Chatelain: Bob Diaco's defense on red alert after Red Wolves roll Huskers for 497 yards

Huskinator said:
I an just glad that didn't bite them in the butt.   We won the game and got away with a mistake, I hope they learn from it and build off it.  Clock management was atrocious!!!!  That is something you can learn from now though.  
Click to expand...
Did they learn from the Illinois game in 2015?

 
This kind of illustrates why I'm skeptical of the "playing vanilla/holding things back" argument.  Yes, to some extent it's possible.  I don't really buy that but it's possible.

But when it gets to the fourth quarter and it's still a competitive contest, could we not break out at least a couple of the tricks?  Was "holding things back" more important than making sure we won this game?

The Red Wolves ran a whopping 32 plays in the fourth quarter alone. They had the ball for 8 minutes, 37 seconds, accumulating 12 first downs and 163 yards on the way to 10 points. ASU needed 17 on the scoreboard, of course, so all that production amounted to a good workout for the NU defense and perhaps some elevated heart rates for NU coaches and fans.
Click to expand...


LJS

 
ASU ran 89 plays.  That included 68 passes and 21 runs.

The rush defense gave up a whopping 3.9 yards per play with a longest of 14 yards.  Zero TDs.

Now, we go into Oregon.  Last week, they passed it 27 times and ran it 52.

This matchup is going to be very interesting to me to see if the decent rushing defense remains.  I expect Oregon's yards per play is going to be more than 3.9.  How much more will be interesting.

 
BigRedBuster said:
ASU ran 89 plays.  That included 68 passes and 21 runs.

The rush defense gave up a whopping 3.9 yards per play with a longest of 14 yards.  Zero TDs.

Now, we go into Oregon.  Last week, they passed it 27 times and ran it 52.

This matchup is going to be very interesting to me to see if the decent rushing defense remains.  I expect Oregon's yards per play is going to be more than 3.9.  How much more will be interesting.
Click to expand...


Good point, and something a lot of us (myself included) have overlooked. The question is whether or not those meager 21 running plays called were a byproduct of being stonewalled by the defense...or if it's just indicative of their scheme and priorities?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
VectorVictor said:
Good point, and something a lot of us (myself included) have overlooked. The question is whether or not those meager 21 running plays called were a byproduct of being stonewalled by the defense...or if it's just indicative of their scheme and priorities?
Click to expand...
Sharp and Benning commented today that Arky State ran a number of RPO's and the pass was wide open so often they just passed it.

I think it was also shown in Husker Chalk Talk that the NU defender would be caught in no-mans land on the RPO's and wouldn't defend either the run or the pass.

 
ColoradoHusk said:
Sharp and Benning commented today that Arky State ran a number of RPO's and the pass was wide open so often they just passed it.

I think it was also shown in Husker Chalk Talk that the NU defender would be caught in no-mans land on the RPO's and wouldn't defend either the run or the pass.
Click to expand...


Thanks. Makes sense why some of our guys looked like statues out there on defense during the first half. 

 
Mavric said:
This kind of illustrates why I'm skeptical of the "playing vanilla/holding things back" argument.  Yes, to some extent it's possible.  I don't really buy that but it's possible.

But when it gets to the fourth quarter and it's still a competitive contest, could we not break out at least a couple of the tricks?  Was "holding things back" more important than making sure we won this game?

LJS
Click to expand...
Agreed. Based on several things I've read/heard in the last couple of days, I think it's a combination of the system being new but also having some personnel issues. IIRC, Benning said there was a particular backer who just looked lost at times on Saturday. Benning also mentioned that there's not a lot you can do from a philosophical standpoint when your guy is in the right position and he whiffs on a tackle.

Husk's post is also pertinent as I remember Benning discussing that this morning.

 
Enhance said:
Agreed. Based on several things I've read/heard in the last couple of days, I think it's a combination of the system being new but also having some personnel issues. IIRC, Benning said there was a particular backer who just looked lost at times on Saturday. Benning also mentioned that there's not a lot you can do from a philosophical standpoint when your guy is in the right position and he whiffs on a tackle.

Husk's post is also pertinent as I remember Benning discussing that this morning.
Click to expand...


I think it's hard to know what the LBs should or shouldn't have been doing because they were obviously coached to NOT do anything for longer than normal.  So to some extent they were all trying to play catch-up.

 
Enhance said:
Agreed. Based on several things I've read/heard in the last couple of days, I think it's a combination of the system being new but also having some personnel issues. IIRC, Benning said there was a particular backer who just looked lost at times on Saturday. Benning also mentioned that there's not a lot you can do from a philosophical standpoint when your guy is in the right position and he whiffs on a tackle.

Husk's post is also pertinent as I remember Benning discussing that this morning.
Click to expand...
Which backer?  Guessing Newby or Young.  We need to bring a safety down to learn the position.

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