Coaching or Talent - which is more responsible

[knapplc]

 

Totally agree they'll take heat, and they should. No way Daniel Davie just lost all his cover skills in one offseason. He's not as bad as he's showing, and that's a scheme issue, just like Melvin Gordon getting 400 yards wasn't an accurate reflection on Maliek Collins' ability, and was a scheme issue.

Did Banker and Co. install a new scheme?

 

Yes, definitely. It's still a 4-3, but the primary focus is on stopping the run, and corners are left on an island to deal with WRs 1-on-1. It's more susceptible to getting burned outside, especially against a competent passing offense and even moreso when you don't get pressure on the QB, which we didn't do all first half.

 

I'm guessing the gamble is that we get through the non-con at 3-1 or at worst 2-2 (which at this point seems likely, unless Southern Miss has an amazing QB), and we get into conference play where we won't face a competent throwing QB in our division. If we can shut down the run we can win the West, and at that point it's a one-game gamble to win the conference.

 

That's what this scheme is designed for. This is a running division, so you gear your defense to stop the run. Make sense, but it looks pretty ugly right now, at 1-2, having played the two best passing teams we'll see all year.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Combination of talent and scheme. We're thin in offensive skill players and our defensive scheme is a joke.

 

It got lit up in the Pac-12 and it's not working here. Miami left points in the field today.

 

I think Tommy played his heart out and showed emotion today, can't day the same about the rest of the team.

[HuskerfaninOkieland]

 

 

Totally agree they'll take heat, and they should. No way Daniel Davie just lost all his cover skills in one offseason. He's not as bad as he's showing, and that's a scheme issue, just like Melvin Gordon getting 400 yards wasn't an accurate reflection on Maliek Collins' ability, and was a scheme issue.

Did Banker and Co. install a new scheme?

 

Yes, definitely. It's still a 4-3, but the primary focus is on stopping the run, and corners are left on an island to deal with WRs 1-on-1. It's more susceptible to getting burned outside, especially against a competent passing offense and even moreso when you don't get pressure on the QB, which we didn't do all first half.

 

I'm guessing the gamble is that we get through the non-con at 3-1 or at worst 2-2 (which at this point seems likely, unless Southern Miss has an amazing QB), and we get into conference play where we won't face a competent throwing QB in our division. If we can shut down the run we can win the West, and at that point it's a one-game gamble to win the conference.

 

That's what this scheme is designed for. This is a running division, so you gear your defense to stop the run. Make sense, but it looks pretty ugly right now, at 1-2, having played the two best passing teams we'll see all year.

 

So Stave and Cook won't light us up in the passing game?

[Blackshirt39]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's coaching. All day it's coaching. Tommy throws off his back foot and can't make it past his first read.

We had Miami tired, you need to piss pound the run with Cross. Fundamentals aren't there.

This is funny. Yeah, I'm sure the coaches are telling him to throw off his back foot and to not go past his first read. Must be coaching. Lol.

The results don't lie. Neither does the eye test.

 

Tommy is fighter and warrior. He has heart for miles and I love him for it. However, his decision making and technique isn't there. These coaches either need to establish the run game or change to a QB that can go through progression.

Yeah, didn't y'all know? Darlington definitely would have won the game for us! Just as easy as putting in the 3rd string quarterback.

Because Tommy won it for us? Look the point is, Tommy is not an efficient and reliable option. We have too many good running backs doing nothing. What I saw from Darlington in the spring game is someone who can manage the game and make the throws needed.

 

Tommy didn't lose the game. I place the blame on the Coaches. But, is Tommy the future or not?

 

I Don't know. Maybe I'm just venting frustration.

Frankly, Tommy is the only D-1 caliber QB on the roster. O'Brien might be able to push him a bit next year, but that's tough for a true frosh. It will take a big injury for someone other than Tommy to be the starter before 2017.

Yeah and Newcombe was to. How do we know? At sometime you gotta make a change. He was struggling with screen passes for God's sake.

Huh? I'm not following you with the Newcombe reference. Crouch was a pretty highly recruited option QB out of high school. He redshirted in '97 after getting hurt in fall camp.

The point I'm trying make(not well) is don't be afraid of second string and beyond. We recruit these guys for a reason. If none of the other guys are D-1 QB, then why are we wasting scholarship space?

 

IMO, develop the 2 freshman. Tommy threw 2 picks when we needed it most today, and that's par for the course with him.

[zoogs]

I don't have enough stomach for losing to want to see what "developing the freshmen quarterbacks" is like.

[TheSker]

 

 

Both.

 

Coaching...pass D is a joke. I'm a give em a chance guy typically but I've already tipped into the Banker is probably a failure camp.

 

Players...wr too thin, rb no stud so far, DE OMG, CB OMG, injuries and suspensions hurt badly most positions from day one.

 

QB...Tommy really needs to be COACHED OVER AND OVER to clean up his terrible pocket decisions (primarily waiting too long then turning and running backwards to 15 yards behind the los until the usual bad result occurs).

I disagree about Tommy. Tommy has been the least of our problems today. He's made mistakes, but he's also been one of the few bright spots throughout the game. It's pretty apparent that the scheme coming into this game was fundamentally flawed.

 

Agreed about the defensive coaching; awful from start to finish. Banker has a very limited competence, obviously.

 

You obviously don't know what you are looking at when it comes to defensive coaching. If you want to question Davies starting and being put on an island, that is fine. But the adjustments after that were something that we never saw under Little Bo Bleep and if you couldn't tell how much more speed Miami had than NU did, then there is no help for you.

 

"Little Bo Bleep" beat Miami.

[knapplc]

So Stave and Cook won't light us up in the passing game?

My crystal ball's in the shop right now, so I'll have to plead ignorance on what they will do. But Stave has who at WR that compares to Miami or BYU? Sparty doesn't have a WR corps like Miami or BYU, either. Heck, South Alabama has a better WR than anyone at Wisconsin.

 

Could either light us up? Sure. But are they better than either Miami or BYU? No way.

[Blackshirt39]

 

So Stave and Cook won't light us up in the passing game?

My crystal ball's in the shop right now, so I'll have to plead ignorance on what they will do. But Stave has who at WR that compares to Miami or BYU? Sparty doesn't have a WR corps like Miami or BYU, either. Heck, South Alabama has a better WR than anyone at Wisconsin.

 

Could either light us up? Sure. But are they better than either Miami or BYU? No way.

I think Cook is. Wisconsin's strength is still running.

[HuskerfaninOkieland]

 

So Stave and Cook won't light us up in the passing game?

My crystal ball's in the shop right now, so I'll have to plead ignorance on what they will do. But Stave has who at WR that compares to Miami or BYU? Sparty doesn't have a WR corps like Miami or BYU, either. Heck, South Alabama has a better WR than anyone at Wisconsin.

 

Could either light us up? Sure. But are they better than either Miami or BYU? No way.

 

You're fired.

 

At this rate, our secondary will make an average receiving corp look like world class athletes.

[Blackshirt39]

I don't have enough stomach for losing to want to see what "developing the freshmen quarterbacks" is like.

If we're gonna rebuild let's rebuild. Why does that conversation always seem stop short of the QB here?

[knapplc]

 

 

So Stave and Cook won't light us up in the passing game?

My crystal ball's in the shop right now, so I'll have to plead ignorance on what they will do. But Stave has who at WR that compares to Miami or BYU? Sparty doesn't have a WR corps like Miami or BYU, either. Heck, South Alabama has a better WR than anyone at Wisconsin.

 

Could either light us up? Sure. But are they better than either Miami or BYU? No way.

 

I think Cook is. Wisconsin's strength is still running.

 

Cook is not as good chucking the ball as Taysom Hill or Brad Kayaa. And his WR corps is not as good as either Miami or BYU. Individually, Cook & Stave - and maybe Beathard - are decent. But as a passing offense, we've seen the best we'll see.

[knapplc]

At this rate, our secondary will make an average receiving corp look like world class athletes.

Yeah, that's the fear. Unless they shore something up quickly, it could happen.

 

But in the Big Ten West, which do you want to stop first, the run or the pass? Pelini's defense was good against spread offenses, the kind we saw in the Big XII North. But against the run-first offenses in the Big Ten West, it was garbage.

 

Almost no defense shuts down everything. You take something away from the offense and see if they can take advantage of what you're giving them. That's every defensive scheme, college or pro. It makes more sense to stop the run in this division, this conference. If we can, we stand a good chance of winning every game.

[HuskerfaninOkieland]

 

 

 

So Stave and Cook won't light us up in the passing game?

My crystal ball's in the shop right now, so I'll have to plead ignorance on what they will do. But Stave has who at WR that compares to Miami or BYU? Sparty doesn't have a WR corps like Miami or BYU, either. Heck, South Alabama has a better WR than anyone at Wisconsin.

 

Could either light us up? Sure. But are they better than either Miami or BYU? No way.

 

I think Cook is. Wisconsin's strength is still running.

 

Cook is not as good chucking the ball as Taysom Hill or Brad Kayaa. And his WR corps is not as good as either Miami or BYU. Individually, Cook & Stave - and maybe Beathard - are decent. But as a passing offense, we've seen the best we'll see.

 

That may be, but when our front 4 isn't getting pressure on the QB and our secondary consistently gets burned, it doesn't seem like it will matter much who the receivers are.

[zoogs]

If we're gonna rebuild let's rebuild. Why does that conversation always seem stop short of the QB here?

We are simply going to have to agree to disagree on both Tommy, and the backup QBs. The difference is too wide. For both our sakes, if we have to find out about those backups this season, I hope I'm the wrong one.

 

Cook is not as good chucking the ball as Taysom Hill or Brad Kayaa. And his WR corps is not as good as either Miami or BYU

OK, I think that is underselling Cook a little (maybe a lot). But frankly, the level the defense is playing, they need to turn things around in a big way or a lot of ho-hum QBs with ho-hum WRs are going to come out and hit the Huskers in the mouth the same way Miami did in the first quarter.

 

Our defense was (historically!) bad last year. We're going to have to try and manage this year.

[GOAT]

We need a legit DC, something we haven't had in a while.