2015 Opponent Previews: Wisconsin

[Hammerhead]

 

 

Riley didn't seem to have trouble slowing down Wisconsin's running game with inferior defensive talent

True, but that wasn't with Paul Chryst as OC.

 

 

 

It's not rocket science. If our guys learn how to keep outside containment, there's no reason why we can't hold Wisconsin's running game. Our defense played for the last few years like they'd never seen a run go outside the tackles.

 

Let's hope Riley and Banker figure it out. I gotta feeling that 408 yard ncaa rushing record against us hastened Bo's departure.

 

OTOH, I think Wisconsin's rushing attack will drop off quite a bit from what it was last year.

 

 

Melvin Gordon was a huge part of it, but I have a feeling that about any decent RB would've put up big numbers in that game. We got punched in the mouth early on and never recovered.

[NUance]

 

 

 

Riley didn't seem to have trouble slowing down Wisconsin's running game with inferior defensive talent

True, but that wasn't with Paul Chryst as OC.

 

 

 

It's not rocket science. If our guys learn how to keep outside containment, there's no reason why we can't hold Wisconsin's running game. Our defense played for the last few years like they'd never seen a run go outside the tackles.

 

Let's hope Riley and Banker figure it out. I gotta feeling that 408 yard ncaa rushing record against us hastened Bo's departure.

 

OTOH, I think Wisconsin's rushing attack will drop off quite a bit from what it was last year.

 

 

Melvin Gordon was a huge part of it, but I have a feeling that about any decent RB would've put up big numbers in that game. We got punched in the mouth early on and never recovered.

 

 

Agreed. Gordon's skill set helped set that rushing record (which didn't stand for very long. Thankfully. lol). But you could plug a number of backs with similar skill into that Wisconsin offensive team/scheme, and the results would have been similar. I'll bet Jeremy Langford plugged into that Wiscy offense might've done just as well. Or Roy Helu from a few years back. Heck, Ahmad Green might have done better in that Wisconsin offense. If that's even possible.

[Redux]

Gordon's abilities helped reach that ridiculous 408 total.

 

A decent back would have only gotten 300 or so.

 

What a friggin embarassment.

[Saunders]

I moved all the Minnesota talk to the Minnesota preview thread.

[Paul in WI]

I'm just hoping that Chryst is exposed as a much better OC than he is a HC.

[Enhance]

It's not rocket science. If our guys learn how to keep outside containment, there's no reason why we can't hold Wisconsin's running game. Our defense played for the last few years like they'd never seen a run go outside the tackles.

They weren't particularly talented at stopping things up the middle at times, either.

[True2tRA]

 

It's not rocket science. If our guys learn how to keep outside containment, there's no reason why we can't hold Wisconsin's running game. Our defense played for the last few years like they'd never seen a run go outside the tackles.

 

They weren't particularly talented at stopping things up the middle at times, either.

I'm no expert guys, but theres a few solutions we could've tried when attempting to stop runs around the edge or runs up the middle. The runs up the middle are the easier of the two to stop, that jet sweep type of run they ran can be trickier.

 

With runs up the middle, there's this neat litte trick teams have been doing since the beginning of time. I've watched teams do it to our offense every single game. McNeese State almost beat us beat us because of it.

 

It's called LOADING THE BOX and PENETRATING GAPS. I know, rocket science right? It's a simple theory really. You just put more guys one the line of scrimmage than the opponent can block then you shoot gaps, get penetration and TACKLE. Crazy stuff I know, yet our old ball coach rarely ever did this stuff.

 

Now protecting the edge can be trickier. Errors can cost you some large plays but theres an easier way to attempt to stop runs on the edge than simply marching your front four up to the line of scrimmage play after play and asking your end to keep outside leverage. Theres multiple ways to ty to stop this but one neat way is to LOAD THE BOX AND PENETRATE GAPS. Now, penetration an also be an enemy if you go too far up field. Ask your ends to actually RUSH up the field and force the back to make a decision. This can cause at least a hesitation or a pause which is much better than giving the guy a full head of steam around the edge. This hesitation, or split second where that back has to make a decision is where your safeties and inebacker can flow to the ball and make tackles in run support. The other trick is to have the linebckers and DT's rush their gaps. This allows for immediate penetration and can many times stop the play before it even gets started.

 

I've watched teams do these things to us and none of those teams allowed 408 yards to a running back in three quarters of football or a number of other rusing records set on a read and react- bend don't break joke that we've watched. Playing aggressive defense, putting your DB's in single man coverage, putting your linebackers on the line of scrimmage, blitzing and creating pressure CAN result in allowing some big plays. From what I've witnessed in the last seven years, a BEND DON'T BREAK defense clearly allows for the same big plays. The difference is, where there is risk, there is many times a reward. Pressure can result in turnovers. It may also result in your defense gang tackling, letting loose, playing aggresssive and UH OH having fun? .............It all seemed to work out for Charie McBride though.

[lo country]

 

 

It's not rocket science. If our guys learn how to keep outside containment, there's no reason why we can't hold Wisconsin's running game. Our defense played for the last few years like they'd never seen a run go outside the tackles.

They weren't particularly talented at stopping things up the middle at times, either.

I'm no expert guys, but theres a few solutions we could've tried when attempting to stop runs around the edge or runs up the middle. The runs up the middle are the easier of the two to stop, that jet sweep type of run they ran can be trickier.

 

With runs up the middle, there's this neat litte trick teams have been doing since the beginning of time. I've watched teams do it to our offense every single game. McNeese State almost beat us beat us because of it.

 

It's called LOADING THE BOX and PENETRATING GAPS. I know, rocket science right? It's a simple theory really. You just put more guys one the line of scrimmage than the opponent can block then you shoot gaps, get penetration and TACKLE. Crazy stuff I know, yet our old ball coach rarely ever did this stuff.

 

Now protecting the edge can be trickier. Errors can cost you some large plays but theres an easier way to attempt to stop runs on the edge than simply marching your front four up to the line of scrimmage play after play and asking your end to keep outside leverage. Theres multiple ways to ty to stop this but one neat way is to LOAD THE BOX AND PENETRATE GAPS. Now, penetration an also be an enemy if you go too far up field. Ask your ends to actually RUSH up the field and force the back to make a decision. This can cause at least a hesitation or a pause which is much better than giving the guy a full head of steam around the edge. This hesitation, or split second where that back has to make a decision is where your safeties and inebacker can flow to the ball and make tackles in run support. The other trick is to have the linebckers and DT's rush their gaps. This allows for immediate penetration and can many times stop the play before it even gets started.

 

I've watched teams do these things to us and none of those teams allowed 408 yards to a running back in three quarters of football or a number of other rusing records set on a read and react- bend don't break joke that we've watched. Playing aggressive defense, putting your DB's in single man coverage, putting your linebackers on the line of scrimmage, blitzing and creating pressure CAN result in allowing some big plays. From what I've witnessed in the last seven years, a BEND DON'T BREAK defense clearly allows for the same big plays. The difference is, where there is risk, there is many times a reward. Pressure can result in turnovers. It may also result in your defense gang tackling, letting loose, playing aggresssive and UH OH having fun? .............It all seemed to work out for Charie McBride though.

 

Hell yea! Narduzzi (sp?) when asked about MSU defense said that its not really complicated. We send one more guy than they can block.... As you said, not rocket science. I wish I could find the clips of MSU shooting the gaps against us and loading the box. AA and TA got hit every play whether they had the ball or not. As you said, this can allow for big plays if you miss the ball carrier, BUT it causes TFL, hesitation, messes with timing, sacks, and can make some guys gun shy and start looking of the "hit". Things that were completely lost on Bo.

 

Not to mention, Wisky had a statue for a QB and we treated him like the love child of Manning and Brady with the mobility and improvisation of Johnny Hypesman... What a friggin joke. No way we get rolled like that this year. New staff, inexperience, new system or not. No way.

[Enhance]

I'm no expert either, but, a lot of times, it comes down to match-ups in addition to the scheme you're playing. For all the love and pub MSU's defense has received in recent years (deservedly so), Nebraska has found ways to exploit them during the last four years. Some years obviously better than others.

 

I personally believe Nebraska's problems often came down to personnel. It would stand to reason that if you didn't have some very dominant players on the d-line and all conference guys in the back 7... things weren't going to go well week-to-week. Like anything, I believe Bo's defense was great in theory but when his talent wasn't great... neither was the defense.

 

Obviously great talent will often correlate to great defense - no brainer. But, when your talent isn't up to snuff, you gotta find ways to still NOT get shredded defensively. I never felt we consistently did a good job of shoring up our issues defensively once the talent level went down.

[True2tRA]

I'm no expert either, but, a lot of times, it comes down to match-ups in addition to the scheme you're playing. For all the love and pub MSU's defense has received in recent years (deservedly so), Nebraska has found ways to exploit them during the last four years. Some years obviously better than others.

 

I personally believe Nebraska's problems often came down to personnel. It would stand to reason that if you didn't have some very dominant players on the d-line and all conference guys in the back 7... things weren't going to go well week-to-week. Like anything, I believe Bo's defense was great in theory but when his talent wasn't great... neither was the defense.

 

Obviously great talent will often correlate to great defense - no brainer. But, when your talent isn't up to snuff, you gotta find ways to still NOT get shredded defensively. I never felt we consistently did a good job of shoring up our issues defensively once the talent level went down.

Man it blows me away that people still lay blame the players.. I really hope Nebraska's defense resembles a Blackshirt defense this year and ends these conversations about the players "just not executing". I heard enough of that from BoBo.

[lo country]

I'm no expert either, but, a lot of times, it comes down to match-ups in addition to the scheme you're playing. For all the love and pub MSU's defense has received in recent years (deservedly so), Nebraska has found ways to exploit them during the last four years. Some years obviously better than others.

 

I personally believe Nebraska's problems often came down to personnel. It would stand to reason that if you didn't have some very dominant players on the d-line and all conference guys in the back 7... things weren't going to go well week-to-week. Like anything, I believe Bo's defense was great in theory but when his talent wasn't great... neither was the defense.

 

Obviously great talent will often correlate to great defense - no brainer. But, when your talent isn't up to snuff, you gotta find ways to still NOT get shredded defensively. I never felt we consistently did a good job of shoring up our issues defensively once the talent level went down.

We almost lost to McNeese St. That's not talent. That dumb ass coaching. SDSU showed the world how to stop Martinez. Better talent? Nope. Coaching.

 

Under Bo, looking back, the only thing that held us back was his fishing and the staff he assembled. No way does Wisky, Minnie, Iowa, McNeese St. etc have better talent. Equal, yes, but good enough to woodshed us? No. Not even close.

 

Bo's gone and my bold prediction is do are the embarrassing losses. Hell, TO lost, but never got beat.

[Stumpy1]

 

I'm no expert either, but, a lot of times, it comes down to match-ups in addition to the scheme you're playing. For all the love and pub MSU's defense has received in recent years (deservedly so), Nebraska has found ways to exploit them during the last four years. Some years obviously better than others.

 

I personally believe Nebraska's problems often came down to personnel. It would stand to reason that if you didn't have some very dominant players on the d-line and all conference guys in the back 7... things weren't going to go well week-to-week. Like anything, I believe Bo's defense was great in theory but when his talent wasn't great... neither was the defense.

 

Obviously great talent will often correlate to great defense - no brainer. But, when your talent isn't up to snuff, you gotta find ways to still NOT get shredded defensively. I never felt we consistently did a good job of shoring up our issues defensively once the talent level went down.

Man it blows me away that people still lay blame the players.. I really hope Nebraska's defense resembles a Blackshirt defense this year and ends these conversations about the players "just not executing". I heard enough of that from BoBo.

 

Execution is a very key aspect of the game. You can have the best scheme in the world but if the players don't execute it, it is pretty much worthless. Take a look at the Gumps. Saban plays a complicated defense out of a 3-4 and yet continually has top rated defenses. Want to know why? Because the players execute it.

[Enhance]

I know that comes off as a bit of a knock on the players, but that actually wasn't my point. To clarify, I blame the coaches, not the players. The reason I brought up the players was because when we didn't have the likes of Suh and Crick on the defensive line things were drastically different game-to-game. Without players of that caliber, we struggled. I'm not blaming the players - I'm blaming the coaches for not having the right scheme and coaching to make the players successful.

[True2tRA]

The magazine says 9-4. I'm assuming one of those losses is the Alabama game and the other must be a bowl game since Wiscy only has 12 games on the schedule and they only predict two losses in conference, correct?

 

Also, does it say who they think the two conference losses will be to? Looking at that schedule, the only two I see plausible is Nebraska and Minnesota. You'd have to think that if Nebraska and Minnesota beat Wisconsin, then the West division would most likely go to one of those teams, not Wisconsin, but they have Wisconsin still as their pick to win the west.

[Sargon]

The magazine says 9-4. I'm assuming one of those losses is the Alabama game and the other must be a bowl game since Wiscy only has 12 games on the schedule and they only predict two losses in conference, correct?

 

Also, does it say who they think the two conference losses will be to? Looking at that schedule, the only two I see plausible is Nebraska and Minnesota. You'd have to think that if Nebraska and Minnesota beat Wisconsin, then the West division would most likely go to one of those teams, not Wisconsin, but they have Wisconsin still as their pick to win the west.

 

9-4, 13 games, isn't possible for the division winner. If Wisky doesn't win the division the four highest rated opponents would be bama, bowl opp, NU and Minny. NW gave em a rough time last year.