What the media and fans haven't learned from TO

[HuskerFowler]

Great read that summarizes my thoughts on the current state of the program. Apparently this is written by a booster. Enjoy.

Somehow this staff took the youngest defense in the BIG and made it not just better but significantly so. The Husker D was 107th in total defense after the South Dakota State game and it finished the season 37th. I was at the Michigan game where that defense grew up, dominated the home team in front of 112,000 people, and played with the confidence of a seasoned group. (As an aside, it comes as no surprise to me, that the Husker defense played their best games away from the drama of Lincoln. Think at Michigan and Penn State.)

http://shonhopwood.com/husker-media-fans-havent-learned-tom-osborne/

 

[Warrior10]

Great read that summarizes my thoughts on the current state of the program. Apparently this is written by a booster. Enjoy.

Somehow this staff took the youngest defense in the BIG and made it not just better but significantly so. The Husker D was 107th in total defense after the South Dakota State game and it finished the season 37th. I was at the Michigan game where that defense grew up, dominated the home team in front of 112,000 people, and played with the confidence of a seasoned group. (As an aside, it comes as no surprise to me, that the Husker defense played their best games away from the drama of Lincoln. Think at Michigan and Penn State.)

http://shonhopwood.c...ed-tom-osborne/

Spot on. The certain media members are really hurting the program.

 

[TheSker]

Excellent read

 

[ladyhawke]

Great read. He gets it! (If you haven't had a chance to read Shon's book Law Man do so. He has a fascinating story!)

 

[MichiganDad3]

I disagree. A poor scheme on D is what caused the horrible performances early in the year. The same scheme that Wiscy shredded in the CCG. Bo finally gave in and asked the players what to do at halftime of the NW game. Bo is responsible for the young D. This is his 6th year, he should have recruited some capable players 3, 4 or 5 years ago. On the other hand, the O put up some impressive numbers given the number of injuries, but the number of turnovers can not be excused.

 

[Mavric]

I disagree. A poor scheme on D is what caused the horrible performances early in the year. The same scheme that Wiscy shredded in the CCG. Bo finally gave in and asked the players what to do at halftime of the NW game. Bo is responsible for the young D. This is his 6th year, he should have recruited some capable players 3, 4 or 5 years ago. On the other hand, the O put up some impressive numbers given the number of injuries, but the number of turnovers can not be excused.

And what did they want to do? Go back to Bo's base scheme instead of the three down linemen they were running early on.

 

[Warrior10]

I disagree. A poor scheme on D is what caused the horrible performances early in the year. The same scheme that Wiscy shredded in the CCG. Bo finally gave in and asked the players what to do at halftime of the NW game. Bo is responsible for the young D. This is his 6th year, he should have recruited some capable players 3, 4 or 5 years ago. On the other hand, the O put up some impressive numbers given the number of injuries, but the number of turnovers can not be excused.

And what did they want to do? Go back to Bo's base scheme instead of the three down linemen they were running early on.

Bolded the key part.

 

[JTrain]

The oddsmakers were aware of our injuries going into the Iowa game, no? Yet we were favored by 3, and lost by 21. Similar results against UCLA, Michigan St. and Minnesota.

If you want to use injuries as an excuse as to why we didn't perform up to preseason expectations, fine. I can accept that. But the fact is, we quite consistently underperformed even compared to adjusted expectations. And that gets us to the real problem. Not that injuries hurt our results this year but that, with or without injuries, we consistently struggle to maintain focus, intensity and discipline for 60 minutes of football. So games that should be down-to-the-wire classics turn out to be brutal losses (UCLA, Iowa, Michigan St.) and games that we should be able to pull away and win by 2-3 scores turn out to be down-to-the-wire classics (Penn State, Wyoming).

Talent level might go up next year. Injuries might go down. And maybe the OWH will go bankrupt and close its doors. And, the least likely of all, maybe the fans will stop being F#cking Fair Weather F#ckings. But even if all those obstacles are cleared, I don't see any reason to think, without any kind of staff changes, that we will suddenly become a team that consistently maintains focus, intensity and discipline for 60 minutes.

Not that I won't have a full jug of Kool-Aid and moonshine at my disposal come next August.

 

[Mavric]

I disagree. A poor scheme on D is what caused the horrible performances early in the year. The same scheme that Wiscy shredded in the CCG. Bo finally gave in and asked the players what to do at halftime of the NW game. Bo is responsible for the young D. This is his 6th year, he should have recruited some capable players 3, 4 or 5 years ago. On the other hand, the O put up some impressive numbers given the number of injuries, but the number of turnovers can not be excused.

And what did they want to do? Go back to Bo's base scheme instead of the three down linemen they were running early on.

Bolded the key part.

Exactly.

 

[MichiganDad3]

I disagree. A poor scheme on D is what caused the horrible performances early in the year. The same scheme that Wiscy shredded in the CCG. Bo finally gave in and asked the players what to do at halftime of the NW game. Bo is responsible for the young D. This is his 6th year, he should have recruited some capable players 3, 4 or 5 years ago. On the other hand, the O put up some impressive numbers given the number of injuries, but the number of turnovers can not be excused.

And what did they want to do? Go back to Bo's base scheme instead of the three down linemen they were running early on.

They wanted a base scheme (simpler) with more attacking and less read and react. The point is that it worked. But Bo let horrible teams have record days running the ball against us, and let us get slaughter by UCLA before he changed. You can't run a 100 yard dash backwards, then run it forward and brag about how much you improved. The only reason the defense improved is because it was ranked below 100. That is inexcusable from a Husker D even if 11 true freshman were starting.

 

[JTrain]

I disagree. A poor scheme on D is what caused the horrible performances early in the year. The same scheme that Wiscy shredded in the CCG. Bo finally gave in and asked the players what to do at halftime of the NW game. Bo is responsible for the young D. This is his 6th year, he should have recruited some capable players 3, 4 or 5 years ago. On the other hand, the O put up some impressive numbers given the number of injuries, but the number of turnovers can not be excused.

And what did they want to do? Go back to Bo's base scheme instead of the three down linemen they were running early on.

You can't run a 100 yard dash backwards, then run it forward and brag about how much you improved.

You can in Huskerland.

 

[MichiganDad3]

The oddsmakers were aware of our injuries going into the Iowa game, no? Yet we were favored by 3, and lost by 21. Similar results against UCLA, Michigan St. and Minnesota.

If you want to use injuries as an excuse as to why we didn't perform up to preseason expectations, fine. I can accept that. But the fact is, we quite consistently underperformed even compared to adjusted expectations. And that gets us to the real problem. Not that injuries hurt our results this year but that, with or without injuries, we consistently struggle to maintain focus, intensity and discipline for 60 minutes of football. So games that should be down-to-the-wire classics turn out to be brutal losses (UCLA, Iowa, Michigan St.) and games that we should be able to pull away and win by 2-3 scores turn out to be down-to-the-wire classics (Penn State, Wyoming).

Talent level might go up next year. Injuries might go down. And maybe the OWH will go bankrupt and close its doors. And, the least likely of all, maybe the fans will stop being F#cking Fair Weather F#ckings. But even if all those obstacles are cleared, I don't see any reason to think, without any kind of staff changes, that we will suddenly become a team that consistently maintains focus, intensity and discipline for 60 minutes.

Not that I won't have a full jug of Kool-Aid and moonshine at my disposal come next August.

I don't get jacked up on the kool aid until a few weeks before the season starts. After the bowl last season I was really down on the Huskers. I din't expect much this year, but by the time the season started I was thinking we were capable of an 11 win season. Here's hoping for good news in the off season and the bowl game.

 

[Warrior10]

I disagree. A poor scheme on D is what caused the horrible performances early in the year. The same scheme that Wiscy shredded in the CCG. Bo finally gave in and asked the players what to do at halftime of the NW game. Bo is responsible for the young D. This is his 6th year, he should have recruited some capable players 3, 4 or 5 years ago. On the other hand, the O put up some impressive numbers given the number of injuries, but the number of turnovers can not be excused.

And what did they want to do? Go back to Bo's base scheme instead of the three down linemen they were running early on.

They wanted a base scheme (simpler) with more attacking and less read and react. The point is that it worked. But Bo let horrible teams have record days running the ball against us, and let us get slaughter by UCLA before he changed. You can't run a 100 yard dash backwards, then run it forward and brag about how much you improved. The only reason the defense improved is because it was ranked below 100. That is inexcusable from a Husker D even if 11 true freshman were starting.

Bo threw his full scheme at the kids, because if ran correctly it works wonderfully.... if you have the athletes (we do). But they were to young to grasp it mentally, so he simplified it and their athleticism took over and worked out fine.

 

[MichiganDad3]

Well the defense didn't work at all for 7.5 games, and that is all on Bo. There weren't many people in the world, other than the Husker staff, that expected that D to work.