Purdue Play-by-Play

[Husker in WI]

11 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

Yes. I feel like I've been saying this for five seasons now. I could make an argument that it's recruiting, but then I feel like there's another argument that it's a bit of a flaw with the "Modified 3-4 Nickle Defense" in terms of how you actually implement it - not the scheme itself.

Lots of people celebrated the 3-4 that Chinander brought initially (and of course Diaco basically ran it also) because they said it's easier to recruit for, in that good 4-3 defensive ends are really hard to come by and it's hard to recruit them to Nebraska.

 

Ok, well fast forward five seasons and any of the guys we've tried to plug in to play the stand-up edge man basically looks like a high school JV player going up against B1G offensive tackles.

 

I really think we misused Caleb Tannor, I think we wasted his athletic ability by trying to use him the way we have. Probably a safe bet we'll do the same thing with Butler also.   

 

Agreed, but I'm hoping whoever the next DC is can save Butler/Gunnerson assuming they stick around.

[Undone]

7 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

 

Agreed, but I'm hoping whoever the next DC is can save Butler/Gunnerson assuming they stick around.

 

Yep, really hope they stay.

 

Butler was on the thinner side for his height of 6'5", but I really think just by looking at his athleticism in live play that if he put on some muscle he could be a legit edge rusher.

 

This is total speculation but I feel like what Chinander was guilty of was sort of hammering the guys into his "pie in the sky" vision of what the scheme could do, instead of making the right tweaks to better utilize the guys he actually has.

 

I feel very confident that a competent DC could take these same players and get significantly better results.

 

Just absolutely stupid how we've wasted all of the resources & upgrades on the offense for this year by losing games with scores like 42-45,& 43-37.

[Mavric]

29 minutes ago, Undone said:

Yes. I feel like I've been saying this for five seasons now. I could make an argument that it's recruiting, but then I feel like there's another argument that it's a bit of a flaw with the "Modified 3-4 Nickle Defense" in terms of how you actually implement it - not the scheme itself.

 

I guess I don't think I remember seeing quite this type of alignment flaw before.  Not that we haven't had issues, but I don't recall thinking we were just totally misaligned over and over again like I thought Saturday.

[Undone]

49 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

I guess I don't think I remember seeing quite this type of alignment flaw before.  Not that we haven't had issues, but I don't recall thinking we were just totally misaligned over and over again like I thought Saturday.

 

Oh, oh - I getcha now. You felt like this was more of a misalignment than being intentional you're saying?

[Mavric]

6 minutes ago, Undone said:

Oh, oh - I getcha now. You felt like this was more of a misalignment than being intentional you're saying?

 

Yeah, I thought we've usually played our DEs/OLBs well outside the OT/TE and they seem to usually have outside contain responsibilities.  But for some reason against Purdue it seemed like they were basically head-up on the OT a lot.  So the OT could just take a reach step and get outside leverage and all they had to do was run outside that block and there was no one left to make the tackle.

[Undone]

26 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Yeah, I thought we've usually played our DEs/OLBs well outside the OT/TE and they seem to usually have outside contain responsibilities.  But for some reason against Purdue it seemed like they were basically head-up on the OT a lot.  So the OT could just take a reach step and get outside leverage and all they had to do was run outside that block and there was no one left to make the tackle.

 

Totally get you, yes.

 

 

[Undone]

On 10/17/2022 at 9:45 AM, Mavric said:

Maybe I just haven't been paying enough attention but Newsome seemed to be really bad this game.

 

Again, still working through the thread slowly.   

 

Hate to say this but his effort is generally really bad. He doesn't want to tackle and doesn't seem to have much interest in the game unless it's a play where he has a chance to make an INT.

[Undone]

3 hours ago, Mavric said:

Kudos to the OL for having three guys running 25 yards downfield .... and still can't find anyone to block.  

 

Yep, and this was the drive where we go with three passing plays, the third of which is the massive whiff by Thompson to a wide open Alante and we settle for the FG. 

           

[Husker in WI]

6 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

Again, still working through the thread slowly.   

 

Hate to say this but his effort is generally really bad. He doesn't want to tackle and doesn't seem to have much interest in the game unless it's a play where he has a chance to make an INT.

 

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt since he was playing hurt, but some of the attempts were pretty ugly. He was never CTB level physical, but last week seemed like an outlier in how passive he was. Hoping it's the injury and not apathy, but could be either.

[Undone]

@Husker in WI: My comments are a composite of things I've seen in other games also.

[Husker in WI]

13 minutes ago, Undone said:

@Husker in WI: My comments are a composite of things I've seen in other games also.

 

Fair enough, I haven't watched him that closely this year because he wasn't one of the bigger problems until last week. But that's a pretty low bar so I'm willing to believe you that he's not been playing hard.

[admo]

Maybe we'll try tackling running backs against Illinois.  Just a suggestion.

[BigRedBuster]

Can someone explain to me what's the difference between these two plays?

 

On the first one, the tackles appear to get totally beat without hardly touching the defender.  CT almost gets killed in a sandwich.

 

On this one, he gets hit on a blitz, but I'm looking specifically at the tackles.  They appear to be able to block their defenders pretty well.

 

So, why can the do it on one play, but not the other?

[zeWilbur]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

So, why can the do it on one play, but not the other?

 

They are raw from a technique standpoint and not great at identifying what the defender is trying to do until it is too late. Hopefully they guess correctly.

 

Here is a something that might help. 13 minutes total but minutes 1-4 do a nice job demonstrating high level concepts for off/def lineman techniques and how it is a chess game. Whole thing is pretty good though. Watch this, then your clips again, and it will be pretty apparent what is going on.

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

12 minutes ago, zeWilbur said:

 

They are raw from a technique standpoint and not great at identifying what the defender is trying to do until it is too late. Hopefully they guess correctly.

 

Here is a something that might help. 13 minutes total but minutes 1-4 do a nice job demonstrating high level concepts for off/def lineman techniques and how it is a chess game. Whole thing is pretty good though. Watch this, then your clips again, and it will be pretty apparent what is going on.

 

 

 

Thanks for the video.  It is good.

 

However, that's not what I see in the clips I posted.  To me, the first video of the tackle shows him moving a little, setting his feet and the defender then is easily getting around him.  In the second one, the tackle is actually moving his feet back to be in position to block a rushing defender.

 

What I didn't know before posting this is that the two clips have two different right tackles.  So, one guy is doing it well and the other isn't.  I suppose maybe the one that failed used the punch technique and the one that was successful used the hug technique.  However, I see the big difference in their feet and movement.  In the video you posted, even the tackles using the punch technique were still moving backwards to be in good position....which the Husker tackle did not do.