Bo's Job Security - 2013 (Poll 1)

[The King]

I'm not into calling players out personally, but I can think of five to ten off the top of my head that do support it. There will always be exceptions to the rule. You can't look at that defensive product we've put on the field the past few years and make any kind of claim that Bo consistently coaches up talent.

I don't know how you can say one way or the other. How do we know the players on the field this last season weren't actually really that horrendously awful and it was a miracle of coaching to get the production out of them that we did?

I would say this factors in. I'm not "pooping" on the players but a lot of them just weren't talented enough and were benefitted by the system - the system DID make them look better and put them in the correct places.

I can't harp on this enough - the players were put in position to make the right play, just for some reason (lack of talent, speed, poor tackling - Stafford always trying to kill the ballcarrier) they wouldn't make the play. Behind closed doors a certain person rhyming with Nelini and Dapuchis refuse to change the scheme because it works - but the recruiting has failed them. Thats why all of the recruiting changes the last couple years. They've acknowledged this and are trying to fix it. Failure in talent, not in scheme. Blame both players and coaches. Coaches lack of recruiting (at the time) and players for not being talented enough. Its not true for all of the players, but there are obvious "misses" that we were counting on.

 

[EZ-E]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1582844-nebraska-football-how-bo-pelini-can-scheme-around-weaknesses-on-defense

"Pelini may need to simplify his beloved schemes that many players have complained are more complex than anything they see in their classes. But a return to the aggression and physicality that tormented Husker opponents in their last years in the Big 12 will play to Nebraska’s strengths and promote a defensive style that imposes its will rather than reacting to opposing offenses."

"By ditching the basic four-man fronts and soft coverages, the Huskers should implement an aggressive, risky and loose style of play. More jamming at the line, more blitz packages, more flying around the field and flocking to the ball like men possessed."

This is the first article I found, with simply a few quotes, but this only took me two minutes to find. This is a journalist stating his belief which backs up what he has also heard from many players. Fact is, many players were quoted as saying the scheme was harder to learn than most of their classes. I can find more articles and quotes it's not hard to find. What is difficult, is arguing with people that close to the situation.

You linked bleacherreport. Enough said.

Find a link to a player saying this.

 

[RedDenver]

http://bleacherrepor...sses-on-defense

"Pelini may need to simplify his beloved schemes that many players have complained are more complex than anything they see in their classes. But a return to the aggression and physicality that tormented Husker opponents in their last years in the Big 12 will play to Nebraska's strengths and promote a defensive style that imposes its will rather than reacting to opposing offenses."

"By ditching the basic four-man fronts and soft coverages, the Huskers should implement an aggressive, risky and loose style of play. More jamming at the line, more blitz packages, more flying around the field and flocking to the ball like men possessed."

This is the first article I found, with simply a few quotes, but this only took me two minutes to find. This is a journalist stating his belief which backs up what he has also heard from many players. Fact is, many players were quoted as saying the scheme was harder to learn than most of their classes. I can find more articles and quotes it's not hard to find. What is difficult, is arguing with people that close to the situation.

You linked bleacherreport. Enough said.

Find a link to a player saying this.

Linking Bleacher is almost an indictment of your point.

 

[KJ.]

"Pelini may need to simplify his beloved schemes that many players have complained are more complex than anything they see in their classes."

The majority of our defense also takes nothing but psychology/sociology/basket weaving classes and still can't get good grades.

Sean Fisher understands the playbook fine. But for the guys who were thrilled to get 19's on their ACTs, it doesn't really mean much to say that the playbook is the most complicated thing they've ever seen.

 

[Mavric]

"Pelini may need to simplify his beloved schemes that many players have complained are more complex than anything they see in their classes."

The majority of our defense also takes nothing but psychology/sociology/basket weaving classes and still can't get good grades.

Sean Fisher understands the playbook fine. But for the guys who were thrilled to get 19's on their ACTs, it doesn't really mean much to say that the playbook is the most complicated thing they've ever seen.

Pretty sure anyone's college play book would be the most complicated thing 99% of players have ever seen.

 

[KJ.]

"Pelini may need to simplify his beloved schemes that many players have complained are more complex than anything they see in their classes."

The majority of our defense also takes nothing but psychology/sociology/basket weaving classes and still can't get good grades.

Sean Fisher understands the playbook fine. But for the guys who were thrilled to get 19's on their ACTs, it doesn't really mean much to say that the playbook is the most complicated thing they've ever seen.

Pretty sure anyone's college play book would be the most complicated thing 99% of players have ever seen.

Exactly, which is a testament to the lack of intelligence in college football players instead of the degree of difficulty in Bo's playbook.

 

[True2tRA]

Find me a link of a player saying otherwise? There's a reason this topic has been discussed for five years now, and apparently still being discussed today. Enough said.

 

[Mierin]

http://bleacherrepor...sses-on-defense

"Pelini may need to simplify his beloved schemes that many players have complained are more complex than anything they see in their classes. But a return to the aggression and physicality that tormented Husker opponents in their last years in the Big 12 will play to Nebraska's strengths and promote a defensive style that imposes its will rather than reacting to opposing offenses."

"By ditching the basic four-man fronts and soft coverages, the Huskers should implement an aggressive, risky and loose style of play. More jamming at the line, more blitz packages, more flying around the field and flocking to the ball like men possessed."

This is the first article I found, with simply a few quotes, but this only took me two minutes to find. This is a journalist stating his belief which backs up what he has also heard from many players. Fact is, many players were quoted as saying the scheme was harder to learn than most of their classes. I can find more articles and quotes it's not hard to find. What is difficult, is arguing with people that close to the situation.

You linked bleacherreport. Enough said.

Find a link to a player saying this.

Linking Bleacher is almost an indictment of your point.

Not "almost." There isn't a single quote in the article and the only other place I saw that the guy who wrote it writes on is his own website.

 

[True2tRA]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/younger-faster-defenders-set-play-nebraska

Anderson, who played sparingly the first two games, told reporters he has had difficulty grasping coach the scheme.

"It was all thrown in front of me and it was hard," he said. "When I was in junior college, I just had to learn my position. Here, you've got to learn everyone's position. ... When your playbook is harder than your homework, that's a problem. I think it's harder than my homework."

Again, I took the time to invest a minute or two to find a players quote. So here you go, here is Anderson's quoted comment. I really don't plan on spending all my time with this, but it is amazing to me how you morons are trying to completely debunk the theory that Bo's scheme has been repeatedly labeled as too difficult. Keep quackin' ducks.

 

[True2tRA]

Like Anderson, Curry said he has struggled to learn the defensive concepts, though he added that the playbook isn't as tough as his academic homework.

"I'm fresh out of high school and we didn't really run that many plays," Curry said. "Here, it's a lot more. I've been doing a decent job of getting the plays down. I need to get better."

Second quote, this from Curry. Again speaking of the difficulty. Clearly more difficult than high school playbooks, but I don't think these guys are saying this for no reason. Some obvious problems with over complication.

 

[True2tRA]

It's been discussed in these places here as well, since this whole concept of Pelini's scheme being overly difficult apparenlty is a whole new thing for you guys...

<journalstar.com/...pelini.../article_754e02f0-20e2-50e2-88bf-612898b8b...‎



espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/tag/_/name/bo-pelini‎



omaha.com/article/20130228/HUSKERS/702289796/1140‎



www.huskers.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=100&ATCLID...‎


bleacherreport.com/.../1332367-nebraska-football-pelini-needs-to-rethin...‎






hailvarsity.com › News › Analysis‎



journalstar.com/...scheme/article_93ed619b-f8e1-56e7-be5a-a3ed75b31...‎





www.cornnation.com/.../nebraska-spring-football-bo-pelinis-public-stanc...‎






huskersgameday.com/.../tweets-from-huskersgameday-for-2012-03-05-2...‎






brophyfootball.blogspot.com/2010/.../nebraska-over-under-front_15.ht...‎






www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2013/03/...nebraska/1958723/‎






newsok.com/coach-bo-pelini-depending...defense-to...nebraska/.../33925...‎






www.sbnation.com/.../2/.../nebraska-spring-football-2013-practice-game‎






www.bcsnn.com/.../8568-does-nebraska-still-believe-in-bo-pelini.html‎






Here, I wasted my time looking up articles where the possibility of the scheme being too difficult is discussed. Some discuss it more than others. What I can't find is any articles where they discuss the scheme being overly simplified and dumb enough for a basket weaver to learn. Some of you act like you have never heard this discussion before.

 

[Mavric]

He has to be willing to compromise. Bo is a black-and-white kinda guy (like a lot of posters here, which is probably why so many of us like him). But in order for him to have fewer blowouts and become more consistent, he's going to have to be willing to simplify his scheme like you said, he's going to have to put a premium on developing talent from mediocre players, and he's going to have to keep reining in that famous temper. He's doing some of this already - most notably the temper - but the memories of his blowups/blowouts are too recent for them to be completely gone from the minds of recruits.

This I think could be the major problem. Not sure it's quit in the same context you're using it but it seems like we only have one scheme. When it works it's great but when it isn't working we don't have anything else to go to. I think we could have won the UCLA game last year if we just went to a simple two-deep, five underneath zone and didn't allow them to run for 30 yards after catching a five yard pass. I'm not in favor of totally changing his scheme but it would be nice to have a Plan B if the need arises.

He's going to have to ramp down the complexity of his scheme to get the best athletes on the field. We've had players with far less athleticism play in front of better athletes simply because they have the knowledge necessary to run his system. BAD IDEA. If his system can't get the best athletes onfield then the system has to be scrapped.

This is often stated but I'm not sure I buy into it. I hate to always pick on a guy but the best example is PJ Smith. How may people were pulling their hair out that Austin Cassidy was always playing in front of "more athletic" players just because he supposedly "knew the system". PJ got his chance last year and I pretty sure he performed worse and I'm not even sure he was a better athlete anyway. We tried almost everyone on the roster at corner and DLine the last couple years and haven't really found anyone to do a consistent job. The possible exception could be some players who red-shirted last year that Bo has already admitted could have been a mistake. You can transition into the argument that we haven't recruited well enough but that's a totally different conversation. Who are the better athletes that haven't gotten their shot yet?

 

[Danimal]

I'm not into calling players out personally, but I can think of five to ten off the top of my head that do support it. There will always be exceptions to the rule. You can't look at that defensive product we've put on the field the past few years and make any kind of claim that Bo consistently coaches up talent.

I don't know how you can say one way or the other. How do we know the players on the field this last season weren't actually really that horrendously awful and it was a miracle of coaching to get the production out of them that we did?

I would say this factors in. I'm not "pooping" on the players but a lot of them just weren't talented enough and were benefitted by the system - the system DID make them look better and put them in the correct places.

I can't harp on this enough - the players were put in position to make the right play, just for some reason (lack of talent, speed, poor tackling - Stafford always trying to kill the ballcarrier) they wouldn't make the play. Behind closed doors a certain person rhyming with Nelini and Dapuchis refuse to change the scheme because it works - but the recruiting has failed them. Thats why all of the recruiting changes the last couple years. They've acknowledged this and are trying to fix it. Failure in talent, not in scheme. Blame both players and coaches. Coaches lack of recruiting (at the time) and players for not being talented enough. Its not true for all of the players, but there are obvious "misses" that we were counting on.

I agree that the blueprint of our defensive demise was laid-out way in advance with three classes of mediocre recruiting, recruiting misses, and busts.(especially in the front 7). In '08 we had Cam for D-line, that was it. In 09 Ankrah and Martin(converted LB) worked for DE. Thad Randle has done alrighti, Cole went to O. We ended-up with nothing at LB for '09. In '10 great juco LB in Lavonte, nothing for high school(ya we were recruiting for the 12 but geez). We had six D-line recruits. Rome played then quit. Cotton moved to O. The other four will never see signficant snap. Secondary had misses too but not class-wide whiffs, partly because we took more db's when recruiting for the 12.

I think we could do more to make the D work with what we have and I do think Bo is a little stubborn, but as you said the system is proven work when you have the guys and we just didn't. Hopefully this year as the '11/'12/'13 class guys develop we start to seen an upturn.

 

[Elf]

If Bo has a losing season, he will get fired.

 

[B.B. Hemingway]

Bo has been doing this a very long time, and I find it hard to believe that he would be so stubborn to let his scheme get in the way of productivity if he thought it was to complex.... I don't think there has been anything said in this thread that hasn't crossed Bo's mind, or that he isn't already well aware of.... Point being, let the most qualified of us (that's Bo) do his job. I am confident that if there is a problem with the scheme, or it's difficulty, Bo will adjust accordingly....