Cosgrove must go

When did I put words anywhere in you?
Click to expand...
I wasn't arguing that:

a) The offensive coaching is the reason why the defense is on the field longer

B) The defense is "tired"

But I will argue this one:

There is no reason that the other team has the ball longer or is on the field more other than that the scheming is poor enough to allow the opposing team to get long drives and huge plays.
Click to expand...
So it's the scheme? The scheme made Bullocks miss at least two key tackles. He's a saftey. He is SUPPOSED TO MAKE OPEN FIELD TACKLES. The scheme made KU block up front very well. The scheme made LB's overpersue time after time. Yea, I'm sure over pursuing a play is all of a sudden being emphasized on a week to week basis. Yea, sorry, not buying that the scheme is the one and only possible source of big plays.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
In my opionion cosgrove needs to go....i have seen improvement with the offense and granted it is not much but it is a new offense all together....but the defense should not be giving up plays like it does.  we looked great early in the season but when you are playing patsies like we do that isnt hard...and that is a whole other subject in itself...but the past few games we have gotten killed with the run up the middle...i am not a football genius but it seems to me if that is your problem maybe you should put a linebacker in the middle ....play 3 linebackers not 2 that are spread out...
this guy is making the same mistakes as last year....that is not acceptable....he is easily an expendable guy...maybe make coach blake the defensive cord and keep him happy and here for his recruiting as well he has experience as a head coach so he would understand many more things...what you think
Click to expand...
What improvement have you seen on offense? Personally id take our offense last year over this years. Our offense looked good maybe one or 2 games against poor defenses otherwise it has been god awful. The defense is equally bad.
Click to expand...
I'd like to respond to this in another area, it doesn't really belong in this thread.

 
i think a defense that spends all it's time on the field, while the O goes 3 and out, is going to give up points......anyone have any stats of TOP for all the games played so far? i would be surprised if we are holding the ball for more than 35% of the time.........hunter
Click to expand...
Except they regularly start the game by giving up 3 scores... I won't buy this 'tired' crap.
Click to expand...
I don't understand. Hunter is saying that by pure numbers, an offense that is on the field more is simply going to score more points. You don't agree?
Click to expand...
Fine, whatever. But if our D could force 3 and out situations then wouldn't the offences be on the field for the same amount of time? It's not like the other team's offence is lining up on the ball when it is supposed to be NU's possession or anything. Okay, even if I grant you that they ARE tired in the first half when they give up 17 - 21 points, they're only tired because the defense can't stop ANY offense at all. 3rd and Long? We might as well just let them step off the 10 yards or whatever they need for a first becasue at least that would save a touchdown. There is no reason that the other team has the ball longer or is on the field more other than that the scheming is poor enough to allow the opposing team to get long drives and huge plays. You're arguing that the symptom is the cause.
Click to expand...
Hey bud, don't put words in my mouth. I was simply pointing out that the longer a defense is on the field, the more time and the more opportunities the other team has to score. Period. I don't care who is coaching, who's in the stands or who's armchair quarterbacking it.
Click to expand...
exactly Dave, that was my point from the start........and yes besides that the D falls on their face on the first series..yes, that too! so what are the excuses for starting poorly? bad defensive schemes??

hunter

 
When did I put words anywhere in you?
Click to expand...
I wasn't arguing that:

a) The offensive coaching is the reason why the defense is on the field longer

B) The defense is "tired"

But I will argue this one:

There is no reason that the other team has the ball longer or is on the field more other than that the scheming is poor enough to allow the opposing team to get long drives and huge plays.
Click to expand...
So it's the scheme? The scheme made Bullocks miss at least two key tackles. He's a saftey. He is SUPPOSED TO MAKE OPEN FIELD TACKLES. The scheme made KU block up front very well. The scheme made LB's overpersue time after time. Yea, I'm sure over pursuing a play is all of a sudden being emphasized on a week to week basis. Yea, sorry, not buying that the scheme is the one and only possible source of big plays.
Click to expand...
:yeah

 
"I wasn't arguing that:

a) The offensive coaching is the reason why the defense is on the field longer

B) The defense is "tired""

I never said that you were...

A wise man once said: "That's the thing about reading between the lines. You are reading something that isn't there."

As for the latter part of the post, a couple of missed tackles don't account for 40 points from Kansas. I'll bet you could go back to the 95-6 season and find a few missed tackles then, too.

 
"I wasn't arguing that:a) The offensive coaching is the reason why the defense is on the field longer

B) The defense is "tired""

I never said that you were...

A wise man once said: "That's the thing about reading between the lines. You are reading something that isn't there."

As for the latter part of the post, a couple of missed tackles don't account for 40 points from Kansas. I'll bet you could go back to the 95-6 season and find a few missed tackles then, too.
Click to expand...
There is a difference between a missed tackle and a touchdown saving missed tackle.

Yea, sometimes you have to read between the lines, but not when there is nothing there. There isn't always an ulterior motive, black helicopters don't fly over your house, etc, etc. ;)

 
i think a defense that spends all it's time on the field, while the O goes 3 and out, is going to give up points......anyone have any stats of TOP for all the games played so far? i would be surprised if we are holding the ball for more than 35% of the time.........

hunter
Click to expand...
Time of possession Opponents: 278:50 minutes

Time of possession Nebraska: 261:16

Difference: 17:34 (quarters are 15 minutes)

 
wow, that is not good.......sustaining drives and momentum is a big problem!

good stats nameless, they help tell the story, even though we don't like it.....

thanks,

hunter

 
i think a defense that spends all it's time on the field, while the O goes 3 and out, is going to give up points......anyone have any stats of TOP for all the games played so far? i would be surprised if we are holding the ball for more than 35% of the time.........

hunter
Click to expand...
Time of possession Opponents: 278:50 minutes

Time of possession Nebraska: 261:16

Difference: 17:34 (quarters are 15 minutes)
Click to expand...
yeah this doesn't sound good, but remember, that is stretched out over 9 games. So it isn't that telling. The 3 and out number, however, is.

 
"I wasn't arguing that:a) The offensive coaching is the reason why the defense is on the field longer

B) The defense is "tired""

I never said that you were...

A wise man once said: "That's the thing about reading between the lines. You are reading something that isn't there."

As for the latter part of the post, a couple of missed tackles don't account for 40 points from Kansas. I'll bet you could go back to the 95-6 season and find a few missed tackles then, too.
Click to expand...
There is a difference between a missed tackle and a touchdown saving missed tackle.

Yea, sometimes you have to read between the lines, but not when there is nothing there. There isn't always an ulterior motive, black helicopters don't fly over your house, etc, etc. ;)
Click to expand...
The sad fact is NU has made quite a few touchdown saving tackles. Against OU I believe it was Grix that ran across the field and cut down peterson after he scampered for 50-60 yards. I know there have been others when our corners took the proper persuit angles and got the ball carrier before he made it in the endzone. The point is they have been giving up big plays and still are. It is only because of the hustle of a few players that these big plays weren't big td plays.

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