Riley Says Defensive Plan was Fine, Execution Wasn't

brophog said:
We say that because we know the result. If we gave up 8 TDs in a row blitzing, we'd blame it on the blitzing. If we're all truthful with ourselves, we know we wouldn't be more content, even a little bit, if we did things differently.
Click to expand...
That wouldn't have happened.... J.T. got like 10 seconds in the pocket... Any QB would have torched us with our plan....Come on, stop defending these coaches.  Why? Riley has been here 3 years, 3 years! we should be executing our game plans by year 3...

 
teachercd said:
I will...honestly, in college football there are a lot of schools where you can almost "hide", college baseball is the best for this but CFB is not far behind.

"Hiding" at a D1 school requires only a few things...

1.  Low expectations to begin with

2.  Coach can't be HORRIBLE or AWESOME

3.  Be NICE!  (don't give people a reason to can you)

You do that and you are set at a lot of schools for a long time.  WSU, OSU, Miss St, Ole Miss, Vandy, NW, Purdue, Illinois, Indiana, Utah, Utah State, TT, ISU, KU, KSU, ASU, UA, UConn, UL, GT, UNC, NCST...then every Non-P5 school
Click to expand...
He also was given opportunities in the NFL and Nebraska. That's where the line wasn't drawn in the sand 

 
84HuskerLaw said:
The biggest problem with execution is a lack of ability to execute it (i.e. too slow, too small, to clumsy, etc).
Click to expand...


The defensive side of the ball, more than the offensive side, is filled with guys that weren't ideally sized for their position. Michigan has a LBer now that reminds me a lot of Lavonte David....that guy supposedly too small to play every down at the position. David is having a great NFL career, and this guy probably will to, because of high motor, high aggressive, smart play. Some guys you just can't keep off the field, even if they're too small or only have one hand. Hustle solves a lot of defensive issues. 

 
Brophog is in a Riley phog.  Its ok to keep finding ways to make this chat room more interesting and compelling for argument sakes.  

I agree with most on here about Riley and his lack of ability to coach up players.  His best teams at Beaver town were when he had NFL talent at QB and at WR, and on occasion at RB.  He can coach NFL skill to a point, but just not in the NFL.  I don't like to go here often, but the old guy down south in Manhatten Kansas, coaches his players up and usually wins alot of the time.  His recruiting classes range from anywhere in the 40's to upper 50's most years.  He has his players ready to play, and they compete most times.  So when I see people that think that this coach is just not got enough talent  or needs more time to gather talent is just not right.  Right?  KSU is comparitive to Wazzu, in many ways, but anyway.  Good coaches can coach up what they have to at least be competitve or want to be that.

 
I don't give Pellini any credit often, but he did coach up his players for the most part.  He did coach his players better or at least they wanted to play hard most of the time.  The talent gap showed up when we played real good teams.  Almost like Riley, hope was lost before the game started.  

 
Nebhawk said:
I agree with most on here about Riley and his lack of ability to coach up players.  His best teams at Beaver town were when he had NFL talent at QB and at WR, and on occasion at RB. 
Click to expand...
Is it possible Riley and his staff developed those players into NFL talents? 

 
And here I was calling Coast To Coast AM to tell them about the extraterrestrial event that caused OSU to score on every drive.

 
zoogs said:
^Really? Is that actually a true, defensible statement? Or are we high into "frame everything Riley has ever done in the worst possible light" hour?

Because it's going to be pretty awkward when Frost talks about execution or engages in what might be called 'coachspeak' after a loss.
Click to expand...


Do you have any examples of when he talked about specific plays or schemes in any of his press conferences?

 
CharBroiled said:
I think the goal of the "bend-don't-break" defense is to not give up the big play. However, 8 to 10 yard chunks are OK because they aren't the big play.

Eventually, the offense will run out of field because of the back of the endzone and get confused...or something.

So it kind of executed. Kind of.
Click to expand...
The old "bend don't break" axiom is a nod to the days of ironman football when players went both ways.  The idea was you give everything on offense , then on defense you give enough to shut down the other team after a first down or two, but you keep them out of the end zone.  A player only has so much to give if they are going both ways for 4qtrs.

Now if we are talking platoon football, then bend dont break is ridiculous.  You simply "Destroy".  3 and out. 

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