Interesting point McKewon

[Nebula]

I was listening to the BRT podcast on my way to work today and Sam brought up a good point. The defense is 100% looking for perfection. It's hypercritical of itself and when one bad thing happens, the players start pushing to make plays and things snowball. Look at what happened against Ohio State. Miller has a 70 yard run, and all of a sudden we can't stop anything after looking so great in the first quarter.

don't forget what followed that play was: rush for 2, pass for 3, interception on your own 20.

I'll be the first to say that this defense is horrible. They played one of the worst games at UCLA that I've seen a Nebraska defense play. However - the the offense didn't hold up their end of the deal during the Ohio State game either. After that long Braxton TD, Nebraska still should have been up 17-7. Instead 6 plays later we were down 21-17. Those other 14 are on the offense. That's momentum, that's when things snowball...and that wasn't the defense.

Good points Chris, per usual.

But the offense scored 38 points. Honestly, I feel like that's enough output to say you held up your end. But you can argue persuasively otherwise. It's just my own personal feeling that the offense did more than enough for us to win that game.

(And btw, can somebody explain to me WTH is going on with our special team coverage? Kickoff and punt coverage has been pretty awful at times stretching back at least to last year from my perspective. Special teams as a whole has really hurt us in both losses, with a painfully struggling Maher killing us in the field position battle in Pasadena, and the backbreaking PR against OSU along with the abysmal blocking on KR returns that saw Abdullah being dragged down inside our 13 yd line more than once. We need to shore those areas up, like, yesterday.)

 

[Nebula]

Eric Martin, not sure if he is 'thriving.' Boom/bust - a lot of big, impact plays, but when he's not doing that, he can be a big liability on the field.

David wasn't just fast, he was instinctive and flowed to the ball and was able to make up for mistakes in that way.

I see your point, but to me Meredith is an example of somebody who is a big liability on the field. Martin's positive play, to me at least, far outweighs where he hurts us. I mean, he's the only guy who can seem to get consistent pressure on the QB. And that's something we desperately need more of.

Bolded: Absolutely right. This is why, early on, David would rack up 15+ tackles in a game, and Bo would later refer to all the mistakes he made. He DID make mistakes, but his incredible instincts combined with his excellent athleticism allowed him to compensate for his missteps, and make big plays despite of them.

 

[zoogs]

I think the Ohio State game is a great example. Martin got nowhere near consistent pressure on the QB...although he made a few great plays to start, I think he had a pretty bad rest of the game. So I don't know if it far outweighs it. I guess they need to find a way to unleash the Caveman in a way that we can get the positives, without getting stung so much by the negatives.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I was listening to the BRT podcast on my way to work today and Sam brought up a good point. The defense is 100% looking for perfection. It's hypercritical of itself and when one bad thing happens, the players start pushing to make plays and things snowball. Look at what happened against Ohio State. Miller has a 70 yard run, and all of a sudden we can't stop anything after looking so great in the first quarter.

don't forget what followed that play was: rush for 2, pass for 3, interception on your own 20.

I'll be the first to say that this defense is horrible. They played one of the worst games at UCLA that I've seen a Nebraska defense play. However - the the offense didn't hold up their end of the deal during the Ohio State game either. After that long Braxton TD, Nebraska still should have been up 17-7. Instead 6 plays later we were down 21-17. Those other 14 are on the offense. That's momentum, that's when things snowball...and that wasn't the defense.

Good points Chris, per usual.

But the offense scored 38 points. Honestly, I feel like that's enough output to say you held up your end. But you can argue persuasively otherwise. It's just my own personal feeling that the offense did more than enough for us to win that game.

(And btw, can somebody explain to me WTH is going on with our special team coverage? Kickoff and punt coverage has been pretty awful at times stretching back at least to last year from my perspective. Special teams as a whole has really hurt us in both losses, with a painfully struggling Maher killing us in the field position battle in Pasadena, and the backbreaking PR against OSU along with the abysmal blocking on KR returns that saw Abdullah being dragged down inside our 13 yd line more than once. We need to shore those areas up, like, yesterday.)

I think we need to quit using special teams as a chance for the walk-ons to get playing time. I know this is an over-generalization, but still sums up the following point

It just seems as if were the only team using under-athletic guys on punt and kickoff coverage to be running down the field to chase around the other team's most talented athlete. I'm not saying that we should have all def starters out there, but I would say about half of the personell on the coverage teams probably do not belong out there. Whether or not starters have to be out there, there has to be better options personel-wize, as harsh as that is.

 

[Nebula]

I think we need to quit using special teams as a chance for the walk-ons to get playing time. I know this is an over-generalization, but still sums up the following point

It just seems as if were the only team using under-athletic guys on punt and kickoff coverage to be running down the field to chase around the other team's most talented athlete. I'm not saying that we should have all def starters out there, but I would say about half of the personell on the coverage teams probably do not belong out there. Whether or not starters have to be out there, there has to be better options personel-wize, as harsh as that is.

Agreed. I wonder if this speaks to a lack of depth, or more of a desire to get experience for guys who aren't going to see a lot of snaps otherwise. Either way, starting at the 15yd line (offensively or defensively) vs. starting on the 35 is a massive difference, to state the obvious.

 

[ZRod]

Are they anticipating in order to compensate for their lack of athleticism and speed? I'm starting to think that if they didn't make a guess they wouldn't be able to stop the play for a reasonable gain. When they guess wrong, big plays happen.

They're not that slow or un-athletic. It's just the players not taking to the coaching. We don't have world beaters but they shouldn't be giving up 40+ points to anyone.

Miller's first big run is a prime example. There is no reason for Ankrah to crash inside like he did, and he got his butt chewed for it because he pretty much blew the play.

 

[Nebula]

I think the Ohio State game is a great example. Martin got nowhere near consistent pressure on the QB...although he made a few great plays to start, I think he had a pretty bad rest of the game. So I don't know if it far outweighs it. I guess they need to find a way to unleash the Caveman in a way that we can get the positives, without getting stung so much by the negatives.

Yeah, good point. Far outweighs is a little strong...I'd backtrack from that assertion. Where he seems to have shined most is in pass rushing, which is something we've desperately needed. Therefore, I might be apt to give him a little more credit than is warranted, just because it's getting to the point where it's almost a miracle when a QB drops back to pass and doesn't have 5+ seconds to scan the field. Run support is a different matter, and Martin hasn't been all world in that area.

 

[kchusker_chris]

But the offense scored 38 points. Honestly, I feel like that's enough output to say you held up your end. But you can argue persuasively otherwise. It's just my own personal feeling that the offense did more than enough for us to win that game.

(And btw, can somebody explain to me WTH is going on with our special team coverage? Kickoff and punt coverage has been pretty awful at times stretching back at least to last year from my perspective. Special teams as a whole has really hurt us in both losses, with a painfully struggling Maher killing us in the field position battle in Pasadena, and the backbreaking PR against OSU along with the abysmal blocking on KR returns that saw Abdullah being dragged down inside our 13 yd line more than once. We need to shore those areas up, like, yesterday.)

38 should be enough. But that means the defense has to hold them to 24. (because they had to spot OSU 14). Can we expect this defense to hold a team like Ohio State, at home, to 24 points on offense? I don't think so. They aren't there. So while Taylor likely disagrees with me, even with a decent defensive showing (something in between 1st & 2nd half wisconsin) - I still think the offense needed to put up 45-50 to win that game. And if the O gives Northwestern 14 they'll likely need that many this week too.

And I agree, special teams is rough. We've got bright spots like Abdulla - but we need to Frank Beamer our special teams. I am convinced VT gets an extra win or two a season because of their ST play.

 

[Nebula]

38 should be enough. But that means the defense has to hold them to 24. (because they had to spot OSU 14). Can we expect this defense to hold a team like Ohio State, at home, to 24 points on offense? I don't think so. They aren't there. So while Taylor likely disagrees with me, even with a decent defensive showing (something in between 1st & 2nd half wisconsin) - I still think the offense needed to put up 45-50 to win that game. And if the O gives Northwestern 14 they'll likely need that many this week too.

And I agree, special teams is rough. We've got bright spots like Abdulla - but we need to Frank Beamer our special teams. I am convinced VT gets an extra win or two a season because of their ST play.

Absolutely agree. 38 points devoid of turnovers is one thing. Spotting the other team 14 points, like you said, changes that dynamic.

Still...38 points, on the road, against Ohio State? Not terrible production. Pretty damn good even, I'd say.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

The problem is we play with no swagger. Although he does have his d!(k ups, who is really the only player that you see making game changing hits every now and then? Stafford. And while he hasn't played great, he is really the only one I ever see bouncing around before plays like he is having fun. It is somewhat a vague connection, but I think there could be a case made.

Edit:but I'm also thinking the lack of attitude may be largely due to the fact that guys have so much going through their heads pre-snap.

This is not a small thing. I went to the UCLA game with binoculars, so I got to see the things they rarely show you on TV. I like to watch the sidelines, see what happens when the players come off the field. And what I saw was.....nothing. Nobody looked pissed. Nobody was talking to each other. Nobody was psyching up, huddling up, pumping up. Nothing. Not the players. Not the coaches. This was in the second half when both O and D weren't playing well, but the Huskers WERE STILL AHEAD. And they looked silent and stunned, as if already accepting defeat. Or acknowledging that they had no idea how to go out there and do anything different.

Talent is great, but attitude is everything. That's why every Saturday and Sunday teams with less talent go out and beat more talented teams, and why some coaches are able to turnaround entire programs utilizing the same personnel.

I think attitude also has a lot to do with how well you hang onto the ball, or yank it away from the other team, but I'll save that for the turnover thread.

 

[VectorVictor]

At least Lee is getting to the point where he's becoming kind of tired, played-out, irrelevant, and writes less. Dirk's way more noticeable because he's putting out garbage nearly every single day.

But Sam McKewon and Shatel are obv the best Nebraska football journalists by a wide margin.

Add Sipple in there, and I'd be inclined to agree.

Yes, Sipple can get a little inflammatory, but was honestly our Sam McKewon before Sam got his Nebraska Statepaper and OWH gig.

Still...38 points, on the road, against Ohio State? Not terrible production. Pretty damn good even, I'd say.

In spite of four turnovers...I'd say that's pretty damn good.

If our kids could quit tripping over their own schlongs in the game, we'd have the most potent offense this side of Oregon...

 

[MLB 51]

Eric Martin, not sure if he is 'thriving.' Boom/bust - a lot of big, impact plays, but when he's not doing that, he can be a big liability on the field.

David wasn't just fast, he was instinctive and flowed to the ball and was able to make up for mistakes in that way. I guess it's a talent issue I would say: if these guys had the talent level of David, we'd be doing a lot better on defense. I'm not sure the scheme is really holding them back so much as they haven't developed to that level of playing, period.

This what it takes to be a great LB.

 

[Paul in WI]

The problem is we play with no swagger. Although he does have his d!(k ups, who is really the only player that you see making game changing hits every now and then? Stafford. And while he hasn't played great, he is really the only one I ever see bouncing around before plays like he is having fun. It is somewhat a vague connection, but I think there could be a case made.

Edit:but I'm also thinking the lack of attitude may be largely due to the fact that guys have so much going through their heads pre-snap.

This is not a small thing. I went to the UCLA game with binoculars, so I got to see the things they rarely show you on TV. I like to watch the sidelines, see what happens when the players come off the field. And what I saw was.....nothing. Nobody looked pissed. Nobody was talking to each other. Nobody was psyching up, huddling up, pumping up. Nothing. Not the players. Not the coaches. This was in the second half when both O and D weren't playing well, but the Huskers WERE STILL AHEAD. And they looked silent and stunned, as if already accepting defeat. Or acknowledging that they had no idea how to go out there and do anything different.

Talent is great, but attitude is everything. That's why every Saturday and Sunday teams with less talent go out and beat more talented teams, and why some coaches are able to turnaround entire programs utilizing the same personnel.

I think attitude also has a lot to do with how well you hang onto the ball, or yank it away from the other team, but I'll save that for the turnover thread.

I couldn't agree with Guy and Lyons more. Attitude is everything, and the players just seem like they're not into the game. I also agree with the OP about the D being mentally overwhelmed. There are ways to address the D's confusion, but I don't have a clue how they're going to address the lack of attitude.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

If it's a whole bunch of things, chances are it's a combination of them which leads to the problem. No one single thing can be pointed to and be declared "the" issue that, if fixed, will result in perfection.

1) Preaching perfection. Whenever big (imperfect) plays are given up...

2) Player mentality. The players mentality gets shaken, things start to snowball.

3) Player athleticism. Our defensive players (for the most part) are probably not the most athletic unit that we could field, and that's fine. If Bo and John think that's our best group, then they must be our best group. But when we don't have the athletes to match the athletes on the other side of the field, things go wrong. Couple that with the snowballing mentality of not being perfect and precise, and the results are horrifying.

As a side note, I also think trying to be in the right spot, along with not being able to match opponent's offenses in athleticism has been detrimental when we're playing a mobile QB; he's another guy that the defense needs to account for, which requires shifts and switches by our defensive personnel.

What I hope to see this game, is for every guy on defense (who is supposed to contain) have a "zone", and if the QB enters that zone, he needs to make the tackle. That way we can tell what the "biggest" problem is.

 

[walksalone]

I'll go ahead and say that our slow/unimpressive outside play is a much worse factor than the mental aspect. Specifically, Merideth, Ankrah, Fisher, & Whaley. Very little speed, very little play making ability.

The slow playing is in part due to trying to be perfect or thinking too much. Offenses can only line up in so many different formations they need to be able to get a presnap read faster and get lined up. After the play starts it should all be reacting. But I think he has them thinking too much after the play starts.

The fact that we are "reacting" is one of the problems. The guys in the front 7 aren't doing enough to disrupt the play. When you've got an enemy making you react to what they are doing, more often than not, you are going to lose. But when you cause you're opponent to change what their doing, making them react, thats how you win...