[Husker] New Defensive Scheme (UNCLASSIFIED)

[Andy Knipp]

Depth at LB is a concern to me, the top 3 are excellent, but the next 3 are
questionable (Whately, May and Stoddard). There also have not been enough LB
recruits in the past couple years for the B10++. That was OK in the 12
because they could take safeties like Cassidy and Hagge and use them as LB.
Not so certain that is a long term plan in the new conference. 



-----Original Message-----
From: husker-bounces at tssi.com [mailto:husker-bounces at tssi.com] On Behalf Of
Nick Chevance
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 6:52 AM
To: Mike Jaixen
Cc: husker at tssi.com
Subject: Re: [Husker] New Defensive Scheme (UNCLASSIFIED)

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Mike Jaixen <mikejaixen at yahoo.com> wrote:
> One thing I've found with the Pelini brothers is that they are flexible in
their
> approach, and can quickly adjust their scheme as necessary.

I agree completely with Mike's points.  I think the opposing offenses
will be more concerned about how to operate against our defense than
we will be concerned about their offenses.  I suspect that the
Pelini's have been having quite the time scheming the new opponents.
I'm sure they're having some fun.

I think we're plenty athletic on the defensive line, while I suspect
the B1G is bigger and more athletic on the offensive line than the Big
XII was, in general.  I agree the issue will be in the linebackers and
whether we need to put more than one run stopper (Compton and Fisher)
back there.  But I'm not too concerned about the defense.  I want to
see more of how the offense can generate some consistency and
effectiveness.  I think that's where the rubber meets the road this
year.  53 days til kickoff.  53 LONG days.

Nick

-- 
"If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
Anatole France

_______________________________________________
husker site list
husker at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker