Gassman

my two cents on OC comparisons. The biggest problem is still lack of identity. Unfortunately, this speaks directly to the offensive line and their inability to control the LOS, set the perimeter edge, or pass protection. a S&C program is only as good as how much work the participants will put in. There seems to be a glaring lack of veteran leadership, either vocally or through action. Someone on this team better figure out a way to light a fire under some arses. there is only so much the coaches can do, the players have to take the responsibility to raise their level of intensity. Both o-line and d-line need to play like their hair is on fire. what has happened is past and nothing can be done about it, the season starts TODAY, and the opportunities are endless. It is all there, right in front of the team, to be taken on the field! Let us see what this team is really made of, because we certainly haven't seen that yet.

– Sep 12, 2011 at 8:56 am

HuskerLocker

One thing to remember is that NU's S&C used to be head and shoulders above everyone else. It wasn't even funny. Now, teams are much closer, but NU still has a slight advantage.

– Sep 11, 2011 at 5:54 pm

crusader34

I may be overreacting to the offense's ineffectiveness, but re: S&C, that's offseason preparation. We've had physically dominant teams in the past, and much credit was given to the cutting edge strength and conditioning program catalyzing those results. Two weeks in a row now our line has fought a losing effort in terms of controlling the trenches, against competition that is much less formidable than that which we'll be seeing during our conference schedule.

– Sep 11, 2011 at 5:10 pm

HuskerLocker

Crusader,

Re: Shawn/Tim: Shawn had an unfortunate problem of second-guessing himself. If Tim has a fault, it appears to be his stubbornness. It could be luck, but likely the mismatches caused all of those bombs/big plays.

Re: S&C: You can only prep players so much physically. They have to execute their assignments and coaches have to adjust.

– Sep 11, 2011 at 4:26 pm

crusader34

Also, our vaunted strength and conditioning program has apparently disappeared. How a "Top 10" team like Nebraska can't shove a WAC opponent backward in short-yardage situations boggles the mind. Wisconsin and Michigan State are already giving me nightmares.

– Sep 11, 2011 at 10:46 am

crusader34

Not sure I follow you on the Shawn Watson probably would have lost us the game bit. I have seen exactly zero evidence so far this year that Tim Beck is an improvement. Wats had a track record of success as an OC before he ever stepped foot in Lincoln. Beck is unproven, and the on-the-field manifestation of his coordinating prowess so far seems to reveal an inferior product. I really hope things turn around, but we've been looking at real garbage the last two weeks.

– Sep 11, 2011 at 10:44 am

nathanielhusker

I agree with some folks as they complain about this game, but I also consider that Nebraska probably has quite a few more wrinkles in their offense that they haven't unveiled yet. When they went to different sets and personnel shifts in the second half (especially the fourth quarter), they really had Fresno's number. I expect to see that in the future. This, to me, was a game Nebraska wanted to win without showing too much. They really underestimated Derek Carr, and that's never a smart choice.
The young playmakers for Nebraska are exactly the kind of skill position players the Huskers need. They are fast, wily, and always have the ability to break a big play. That will help when stiffer competition comes. By the way, I don't have any reason to believe that Washington will be much stiffer competition.
There has not been a single zone read play this year. I doubt it has been removed from the playbook, and I would look for Beck to use it at least once or twice prior to Wisconsin. That will give the offense another much-needed weapon in Taylor Martinez.
The defensive secondary looks like they really miss Alfonzo Dennard. It's a good thing he will be back (hopefully) before Wisconsin. Watching Wisconsin throw their out routes and slants vs Oregon State made me cringe. Of course, Oregon State just isn't very good.
I'm not sold that this team isn't very good on offense, and I'm definitely not sold that they aren't every bit the defensive team they are supposed to be. They have put up 40 and 42 points so far and have allowed 7 and 29. That's not all that bad...unless you're wanting perfection.

– Sep 11, 2011 at 10:42 am

1audiofile

I admit it, I was surprised a bit. The Bulldogs came to play and the Huskers thought this was another tune up game. The Bull dogs played great and I give them every praise because they deserve it. My main concern is that in every score, there was either a very long run or a very long pass. While that can be a good thing, the offense does not seem to have the ability to drive the length of the field. This will be a problem. You cannot depend on 100 yd kick off returns in every game. My real concern though is the defense. They were supposed to be the dependable part of the team. They would always keep the score low so the offense would be able to win it with only a few scores. We have seen in two games that the new defense does not defend the pass or the run particularly well. They would be better off going back to the Paso. It was not great against the run but it did shut down the passing. I realize there are new coaches and new D backs but the line is largely the same and they are not penetrating the backfield or getting to the QB. I realize the Brothers Pelini are great defensive minds but it is not showing on the field this year I saw Wilson yesterday and he will pick us apart. He is deadly accurate with a very quick release. Lastly, teams now understand that if you shut down Taylor, you shut down about 80% if the offense. Cudos to Burkehead and his fourth quarter runs. When the team needed him, he was there. I guess he really is a Superman.

– Sep 11, 2011 at 9:28 am