Year Four

[RedDenver]

Big difference betweeen running QBs and RBs in my opinion. RBs tend to get wrapped up or leg tackled because of how they run and where the contact comes from - LB shedding a block at the 2nd level or flat out running into the line. QBs on the other hand typically take shots from a full speed running corner or safety as they round the edge. Also - the defensive mindset is to tackle the RB, not risk a big play by trying to get the big hit, but when they have a shot at a QB they take it full bore.

Nobody here wants to respond, but I think you are right and those hits are not always pad to pad.

That said, I posted one time about taking it easy on Bo, first off it takes a coach 5 years to get all his recruits and such in place, and as was said, now he gets thrown into a new conf, where it's sort of like every week is a bowl game. Maybe not quite that bad as they did some work on the other B10 teams this summer.

Looking at Phil Steele's stats on injuries (starts lost to injury and such), the B12, P12, and SEC have roughly the same number of injuries as the B1G. I very much doubt the tackling and blocking in the B1G will lead to more injuries for NU.

As for running QB's getting hurt, that seems to be true compared to strictly passing QB's (my own observations, no stats to back that up). But every position gets dinged up or injured at various times - it's football.

 

[Saunders]

Hit the nail on the head. I agree with everything EZ said in his post. We actually talked at length about that. To say that a team like Alabama or TCU wouldve rolled us last year because we lost 2 games to unranked teams is a little off base. We have seen it time, and time again were good teams lose to teams they shouldnt. We are not elite yet, but we are getting there. Think about where we were 3 years ago, and then think about where we are now.

...and think about where we have to be to consistently play for MNC's. We aren't there yet. Last year was proof that we aren't, and in no way supportative of being close.

Where we were 3 years ago makes little difference.

And where exactly is that? Alabama, Florida, Texas, USC and so on cant even play consistently to be in it for MNCs every year...see last year for proof. Nebraska can play with anyone in the nation and beat them at any given time.

I'd say Alabama is consistently in the hunt. Florida as well. Texas probably as well. They won't have a 20 year droubt (USC probably will) Ohio State. Those are teams that might not play every for it year, but they have the potential to. They'll have down years, but it won't last long. We haven't been anywhere near that recently. We lost 4 games last year with an offense that was down right anemic the second half of the season. MNC contenders aren't firing their offensive coordinator after the season, they're begging them not to take the big time D1 head coaching job.

Alabama was 7-6 4 years ago, and 10-3 last year. They've also had a few close calls against crappy teams themselves. Florida was 8-5 last year, and will be lucky to get that record this year. Texas was 5-7. Of those teams, 2 of them made major changes. Just saying. We're not there yet, but we're close.

 

[suh_fan93]

I am not worried about the system so much as I am the players who make up that system. Bo has done a above and beyond job of taking guys and making them great defensively. Disciplined football players who make up for possible lack of ability with knowing where to go and when. I just worry about the personel. Guys need to really step up this year.

We have a tough schedule too so I don't think myself or anyone can forget about that as well. If we finish with a decent record overall and in the Big 10 I will be happy.

:bonesflag:

 

[bigg10]

Big difference betweeen running QBs and RBs in my opinion. RBs tend to get wrapped up or leg tackled because of how they run and where the contact comes from - LB shedding a block at the 2nd level or flat out running into the line. QBs on the other hand typically take shots from a full speed running corner or safety as they round the edge. Also - the defensive mindset is to tackle the RB, not risk a big play by trying to get the big hit, but when they have a shot at a QB they take it full bore.

Nobody here wants to respond, but I think you are right and those hits are not always pad to pad.

That said, I posted one time about taking it easy on Bo, first off it takes a coach 5 years to get all his recruits and such in place, and as was said, now he gets thrown into a new conf, where it's sort of like every week is a bowl game. Maybe not quite that bad as they did some work on the other B10 teams this summer.

Looking at Phil Steele's stats on injuries (starts lost to injury and such), the B12, P12, and SEC have roughly the same number of injuries as the B1G. I very much doubt the tackling and blocking in the B1G will lead to more injuries for NU.

As for running QB's getting hurt, that seems to be true compared to strictly passing QB's (my own observations, no stats to back that up). But every position gets dinged up or injured at various times - it's football.

That may be true, I dont know (about the number in each conf). Check it out by position and not just missing a start, but anything a half or over, again I am not going to look it up, but I would guess those other conf have more qb injuries. So yeah I think you will find #1 running qb's in the B10 get hurt way more than non running qb's #2 Because the B10 has most of the time, up until recently had less running qb's, there was less injuries to the qb spot compared to conf's who have many running qb's. #3 Look up all the injuries to all the qb's in the B10 who have missed a half a game or more, due to being "knicked up". It is actually very surprising. Nobody knows if Persa will ever be 100% after an injury like that.

 

[EZ-E]

The only team that we did not match up well with in the past two seasons was 09 Alabama. There is not another program in this land that you can look at and say that they are much better and way ahead of us. There is not and I am tired of hearing even our own people say that. They are incorrect in their analysis when stating otherwise. There was not a team in the nation last year we couldn't have played with and beaten. We were a handful of plays away from being serious National Title contenders. Our top 50 guys could strap it on, wearing that red N on the sides of their helmets and play with anyone in the nation I garuntee it.

it takes more than a handful of plays to lose 4 games. perhaps you missed the end of the season - but we were not 4 quarters of football team last year. we were far from competing with Auburn/Oregon/Wiscons/TCU. They would have crushed us in 4 quarters of football 9 times out of 10. Sure, we were capable of beating them once or twice, but that's a lot of :koolaid2: sir.

In my opinion, there were two distinct plays that had they gone differently in the UT game we win it. The fumble on our side of the 50, and the Rex drop. aTm, I really don't want to get into that game because we all know what happened. OU, the TMart INT and Helu's fumble are examples of what I am talking about. If you take those away, we win those games. I agree that Champions find ways to overcome these plays and not make these mistakes, but you see where I am coming from. To say Auburn/Oregon/Wisconsin/TCU would have crushed us is an overstatement. The only way we would play any of them is in a bowl game. Are you telling me that Bo Pelini couldn't come up with a scheme to stop each one of those teams?

 

[EZ-E]

After re-reading the responses I have found that quite a few more people agree with me than disagree.

We really have something special going on in Lincoln. I just hope that it isn't year four of a five year project. I want to win the Big Ten this year and be mentioned for a National Title!!!

 

[bball_backer]

He's a quarterback. I can't think of many quarterbacks that "act the hammer" when running with the football. In fact, I'm pretty sure you have less to worry about if you go with the hit than if you try to make your own. Otherwise, what would be the point of sliding to the ground?

I think Martinez runs like any other running quarterback - try to make a play, if you get hit and wrapped up don't do anything stupid like twist around.

Is that a serious question? ......

The point of sliding has nothing to do with absorbing a hit, you slide so you don't get hit at all. And going with the hit? Sounds to me like shying away, which leads to way more injuries.

I think it was knapp who asked about why we don't worry about Rex: Rex and Taylor run/take hits completely differently. Taylor doesn't run straight up, but it' darn close. Rewatching games, I cringe everytime Taylor takes a hit because he leaves his entire body exposed to the hit, all he does is flinch a little right at impact. Rex gets low, puts a shoulder into the guy, and either falls forward or slides off the hit by changing body angle. Taylor leaves himself completely exposed.

 

[bshirt]

There was not a team in the nation last year we couldn't have played with and beaten.

Um. Obviously that is wrong. I still think Alabama would have rolled us. There are a handful of teams that were better than what they were ranked. If we were capable of beating every team in the nation last year, then why did we lose to 2 schools that finished unranked (one that didn't make a bowl game) Texas A&M who got stomped by LSU in a bowl game, who doesn't even play good offense. Then an 2 loss OU squad that I guarantee loses its BCS game if they play ANYONE besides UCONN. Oh and There is absolutely no possible way Nebraska could have beaten Oregon or Auburn last year. You couldn't change my mind otherwise either. Wisconsin got beat by TCU and I think they would have ate our lunch with that rushing attack last year. Our Rush D was piss poor at times last year if you don't remember.

Now, if you take the Shawn Watson factor out of it, then I would probably agree with you. However, No team is capable of winning every game with shawn watson as O.C.

I fully agree with you about Callawatts but Gilmore's stone-handed wrs didn't help a lot either (especially the Texas game).

With Callawatts/Gilmore gone I see us ready to line up equal with anybody. We get some depth on the Oline and we're BACK.

 

[bshirt]

There was not a team in the nation last year we couldn't have played with and beaten.

Um. Obviously that is wrong. I still think Alabama would have rolled us. There are a handful of teams that were better than what they were ranked. If we were capable of beating every team in the nation last year, then why did we lose to 2 schools that finished unranked (one that didn't make a bowl game) Texas A&M who got stomped by LSU in a bowl game, who doesn't even play good offense.

How is it obviously wrong? What's obviously wrong is your interpretation of what he is saying. Oregon could have beaten Auburn and probably would have half the time if they played 100 games. I feel like that is what he's saying about Nebraska against any team. We would have beaten Texas A&M 4 of 5 times even with our QB injured. We are close to getting to where we are consistent and beat those teams every time and close to the level we need to be to win championships. That is what he is saying (I think).

Hit the nail on the head. I agree with everything EZ said in his post. We actually talked at length about that. To say that a team like Alabama or TCU wouldve rolled us last year because we lost 2 games to unranked teams is a little off base. We have seen it time, and time again were good teams lose to teams they shouldnt. We are not elite yet, but we are getting there. Think about where we were 3 years ago, and then think about where we are now.

Oh boy, that's for sure.

From the toilet to a contender for the big dance. THANK YOU Bo & TO!!

 

[74Hunter]

I think that eze makes a great point, many great points. So, imo, looking at the ol, I think that many people need to back off of barney cotton. The ol has been riddled with injury, lack of depth, and has been saddled with an oc who was inept at best. I know there are plenty of cotton haters out there, and the jury is still out on barney, but Bo knows football,.and he is not afraid to give anyone the boot. If Bo loses faith in barney, so will I. If as many freshman and sophomores start as we think, it will be a tough process.looking back on last year, the ol played pretty good overall, but we may never see the ols of the early eighties or mid nineties ever again. The oc and the qb (at times) didn't do the ol any favors.

 

[AK-47]

Where we were 3 years ago makes little difference.

Lots of math problems would be impossible if that were the case.

Because Suh, Prince, and all those players aren't on the team this year. You think anyone we play this year cares where we were 3 years ago? You think it makes us more dominant and a better team because we sucked that bad 3 years ago? It makes ZERO difference in the outcome of the 2011 Wisconsin game. It's not a math problem, it's football.

The idea is to compare the rate by which the team is improving ( R ) against the overall success of a team (S). And make no mistake about it, we are improving. Time is the key issue (T). So here's the math problem: S = R x T. Solve for S.... Because the sides must be equal, the higher the values for R and T are will lead to more success. The R value was essentially 0 when Bo took over and the number has no doubt increased dramatically since. Now I'm not saying we can actually put a number value on anything except time (and sorry for the word problem, I'm sure most of us thought we were done with those), but this is the basic logic of the concept spelled out in a simple way.

 

[jsneb83]

Where we were 3 years ago makes little difference.

Lots of math problems would be impossible if that were the case.

Because Suh, Prince, and all those players aren't on the team this year. You think anyone we play this year cares where we were 3 years ago? You think it makes us more dominant and a better team because we sucked that bad 3 years ago? It makes ZERO difference in the outcome of the 2011 Wisconsin game. It's not a math problem, it's football.

The idea is to compare the rate by which the team is improving ( R ) against the overall success of a team (S). And make no mistake about it, we are improving. Time is the key issue (T). So here's the math problem: S = R x T. Solve for S.... Because the sides must be equal, the higher the values for R and T are will lead to more success. The R value was essentially 0 when Bo took over and the number has no doubt increased dramatically since. Now I'm not saying we can actually put a number value on anything except time (and sorry for the word problem, I'm sure most of us thought we were done with those), but this is the basic logic of the concept spelled out in a simple way.

Well technically, the rate isn't linear like you have, because our rate varies every year. Once to get to a certain point, you regress a bit, then you come back. So our success is more of a sine/cosine function.

 

[bigg10]

Where we were 3 years ago makes little difference.

Lots of math problems would be impossible if that were the case.

Because Suh, Prince, and all those players aren't on the team this year. You think anyone we play this year cares where we were 3 years ago? You think it makes us more dominant and a better team because we sucked that bad 3 years ago? It makes ZERO difference in the outcome of the 2011 Wisconsin game. It's not a math problem, it's football.

The idea is to compare the rate by which the team is improving ( R ) against the overall success of a team (S). And make no mistake about it, we are improving. Time is the key issue (T). So here's the math problem: S = R x T. Solve for S.... Because the sides must be equal, the higher the values for R and T are will lead to more success. The R value was essentially 0 when Bo took over and the number has no doubt increased dramatically since. Now I'm not saying we can actually put a number value on anything except time (and sorry for the word problem, I'm sure most of us thought we were done with those), but this is the basic logic of the concept spelled out in a simple way.

Use the hot/crazy scale and see what side of the Vicky Mendoza diagonal line the team is on. Ofcourse you would replace hot/crazy with improving/time.

 

[kchusker_chris]

We are to the point in our program where our goal should be to win every single game.

Um, seriously? I should hope so...what was the goal prior? Pat yourself on the back for this little nugget. (size 5 even) :LOLtartar

 

[hskerprid]

Martinez' play style doesn't lend him to injuries, Martinez' position and history with injuries is the reason to worry.

There's a reason the term "injury prone" exists. It's like stereotypes - usually, there is some truth to them in essence. Martinez' past issues do give me reason to worry, but I'm not going to think about it unless it happens again.

Sounds like a "Watsonism". Sticking ones head in the sand and not addressing an issue will get you hurt all day long. Martinez has a style of play that DOES lead him to get injured. When in the open field you must deliver the hit and not absorb the hit ala Crouch and Frazier, hell even Lord. How many games did they miss due to injury? They ran the option for petes sake!