Jump to content

***The Nebraska Defense - Blackshirts 2022***


suh_fan93

Recommended Posts

On 9/22/2022 at 10:16 PM, Mavric said:

 

Part of it seems to be he's reading the HB.  The HB slow plays like he's going across the formation, LB28 shadows that then has to come back to the hole.

 

Part of the problem - like @MyBloodIsRed16 said - is the DL on that side gets blown up.

 

But I think the biggest issue here is we have 6 in the box and they have six blockers.  All they have to do is get a hat on a hat and we're in trouble.  Especially when they have five on the line against three DLs.

Yep...those are just read steps...I don't know if anyone bothers reading guards at the CFB level anymore because of all the RPO stuff...

 

So you probably read first back to your side and mirror?  That is just a guess though.

Link to comment

9 minutes ago, runningblind said:

The talent conversation is silly to me sometimes.  Their players play better than ours.  I'd call that being more talented.  Think whatever you'd like about potential, that's all subjective. 

I guess people have different definitions for talent. 
 

Mine is, you can have two kids that have the same physical and mental ability to do something. Now, each can go to different colleges and be coached totally different. One plays well and one does not. That doesn’t mean one doesn’t have talent. It means that talent hasn’t been developed and put in a position to succeed. 
 

For instance, if you take LBs and put them in a very passive scheme and don’t get any sacks, does that mean they are less talented than if you took the same group and put them in an aggressive scheme and they got three sacks?

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I guess people have different definitions for talent. 
 

Mine is, you can have two kids that have the same physical and mental ability to do something. Now, each can go to different colleges and be coached totally different. One plays well and one does not. That doesn’t mean one doesn’t have talent. It means that talent hasn’t been developed and put in a position to succeed. 
 

For instance, if you take LBs and put them in a very passive scheme and don’t get any sacks, does that mean they are less talented than if you took the same group and put them in an aggressive scheme and they got three sacks?

That's a hypothetical though.  Do you define talent on what ifs? That's purely potential to me, and is mostly irrelevant.  What you actually get done is all that matters in regards to how good you are at something.  There are an infinite number of scenarios that could be, but just the one that actually happens. 

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, runningblind said:

That's a hypothetical though.  Do you define talent on what ifs? That's purely potential to me, and is mostly irrelevant.  What you actually get done is all that matters in regards to how good you are at something.  There are an infinite number of scenarios that could be, but just the one that actually happens. 

And there are many factors that affect what happens on the field other than talent level. 
 

literally, if the coach only puts one LB in when he should have three, the lack of success, according to you, is because that one LB lacks talent. 
 

I disagree. 

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

And there are many factors that affect what happens on the field other than talent level. 
 

literally, if the coach only puts one LB in when he should have three, the lack of success, according to you, is because that one LB lacks talent. 
 

I disagree. 

I'm saying it doesn't matter.  If two of those LBs do nothing in college because of the wrong coach or wrong scheme, who cares? Yay, they have some perceived/potential/unrealized talent?  The only talent that matters is the one that actually produces.  I get there are extenuating circumstances, but that's life. 

Link to comment

25 minutes ago, runningblind said:

I'm saying it doesn't matter.  If two of those LBs do nothing in college because of the wrong coach or wrong scheme, who cares? Yay, they have some perceived/potential/unrealized talent?  The only talent that matters is the one that actually produces.  I get there are extenuating circumstances, but that's life. 

It matters when you are in the process of changing coaches. I believe the physical talent is there for this team to play better if the coaching is better. 
 

From your comments, it sounds like you don’t think so. 

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

It matters when you are in the process of changing coaches. I believe the physical talent is there for this team to play better if the coaching is better. 
 

From your comments, it sounds like you don’t think so. 

You keep on stating that there is physical talent out there, but how do reconcile the front 4 getting manhandled game after game, and the LB’s looking slow.  It’s not all just lack of effort or being confused by the defensive assignments.  There has to be a talent level out there which NU is lacking. 

Link to comment
10 hours ago, ColoradoHusk said:

You keep on stating that there is physical talent out there, but how do reconcile the front 4 getting manhandled game after game, and the LB’s looking slow.  It’s not all just lack of effort or being confused by the defensive assignments.  There has to be a talent level out there which NU is lacking. 

Because when I watch certain plays where we give up a big play, it's because someone doesn't fill the right gap or the defense that's called doesn't set them up to be successful. Example, when you have no D linemen over either guard or center and only one MLB, that's an easy run up the middle for a big gain.  That's not on the talent.  That's on the scheme that's called.  I'm not saying we have talent to go out and win the Big Ten or NC.  I'm saying we have better talent than the results on the field.  Coach them better and have a better scheme and the defense will work better.

Link to comment
13 hours ago, runningblind said:

The talent conversation is silly to me sometimes.  Their players play better than ours.  I'd call that being more talented.  Think whatever you'd like about potential, that's all subjective. 

 

Nobody said anything about the concept of "potential."

 

Think of it more as comparing their high school tape, let's say from senior year. So there we're talking about what a qualified analyst sees in how the kid plays compared to other players all across the country.

 

Then also things like shuttle run times, 40 yard dash times, etc. So we are talking about tangible things.

 

I agree with Buster entirely - if you take a composite of those things, I don't believe KSU's players had more of them entering into their freshman year of college.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
20 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

Nobody said anything about the concept of "potential."

 

Think of it more as comparing their high school tape, let's say from senior year. So there we're talking about what a qualified analyst sees in how the kid plays compared to other players all across the country.

 

Then also things like shuttle run times, 40 yard dash times, etc. So we are talking about tangible things.

 

I agree with Buster entirely - if you take a composite of those things, I don't believe KSU's players had more of them entering into their freshman year of college.

 

12 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

It matters when you are in the process of changing coaches. I believe the physical talent is there for this team to play better if the coaching is better. 
 

From your comments, it sounds like you don’t think so. 

I can see what you are getting at, in the event of a coaching change.  I wonder however, is that same talent available to the new coach or is it diminished now with time spent under poor coaching and being put in bad situations?  Mentally at least they have to doubt themselves more and self confidence has taken a hit I would suspect. 

Link to comment

23 minutes ago, runningblind said:

I can see what you are getting at, in the event of a coaching change.  I wonder however, is that same talent available to the new coach or is it diminished now with time spent under poor coaching and being put in bad situations?  Mentally at least they have to doubt themselves more and self confidence has taken a hit I would suspect. 

I think it's a combination.  Obviously, next year some of the players won't be here anymore and some new ones will be.  So, it's not reality to think about a new coach taking over this exact team and what they can do with it.

 

Some players will still be here and the new coach will have to deal with the team mentality and the bad habits that have been instilled with the players that are still here.  

 

Another part of being in a bad scheme is the mentality that the player has towards it.  If he knows it's a bad scheme and knows he doesn't have a chance to be successful, it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.  If the players are practiced well and instructed well in a good system, they realize that and their attitude in the scheme improves.

 

I see it in employees.  If I put an employee in a situation where he truly doesn't believe they can succeed, their attitude while attempting to succeed is different.

Link to comment

Let's do a test here:

 

Look at this definition of what folks think a DE should be coming out of HS:

 

https://www.gobigrecruiting.com/recruiting101/football/positional_guidelines/defensive_line

 

Now, go look at this guy's stats.

 

DE Recruit #1:

image.png.45e6daa4c8effd245e49c3b010c4dbe1.png

 

At last year's NFL combine, DE Kayvon Thibodeaux out of Oregon (6'4", 254) ran a 4.58 40 and benched 225 for 27 reps.

 

I'm not one that is big on numbers (cause they can't tell heart), but according to the link above, the first person above is as good as a group of five/FCS defensive end.

 

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, alexhortdog95 said:

Let's do a test here:

 

Look at this definition of what folks think a DE should be coming out of HS:

 

https://www.gobigrecruiting.com/recruiting101/football/positional_guidelines/defensive_line

 

Now, go look at this guy's stats.

 

DE Recruit #1:

image.png.45e6daa4c8effd245e49c3b010c4dbe1.png

 

At last year's NFL combine, DE Kayvon Thibodeaux out of Oregon (6'4", 254) ran a 4.58 40 and benched 225 for 27 reps.

 

I'm not one that is big on numbers (cause they can't tell heart), but according to the link above, the first person above is as good as a group of five/FCS defensive end.

 

A recruit coming out of HS is very different than a guy coming out of college after being in a S&C program for 3-4 years and playing FBS ball.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
33 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

A recruit coming out of HS is very different than a guy coming out of college after being in a S&C program for 3-4 years and playing FBS ball.

 

Very true, but you first have to have a foundation to build upon.  I watched the Buckeyes play the other night, they had this all world tight end that was straight schooling Wisconsin.  Found out that the guy came to school and has played three different positions since he's been there.

 

He was that good to play all the positions, though.  A good foundation can create some good looking buildings.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...