Bo's Philosophy: Knowledge over Athleticism

I was being sarcastic folks. Some of you missed the point entirely. I am disgusted with the way our defense played against UCLA (and Southern Miss). The problem wasn't much of Bo's defensive scheme, but rather fundamentals. Tackling, being more explosive on the line, putting your hands up in the passing lane, looking for the ball while its in the air, shedding blocks. Those are fundamentals that killed the defense Saturday night.

But i find it ridiculous to say that Bo's playbook needs to be dumbed down when I bet 100% of you don't know the Husker defensive playbook.

Now i am sure Bo's defensive scheme has evolved since 2003, but I am sure the players he coached as a defensive coordinator in 2003 at Nebraska, 2004 Oklahoma, and 2005 - 2007 LSU had no problems learning Bo's playbook. So why pick on his defensive scheme after 1 loss to UCLA?

 
One of two things are at play here. Either the scheme is much too difficult to grasp, or we have some of the poorest talent ever to play for big red. We gave up the second most yards in Husker history. Clownahan was faulted for his offensive playbook being much too difficult. Bo looked the furthest thing from a defensive guru against UCLA. A dumbdowned 45 give or take offensive playbook by UCLA ran circles around our defense. I don't know whether or not we have more athletic players riding the pine, but if we don't then we're in trouble for an extended period of time. We have to thank our lucky stars TO got us into the Big 10 because West Virginia, Okie State, OU, etc. would absolutely torch this defense. Did anyone see the final score of the KState Miami game? This is probably what a lot of our scores would have looked like if we were still in the Big 12.

 
I think what we all want to see is an attacking defense. Watch any other team and they are attacking. UCLA attacked our offense. Every team in the SEC attacks on defense. Let the horses out and let these guys get after that offense!

 
Some posters here are trying to lead us to believe that we don't have any horses in the stable. If this is the case, then we have even bigger problems for an extended period of time.

 
junior4949 said:
Some posters here are trying to lead us to believe that we don't have any horses in the stable. If this is the case, then we have even bigger problems for an extended period of time.
Click to expand...
junior4949 said:
Some posters here are trying to lead us to believe that we don't have any horses in the stable. If this is the case, then we have even bigger problems for an extended period of time.
Click to expand...
I return to the Boise State defense comparison. We certainly have more horses in the stable than they do --- but they are well coached, know their assignments and can thus play aggressively, with physicality and with focus --- precisely what our "horses" cannot do because they do not know where to line up or what their assignments are. BSU has vastly better defense than NU with fewer horses.

NU is ranked something like # 80 or so nationally in defense. That is skewed now and will get better --- NU will likely be a # 50 or so defense in the end (i surmise) --- but I doubt there are more than 15 or so programs with better horses on their defense and perhaps another 4-5 that are comparable. NU should be a top 20 defense... our talent is at that level (certainly no less than #25)... we are way worse defensively because of poor coaching. Plain and simple.

No coaches should allow players to be so under-prepared, so confused on the field, and allow players who do not wrap, do not tackle with the head properly aligned, etc. Watching NU football is like a coaching clinics film for what not to do.

 
Fuzzy, I agree with your overall point, but something has to be done. I don't think anybody who posts on this boards knows anything about Bo's actual playbook, but many here understand the basic scheme idea, what kind of players you need to have to make it successful, and how those players should execute it. I'm not as schematically savvy as other people, but the statistics over our last 16 games explain why something is off kilter.

Our 2011 opponents averaged about 4.0 YPC. In 2012, USM averaged 4.0 YPC and UCLA a shocking 6.1 YPC. I haven't personally looked up this information, but somebody said UCLA also had three redshirt freshman playing on the o-line, and I know for a fact their QB is a redshirt freshman. And after all that inexperience we gave up 6.1 YPC. And it's not like this is a fluke or an "everybody has a bad game" situation. Our defensive stats were appalling and they've gotten worse since last year, despite returning almost all our defensive line talent, most of our linebacking corp, and a secondary with a lot of experience. I mean, you watch these guys and it looks like it's not even a scheme issue - we straight up can't physically take care of an opponent. We can't use our power or technique to make plays consistently. Something is very, very off, and given the experience we have back, it shouldn't be.

So, like I said, I agree with you in that people are going a little over the top, and I'm sure you agree with me saying something has to be done.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Enhance89 said:
So, like I said, I agree with you in that people are going a little over the top, and I'm sure you agree with me saying something has to be done.
Click to expand...
Exactly. There's a difference between berating the players' ability and merely pointing out how the players' abilities might be able to be used differently to achieve better results.

That's not condescension - that's a football message board.

 
junior4949 said:
One of two things are at play here. Either the scheme is much too difficult to grasp, or we have some of the poorest talent ever to play for big red. We gave up the second most yards in Husker history. Clownahan was faulted for his offensive playbook being much too difficult. Bo looked the furthest thing from a defensive guru against UCLA. A dumbdowned 45 give or take offensive playbook by UCLA ran circles around our defense. I don't know whether or not we have more athletic players riding the pine, but if we don't then we're in trouble for an extended period of time. We have to thank our lucky stars TO got us into the Big 10 because West Virginia, Okie State, OU, etc. would absolutely torch this defense. Did anyone see the final score of the KState Miami game? This is probably what a lot of our scores would have looked like if we were still in the Big 12.
Click to expand...
junior4949 said:
One of two things are at play here. Either the scheme is much too difficult to grasp, or we have some of the poorest talent ever to play for big red. We gave up the second most yards in Husker history. Clownahan was faulted for his offensive playbook being much too difficult. Bo looked the furthest thing from a defensive guru against UCLA. A dumbdowned 45 give or take offensive playbook by UCLA ran circles around our defense. I don't know whether or not we have more athletic players riding the pine, but if we don't then we're in trouble for an extended period of time. We have to thank our lucky stars TO got us into the Big 10 because West Virginia, Okie State, OU, etc. would absolutely torch this defense. Did anyone see the final score of the KState Miami game? This is probably what a lot of our scores would have looked like if we were still in the Big 12.
Click to expand...
Agreed about the Big 12. I'd think Oklahoma, WVU and Oklahoma State would put up 60+ points on NU --- literally as many points as they desired until they felt like backing off (which Oklahoma State seemingly does not do). KSU and Texas would also doubtless be 50+ points against NU as well.

 
maskershake said:
I think what we all want to see is an attacking defense. Watch any other team and they are attacking. UCLA attacked our offense. Every team in the SEC attacks on defense. Let the horses out and let these guys get after that offense!
Click to expand...
Please!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was on this board defending the 2010 defense when others complained about the yards rushing NU allowed. I thought it was OK, because NU was top 10 in points allowed. I didn't like the passive 2-gap scheme, but I was happy with the points allowed. Well, now the point performance is also poor. How can you stop the run when you give up a yard on the LOS (7 yards for a first down now in 3 plays) and let the OL get a running start?

 
I don't have a problem with the way Bo is doing this. Sure, the guy who is a stud athlete looks cool on the plays they make, but if he doesn't know what he is doing most of the time, he is a liability. The way you put it, we should just play whoever comes in as the highest rated recruit and forget about everything else.

In reality, to be really good, the player has to have both. He has to be a stud athlete AND know the system. This is a team game. Not just a bunch of individuals running around out there on their own. If he doesn't know what he is supposed to do then the team doesn't work.

There are many examples of this.

Joe Dailey. Everyone thought he was a stud and was pissed that Lord started instead of him. How did that work when we finally saw what he was like on the field?

Carnes. Everyone last year thought he should be on the field because he was so good. Well, he is now passed up on the depth chart by a walk on and a true freshman. Obviously he is not the great QB that everyone thought he was last year.

Obviously the QB position is the highly visible position so examples were easy to see. BUT, the same thing happens everywhere else.

You want to play?? Work your azz off and give the coaches a reason to trust that you will know what you are doing when you step on the field.

When things don't go right, the fans always think the guy on the bench is better. The fact is, the coaches know these players way better than any fan.

 
After reading Pelini's quotes from the presser, it appears they might look to include some more younger bodies in the defensive line rotation this week. He says they're still trying to find the right fit there, which leads me to think no job is safe. And after watching Saturday's game, I'd say that's promising to hear him say.

He also said he believes our line spends too much time letting the offense dictate what happens rather than them dictate what the offense does. Obvious, of course, but just goes to show Pelini at least sees exactly what we see and realizes the issue.

He also said he believes we have the talent on the defensive line to play with anyone in the nation. I don't see it and the production supports my thought process.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not gonna sit here and knock on Bo too much because I always have been a big supporter of Pelini. I will say this though, there is something to the "knowledge over athleticism" comments. So far, Lavonte and Stafford have both been "lost" out there according to Bo, yet both have looked like a few of the biggest playmakers we've had on the field the last two years. So clearly knowledge does not equal success. If knowledge equaled success, Bo's fifth year defense, full of only his recruits, wouldn't have given up the most yardage in Nebraska football history. (You can say second most if you want, but according to another poster, if UCLA QB had not fallen back when kneeling the ball twice, it would have been a record worst performance ever seen by this University.)

 
BigRedBuster, that's all fine and sugar coated sweet what your saying there, but what has the defense done to show you that these guys have proven to the coaches that they know what they are doing? I agree with some of the above. I think every job ought to be open competition at this point. Especially the defensive line. There isn't a defensive lineman I've seen yet that shows me they should be out there. Especially Baker and Meredith. These guys are seniors? So what? Just because they're seniors means they instantly get the nod? If we got younger guys who can go out there and make plays then it should be happening. Alonzo Whaley has missed more tackles in two games than many guys miss in their careers. The defense looks sad guys, there's no two ways around it. Even the coaches are acknowledging it. 2nd most yard allowed in school history? Gimme a break. UCLA might be a good team, they definitely outcoached and outplayed us, but our defense surely made them look a hell of a lot better than they actually are.

 
True to the Red.......Always said:
BigRedBuster, that's all fine and sugar coated sweet what your saying there, but what has the defense done to show you that these guys have proven to the coaches that they know what they are doing? I agree with some of the above. I think every job ought to be open competition at this point. Especially the defensive line. There isn't a defensive lineman I've seen yet that shows me they should be out there. Especially Baker and Meredith. These guys are seniors? So what? Just because they're seniors means they instantly get the nod? If we got younger guys who can go out there and make plays then it should be happening. Alonzo Whaley has missed more tackles in two games than many guys miss in their careers. The defense looks sad guys, there's no two ways around it. Even the coaches are acknowledging it. 2nd most yard allowed in school history? Gimme a break. UCLA might be a good team, they definitely outcoached and outplayed us, but our defense surely made them look a hell of a lot better than they actually are.
Click to expand...
You imply that Bo plays seniors because they are seniors. That just flat out isn't true. The depth chart is full of players that beat out older players.

No, the defense stinks and nobody has proven they deserve to keep their jobs. The entire side of the ball needs to be open for the job. BUT, it still needs to be proven to the coaches that they know what they are doing and can make plays.

 
Enhance89 said:
Fuzzy, I agree with your overall point, but something has to be done. I don't think anybody who posts on this boards knows anything about Bo's actual playbook, but many here understand the basic scheme idea, what kind of players you need to have to make it successful, and how those players should execute it. I'm not as schematically savvy as other people, but the statistics over our last 16 games explain why something is off kilter.

Our 2011 opponents averaged about 4.0 YPC. In 2012, USM averaged 4.0 YPC and UCLA a shocking 6.1 YPC. I haven't personally looked up this information, but somebody said UCLA also had three redshirt freshman playing on the o-line, and I know for a fact their QB is a redshirt freshman. And after all that inexperience we gave up 6.1 YPC. And it's not like this is a fluke or an "everybody has a bad game" situation. Our defensive stats were appalling and they've gotten worse since last year, despite returning almost all our defensive line talent, most of our linebacking corp, and a secondary with a lot of experience. I mean, you watch these guys and it looks like it's not even a scheme issue - we straight up can't physically take care of an opponent. We can't use our power or technique to make plays consistently. Something is very, very off, and given the experience we have back, it shouldn't be.

So, like I said, I agree with you in that people are going a little over the top, and I'm sure you agree with me saying something has to be done.
Click to expand...
I rewatched the game, and i most of the defensive lines problems that i saw was fundamentals of shedding the block. Maybe Coach K is pushing more techniques than fundamentals, i don't know.

The defense needs to earn fan support back. Best way to do that? For starters, keep Arkansas St. and Idaho St. off the scoreboard when we play them over the next two weeks.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top