secondary/o line

H

huskers1

Starter
so maybe some guys on here, EZ or Skers, can explain to me why thorell and blatchford are playing...really is that just a joke or just to say he plays nebraska guys? They are in no way good enough to even play at let alone start at a place like Ohio. Why are they playing for us? On two plays Blatchford was beat by at least 2-3 yards. I think Mitchell is going to be outstanding, why can't he be put in the nickel? What about Washington? No joke, having David or Compton would probably be better than having Blatchford on a a slot receiver.

I know it was the first game but the o line looked flat out terrible. I totally get the timing and spacing issues on the option and I also get that they had about 9 guys in the box and we didn't even try to go over the top but why such a lack of depth on the o line? For a walk on sophmore and a true freshman to be starting on the right side and a true sophomore to be starting at left guard is just mind blowing. You look at the defense and they are always talking about developing depth. Why has Cotton not done that on the o line? Where are guys like Ash, Qvale, and Thompson not been better developed? It just seems like there's always an excuse. Injuries, being young, new offense. Injuries are part of the game and at this point we shouldn't be young.

Insight?

 
huskers1 said:
so maybe some guys on here, EZ or Skers, can explain to me why thorell and blatchford are playing...really is that just a joke or just to say he plays nebraska guys? They are in no way good enough to even play at let alone start at a place like Ohio. Why are they playing for us? On two plays Blatchford was beat by at least 2-3 yards. I think Mitchell is going to be outstanding, why can't he be put in the nickel? What about Washington? No joke, having David or Compton would probably be better than having Blatchford on a a slot receiver.

I know it was the first game but the o line looked flat out terrible. I totally get the timing and spacing issues on the option and I also get that they had about 9 guys in the box and we didn't even try to go over the top but why such a lack of depth on the o line? For a walk on sophmore and a true freshman to be starting on the right side and a true sophomore to be starting at left guard is just mind blowing. You look at the defense and they are always talking about developing depth. Why has Cotton not done that on the o line? Where are guys like Ash, Qvale, and Thompson not been better developed? It just seems like there's always an excuse. Injuries, being young, new offense. Injuries are part of the game and at this point we shouldn't be young.

Insight?
Click to expand...
Cotton has been around a long time, he knows coach speak.....i am tired of speeches........

 
Even if Tenn-Chatt fills the box, a good o-line still dominates a team like the Mocs. It was sickening watching a physically superior o-line getting beat by a small d-line. If this line can't produce vs. UTC, then they will get lit up in the B1G. Run, pass, doesn't matter if you can't block. and NU can't. Cotton can't coach them, but we'll support him all year I'm sure. Worst hire/retention ever.

 
I agree that Cotton should've been gone and I wasn't high on the Beck higher, but we had alot of injuries on the o-line correct?

 
BIGREDIOWAN said:
I agree that Cotton should've been gone and I wasn't high on the Beck higher, but we had alot of injuries on the o-line correct?
Click to expand...
Yeah true BRI, but how 'small' are the Husker backup linemen? Yes, technique is obviously important, but size should be able to account for some pancake blocks? UTC looked like they were just running around us and making plays on the ends, and they were sealing the middle runs. How?!? This was easily the smallest line NU will see. I hope I'm right that UTC was able to make plays because they were small but quick, and that the rest of the schedule Nebraska will be ok because they'll be blocking bigger but slower linemen?

 
Actually it sounds like Evans will slide down to Nickel and Green will play corner. A lot of the younger players have not learned the defense well enough to play the nickel and dime. They tried having Green play a little nickel awhile back but moved him back to corner. At that time they said it would probably better if the players learn one position well before trying another. I am guessing the nickel can be complicated. The dime less so IMO. I thought Thorell did okay at the dime. Mitchell is a straight up DB and way to light to play nickel. Not sure about Washington either way. I disagree with the thought that the 2 LB's have better coverage skills then Blatchford. I do agree that Blatchford is not the fastest. We will see what happens.

I am not worried as much about the secondary as much as I am about the LB's. David had a few busts. Fish is rusty and doesnt have a lot of experience. Compton is hurt. Depth is an issue.

As far as depth at the OL. I would go back to previous posts. They don't have adequate numbers at the OL position in recruiting classes of yore. They are trying to rectify that. They only had 2 OL recruits in the class that are seniors now...Burkes who is gone and Marcel Jones who has had back issues. The next class they had a juco (Henry) who is gone, Grant never made it here, Baker switched to DL because that was the priority back then and Thompson. So that's only 2 players out of 2 classes. That's your upper classmen. Really you should have a bunch of upper classmen starting and and the young guys that are playing now should be providing depth and learning. But we didnt have the numbers and that's why we are seeing a bunch of sophomores and freshmen playing. It also didn't help that they didn't have a huge bunch of walk on OL in the program either. That's some of the issue IMO.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Baker didn't want to play on the O-line and be held to the standards his dad had. IIRC Baker insisted on being on Defense and it really had nothing to do with which side of the ball had priority.

 
HuskerfaninOkieland said:
Baker didn't want to play on the O-line and be held to the standards his dad had. IIRC Baker insisted on being on Defense and it really had nothing to do with which side of the ball had priority.
Click to expand...
That I did not know. I stand corrected. The only thing I can go by is the media and what I can remember.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
probably pointed out in other threads, but with regards to the o-line play, i read this quote from pelini in the OWH.

"Honestly, I don't think we came off the ball very well," Pelini said. "We didn't dominate the line of scrimmage the way I feel we need to. A lot of that's not the want-to. A lot of that is the fundamentals and technique."

the last part seems like a dig at cotton for not coaching the young players up.

 
I really hope this O-line can develop. If I'm not mistaken 4 guys were making their first 'starts' on Saturday. I think any 'new' offensive line needs time to develop. I can say that if this sort of thing continues well into the season it should be Cotton's last season here. Hoping this O-line evolves, I'm sure they will but the question is 'how much?' If not by much something has got to give.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Im not a huge Cotton supporter, but doesnt Garrisson shoulder some of this blame that some are dishing out?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
From what I saw, the single biggest issue from our line on Saturday was from the senior leader of our line.

With his size, Caputo has some SERIOUS issues trying to anchor. I know Caputo is one of the strongest guys on the team, but if a DL gets him off balance in any way, it's a wrap. Caputo has little to no ability to re-anchor and set himself back.

Really, I would rather go with Reeves or even slide Spencer Long over to center. Caputo got busted up pretty bad last year, and he got worked by a UTC defensive line as well. When we get into B10 play and he has to see guys like Mike Martin, John Simon, Jerel Worthy, Mike Daniels, etc., it will not be pretty for the interior of our line. We will be looking at alot of collapsed pockets from the interior.

 
We've had 16 O-linemen recruits over the four years from 2008-11. Yet our starters include a walk-on and a former walk-on. That's not much of a batting average for recruiting. Sure, we've recruited some great young stars in the past couple of classes. But we've had way too many busts. Guys who never even came close to contributing. That's part of our problem on the offensive line.

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