Secondary Play

[alwayshusking]

Our edge pass rush or lack thereof is more of a problem than our secondary. With this scheme you are going to give up some passing yards, it's the trade off with shutting down the run game. Davie may not be up to being put on an island. Jones/Rose may have to step in we'll see.

 

Either way you will get beat from time to time regardless of who is out there, especially without a great pass rush. It's 2015, many teams are skilled enough at QB and WR to hit some passes. Michigan State gave up 365 yards passing to WMU with a similar defensive scheme in their opener and they are a NC contender.

 

It looked like we were playing quite a bit of Cover 1 vs USA along with our normal Cover 4 stuff.

[NebraskaShellback]

Kaaya stats for the 2015 after two games

 

Rushing: 2 attempts = -11

Passing: 37/59 for 460 yards = 62.7% (2014 season 221/378 for 3198 yards = 58.5%)

2 sacks in the first game (Sacked 20 times last year 2014 = 1.5 per game)

INT 0 (12 Ints last year =1 per game average) will we get a couple this Saturday? Nate should get 1 Int.

 

* Not a run threat in the Miami scheme

[zoogs]

 

Definitely an interesting take. USA went deep over and over on the Blackshirts with seemingly no effort to respond from us, but perhaps testing our corners was part of the plan.

[4skers89]

https://twitter.com/HuskerExtraSip/status/643585629209665536Definitely an interesting take. USA went deep over and over on the Blackshirts with seemingly no effort to respond from us, but perhaps testing our corners was part of the plan.

But what about the second sentence? Sometimes I get the feeling that Riley is sneaky. I mean look at our passing game thus far. We only throw short to intermediate passes. We really don't have that big play ability. Or do we...

[True2tRA]

The things we know, and the things we think we know.......Amirite Sip? Haha.

 

Interesting stuff.

[lo country]

The things we know, and the things we think we know.......Amirite Sip? Haha.

Interesting stuff.

The fact he has gamesmanship is a plus. Even if we are what we are, this simple statement will DC's wondering.... That's a good thing.

 

I'm hoping, after 7 yrs of Bo, we can actually be vanilla by design and hide things. Maybe put things on film for the sole purpose of making DC's waste time game planning. Or to set up a play or series in another game.

[True2tRA]

 

The things we know, and the things we think we know.......Amirite Sip? Haha.

Interesting stuff.

The fact he has gamesmanship is a plus. Even if we are what we are, this simple statement will DC's wondering.... That's a good thing.

I'm hoping, after 7 yrs of Bo, we can actually be vanilla by design and hide things. Maybe put things on film for the sole purpose of making DC's waste time game planning. Or to set up a play or series in another game.

It's fun because you just don't know for sure, but it could totally make sense. It might be complete crap, or Riley, Langs and Banker could be masterminds crafting all kinds of stuff we know nothing about. I'd believe it too, if they were. The experiences these guys have is an immeasurable advantage in our favor.

[Mavric]

Which is possible, depending on what the play is. However, watching a lot of the BYU game, I see releases from LB's, and coverage from both LB's. Here are two plays that I see both coverages.

 

Here's a play with LB in coverage while you have both safeties have robber roles. Quick pass from Hill, smart read, he knows whats going on. LB stays in coverage, while Cockrell becomes robber.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoOU5N2PCoM?t=25m47s

 

The play after, you can see Dedrick release the guy to Safety.

I don't think your analysis of the first play is correct. Davie has the outside WR, Williams has the slot and Gifford has the RB. That's why Gifford takes a hop step toward the formation at the snap. It's only when the RB goes away from him that he retreats and drops into a zone coverage of the flat. But that's why the quick out is wide open - because Williams is assigned to cover it but he's too far away to stop the short pass. Gerry is in more of a robber roll as he steps up an can come from the backside to make a play on a short pass on the other side of the field. You can also tell there is no deep safety help as the pass is a bomb down the middle of the field but there is only man coverage - no safety help deep.

 

I believe the same is true on the next play - the CB has the wide out, the safety has the slot and Young has the RB. But the RB again goes the other way so Young drops to zone (flat). This is also what I'm talking about when I say the LBs are "not doing anything." Obviously I don't mean just sitting down and taking the play off. But they aren't covering anyone or pressuring the QB. They're covering a zone that often has no one there. If you're running a true zone, that will happen from time to time. But when you're largely running man-to-man, it doesn't make a lot of sense to have LBs covering no one, especially short after all the WRs have gone deep.

 

You can see this coverage illustrated even better on this play.

 

It's the play before the second play you linked. At first I couldn't figure out why Cockrell let the slot go so easily for an easy catch. But when you watch closer - and especially when you watch the replay from the low angle behind the defense - you can see that the corner has the wide out, Williams, from the safety spot, eyes the slot and immediatly breaks to the outside as the slot does, and Cockrell, lined up in an OLB spot, takes a couple steps forward toward the back to which he is assigned. It's only after the pass is thrown that Cockrell retreats to try to catch the slot. Again, because the RB to which Cockrell is assigned stays in to block, he is rendered basically useless in pass coverage.

 

 

 

And on this trips play, you can see Banderas begin to cover the third guy in, but as soon as he passes him, he releases him also.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoOU5N2PCoM?t=16m40s

 

That play is ingenious, because they attack on one side, leaving two guys having to play m2m. Gerry is robber on the play,but he bites a bit on the PA fake, so that split second keeps him out of the play. And with the LB releasing to Cockrell, he's essentially out as a robber.

 

But you might be right. There might be certain plays where we play that type of role, but I see the m2m with LB's on the under, as well as the release to the Safeties.

I don't think this is right either. Bando is indeed in some sort of zone coverage but there is no receiver within 15 yards of him so he is basically "doing nothing." We are completely manned up on the trips with Gerry as the robber on the other side (Gerry had no chance to help on this play because he was the short route robber and they threw the deep seam route, exactly like the play above). You can tell this because the CB runs deep with the outside receiver and Williams follows the inside slot across the field on the crossing route, ending up in the same place as Gerry. If it was a zone coverage, Williams would have stayed in his quarter of the field and had help for Cockrell over the top. But because they're all in man, Cockrell has no help and is left to try to cover his man anywhere he goes on the field. Since his man is just outside the hashmarks, he can run basically any route imaginable, making that a very tough spot for Cockrell to be all by himself. I don't think the play is so ingenious as it is taking advantage of our man coverage with little pass rush and giving a pretty good quarterback time to find any of three receivers who are able to beat their man.

[Mavric]

 

Definitely an interesting take. USA went deep over and over on the Blackshirts with seemingly no effort to respond from us, but perhaps testing our corners was part of the plan.

 

I could see this if we weren't running the same coverage against BYU. Unless we were fine losing a game as long as we didn't tip our hand to future opponents.

[True2tRA]

 

https://twitter.com/HuskerExtraSip/status/643585629209665536

Definitely an interesting take. USA went deep over and over on the Blackshirts with seemingly no effort to respond from us, but perhaps testing our corners was part of the plan.

 

I could see this if we weren't running the same coverage against BYU. Unless we were fine losing a game as long as we didn't tip our hand to future opponents.

Hard to say that.

 

We were never in danger of losing to SoBama, and we didn't lose to BYU until :00 seconds left.

[funhusker]

 

 

Definitely an interesting take. USA went deep over and over on the Blackshirts with seemingly no effort to respond from us, but perhaps testing our corners was part of the plan.

 

I could see this if we weren't running the same coverage against BYU. Unless we were fine losing a game as long as we didn't tip our hand to future opponents.

 

I agree, Mavric. However, just for fun. Maybe the BYU game made them aware of some deficiencies, player and/or scheme. They feel comfortable in the scheme fix in practice during the USA week, but want to see it the players took the coaching also. ...

[Mavric]

 

 

https://twitter.com/HuskerExtraSip/status/643585629209665536

Definitely an interesting take. USA went deep over and over on the Blackshirts with seemingly no effort to respond from us, but perhaps testing our corners was part of the plan.

I could see this if we weren't running the same coverage against BYU. Unless we were fine losing a game as long as we didn't tip our hand to future opponents.

Hard to say that.

 

We were never in danger of losing to SoBama, and we didn't lose to BYU until :00 seconds left.

 

 

If BYU had staged some miraculous comeback and won in the last second, maybe.

 

Considering they were tied for most of the second quarter, led for over a quarter in the middle of the game and were within a score for the last 20 minutes, no.

[Mavric]

 

 

 

Definitely an interesting take. USA went deep over and over on the Blackshirts with seemingly no effort to respond from us, but perhaps testing our corners was part of the plan.

 

I could see this if we weren't running the same coverage against BYU. Unless we were fine losing a game as long as we didn't tip our hand to future opponents.

 

I agree, Mavric. However, just for fun. Maybe the BYU game made them aware of some deficiencies, player and/or scheme. They feel comfortable in the scheme fix in practice during the USA week, but want to see it the players took the coaching also. ...

 

 

I hope not. Because if we have three defensive coordinators that don't know that playing mostly man coverage leaves you vulnerable, we definitely have issues.

[zoogs]

I'm sure that observation has not managed to escape three defensive coordinators only to find its way down to us message board posters.

 

That said, I agree with Mavric. This theory of Sip's holds less water if the BYU game played out the same way (I did not watch).

 

It's one thing if it's a managed vulnerability that they have to accept given what they want the defense to be. But, our last defense also had some vulnerabilities that were blown wide open repeatedly in the worst ways possible. So...that's not going to happen again, right? We'll find out in some measure this Saturday.

[BigRedBuster]

Ummm....I will guarantee you they know that. No matter how you play defense, you are vulnerable somewhere.

 

I have no problem with their theory on defense. Stop the run and make them beat you through the air.

 

Long passes are a much lower percentage play.