[Husker] Players defend Callahan (fwd)

[BRADALAN at aol.com]

In a message dated 11/9/2005 3:10:07 P.M. Hawaiian Standard Time,  
nolan at romaine.tssi.com writes:

I said  when BC was hired that I thought the 2005 season would be the 
low-water  mark.  At this point, I hope I'm right, the lack of consistency 
on  defense has me worried that it may be the bigger problem in the long  
run.  It would not surprise me to see at least one change among the  
defensive coaches before next spring, possibly as early as the  week
after the last game, whenever that turns out to  be.


___________________________________________
 
It will surprise me greatly if any defensive coach is fired after this  
season.  Can anyone really point to any defensive position coach as  a point of 
failure?  Elmassian is the only one I can possibly see being  changed.  From what 
I've seen the D line is much better than last year and  the Linebackers have 
been HUGE, even with the loss of two starters to  injuries.  
 
Despite mental breakdowns and missed tackles on occasion, I am still not  
sold on Cosgrove.  The media guys doing the OU game made some remark about  him 
being one of the best DCs in the country, highly sought after, etc.   This is a 
bunch of BS spin, IMHO.  I posted last season a comparison of the  Wisconsin 
and Nebraska Defenses with and without Cosgrove.  While I don't  remember the 
exact numbers, the bottom line was that Wisconsin had a mediocre  Division I 
defense giving up around 28 points a game the last 3-4 years he was  there, and 
then suddenly was in the top 5-10 in scoring defense through the  first 8 
games, until a couple of late-season meltdowns.  The Huskers took  what was a 
pretty good defense in 2003, with what was supposed to be one of the  best 
secondaries in the nation, and went completely in the tank, with most of  the same 
players.  This was a case, again in my opinion, of a  not-particularly-good DC 
trying to force his mediocre system onto a bunch of  players who were not 
familiar with it, and paying the price.  He called a  horrible game against TTech 
and then blamed the players for not executing (like  he is still doing).  It's 
no wonder the D kind of quit on him late in the  season, and no surprise that 
Bullocks and Washington left early.  It's hard  to stay motivated if the 
coach keeps setting you up for failure.
 
This season has been a mixed bag on defense.  The team has played  hard, but 
been hampered by poor schemes and offensive mistakes that have put  them in 
some big holes.  They have shown far more heart than last year, but  are still 
making some mistakes, so it's not all Cosgrove's fault.  However,  I could 
stomach him a lot more if he was man enough to come to a post-game and  say 
something like "I need to do a better job with my game plan and in getting  the boys 
prepared so we can start strong."  Doesn't have to grovel and  apologize or 
say it's all his fault, but at least share the blame  instead of just repeating 
"the schemes were there, they just didn't execute"  after every loss.
 
In any case, the question is: should Cos prove to be the failure point in  
the Defensive staff, will BC replace his college buddy?  Or will he change  out 
every other D coach first, to include John Blake, super-recruiter?  I  think 
the latter course is more likely, and will be much worse for the players  and 
the program as a whole.  I just can't see him firing Cosgrove unless he  gets a 
"you fire him or I fire you both" from the AD.
 
I just hope that Cosgrove doesn't outscheme himself again, and the Huskers  
bow their necks and take care of business Saturday.
 
GO BIG RED!!!
 
Brad Bredenkamp