Pre-Season Pressers

[swmohusker]

30 minutes ago, floridacorn said:

 

As a coach I say this all the time, tackling issues typically stem from athleticism issues.  ei, if you're behind on the play, you're not in position to make a solid tackle, & that presents as poor tackling.  It's not complicated, better athletes = better tackling.

 

Part of tackling is athletes.  The other is Knowing and trusting your fit.  Knowing the CB has outside leverage will help safeties and backers on tackle better on the perimeter.  Knowing your DE is going to spill a puller will help LBs flow and tackle better.  

[Mavric]

 

 

 

 

[Mavric]

 

 

[Husker in WI]

Some of my thoughts that no one asked for:

• Reimer's rise continues - in limited time he's always around the ball, and we haven't had a truly instinctive LB since probably Lavonte. He's obviously not that level, but even our decent LBs since then (Zaire Anderson, Banderas, Weber) didn't seem to have outstanding instincts. 
• Honestly, the most important 'development' at ILB is probably Ruud's. Getting better athletes is also a must (and we're off to a good start there), but it's easy to forget this is his first position coach job. I think he'll get it figured out. 
• Tuioti lists Riley as 6'6, 340. Good lord.
• Love to see Damion getting hyped up a bit by Tuioti. Even mentioned that Riley, Green, and Robinson were basically competing for his Damion's spot, but sounds like he's the #1. I expect a big year out of him. Also don't recall him doing interviews before, seems like a good dude. Deontre and Ty mentioned him as a leader as well.
• A lot of praise for the Davises and Darrion.
• Wouldn't be shocked if our 'starting' front 7 is Stille/Daniels/Thomas and Jojo/Miller/Honas/Nelson. But by the end of the year our best lineup is quite possibly Robinson/Riley/Rogers and Jojo/Reimer/Henrich/Tannor. 

[SECHusker]

12 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

Some of my thoughts that no one asked for:

• Reimer's rise continues - in limited time he's always around the ball, and we haven't had a truly instinctive LB since probably Lavonte. He's obviously not that level, but even our decent LBs since then (Zaire Anderson, Banderas, Weber) didn't seem to have outstanding instincts. 
• Honestly, the most important 'development' at ILB is probably Ruud's. Getting better athletes is also a must (and we're off to a good start there), but it's easy to forget this is his first position coach job. I think he'll get it figured out. 
• Tuioti lists Riley as 6'6, 340. Good lord.
• Love to see Damion getting hyped up a bit by Tuioti. Even mentioned that Riley, Green, and Robinson were basically competing for his Damion's spot, but sounds like he's the #1. I expect a big year out of him. Also don't recall him doing interviews before, seems like a good dude. Deontre and Ty mentioned him as a leader as well.
• A lot of praise for the Davises and Darrion.
• Wouldn't be shocked if our 'starting' front 7 is Stille/Daniels/Thomas and Jojo/Miller/Honas/Nelson. But by the end of the year our best lineup is quite possibly Robinson/Riley/Rogers and Jojo/Reimer/Henrich/Tannor. 

 

Agree with a lot you said, but don't sleep on Nelson.

[Undone]

37 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

Some of my thoughts that no one asked for:

• Reimer's rise continues - in limited time he's always around the ball, and we haven't had a truly instinctive LB since probably Lavonte. He's obviously not that level, but even our decent LBs since then (Zaire Anderson, Banderas, Weber) didn't seem to have outstanding instincts. 
• Honestly, the most important 'development' at ILB is probably Ruud's. Getting better athletes is also a must (and we're off to a good start there), but it's easy to forget this is his first position coach job. I think he'll get it figured out. 
• Tuioti lists Riley as 6'6, 340. Good lord.
• Love to see Damion getting hyped up a bit by Tuioti. Even mentioned that Riley, Green, and Robinson were basically competing for his Damion's spot, but sounds like he's the #1. I expect a big year out of him. Also don't recall him doing interviews before, seems like a good dude. Deontre and Ty mentioned him as a leader as well.
• A lot of praise for the Davises and Darrion.
• Wouldn't be shocked if our 'starting' front 7 is Stille/Daniels/Thomas and Jojo/Miller/Honas/Nelson. But by the end of the year our best lineup is quite possibly Robinson/Riley/Rogers and Jojo/Reimer/Henrich/Tannor. 

 

Good stuff!

 

 

 

24 minutes ago, SECHusker said:

 

Agree with a lot you said, but don't sleep on Nelson.

 

From what I saw of Nelson last year I find it pretty hard to believe he's faster & more athletic than Tannor. Now does he excel in other ways that Tannor doesn't (drive, knowing where to be, reading formations, etc.)? Maybe.

[Decked]

No way I think Riley is 340. Just like the Davis brothers weren’t 320s. 

[C-4]

17 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

Good stuff!

 

 

 

 

From what I saw of Nelson last year I find it pretty hard to believe he's faster & more athletic than Tannor. Now does he excel in other ways that Tannor doesn't (drive, knowing where to be, reading formations, etc.)? Maybe.

Nelson plays faster and more athletic than Tannor. We haven’t seen Tannor’s athleticism translate on the field yet. I’m not talking about stats or big plays, even, he just hasn’t shown it yet.

[Husker in WI]

5 minutes ago, Decked said:

No way I think Riley is 340. Just like the Davis brothers weren’t 320s. 

 

That's a good point - once last year a reporter asked Darrion about his weight since he was listed at 340. He said he definitely wasn't 340 and had never had been in that range. I might buy Carlos Davis at 320, he weighed in at 313 at the combine and D lineman sometimes slim down for that. 

[Undone]

11 minutes ago, C-4 said:

Nelson plays faster and more athletic than Tannor. We haven’t seen Tannor’s athleticism translate on the field yet. I’m not talking about stats or big plays, even, he just hasn’t shown it yet.

 

I could be wrong about this, but it seems like Chinander has it in his mind that for his 3-4 to be successful, he has to have these big 'tweener OLBs - guys that are in between the size of a "normal" OLB and a traditional defensive end. Nelson is sized roughly like that.

 

If you actually get a couple good starters that fit that build and are quick & athletic, you've hit the jackpot. But in my opinion those guys are just as hard to actually find & recruit as good traditional defensive ends; they're not just all over and I'm not convinced we actually have any of them at all on our roster right now.

 

I did a bunch of research last season along with a couple posts on here showing the size of Wisconsin's linebackers last year; they weren't big guys at all. And Wisconsin runs a 3-4.

 

I realize I can't like, keyboard warrior my way into a perfect take on all of this but what we really need at OLB are some athletes that fly to the ball, no matter how big they are or even whether or not they're particularly brutal tacklers.

[BIG ERN]

2 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

I could be wrong about this, but it seems like Chinander has it in his mind that for his 3-4 to be successful, he has to have this big 'tweener OLBs - guys that are in between the size of a "normal" OLB and a traditional defensive end.

 

If you actually get a couple good starters that fit that build and are quick & athletic, you've hit the jackpot. But in my opinion those guys are just as hard to actually find & recruit as good traditional defensive ends; they're not just all over and I'm not convinced we actually have any of them at all on our roster right now.

 

I did a bunch of research last season along with a couple posts on here showing the size of Wisconsin's linebackers last year; they weren't big guys at all. And Wisconsin runs a 3-4.

 

I realize I can't like, keyboard warrior my way into a perfect take on all of this but what we really need at OLB are some athletes that fly to the ball, no matter how big they are or even whether or not they're particularly brutal tacklers.

I said before that we can recruit better locally for a 4-3 vs a 3-4..harder to find those bigger D lineman and athletic OLBs. Wisconsin of course has had a great defense but lets not forget that they have also had some of the better rushing offense in the nation as well. This matters for pace of play and controlling the clock to make stats look better. Either way their coaching has been better for quite sometime on that side of the ball. Outside of Watt and Schobert their OLB haven't been great but those two were very solid. Watt even doing well in NFL. Something that has been light years better is ILB play. They always have two very sound ILBs that wrap up and tackle very well. We will see that soon with Reimer and Henrich IMO. 

[GBRFAN]

Wow is Omaha now part of Iowa - some of those questions took some real high IQ's

[Wistrom Disciple]

3 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

I said before that we can recruit better locally for a 4-3 vs a 3-4..harder to find those bigger D lineman and athletic OLBs. Wisconsin of course has had a great defense but lets not forget that they have also had some of the better rushing offense in the nation as well. This matters for pace of play and controlling the clock to make stats look better. Either way their coaching has been better for quite sometime on that side of the ball. Outside of Watt and Schobert their OLB haven't been great but those two were very solid. Watt even doing well in NFL. Something that has been light years better is ILB play. They always have two very sound ILBs that wrap up and tackle very well. We will see that soon with Reimer and Henrich IMO. 

 

Agreed, for the run-heavy Big Ten it does feel like 4-3 would be more appropriate. Your comment about the pace of play is spot on for Wiscy. Our defense gets a lot of flack (some deserved) for the team's shortcomings last year. Our stagnant offense kept the defense on the field for far too long many games. There must be a balance in order for the staff's philosophy to work as we can't lose the time of possession by +20-30% each game unless we're scoring hand over fist. 

 

Also agree that Wisconsin has been stout up front but their moneymakers are the linebackers as I see only two Wisconsin defensive linemen in the NFL (Watt & Beau Allen) and two in the secondary (Dixon & Jamerson). My understanding of the Wiscy defensive philosophy is to gum up the line with big boys, try to umbrella defend with the secondary and let the backers make the plays. I think we're slowly adopting the d-line philosophy with the big boys and gumming up the interior but we also are wanting playmakers in the secondary, not just guys to contain. It isn't a bad thought process but requires the right personnel and linebackers who can tackle when needed. 

 

[Undone]

2 hours ago, Wistrom Disciple said:

Our defense gets a lot of flack (some deserved) for the team's shortcomings last year. Our stagnant offense kept the defense on the field for far too long many games.

 

Yes, and when you combine that stagnant offense with pi$$-poor special teams - constantly letting the other team start drives on their own 35-40 - you can't blame our defense last year too badly for the 5-7 record.

 

A great example where our linebackers played terrible last year though was the Minnesota game. We'd get caught looking stupid on stretch plays, over-persuing, bad tackling...awful. Need a lot more out of a linebacking corps in a 3-4 scheme in a run-heavy conference, there's no doubt about that.

[floridacorn]

3 hours ago, Undone said:

 

I could be wrong about this, but it seems like Chinander has it in his mind that for his 3-4 to be successful, he has to have these big 'tweener OLBs - guys that are in between the size of a "normal" OLB and a traditional defensive end. Nelson is sized roughly like that.

 

If you actually get a couple good starters that fit that build and are quick & athletic, you've hit the jackpot. But in my opinion those guys are just as hard to actually find & recruit as good traditional defensive ends; they're not just all over and I'm not convinced we actually have any of them at all on our roster right now.

 

I did a bunch of research last season along with a couple posts on here showing the size of Wisconsin's linebackers last year; they weren't big guys at all. And Wisconsin runs a 3-4.

 

I realize I can't like, keyboard warrior my way into a perfect take on all of this but what we really need at OLB are some athletes that fly to the ball, no matter how big they are or even whether or not they're particularly brutal tacklers.

 

It comes down to what coverages you run, what you ask these "OLB's" to do in coverage, & sub-packages.  The Bucs run a 3-4 with JPP & Shaq Barrett as OLB's.   The Steelers do the same w/Bud Dupree & TJ Watt.  JPP was a career 4-3 DE, the rest fit the hybrid mold you reference better, but they are clearly no JoJo or Shaquem Griffin, & they aren't asked to do much in coverage.

 

I watched the Steelers opening game & interestingly found them playing Chinanders "TITE" formation the entire game as their base defense.  The key difference between these D's, the Georgia & Alabama's of the world & what I've seen of Chinanders D to date are sub-packages.  These teams all remove a 3-4 DE & spin their OLB's down to a 4-3 DE.  Where Chinander dating back to UCF has been married to his base D far more.  Prior to late last season, I've never noticed him switch, but that doesn't mean he didn't.  

 

I think NU's is on the right track with "OLB's" like Nelson, Cooper, & Payne, & I prefer their 3-4 scheme, but I think Chinander's sub-package D has to evolve for him to become a high level DC.