to do that to create mismatches and dictations. Greg McMullen and Avery Moss are not capable of playin the edge AND inside linebacker or a spinner technique in a 34. Gregory gives us that option, and his talent level creates a situation in which the offense has to account for him EVERY SINGLE PLAY. And when we're movin him around, it creates issues on the offense. And saturday night, we didnt move him around much. Which I find interesting as it fits in with the rest of the things we do really well but just threw out saturday night.

I agree with him about Gregory. Did we need to get cute with Wistrom, Tomich or Alberts? Nope.

 

Exactly. We didnt NEED to.

 

We apparently need to with Gregory. He's obviously more effective when being moved around than he is line up at a normal DE spot where, like I said, the offense can easily run away from him, double team him with the tacklel and a back/TE chippin, cut block the hell out of him. Movin him around, esp in obvious pass downs where he can delay blitz and pick his spots is great. Imagine if they did that stuff with Clowny. Gregory is a tremendous athlete for his size. His quickness allows for it and generates tremendous mismatches. Now a days football is about matchups and exploiting mismatches. it's just another thing with Peter about the good ole days...."ah just put your hand in the ground and be a badass and run everyone over". Does not work that way.

 

Why? Can't he beat his guy? I think you are missing the point. We didn't need to get cute with those guys because they beat their guy more times than not. Like Peter said if Gregory is that good he can beat the guy lined up across from him. How do you know he is more effective when moved around? Does he have more TFL or sacks when lined up in another position other than his own?

 

I can tell you from anecdotal evidence that the times I've seen RG lined up at LB pre-snap, he's caused some havoc up the middle and at least pressured the QB into a bad throw on a good chunk of the plays I've noticed him.

 

Why would you not want what is best for the defense overall? Screw Gregory proving he is a stud DE, I just want him to give us the best chance to win.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

 

I can't disagree with anything he said. It comes down to balls and wanting to win more than anything in the world. I wonder though, is this a Nebraska problem or a societal problem? It seems kids don't want to work hard these days.

I don't doubt every last member of that team wants to win. With the exception of a select few, the willingness to put forth the effort required to win I'm quite sure is sorely lacking and has been for quite awhile.

 

And that includes some of the staff as well.

 

 

Which sort of begs the questions: why isn't the willingness being shown?