[Husker] "Defense"

[David Strong]

Hey Omar....

Don't let the tone of Steve's note bother you.  There's a group on the list which occasionally designates themselves as the email behaviour police when someone posts something which they consider to be in bad form. They, of course, decide what is bad form and what isn't.  There was nothing wrong with your post, in fact it was interesting.  The defense as a whole had an adequate performance, but nothing to get excited about.  They gave up five touchdowns, only one of which was after the outcome was not in doubt.  KU had over 400 yards of total offense.  So while it was better, no one would argue that there isn't a long way to go.  We scored more points than they did, that was reason enough to celebrate.

Dave

> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 09:55:36 -0700
> To: husker at tssi.com
> From: sstone at pvtnetworks.net
> Subject: Re: [Husker] "Defense"
> 
> Omar wrote:
> 
> >I watched the game last night on FCS "No Huddle".
> >
> >Anyhow, while the offense looked great, half of the defense did not. 
> >The secondary was routinely beat for big plays and just looked lost 
> >and out of position for much of the time they were on the field.
> >The play where Hagg nailed Reesing with a HUGE hit, yet failed to 
> >bring him down, resulting in Reesing finding a WIDE open Meier for 
> >an easy touchdown was absolutely unforgiveable. I'm sure the 
> >brothers Pelini will be sharing their thoughts with young Hagg if 
> >they haven't done so already.
> 
> It seems to me that terms like "absolutely unforgiveable" belong to 
> those sitting in the cheap seats. Sure, Hagg should have wrapped him 
> up, which he knew five seconds after the missed tackle, but remember 
> the kid's just a true sophomore. (But ought to be a redshirt 
> freshman.)
> 
> >Seeing KU receivers just run wild in the wild green yonder (racking 
> >up the YAC) was gut wrenching. I believe if the secondary had 
> >stepped up and made big plays, KU would not have scored as much, nor 
> >would NU have given up so many yards.
> 
> Sounds like a wild exaggeration. Many of the sacks and QB hurries 
> resulted from KU receivers being covered.
> 
> >It was great to see the D-line bringing pressure on Reesing, but 
> >this secondary just stinks. The D-Line is making plays, but the LBs 
> >and secondary seem to be struggling greatly.
> 
> "...but this secondary just stinks..." is a phrase I'd love to hear 
> the writer repeat in the Husker locker room after practice. 
> (Naturally that will NEVER happen       :-))   This kind of comment 
> belongs on one of the many bulletin board sites, not on the 
> HuskerList.
> 
> >I realize that much of the Pelini defensive philosophy is just 
> >taking hold. So I hope the corners and safeties watch alot of game 
> >film this week to shore up the missed tackles, missed assignments as 
> >well as being out of position badly. The coverage needs to tighten 
> >up and they need to play much more physical and smart.
> >I'm beginning to wonder if having a largely thin and inexperienced 
> >LB corp, which takes alot of pressure off of the secondary in the 
> >midrange passing game, has exposed the secondary to such serious 
> >gaffes.
> 
> Only now this is beginning to sink in? After being an an established 
> fact for ten games?
> 
> >And now with Glenn out, the LB corps gets even greener.
> >Here's hoping that the "Blackshirts" get their act together against 
> >a woeful KSU unit. Thank God our offense scores so many points..
> 
> I can't imagine God has a lot of input in the Husker offense.
> 
> Steve Stone
> 
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker

_________________________________________________________________
Color coding for safety: Windows Live Hotmail alerts you to suspicious email.
http://windowslive.com/Explore/Hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_safety_112008