[Husker] my thoughts (pretty long)

[Rod Wellman]

Regarding the O-line, I recall that the D-line of Western Michigan is  
regarded as the strength of the defense.  They're a good bunch, and  
when you factor in stacking the line with 8 in the box, I think that  
accounts for our sputtering a running game.  It concerns me a bit  
because of the alleged emphasis on the run during practice, but maybe  
we need to give it a couple more games before getting too worried.  
Kudos to Watson for realizing this and adapting, rather than being  
stubborn and "taking what we want" :)

I thought our D-line played really well.  They absolutely stuffed the  
running game.  We had decent pressure on the QB, if not fantastic.  I  
liked the few stunt-type blitzes I saw and it seemed like our D was  
always showing something different, versus last year where we were  
basically lined up in our defense 10 seconds before the snap...no  
threat or "look" of a blitz or stunt or anything.  We just watched the  
offense run their play.  This year's D looks unpredictable, and  
they're "taking it to" the offense, and that's going to help us in the  
long run.  They got burned a couple times, but nothing that can't be  
fixed, and Western Michigan is a veteran team who does a good job  
running their offense.  They're going to win some games this year.

Overall, I'm cautiously optimistic.  I liked a lot of what I saw, but  
we're a ways a way from hanging with the big boys.

Rod W.
Sioux City, Ia.

On Sep 1, 2008, at 8:42 AM, Steve Reichenbach wrote:

>> GOOD:
>>
>> 1) Although he was out of position on a couple plays (to be  
>> expected in your
>> first ever game at linebacker) Cody Glenn looks the part.  He's  
>> probably one
>> of the top 3 or 4 fastest guys on the defense, CLEARLY faster than  
>> Dillard
>> or Wortman.  He ran down the speedy RB a couple times and caught some
>> receivers in time to breakup the pass.  I was blown away by his speed
>> though.
>>
>> 2) Dillard has always been great in the run, but he does seem to  
>> have more
>> mobility this year and should be able to help out in the passing  
>> game.
>>
> Glenn played great but clearly had some confusion.  Dillard looked to
> be solid, and playing your assignment is important for the MLB, but I
> hope he is able to have a bit more impact as he settles into the  
> starting
> role.
>
>> 9) Great day for Swift, he seemed to always be open at the right  
>> time.
>> Menelik Holt had one drop, but everywhere else looked solid.  There  
>> was a
>> couple times where Niles Paul looked like he had a little dear in the
>> headlights, but I think he'll be good in the long run.
>>
> I liked what I saw from Holt.  The receivers were blocking better  
> downfield,
> but there were times they let down.
>
>> BAD
>>
>> 1) Offensive line seemed to have trouble pushing WMU back.  Running  
>> backs
>> were dealing with a lot of defenders in the backfield.  Part of  
>> that could
>> be WMU stacking the box, which they certainly did.  Good thing we  
>> have an OC
>> who was willing to adjust and throw the ball all over their DBs on an
>> island.
>>
> I'd say the line play on both sides are still the biggest concerns.   
> On
> the D, they need better pass rush.  On the O, they need better push  
> off
> the line on runs.
>
>> 2) The first interception from Ganz I can live with.  It was a VERY  
>> slightly
>> overthrown ball that the receiver got his hands on, but skipped  
>> into the DBs
>> hands instead.  The second one was just plain bad.  He tried to  
>> throw it
>> through the linebacker to a guy that was blanket covered anyway.
>>
> This is my biggest worry about Ganz.  I was pleased with how well he  
> took
> care of the ball during the first half.  Hopefully, that's more what  
> we'll
> see, because he's going to have more pressure and closer games.
>
>> 3) Despite getting 4-sacks versus the 13 we had all year last year  
>> (I still
>> can't believe we only had 13), I really thought their QB had a lot  
>> of time
>> to throw and we didn't get sufficient pressure on the QB, even when  
>> we
>> blitzed.
>>
> I agree.
>
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
>
> Note:  Please DO NOT REPLY to any messages purporting to come from  
> the Husker List via BSafe Online spam killer.  These are coming from  
> a list subscriber who has this package installed, not from the  
> Husker List.  (This package apparently does not understand how  
> mailing lists work.)