My take on our first two games

[The Maudfather]

In the first two games, you saw a bunch of sets that you will never see again. I truely do believe that. Bo LOVES to keep his cards close to his chest only revealing what he absolutely has to. You saw a very vanilla offense and defense the first two games because Bo banked on us being able to win the game on us being just flat out better ball players than them. While I am not claiming Fresno is going to win any championships anytime soon, they surely are no stranger to playing in atmospheres like last night.

What you saw in the first four or so drives in the 2nd half is what we have been hiding from the nation. I do believe the coaches learned a very valuable lesson and that is: NO MATTER WHO YOU PLAY YOU RUN YOUR OFFENSE AND DEFENSE. It was very encouraging the type of offense that Tim Beck has mapped out. I really hope we see that through four quarters of football against Washington.

Cheers boys.

That doesn't explain why our O-Lines and D-Lines are getting pushed around by FCS and WAC teams.

I doubt we blitzed more than a handful of times. Matt Davidson was spot on when he said that Fresno was in max protect the whole game and always rolled the pocket with Carr. Our DTs were doubled the whole game. Suh isn't walking through those doors. Not many college DTs can take on double teams. If you look to the second half, there weren't many plays that I can recall that our OL got pushed around. Into the fourth quarter and when Rex was carrying the load for us, I would say that we were running at them with our OL pretty good. My issue with it is we have been running plays for a game and a half that we will never run during the regular season. Our offense needs to start getting reps in the plays we will actually run. This could be one of the reasons that it does not seem we can ever get comfortable up front on the OL.

Notice the flow in the 2nd half when we started running the offense that we had practiced all through the winter, spring, and summer?

Agreed. The vast majority of their blocking schemes looked like this.

Combine this with rolling the pocket and throwing a lot of 3 step drop, quick hitters and you'll be able to take some heat off your qb. However, (I've watched the game a couple of times now) there were a handful of plays where Crick didn't get the double team and he was just flat out handled by Fresno St's left guard and even one play on a 3rd quarter run (1st and 10, at the 12:42 mark) the left guard blocks him from the top of the midfield N to the bottom. It looks like Crick just gave up on that play. If you're going to be an All-American, you can't take plays off and you have to make them pay for not bringing the double team. I'd say looking down the road, you can expect much more of the same blocking scheme wise, which is why we need someone else on the Dline to step it up.

EZE, which plays are you referring to that will not be run?

 

[HuskerFowler]

Unfortunately I didn't get to watch the game or listen to much more than 3 or 4 mintues every half as I was committed to an event. I came home to watch and the wife had killed the DVR so....it sounds like I will be saved the stress. That being said...to me it sounds like the D-line greatly underperformed. I know several people I respect that have a good pulse on the program are very concerned. Its just as I had stated this summer...we're not as good there as we think. I personally think moving to a 3 lb system will hurt us this year. We were very efficient as a defense when we put in the peso a year ago and when we run it in practice we are very good still as the personnel groupings seem to be better. I hope we run it more in the future.

I know the offense was frustrating at times. I did hear a snip it from one coach that this week was similar to last week in that they decided to work on some things they've had continual issues with at times during the game rather than always call it based on what the defense was giving us. That makes me uncomfortable that we make decisions like that.

Woah, what?

On two levels. First, I completely agree that we shouldn't be doing that stuff in actual games. It is a mindset that does not seem to be typical of Bo, no matter who the opponent. Such as what you mentioned with the audibles and Taylor being told to just run the play so they could get it on tape. Screw that - these audibles are pretty new to Taylor, let him do it as much as he can, and let him get some confidence as they start working.

Second, I thought the hallmark of this new offense is that they weren't going to call it based on what the defense gave us.

I don't know where that game from. This offense is specifically designed to create mismatched base on defensive schemes and personnel. We attack and then exploit once they try to adjust to those mismatches. If thats not taking what the defense gives us I don't know what is. If we were running a power I then we'd be trying to impose on the D but I don't think we can do that well enough. Talking with some people (I still haven't watched the game) I was told we ran 4 different types of option again with the most success out of the diamond sets and the veer sets. Our belly option apparently fell flat on its face again and is weak. Although he thought maybe as the season goes on we might get the full back involved in that set and it would help open it up, but right now...that's the one that gets shut down.

You have to remember that zoogies has this knee-jerk reaction to anything that he perceives as a slight against Bill Callahan or Shawn Watson. He's still fighting that battle, four years and one year later.

Apparently those windmills won't tilt at themselves.

Am I missing the mention of BC/Watson in here? (maybe it's you that won't let it go) I think what he is referring to is Beck stating at the beginning of the year that our offense was going to dictate the game, not their defense. We were going to run what we run - and their defense can try to adjust. We were all really happy about that - i think the quote was splattered around Huskerboard multiple times. But, that pretty much completely counters what da skers said (and he's usually right) - so I guess I can see some concern if we are going into a game knowing that the first 2 quarters are a "guage" for how our offense should be executed the second 2 quarters. It seems that's how the first 2 games have gone though. We dip our foot into the water, test the temp - then adjust. That works against the Fresno States - won't work when you're down 24 to Wisconsin before you've got a good reading.

Ummmmm . .. . and how do you think they build a game plan? By drawing plays from a hat? They break down the film look at tendencies, personnel, etc and build a way to attack perceived weaknesses. We run those plays, they try to adjust, we kick them in the nuts when they do that because we knew what we are going to do once they start to move people to adjust to our attack. So. . I would say that's dictating a the game. We didn't do that a lot in the past. We ran plays we thought would work but had no plan if they adjusted to us. We haven't really done that expect for a few series in the second half. Fresno basically played completely different than they had in the past year on both offense and defense. They game planned very well and we still adjusted and won.

And the first two games were more about us trying things than us attacking them. (or so I've been told)That should change next game.

exactly... Thank you +1

 

[junior4949]

Here's my take. Offensively, we have to break a big play or we might as well just punt the ball away. Throughout the game, I found myself wanting the Fresno offense a lot more than ours because they had the ability to sustain drives and not live on the long play. I'd compare our offense to the three point shooting basketball teams. If they go cold, they get beat. Our big play only offense is going to run into a team that won't give those big plays up, and it will spell disaster. Defensively, I was pretty disappointed here. It seemed like Fresno actually ran the ball better in the second half than the first half. Heading into Big 10 play, my concern was the ability for Fresno to run right at the heart of our defense. On one hand, the game might have been good for us knocking us down a peg or two. I kept hearing during the game how our DL was one of the best in college football. They sure didn't show it. On the other hand, the game might just turn out to be like the South Dakota State game from a year ago where Fresno just gave several Big 10 teams the blueprint on how to beat us. We're just not the well oiled machine I was hoping to see thus far in the season. The pieces of the puzzle are there, but they just haven't been put together yet. We have some very young and exciting players to watch. I'd just love to see the team gelling better at this point. Wisconsin is beginning to scare me more day by day.

 

[knapplc]

I do not understand the complaint against scoring "too quickly." The longer you hold the ball, the more plays you run in a possession, the more chances you have of fumbling. Give me three two-play scoring drives per half and I'll be happy.

This is exactly why you build depth on your defense.

 

[Huskerfan1985]

That doesn't explain why our O-Lines and D-Lines are getting pushed around by FCS and WAC teams.

Easy answer: They are used to practicing against each other. The D line looks like they are used to playing against a well....young inexperienced o-line everyday....oh wait. The O-line is just plain young and not that great. Not trying to be critical but that O-line just ins't what we expect.

They will likely get better as the year goes on, but I don't think you will see drastic O-line improvement for YEARS. You can place blame where you like, bad coaching, technique, experience, whatever, but when you're starting walk-ons and freshman at key line positions, it's a good indication of where your team is at. How many other top 25 teams have similar lines?

 

[Huskerfan1985]

Another point I'd like to make is how well Taylor is actually playing. I know, it's easy to be critical and place blame for everything wrong with the offense on Taylor, but look around. Our O-line, IMO, isn't very good. We've got basically zero contribution from burkhead or any other running back and the "go to" dependable receiver (Kinnie) can't seem to make a play to help his QB out.

Does Taylor have an akward throwing motion? absolutely, but most of his throws were good enough to be caught. Several to Kinnie were not perfect, but def catchable passes. He even had a long throw to Turner that wasn't caught, but if you watch you can see Turner mis-play the ball a little (freshman mistake, not a big deal, he atleast he makes up for it).

It really bothers me that he still fumbles a lot, but he's a SOPHMORE (pretty sure that's mispelled). On the flip side, he's also putting up Crouch/Frost like rushing numbers with an O-line that would not have made the practice squad for their respective teams. I'm not particulary a pro-taylor guy, but I think we need to take a step back, realize the youth that we have and that this team may be a a year or two from where we would like. I hope he improves his passing, but for now, i'm pretty happy with what i've seen.

 

[knapplc]

The O-line is just plain young and not that great. Not trying to be critical but that O-line just ins't what we expect.

They will likely get better as the year goes on, but I don't think you will see drastic O-line improvement for YEARS. You can place blame where you like, bad coaching, technique, experience, whatever, but when you're starting walk-ons and freshman at key line positions, it's a good indication of where your team is at. How many other top 25 teams have similar lines?

Going along with your comments about Martinez being a sophomore, this O Line is actually very young. They're also very inexperienced – most of them are just seeing their first starts as Huskers.

Yoshi (SR) – 2 career starts

ARod (SO) – 2

Caputo (SR) – 16

Long (SO) – 2

Moore (FR) – 2

Most Top 25 teams don't have a line that averages less than five career starts per man. We're going to have growing pains with young guys like this, just like we had growing pains with a young Taylor Martinez last year. The hope is that these guys build fast and get good. We'll see how it goes.

 

[Joe_5700]

Another point I'd like to make is how well Taylor is actually playing. I know, it's easy to be critical and place blame for everything wrong with the offense on Taylor, but look around. Our O-line, IMO, isn't very good. We've got basically zero contribution from burkhead or any other running back and the "go to" dependable receiver (Kinnie) can't seem to make a play to help his QB out.

Does Taylor have an akward throwing motion? absolutely, but most of his throws were good enough to be caught. Several to Kinnie were not perfect, but def catchable passes. He even had a long throw to Turner that wasn't caught, but if you watch you can see Turner mis-play the ball a little (freshman mistake, not a big deal, he atleast he makes up for it).

It really bothers me that he still fumbles a lot, but he's a SOPHMORE (pretty sure that's mispelled). On the flip side, he's also putting up Crouch/Frost like rushing numbers with an O-line that would not have made the practice squad for their respective teams. I'm not particulary a pro-taylor guy, but I think we need to take a step back, realize the youth that we have and that this team may be a a year or two from where we would like. I hope he improves his passing, but for now, i'm pretty happy with what i've seen.

I was really excited to see Martinez turn around a terrible start and show lots of improvment as the game progressed. You can really tell he put some time in practicing those floating passes (which still need more touch and practice). This game will definately serve as a confidence builder and help for the rest of the team to recognize him as a leader. Did you also notice the celebration that Taylor had with the rest of the team for big plays he or others made? He doesn't seem like that lone wolf type that everyone painted him to be anymore.

 

[The Maudfather]

I would still like to know which plays the OP was talking about when he said that we ran a lot of things we will never see again.

 

[typ3kal]

The bright side is that in 2 seasons our offense is going to be beast mode. Mostly a senior line with a senior QB, JR RBs / WR. Yikes.

 

[Huskerfan1985]

The O-line is just plain young and not that great. Not trying to be critical but that O-line just ins't what we expect.

They will likely get better as the year goes on, but I don't think you will see drastic O-line improvement for YEARS. You can place blame where you like, bad coaching, technique, experience, whatever, but when you're starting walk-ons and freshman at key line positions, it's a good indication of where your team is at. How many other top 25 teams have similar lines?

Going along with your comments about Martinez being a sophomore, this O Line is actually very young. They're also very inexperienced – most of them are just seeing their first starts as Huskers.

Yoshi (SR) – 2 career starts

ARod (SO) – 2

Caputo (SR) – 16

Long (SO) – 2

Moore (FR) – 2

Most Top 25 teams don't have a line that averages less than five career starts per man. We're going to have growing pains with young guys like this, just like we had growing pains with a young Taylor Martinez last year. The hope is that these guys build fast and get good. We'll see how it goes.

Totally agree, and that's why the sad truth might be that we are overhyped because you don't see other top 25 teams with an average of less than five starts per man. I'm with, hopefully they build fast and get good, but nothing replaces experience.

 

[Huskerfan1985]

The bright side is that in 2 seasons our offense is going to be beast mode. Mostly a senior line with a senior QB, JR RBs / WR. Yikes.

EXACTLY! It's just really hard to wait and not necessarily write this year off, but know deep down that they are just too young to perform consistantly at a high level.

 

[Saunders]

Another point I'd like to make is how well Taylor is actually playing. I know, it's easy to be critical and place blame for everything wrong with the offense on Taylor, but look around. Our O-line, IMO, isn't very good. We've got basically zero contribution from burkhead or any other running back and the "go to" dependable receiver (Kinnie) can't seem to make a play to help his QB out.

Does Taylor have an akward throwing motion? absolutely, but most of his throws were good enough to be caught. Several to Kinnie were not perfect, but def catchable passes. He even had a long throw to Turner that wasn't caught, but if you watch you can see Turner mis-play the ball a little (freshman mistake, not a big deal, he atleast he makes up for it).

It really bothers me that he still fumbles a lot, but he's a SOPHMORE (pretty sure that's mispelled). On the flip side, he's also putting up Crouch/Frost like rushing numbers with an O-line that would not have made the practice squad for their respective teams. I'm not particulary a pro-taylor guy, but I think we need to take a step back, realize the youth that we have and that this team may be a a year or two from where we would like. I hope he improves his passing, but for now, i'm pretty happy with what i've seen.

I was really excited to see Martinez turn around a terrible start and show lots of improvment as the game progressed. You can really tell he put some time in practicing those floating passes (which still need more touch and practice). This game will definately serve as a confidence builder and help for the rest of the team to recognize him as a leader. Did you also notice the celebration that Taylor had with the rest of the team for big plays he or others made? He doesn't seem like that lone wolf type that everyone painted him to be anymore.

I agree with everything you said. As for your last statement, it happened last year too, and there's a mountain of evidence. People who say otherwise are straight up lying.

 

[junior4949]

Didn't we have four new starters on the OL starting the 1995 season?

 

[Pedro Guerrero]

Wow, you're an experienced mod at setting up strawmen. Being a "conference" game or not had zero to with the previous commentary I posted. Zero. You want to dream up that it was.....more power to ya.

Obviously it's not written in stone we would have lost the game and nobody said it was "automatic". Except you. Again......you're good at it! :clap

When a “blanket statement” such as “we would have lost this game the last two years” is made you leave it up to interpretation and it is up to the “straw men” to make judgments and decide which angle they would like to argue or attack. Especially when you give no information as to why or what reasoning you basing that statement off of.

Also isn’t saying “we would have lost this game the last two years” basically saying it would have been an automatic loss?