Game Thread: Arkansas St. @ Nebraska 7 P.M. CT BTN

[Red_Alert]

"I would have loved to hear what Diaco had to say after the game, but he breezed past reporters without comment. That's unfortunate.

As poorly as Mark Banker's defense played at times, he never ducked out on postgame interviews. Langsdorf always is there to take questions."

https://www.google.com/amp/journals...cle_54238994-86fa-5f82-b6b2-951b2a3c2a14.html

 

[corn train]

I did notice Riley looked really stressed on the sideline, as much as I've ever seen him come undone, that make me feel a little uneasy

 

[Red_Alert]

If they're scrimmaging every day then maybe but you know then best lessons are under live fire, they'll get better for certain, I don't think Dcow is going easy on them because it would make Rileys pussy more sore

We shall see, I guess. It was difficult watching what looked like 4 Q's of prevent D.

Arkansas St only had 21 rushing attempts, but averaged 3.9 ypc on those. I once had a coach that told us if we could average 4 ypc we'd never lose. 4 x 3 =12 yds and move the chains.

 

[Red_Alert]

I did notice Riley looked really stressed on the sideline, as much as I've ever seen him come undone, that make me feel a little uneasy

Did you see him try to slam his headset down and the wire made it swing around like a tether-ball? LOL

 

[Red_Alert]

First Downs..

Arkansas St - 32
Nebraska - 25

 

[oaknightshockey1]

True that...How about 60 practices (spring/fall)?

I think I trust Jay Foreman when he says they aren't physical enough or using correct technique. The question is will/can those be fixed?

The "Old Guard" always use the physicality argument, to the point that it is meaningless anymore. We were plenty physical. Our issue in this game was schematic, and that is correctable. Expecting our LBs to turn and run with their #2 or #3 WRs isn't going to be super successful, and Diaco has not done that in the past. Right or wrong, we didn't open up the playbook on D. It was a gamble that almost bit us in the ass. I don't know whether our new scheme will work, but that game didn't answer any questions in that regard because we hardly used it.

 

[Red_Alert]

The "Old Guard" always use the physicality argument, to the point that it is meaningless anymore. We were plenty physical. Our issue in this game was schematic, and that is correctable. Expecting our LBs to turn and run with their #2 or #3 WRs isn't going to be super successful, and Diaco has not done that in the past. Right or wrong, we didn't open up the playbook on D. It was a gamble that almost bit us in the ass. I don't know whether our new scheme will work, but that game didn't answer any questions in that regard because we hardly used it.

Being physical is just as important to success in today's CFB as it was in the 70's, 80's, 90's. See Alabama.

Bama gave up 7
Clemson gave up 3
Penn St gave up 0
Oklahoma gave up 7
Auburn gave up 7
Georgia gave up 10

Nebraska gave up 36 and was 11 yds, 10 seconds, and a couple dropped passes away from giving up 43 and OT.

 

[Red_Alert]

LOL @ trying to sugar-coat 4 Q's of prevent D against a mid-major that you should completely roll at the line-of-scrimmage.

"Old Guard" needs to know modern football is not played with power, but with finesse.

 

[Red_Alert]

68 pass attempts and just one sack.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

LOL @ trying to sugar-coat 4 Q's of prevent D against a mid-major that you should completely roll at the line-of-scrimmage.

"Old Guard" needs to know modern football is not played with power, but with finesse.

Nowhere did I say that playing physical wasn't essential. I said they were plenty physical and that wasn't the problem last night. DL got pretty good push with only 3 or 4. Stoltenberg ate up double teams all night. Mo Barry and Gifford had some pretty darn physical plays at LB and our safeties were pretty physical too. Getting beat on short routes has nothing to do with playing physical, it has to do with scheme. Not matching 4 wide receivers with nickel or dime for the majority of the game lets that happen. Our OLBs can keep up with a TE, not a WR.

 

[Jack_John_Mark]

Decent read here.

Nebraska's Defense Will be Fine

 

[oaknightshockey1]

68 pass attempts and just one sack.

You're better than that. When the QB holds the ball for 1.5 seconds on most passing attempts, how many sacks do you expect?

 

[Red_Alert]

You're better than that. When the QB holds the ball for 1.5 seconds on most passing attempts, how many sacks do you expect?

Not the game I saw. He held the ball a lot longer than 1.5 seconds MOST of the time. There were only 5 QB hurries in the 68 attempts.

It was 4 Q's of prevent D. I know what I saw.

 

[Red_Alert]

Got some chores to do. BBL for some more sugar-coating. LOL

 

[Jack_John_Mark]

I wasn't concerned about the pressure we weren't getting. I wasn't expecting to get pressure.

My concern was that we were dropping so many guys into coverage at times and they'd have a guy wide open 8 yards down field. Those little pass plays killed us all night.

 

[corn train]

The numbers defending a spread team are going to be off the charts, how many times did we get beat deep or over the top? Next week is going to be much of the same gimmicks, if the score is the same then I'll be just as happy with a W. If I had to guess I would say Diaco will have the opportunity for some specific coaching this next week
Tre had a huge game, I'm very happy the committee was out, I'm on record of my dislike for that option

 

[oaknightshockey1]

Not the game I saw. He held the ball a lot longer than 1.5 seconds MOST of the time. There were only 5 QB hurries in the 68 attempts.

It was 4 Q's of prevent D. I know what I saw.

Might want to rewatch. I'll ask again...how many sacks were you expecting? I'm not sugar coating anything, I'm saying that all that stuff about technique and physicality is bullshit. You seem to agree it is a schematic issue, since you keep saying we played 4 quarters of prevent D. We ran about 3 coverages all night long. That's the problem, and it appears to be by design, since Diaco usually doesn't match 4 WR with base D. Personally I don't think we are good enough to roll out a game plan like that, and it almost bit us. That said, I highly doubt we do the same thing at UO. We will find out in a week.

 

[Jack_John_Mark]

The numbers defending a spread team are going to be off the charts, how many times did we get beat deep or over the top? Next week is going to be much of the same gimmicks, if the score is the same then I'll be just as happy with a W. If I had to guess I would say Diaco will have the opportunity for some specific coaching this next week
Tre had a huge game, I'm very happy the committee was out, I'm on record of my dislike for that option

I actually don't expect Oregon to be much more of a challenge than Arkansas State was.

Gonna be high scoring. Probably 80-90 points scored in the game.

Real similar with the exception that Oregon will have a few more weapons and there won't be 90,000 dressed in red screaming.

 

[corn train]

I actually don't expect Oregon to be much more of a challenge than Arkansas State was.

Gonna be high scoring. Probably 80-90 points scored in the game.

Real similar with the exception that Oregon will have a few more weapons and there won't be 90,000 dressed in red screaming.

Yeah it'll be Ark st on roids, Nike has some speed on the edges, I'm very concerned about our olb's or lack there of defending the barrage of bubbles were about to endure

 

[Exorbitant]

Obviously we didn't see the whole Diaco defense and it almost got us beat. Nebraska will look better on defense in the future. Offensively, there are some kinks to work out, but it's an exciting offense to watch. There will be some rough patches to endure this season. My prediction of 8 wins during the season looks about right. GBR.