killer cacti
All-Conference
Dabo isn't leaving Clemson for anywhere except Bama, if he were to get the opportunity.
And that "vanilla" defense includes blitzing almost half the time and introducing a 3-3 look and zone blitzing that I don't recall being much a part of prior defenses.First, Bo's defense is too complicated. He isn't getting athletes on the field.
Then, Bo goes vanilla and puts freaks on the field and is being too simple and "phoning it in."
Dude can't win either way.
He could win by putting a good defense on the field.First, Bo's defense is too complicated. He isn't getting athletes on the field.
Then, Bo goes vanilla and puts freaks on the field and is being too simple and "phoning it in."
Dude can't win either way.
Apparently he won Saturday without doing so......though several posters seem to be realizing it wasn't so bad after re-watching the game.He could win by putting a good defense on the field.
Those two criticisms aren't necessarily coming from the same people. And of course different people are going to have different opinions.First, Bo's defense is too complicated. He isn't getting athletes on the field.
Then, Bo goes vanilla and puts freaks on the field and is being too simple and "phoning it in."
Dude can't win either way.
This is what worries me. We have a ton of talent, but is it going to go to waste due to the inability to make changes on the fly? Now, if this gets fixed and there are visible improvements during Southern Miss, then you're going to have people jumping on the "I knew we'd be ok" bandwagon in a hurry.Guys we can spend time freaking out about how bad we played but I am really excited about this Defense. We are FAST!!! We had hands on their quarterback multiple times. Our DE's have way more speed off the ends and our DB's played pretty well. Our biggest issue was the run up the middle and a lot of that had to do with how simple the defense was and how the coaches couldn't make adjustments cause they didn't give the kids enough to work with going in. But all of this is fixable. I really think that we will see a big jump this week and another big jump before UCLA.
We are going to be making some mistakes for the first half of the season for sure but I really think that we'll be pretty dang good by the 2nd half of the season. There's a lot to be excited about... we really do have a lot of talent and speed. As soon as these young kids get some reps and game experience and really have more time with the defense they are going to be studs.
You should listen to Damon Benning's take on the coaches making adjustments: http://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=111&c=991&f=1810441This is what worries me. We have a ton of talent, but is it going to go to waste due to the inability to make changes on the fly? Now, if this gets fixed and there are visible improvements during Southern Miss, then you're going to have people jumping on the "I knew we'd be ok" bandwagon in a hurry.Guys we can spend time freaking out about how bad we played but I am really excited about this Defense. We are FAST!!! We had hands on their quarterback multiple times. Our DE's have way more speed off the ends and our DB's played pretty well. Our biggest issue was the run up the middle and a lot of that had to do with how simple the defense was and how the coaches couldn't make adjustments cause they didn't give the kids enough to work with going in. But all of this is fixable. I really think that we will see a big jump this week and another big jump before UCLA.
We are going to be making some mistakes for the first half of the season for sure but I really think that we'll be pretty dang good by the 2nd half of the season. There's a lot to be excited about... we really do have a lot of talent and speed. As soon as these young kids get some reps and game experience and really have more time with the defense they are going to be studs.
I don't want this speed we have on the defensive side of the ball to go to waste. I want people to be afraid of the Blackshirts again.
I'm not "hating," but simply expressing my opinion. Some think Pelini is doing a great job in all respects. I respectfully disagree. I think he's doing a good job in some aspects of his job and a terrible job in others. And I think that's reflected by the fact that we win 9-10 games a season but also lose four, with an average of two blowouts.My thoughts exactly^.So are you the same Tfree from over at Huskerpedia? Isn't there enough hate going on over there from GFOA, Big D, Pops, and Bilsker? That you have to bring it over here.I respectfully disagree. It's possible that the dysfunction only shows up at certain times, such as when they're matched up against a superior staff and challenged to make adjustments on the fly. That's when the dysfunctional nature of this staff becomes apparent. And it's a recurring theme during the blowouts. It was also on full display on Saturday.A team doesn't win 9 or more games each year of a coaching tenure if things are seriously dysfunctional.But now that he has his own staff, the dysfunction just continues.
Just went and checked some random games from the late 70s through the 80s and early 90s (ignoring the NC seasons). The only games that I saw that were close season-opening, non-conference games were against top 25 opponents. A #1 Alabama that won 20-3 was probably the worst. I didn't see any (and I didn't check them all, but I wasn't being selective, either) apparent struggles with non-ranked non-conference opponents. What's the opposite of rose-colored glasses? Smog-colored? Looking back with smog-colored glasses to make the present seem less bad? That seems like it should be a thing.Wow. This thread could be about a huge number of non-con games from almost every year I've been a Husker fan. Teams, no matter how good, have bad games. Usually the first game opponent is lousy so we don't notice...
Well, I was talking about the discussions not the final score. That was sort of my point. These "OMG!!! WE SUCK!!!" discussions happen almost every season. But we usually win by a comfortable margin, so fans tend not to remember the game looking back. In fact this same scenario happened the last time we played Wyoming in Lincoln.Just went and checked some random games from the late 70s through the 80s and early 90s (ignoring the NC seasons). The only games that I saw that were close season-opening, non-conference games were against top 25 opponents. A #1 Alabama that won 20-3 was probably the worst. I didn't see any (and I didn't check them all, but I wasn't being selective, either) apparent struggles with non-ranked non-conference opponents. What's the opposite of rose-colored glasses? Smog-colored? Looking back with smog-colored glasses to make the present seem less bad? That seems like it should be a thing.Wow. This thread could be about a huge number of non-con games from almost every year I've been a Husker fan. Teams, no matter how good, have bad games. Usually the first game opponent is lousy so we don't notice...