Quit Hating On The Secondary!!

[benjibean1]

I'm only hating on one member of the secondary: Asante.

Culbert and Thenarse need to take as many reps as possible away from him once they are healthy.

I am sitting in my office chair and I am still covering the receiver on thursday....better than Asante did all game.

 

[Huskerballz]

I'm sorry DJR, but you're waaaay of with calling the defense a Cosgrove defense. We gave up an average of over 400 yards a game last season. we held this team to about 350, that's marked improvement right there. If you want a good defense right now then go cheer for USC.

I do agree, some people act like it's the end of the world because in the first game, a passing team completed some passes. Yes, it was 30 passes, and yes there were some for big gains, but in the end, this defense still played impressively considering how horrible they were last year.

And I too am disappointed in Asante. I was excited about him this season, thought he'd crack some heads. I hope he comes into form, and if not, he's still got another year to improve as well.

 

[junior4949]

400 last year to 350 this year considering the teams looks about par for the course I must say.

 

[DJR313]

I'm sorry DJR, but you're waaaay of with calling the defense a Cosgrove defense. We gave up an average of over 400 yards a game last season. we held this team to about 350, that's marked improvement right there. If you want a good defense right now then go cheer for USC.

Did you have your eyes open on Saturday? They ran those stinkin crossing routes for 10-15 yards repeatedly without the play getting stopped, that's how it reminded me of a Cosgrove defense, the inability for the defense to adjust on the fly. You think that game was a marked improvement over last year? Nevada was held to 185 yards offense in the opener, and that team has more offensive firepower than Western Michigan does.

Also, don't tell me to go cheer for another team if I wasn't pleased. That's a bullsh#t attitude. What I saw on Saturday was not a marked improvement of bogastic proportions that has been built up. True, they may be building towards that, but they aren't there yet. I am supportive of this team, but after the past 5 years or so, I am cautiously optimistic and would like to see more encouraging signs before drinking the Boberry kool-aid that everyone is drunk on. I think this team can and will get better, but after 1 game, I am not going to say they are awful, not going to say they are great. I am saying I saw a lot of things that we saw in the past few years that many complained about. Hopefully those things get corrected and they can continue to improve. I think that is where we will see the difference in coaching staffs.

Remind you of Cosgrove???? You can't be serious. It's the first game for crying out loud. Do you want the boys to look like National Champions??? Wait a couple of more games before you start passing judgement.

I'm not passing judgement, which is why I said, "I hope to see marked improvement between game 1 and 2 when most improvement takes place." I don't understand why some people cannot accept objective observations about their team. I don't think I stated anything that wasn't obvious in watching the game. Some of you need to settle down a bit. Geez.

 

[shyndy]

I'm sorry DJR, but you're waaaay of with calling the defense a Cosgrove defense. We gave up an average of over 400 yards a game last season. we held this team to about 350, that's marked improvement right there. If you want a good defense right now then go cheer for USC.

Did you have your eyes open on Saturday? They ran those stinkin crossing routes for 10-15 yards repeatedly without the play getting stopped, that's how it reminded me of a Cosgrove defense, the inability for the defense to adjust on the fly. You think that game was a marked improvement over last year? Nevada was held to 185 yards offense in the opener, and that team has more offensive firepower than Western Michigan does.

Also, don't tell me to go cheer for another team if I wasn't pleased. That's a bullsh#t attitude. What I saw on Saturday was not a marked improvement of bogastic proportions that has been built up. True, they may be building towards that, but they aren't there yet. I am supportive of this team, but after the past 5 years or so, I am cautiously optimistic and would like to see more encouraging signs before drinking the Boberry kool-aid that everyone is drunk on. I think this team can and will get better, but after 1 game, I am not going to say they are awful, not going to say they are great. I am saying I saw a lot of things that we saw in the past few years that many complained about. Hopefully those things get corrected and they can continue to improve. I think that is where we will see the difference in coaching staffs.

Remind you of Cosgrove???? You can't be serious. It's the first game for crying out loud. Do you want the boys to look like National Champions??? Wait a couple of more games before you start passing judgement.

I'm not passing judgement, which is why I said, "I hope to see marked improvement between game 1 and 2 when most improvement takes place." I don't understand why some people cannot accept objective observations about their team. I don't think I stated anything that wasn't obvious in watching the game. Some of you need to settle down a bit. Geez.

Yeah we had a little bit of trouble with a couple certain routes, and got burned by the TE a few times, but it never approached looking like a Cosgrove defense. Here is why:

1. when we stopped a guy behind the backfield early in the game, all 11 people were there making the tackle, I can't even remember the last time I have seen that

2. 8 rushing yards

3. DL's that do something other than act like they are blocking the O linemen

4. CB's that try to make plays on the ball more than the reciever

5. 4 sacks

6. 2 turnovers (left a few on the field, too)

7. and most importantly people acting excited- even coaches (lol @ ekeler).

yeah we held Nevada to 185 yards last year, but had we played them later in the year when things were clicking and they had Kopernick starting, it would have been different.

 

[HuskerFan505]

I keep hearing all this talk about how bad the secondary is and it needs to improve... yeah we allowed 342 yards passing, because we allowed 8 rushing!!!

When a team drops back and passes that much we're gonna allow some passing yards, especially with how the rules are set up today for passing offenses.

They passed 49 times! oh course they are gonna get a lot of yards. Not to mention 3/4 of the secondary had hardly played in a game let alone in the secondary. They also didn't have anyone to sub in for them to get a break.

:rant

Sorry I just don't get why people are acting like this is such a terrible weakness right now, give it a couple of weeks before you judge.

Also Prince will be a star, you can already see flashes of it whether it has been on Special Teams or Defense

I agree, we have the talent to play well in the secondary, they just need to learn the system well, stay disciplined during the games and good things will happen. Our pass rush and pressure up front was of noticeable improvement from last year, hopefully the secondary will come along shortly. GBR!!!!

I'm sorry DJR, but you're waaaay of with calling the defense a Cosgrove defense. We gave up an average of over 400 yards a game last season. we held this team to about 350, that's marked improvement right there. If you want a good defense right now then go cheer for USC.

Did you have your eyes open on Saturday? They ran those stinkin crossing routes for 10-15 yards repeatedly without the play getting stopped, that's how it reminded me of a Cosgrove defense, the inability for the defense to adjust on the fly. You think that game was a marked improvement over last year? Nevada was held to 185 yards offense in the opener, and that team has more offensive firepower than Western Michigan does.

Also, don't tell me to go cheer for another team if I wasn't pleased. That's a bullsh#t attitude. What I saw on Saturday was not a marked improvement of bogastic proportions that has been built up. True, they may be building towards that, but they aren't there yet. I am supportive of this team, but after the past 5 years or so, I am cautiously optimistic and would like to see more encouraging signs before drinking the Boberry kool-aid that everyone is drunk on. I think this team can and will get better, but after 1 game, I am not going to say they are awful, not going to say they are great. I am saying I saw a lot of things that we saw in the past few years that many complained about. Hopefully those things get corrected and they can continue to improve. I think that is where we will see the difference in coaching staffs.

Remind you of Cosgrove???? You can't be serious. It's the first game for crying out loud. Do you want the boys to look like National Champions??? Wait a couple of more games before you start passing judgement.

I'm not passing judgement, which is why I said, "I hope to see marked improvement between game 1 and 2 when most improvement takes place." I don't understand why some people cannot accept objective observations about their team. I don't think I stated anything that wasn't obvious in watching the game. Some of you need to settle down a bit. Geez.

Yeah we had a little bit of trouble with a couple certain routes, and got burned by the TE a few times, but it never approached looking like a Cosgrove defense. Here is why:

1. when we stopped a guy behind the backfield early in the game, all 11 people were there making the tackle, I can't even remember the last time I have seen that

2. 8 rushing yards

3. DL's that do something other than act like they are blocking the O linemen

4. CB's that try to make plays on the ball more than the reciever

5. 4 sacks

6. 2 turnovers (left a few on the field, too)

7. and most importantly people acting excited- even coaches (lol @ ekeler).

yeah we held Nevada to 185 yards last year, but had we played them later in the year when things were clicking and they had Kopernick starting, it would have been different.

Agreed, we will get better. We have the talent, definetly the coaches, all thats needed is discipline and reps.

:bonez :bonez

 

[SkullandBones]

I'm not hating on anyone, all I'm saying is that they need to get their sh#$%t together here pretty quick, VT and Mizzou are right around the corner. Overall they played pretty well, brilliant at times...but they also looked confused and completely out of sync at others. I don't think for the most part it's lack of talent, there's plenty there to run with anyone, but the mental lapses have to be addressed....as I'm sure they will be.

 

[HuskerTrucker]

No depth, that is the whole problem in the secondary...7 yards per attempt will never fly against a Big 12 opponent...we won't keep them to 8 yards rushing.

 

[DJR313]

Yeah we had a little bit of trouble with a couple certain routes, and got burned by the TE a few times, but it never approached looking like a Cosgrove defense. Here is why:

1. when we stopped a guy behind the backfield early in the game, all 11 people were there making the tackle, I can't even remember the last time I have seen that

You're right and it is encouraging, it's been awhile.

2. 8 rushing yards

That was nice too.

3. DL's that do something other than act like they are blocking the O linemen

Yes, they played better, but not awesome.

4. CB's that try to make plays on the ball more than the reciever

That is certainly refreshing.

5. 4 sacks

That is misleading because 2-3 were in mop-up duty on the last series. There still was not a ton of pressure generated on the QB from the front 4, better than last year, but they still need to be able to get to the QB more.

6. 2 turnovers (left a few on the field, too)

Glenn created that turnover, that is a TO that would not have happened last year. The West INT was gift wrapped.

7. and most importantly people acting excited- even coaches (lol @ ekeler).

Kinda neat to see Ekeler get excited, but why were the backup LB's never used? The players like him and he is an intense coach, but can he manage his personnel?

yeah we held Nevada to 185 yards last year, but had we played them later in the year when things were clicking and they had Kopernick starting, it would have been different.

Very possibly, but all I am saying is that last year, the defense came out and dominated for the most part and look what happened the rest of the year. I hope this defense will grow from week to week and get better and better. Seeing the same play being successful over and over again was just a painful throwback to having Cosgrove calling the defense and I hope that gets fixed. That is why I made that reference, everyone can put away their swords for me using the 'C' word.

 

[BIGREDIOWAN]

I think we will be fine in the secondary area as the season goes on. The team as a whole will only get better under Bo.

 

[zoogs]

Some people desperately WANT affirmation that we have returned to the shutdown defenses of 1999. Well, we haven't had that yet. Whether we return to it soon...we'll just have to wait and see. No fan can just will that into being

Any word on if O'Hanlon is starting this week as well?

 

[Vuren]

I keep hearing all this talk about how bad the secondary is and it needs to improve... yeah we allowed 342 yards passing, because we allowed 8 rushing!!!

When a team drops back and passes that much we're gonna allow some passing yards, especially with how the rules are set up today for passing offenses.

They passed 49 times! oh course they are gonna get a lot of yards. Not to mention 3/4 of the secondary had hardly played in a game let alone in the secondary. They also didn't have anyone to sub in for them to get a break.

:rant

Sorry I just don't get why people are acting like this is such a terrible weakness right now, give it a couple of weeks before you judge.

Also Prince will be a star, you can already see flashes of it whether it has been on Special Teams or Defense

all things considered, giving up 6.97 yards a pass isn't that bad...

and about prince...holy crap like that one play he was completely out of and then somehow got back in the play and broke the pass up...i loved it.

 

[Vuren]

Yeah we had a little bit of trouble with a couple certain routes, and got burned by the TE a few times, but it never approached looking like a Cosgrove defense. Here is why:

1. when we stopped a guy behind the backfield early in the game, all 11 people were there making the tackle, I can't even remember the last time I have seen that

You're right and it is encouraging, it's been awhile.

2. 8 rushing yards

That was nice too.

3. DL's that do something other than act like they are blocking the O linemen

Yes, they played better, but not awesome.

4. CB's that try to make plays on the ball more than the reciever

That is certainly refreshing.

5. 4 sacks

That is misleading because 2-3 were in mop-up duty on the last series. There still was not a ton of pressure generated on the QB from the front 4, better than last year, but they still need to be able to get to the QB more.

6. 2 turnovers (left a few on the field, too)

Glenn created that turnover, that is a TO that would not have happened last year. The West INT was gift wrapped.

7. and most importantly people acting excited- even coaches (lol @ ekeler).

Kinda neat to see Ekeler get excited, but why were the backup LB's never used? The players like him and he is an intense coach, but can he manage his personnel?

yeah we held Nevada to 185 yards last year, but had we played them later in the year when things were clicking and they had Kopernick starting, it would have been different.

Very possibly, but all I am saying is that last year, the defense came out and dominated for the most part and look what happened the rest of the year. I hope this defense will grow from week to week and get better and better. Seeing the same play being successful over and over again was just a painful throwback to having Cosgrove calling the defense and I hope that gets fixed. That is why I made that reference, everyone can put away their swords for me using the 'C' word.

why didn't we use more linebackers you ask?

because WMU didn't allow us too, they were subbing in very very late into the play clock and our defense didn't have enough time to check to see who needed to go out and come in. so we stuck with the same guys.

 

[Danimal]

Considering we were without Blue, Murillo, Thenarse, and Culburt plus this was the first game in a new system with inexperienced players they didn't do too bad.

Much of what went wrong was fixable. Hopefully there is considerable improvement soon.

 

[zoogs]

We had Murillo, didn't we? I'm pretty sure he was in on some plays, or am I wrong?