Monday, October 31, 2005
OU reaction and analysis
Unlike the Missouri game, the OU loss wasn't primarily the coaches' fault. The gameplan was appropriate. Bullocks missed a tackle on both of Peterson's long runs, and several others were missed as well. Taylor had his first bad game (at times), although he had his moments. Coz has actually did some good things scheme-wise, but the players didn't always execute. For example, on one play Coz called a coverage where a defender came underneath the off-man coverage, baiting the QB into an INT (which our DB dropped - I wish Nebraska would do this more). The coaches also did the right thing by starting Murtha over Thomas, but Murtha got destroyed on the 1st play (although he seemed to be fine for the rest of the game).
THIS TIME, the lack of pass rush wasn't Coz's fault. He was calling blitzes, but Nebraska could not get to Bomar even with extra defenders. There were several plays Bomar beat the blitz and one-on-one coverage, which is probably why Coz didn't blitz much on OU's late drives. This is understandable. As for Peterson's running...the Blackshirts missed several tackles and Peterson is just a great back. It happens...it is nobody's "fault".
The fake FG was a coaching error. It was logical to allow OU to kick into a strong wind and play it safe...that was the only major coaching error I saw in defense/special teams.
Offensively...not so good. Too many long-developing pass plays. Not enough short/quick passes until later in the game. The script isn't working at the beginning of games; not enough screens and draws (again). Opponents are going to continue to blitz until Nebraska re-establishes the running game or punishes defenses with more quick passes, screens, and draws.
I've ripped the coaches at times, but this loss wasn't their fault, at least in terms of strategy. The gameplan was solid, particularly on defense. OU just played better. This loss hurts, but at least Nebraska isn't getting blown out like last season. I still think a 2-1 finish is likely if the team keeps its collective head up (I don't see much chance of winning all 3, particularly at CU).
Still, objectively...have you notice Nebraska plays better the further away from the beginning of the game and halftime? It's as if, the further away from the coaches' input they get, the better they play. The 2nd and 4th quarters have been Nebraska's best quarters all season. Why? This concerns me deeply. If Nebraska manages to somehow win the last three, this season should still be considered a relative success. If Nebraska wins 2 of 3, I think the level of improvement from last season would be acceptable. If Nebraska wins 1 of 3 and barely makes it to a bowl game, this team will have underachieved badly. If Nebraska loses all 3 of the final games, ending on a 5 game losing streak and missing a bowl for the second straight year...it would be time to talk about changes. Not in terms of Callahan, but on his staff and in the AD's office. If Nebraska does miss out on a bowl game for the second consecutive season, Steve Pederson, the man who created this situation, should have to answer for it after gutting a 10-3 football team in 2003.
THIS TIME, the lack of pass rush wasn't Coz's fault. He was calling blitzes, but Nebraska could not get to Bomar even with extra defenders. There were several plays Bomar beat the blitz and one-on-one coverage, which is probably why Coz didn't blitz much on OU's late drives. This is understandable. As for Peterson's running...the Blackshirts missed several tackles and Peterson is just a great back. It happens...it is nobody's "fault".
The fake FG was a coaching error. It was logical to allow OU to kick into a strong wind and play it safe...that was the only major coaching error I saw in defense/special teams.
Offensively...not so good. Too many long-developing pass plays. Not enough short/quick passes until later in the game. The script isn't working at the beginning of games; not enough screens and draws (again). Opponents are going to continue to blitz until Nebraska re-establishes the running game or punishes defenses with more quick passes, screens, and draws.
I've ripped the coaches at times, but this loss wasn't their fault, at least in terms of strategy. The gameplan was solid, particularly on defense. OU just played better. This loss hurts, but at least Nebraska isn't getting blown out like last season. I still think a 2-1 finish is likely if the team keeps its collective head up (I don't see much chance of winning all 3, particularly at CU).
Still, objectively...have you notice Nebraska plays better the further away from the beginning of the game and halftime? It's as if, the further away from the coaches' input they get, the better they play. The 2nd and 4th quarters have been Nebraska's best quarters all season. Why? This concerns me deeply. If Nebraska manages to somehow win the last three, this season should still be considered a relative success. If Nebraska wins 2 of 3, I think the level of improvement from last season would be acceptable. If Nebraska wins 1 of 3 and barely makes it to a bowl game, this team will have underachieved badly. If Nebraska loses all 3 of the final games, ending on a 5 game losing streak and missing a bowl for the second straight year...it would be time to talk about changes. Not in terms of Callahan, but on his staff and in the AD's office. If Nebraska does miss out on a bowl game for the second consecutive season, Steve Pederson, the man who created this situation, should have to answer for it after gutting a 10-3 football team in 2003.
Posted by Dflex @ Monday, October 31, 2005 || 
Comments:
<< Home
I think you are too easy on the Koz. They jumped to a 14 point lead and I don't think the Koz was prepared.
His three man rush is bad and it was bad last year too. We don't have the best three defensive linemen of the decade playing for us. We need to rush four or five and stop showing blitz too soon. The offensive linemen have too much time to think about their adjustments. Our D-backs don't play up close or play bump & run. Coupled with the weak the rush, the passer has too much time and the routes are open particularly in the middle. I think our defensive line is pretty good but I think the defensive backfield is weak and the overall defense is vulnerable. Blake should stay but the other defensive coaches should be replaced or taken out behind the barn for a meeting of the minds.
The offense is just sick. The offensive line is offensive to the senses. We have become a passing team with a weak run threat. I don't believe in the West Coach offense. I don't believe in any offense that is primarily pass. Callahan talks about balance but doesn't do it- mostly because he doesn't have an offensive line. Many teams have used and most are losers- they don't have the talent. San Francisco won big with it as long as they had Steve Young, Roger Craig, Rice, Rathman, and a host of other quality players. They are gone and so are the 49-er's successes. We need a running game that can control the ball and eat up the clock when necessary. But,it has to have a credible passing threat so that opponents can't ignore the pass and tweak their defenses to stop the option and a few other runs (when Crouch or Daily would share the ball with someone other than themselves).
Post a Comment
His three man rush is bad and it was bad last year too. We don't have the best three defensive linemen of the decade playing for us. We need to rush four or five and stop showing blitz too soon. The offensive linemen have too much time to think about their adjustments. Our D-backs don't play up close or play bump & run. Coupled with the weak the rush, the passer has too much time and the routes are open particularly in the middle. I think our defensive line is pretty good but I think the defensive backfield is weak and the overall defense is vulnerable. Blake should stay but the other defensive coaches should be replaced or taken out behind the barn for a meeting of the minds.
The offense is just sick. The offensive line is offensive to the senses. We have become a passing team with a weak run threat. I don't believe in the West Coach offense. I don't believe in any offense that is primarily pass. Callahan talks about balance but doesn't do it- mostly because he doesn't have an offensive line. Many teams have used and most are losers- they don't have the talent. San Francisco won big with it as long as they had Steve Young, Roger Craig, Rice, Rathman, and a host of other quality players. They are gone and so are the 49-er's successes. We need a running game that can control the ball and eat up the clock when necessary. But,it has to have a credible passing threat so that opponents can't ignore the pass and tweak their defenses to stop the option and a few other runs (when Crouch or Daily would share the ball with someone other than themselves).
<< Home
