True2tRA
Banned
Article by Sip. Some good points and some good questions.
http://journalstar.com/sports/columnists/sipple/steven-m-sipple-extent-of-nu-s-defensive-woes-is/article_b6da382d-6f8b-5752-8377-dd26b414ea3b.html
A few things he mentioned that I've always believed....
Nebraska fans mostly wanted to see progress on defense. They didn't see it, which helps explain the lack of energy in Memorial Stadium. In the second half, as Wyoming rallied, I also perceived a lack of urgency from both NU players and fans. Am I wrong?
Thing is, expectations for Nebraska's defense were relatively low entering the game. Husker fans anticipated growing pains. But I'm not sure they anticipated searing growing pains. The fans wanted to come away feeling at least some sense of optimism. Perhaps a few folks did. Bless their hearts. I LOL'd at this, reminds me of a few here.
Considering losses late last season to Wisconsin (70-31) and Georgia (45-31), you naturally begin to question Bo Pelini's system. Or perhaps you're already miles down that road. After all, Nebraska allowed an average of 610.3 yards in its last three games.
Pelini boasts a defense that is "multiple." Whether that is good or bad is in the eye of the beholder. Whether Pelini's system is difficult or easy to learn depends on whom you ask. Given the 2013 defense's pervasive youth and inexperience, a predictable-but-relevant question arises (once again): Are defenders thinking too much as opposed to cutting loose and using their athleticism fully?
Michigan, on the other hand, is far less complex on both sides of the ball. Coach Brady Hoke keeps things pretty basic. Which approach is better? Talk to me in early December.
"Watching Michigan in the spring was like watching someone build a house," DiNardo said. "It's the foundation. Then, it's one room. Then, the next room. You kind of know it's going to be a mansion at the end."
I've always preached this last part. Nebraska's coaches are trying to hard to be multiple. It's a crock of sh#t. No good teacher teaches ten things half assed, then moves on to ten more things. To be successful, you teach one thing at a time, you execute it properly over and over and you move on to teaching more. This is why reps for all players are important in practice. By the time your number is called, you should have seen these things before. You start somewhere and you build. You build on the things you do well. Right now, we do 100 different things and we don't do any of them very well, so what the f#*k is the point of doing 100 things then? There isn't a point in my opinion, and once again we are facing another Pelini coached season where we are all thinking "back to the drawing board". Only this time it's after a week one game where Wyoming puts up record numbers and almost beats us in our house.
http://journalstar.com/sports/columnists/sipple/steven-m-sipple-extent-of-nu-s-defensive-woes-is/article_b6da382d-6f8b-5752-8377-dd26b414ea3b.html
A few things he mentioned that I've always believed....
Nebraska fans mostly wanted to see progress on defense. They didn't see it, which helps explain the lack of energy in Memorial Stadium. In the second half, as Wyoming rallied, I also perceived a lack of urgency from both NU players and fans. Am I wrong?
Thing is, expectations for Nebraska's defense were relatively low entering the game. Husker fans anticipated growing pains. But I'm not sure they anticipated searing growing pains. The fans wanted to come away feeling at least some sense of optimism. Perhaps a few folks did. Bless their hearts. I LOL'd at this, reminds me of a few here.
Considering losses late last season to Wisconsin (70-31) and Georgia (45-31), you naturally begin to question Bo Pelini's system. Or perhaps you're already miles down that road. After all, Nebraska allowed an average of 610.3 yards in its last three games.
Pelini boasts a defense that is "multiple." Whether that is good or bad is in the eye of the beholder. Whether Pelini's system is difficult or easy to learn depends on whom you ask. Given the 2013 defense's pervasive youth and inexperience, a predictable-but-relevant question arises (once again): Are defenders thinking too much as opposed to cutting loose and using their athleticism fully?
Michigan, on the other hand, is far less complex on both sides of the ball. Coach Brady Hoke keeps things pretty basic. Which approach is better? Talk to me in early December.
"Watching Michigan in the spring was like watching someone build a house," DiNardo said. "It's the foundation. Then, it's one room. Then, the next room. You kind of know it's going to be a mansion at the end."
I've always preached this last part. Nebraska's coaches are trying to hard to be multiple. It's a crock of sh#t. No good teacher teaches ten things half assed, then moves on to ten more things. To be successful, you teach one thing at a time, you execute it properly over and over and you move on to teaching more. This is why reps for all players are important in practice. By the time your number is called, you should have seen these things before. You start somewhere and you build. You build on the things you do well. Right now, we do 100 different things and we don't do any of them very well, so what the f#*k is the point of doing 100 things then? There isn't a point in my opinion, and once again we are facing another Pelini coached season where we are all thinking "back to the drawing board". Only this time it's after a week one game where Wyoming puts up record numbers and almost beats us in our house.
