Lack of Preparation/Fundamentals

[robsker]

Got to say I don't understand where you are coming from, at all.

Now, granted, in terms of offense, we haven't looked good. But we had a faulty plan and a poor coach leading that group for Bo's first three years. The jury is out on Beck after just two games. We will see.

Defensively. Really. Seriously. You are not joking about the above.

Nebraska got blown out by Missouri in Bo's first year. And the defense responded by posting a great defensive plan against a Texas Tech team that featured jaw dropping talent at the skill positions.

And the Pelini's have continued to do this every year.

If we had a passable offense. Respectable. Anything. We would be the back-to-back Big 12 champs.

You will note that from my original post, I did not call out lack of fundamentals or lack of fire on the defense. All my specific points re: these problems were specified as offensive problems. So... because I was not addressing anything on the defensive side of the ball i was not joking --- because that was not in view. When I say we need to be focused on both sides of the ball that means what it says... both on O and on D (not just on D). We have had focus on D (though there too, from time to time we have assignment problems --- but so do others and we are not outliers there... in fact we are actually quite good there).

We may be saying precisely the same thing... you say "if only we had a passable offense" and I say "if only we had coaching staff that had the talent we have prepared --- fundamentally --- that played with fire." these are the same --- with the only difference being that I am specifying a reason for offensive problems (coaching) and you did not. When you say we had a faulty coach and a bad plan --- well I agree, that was a major premise in my post.

I also said it was fixable --- at least theoretically --- but that progress toward that end has not yet been shown. And yes some have pointed out that that will take time. OK. Agreed. That is why I say temper your expectations --- this may be a really rocky year one in the B10. Maybe this staff will get things rolling (they have improved the penalty part --- or at least it seems so so far.) That said, as much of a Pelini fan as many of us are, one must question the staffing that we had on offense and can still legitimately question what we have now (has Cotton really earned the right to stay employed here? Should we really have hired and internal person from a failed Offensive staff that has no experience as a coordinator --- or should we have gone after a proven commodity for that position?)

I think if we are honest, coaching and coaching decisions re; hiring are a major contributor to the state of NU football.

Are you sure about that? Because I completely took it as both sides of the ball... like you said..

One thing that has not been mentioned here often is something that disappoints me a great deal. Perhaps I am alone in this assessment of the teams performance... But...

This coaching staff has not seemingly shown the ability to field a focused team that plays with intensity and solid fundamentals on both sides of the ball every play. It just has not happened under Pelini. Until that happens, until the Huskers play with fire and focus and play smart with good fundamentals (both sides of the ball, all 4 quarters of a game --- game in and game out) --- until this team becomes a team that is prepared mentally and plays assignment football... well until that happens, expect this team to be as it has been these past several years... incapable of contending (that is, consistently beating) comparable (slightly less, equally or slightly better) talent opponents that are better prepared. Wisconsin, Penn State, Michigan, Michigan State, Iowa (yes, even Iowa), and Ohio State will all be really, really tough games.

Now, if you are talking strictly about the offensive side of the ball, I will tend to agree, slightly.. But, we have a brand new offensive coordinator who has held that position for a whopping 2 games... You can't take Watson's inability to do what you've said and pin that on Beck.. So if you really feel it's just the offense, say that, don't say both sides of the ball.. But at the same time, you have to give the offense time to actually mesh before you expect great things.

makes sense how you took what I wrote --- and I guess it was somewhat unclear. But the bolded statement is entirely a true statement --- until we are fundamentally sound on both sides of the ball --- until we are fired up, focused and playing assignment football on both sides of the ball... well we are in trouble. That is a true statement. BOTH sides have to be prepared. One is not enough. When I specified the details and they were all on the O, I thought that that would be clear.

Even so, it can be argued --- and has been argued by another poster --- that even out D is not prepared consistently. He has a point --- because the D is at times unfocused too. Still, my point was we need prepardeness on both sides, every play every quarter and we are not getting it.

Re: the "brand new coordinator" needing time... OK, somewhat true... but he is an internal guy, he knows all the kids, all the culture, what they were doing, etc. --- he is formally "new" but because he has been in the system all along, the transition should be quicker. So... some slack but not much.

 

[Enhance]

I don't think it's too far off to say that we've seen some pretty unprepared Bo Pelini teams the last couple of years. Especially the bowl game - we were routinely gashed by a mediocre team, and it was readily apparent that many of our defenders - seniors, playing their last games as Blackshirts - were not prepared to play that game.

SDSU was another glaring example. How else do you explain thirty minutes of possession and 65 offensive plays from a D2 school that finished 5-6?

How else do you explain a loss to 5-7 Texas? How else do you explain a loss to 7-6 Washington?

That's three games off the top of my head where we were either unprepared, unmotivated, unconcerned, un-whatever adjective you want to use.

It is Bo's job to get this team ready to go, and many times, he hasn't gotten it done. That's something he has to work on. He's only just started his fourth year as head coach, so maybe this is a weak area for him. I see no reason to believe he won't get it fixed, but it needs to be addressed.

Or maybe he's got it straight in his head, but the players are the ones having the problem. There has been a LOT written about our defense this year – how great they are, All-Americans at all three levels, etc. I sometimes wonder if these guys spend too much time reading their press and then they underestimate their opponents.

Whatever the reason, there is evidence that something needs to be fixed here.

I agree with most of what you said, but I think the one area I disagree with is using "team" to describe not being prepared for a football game. More often than not since 2009, the defense has shown up and been ready to go. They had their weeks, but every single defense in the nation has their bad weeks. It's impossible play great defense every single week. Some weeks you're going to struggle a bit more than others. It's unavoidable.

The offense, however, has consistently been the thorn in the side of progress. It is Bo's job to get the "team" ready, yes, but the "team" isn't the problem - it's the offense. Whether that means Bo needs to be involved more or we need to wait out Beck's progress, I don't know. I just don't think it's fair to say the "team" hasn't been ready when in most cases the defense has been.

 

[skersfan]

I have been saying the exact same thing since Bo took over. There is a problem, with motivation to excell in this program. Lack of preperation has been shown numerous times, and that is on both sides of the ball. Inability to make changes has been shown over and over. Waiting until half time to make changes against a true NC team will kill us.

We have a tough road to hoe, and there needs to be changes made and quickly. If we play like the last game, I see us losing up to 5 games this year.

Preparing exactly like we have for the last two games, will not work against Washington. They are coming here with the idea they can win, they have score board. Reason, the kids did not want to play them. So What!!!!! Not getting them fired up is coaching, no consequences for lack of effort, desire, motivation and most of all pride in the N on their helmets.

We have problems and they need to figure it out quickly.

We played a team with a real coach last weekend, Pelini needs to learn from this game. Follow the lead of a true coach, not media fabricated one.

Bo is close, but their is still some of the Pro coaching left in him.

 

[zoogs]

I don't think it is lack of preparation of motivation to excel. I think it's just that there's more volatility than you'd usually expect. If anything, it is over preparation and over motivation that I think causes that.

I don't totally buy that we didn't to play the Holiday Bowl excuse either. I think there were a number of factors in that game, not the least of which were 1) injuries and 2) being outcoached. It is harder to admit, but even with the best coaches, you win some battles and you lose some. Not exactly slouches on the other side.

 

[robsker]

I don't think it's too far off to say that we've seen some pretty unprepared Bo Pelini teams the last couple of years. Especially the bowl game - we were routinely gashed by a mediocre team, and it was readily apparent that many of our defenders - seniors, playing their last games as Blackshirts - were not prepared to play that game.

SDSU was another glaring example. How else do you explain thirty minutes of possession and 65 offensive plays from a D2 school that finished 5-6?

How else do you explain a loss to 5-7 Texas? How else do you explain a loss to 7-6 Washington?

That's three games off the top of my head where we were either unprepared, unmotivated, unconcerned, un-whatever adjective you want to use.

It is Bo's job to get this team ready to go, and many times, he hasn't gotten it done. That's something he has to work on. He's only just started his fourth year as head coach, so maybe this is a weak area for him. I see no reason to believe he won't get it fixed, but it needs to be addressed.

Or maybe he's got it straight in his head, but the players are the ones having the problem. There has been a LOT written about our defense this year – how great they are, All-Americans at all three levels, etc. I sometimes wonder if these guys spend too much time reading their press and then they underestimate their opponents.

Whatever the reason, there is evidence that something needs to be fixed here.

I agree with most of what you said, but I think the one area I disagree with is using "team" to describe not being prepared for a football game. More often than not since 2009, the defense has shown up and been ready to go. They had their weeks, but every single defense in the nation has their bad weeks. It's impossible play great defense every single week. Some weeks you're going to struggle a bit more than others. It's unavoidable.

The offense, however, has consistently been the thorn in the side of progress. It is Bo's job to get the "team" ready, yes, but the "team" isn't the problem - it's the offense. Whether that means Bo needs to be involved more or we need to wait out Beck's progress, I don't know. I just don't think it's fair to say the "team" hasn't been ready when in most cases the defense has been.

What you say makes sense. We are pretty much, I think, on the same page.

I simply think that the head coach, through his entire staff, is responsible to have the whole team ready --- O, D and ST --- and assume you would agree --- I was just using the term "team" to encompass the whole "the O, the D, and the ST" and if any part is lacking, the whole is lacking. Essentially, I was not subdividing the units except in saying that each unit needs to be prepared --- any unit that is not then defines a team that is not prepared.

 

[Enhance]

I don't think it's too far off to say that we've seen some pretty unprepared Bo Pelini teams the last couple of years. Especially the bowl game - we were routinely gashed by a mediocre team, and it was readily apparent that many of our defenders - seniors, playing their last games as Blackshirts - were not prepared to play that game.

SDSU was another glaring example. How else do you explain thirty minutes of possession and 65 offensive plays from a D2 school that finished 5-6?

How else do you explain a loss to 5-7 Texas? How else do you explain a loss to 7-6 Washington?

That's three games off the top of my head where we were either unprepared, unmotivated, unconcerned, un-whatever adjective you want to use.

It is Bo's job to get this team ready to go, and many times, he hasn't gotten it done. That's something he has to work on. He's only just started his fourth year as head coach, so maybe this is a weak area for him. I see no reason to believe he won't get it fixed, but it needs to be addressed.

Or maybe he's got it straight in his head, but the players are the ones having the problem. There has been a LOT written about our defense this year – how great they are, All-Americans at all three levels, etc. I sometimes wonder if these guys spend too much time reading their press and then they underestimate their opponents.

Whatever the reason, there is evidence that something needs to be fixed here.

I agree with most of what you said, but I think the one area I disagree with is using "team" to describe not being prepared for a football game. More often than not since 2009, the defense has shown up and been ready to go. They had their weeks, but every single defense in the nation has their bad weeks. It's impossible play great defense every single week. Some weeks you're going to struggle a bit more than others. It's unavoidable.

The offense, however, has consistently been the thorn in the side of progress. It is Bo's job to get the "team" ready, yes, but the "team" isn't the problem - it's the offense. Whether that means Bo needs to be involved more or we need to wait out Beck's progress, I don't know. I just don't think it's fair to say the "team" hasn't been ready when in most cases the defense has been.

What you say makes sense. We are pretty much, I think, on the same page.

I simply think that the head coach, through his entire staff, is responsible to have the whole team ready --- O, D and ST --- and assume you would agree --- I was just using the term "team" to encompass the whole "the O, the D, and the ST" and if any part is lacking, the whole is lacking. Essentially, I was not subdividing the units except in saying that each unit needs to be prepared --- any unit that is not then defines a team that is not prepared.

Oh yes I agree in that sense. It's Bo's job to have the entire team ready and there's no question about that. If the offense is playing well and the defense is bad, it's a reflection on the coordinators but also on Pelini, ultimately.

I guess what I don't think is fair is to say the entire team has been unprepared, because the defense has been in most cases.

 

[skersfan]

Texas, SDSU, Washington2 and last night showed us that the defense was not ready to play as I see it. There were others, but those are most glaring.

The defense has had its share of let downs.

Every team out there any more has the weapons to beat anyone on a given day. That is what you have to prepare for. The unknown, the over achiever.

He will learn this as time goes by. But it has to be a concern for us, going into every game it seems.

 

[Enhance]

Texas, SDSU, Washington2 and last night showed us that the defense was not ready to play as I see it. There were others, but those are most glaring.

The defense has had its share of let downs.

Every team out there any more has the weapons to beat anyone on a given day. That is what you have to prepare for. The unknown, the over achiever.

He will learn this as time goes by. But it has to be a concern for us, going into every game it seems.

They didn't put their best foot forward, but I think you're kidding yourself if you don't think the defense played well enough for the offenses to win that game. If you had told me at the beginning of the year last year that we'd hold Texas to 20, SDSU to three and Washington game two to 19 points, I would have said we win hands down.

All three of those games were blundered because of the offense and I personally don't see an argument against it.

Games like Okie Lite and ISU were the worst defensive games.