At some point, players have to lead -- not just Pelini

As Nebraska football begins spring practice Saturday in preparation for the 2012 season (Year No. 5 under head coach Bo Pelini), I can’t help but keep coming back to a column that Tom Shatel wrote about a week ago in the Omaha World Herald:

http://www.omaha.com/article/20120306/BIGRED/703069868

It was an excellent story on the scuttlebutt about what is going on in the program to hopefully get Nebraska that elusive conference title that has been missing since 1999 and BCS Bowl appearance since 2001. The Huskers have flirted with both statuses on a couple of occasions but people are hungry for a return to the glory years. While such a feat is no more likely to happen this year, the fact that the team is making changes that Shatel addresses is a good sign.

Shatel focuses on how players are being given more latitude to show leadership and take ownership of the program. The story focused on a players meeting that was held after the team returned to Lincoln following their 30-13 Capital One Bowl loss to South Carolina. You know the particulars of that game. Nebraska outplayed the Gamecocks in the first half but staggered worse than a drunken sailor when it came time to take control of the game.

In addition, the story also addressed players being given more latitude to voice those concerns to Pelini, something that reportedly was not the case in the past. It certainly makes sense for Pelini to do so because he has led the program for five years. These players are exclusively his and were recruited exclusively in his time. Translation, no more even slight remnants of the Bill Callahan era. Pelini has built this car and hired the drivers.    

Is this a sign that Pelini himself is growing more as a leader? Well, talk is cheap and March is always full of optimism but something had to change. Pelini has a persuasive personality but at some point players tune out the coach. I’m not suggesting that Nebraska players have done that to Pelini but if you have vocal leaders that are preaching the same message as the coach, then the coach’s message carries that much more weight.

You can’t help but think back to the Tom Osborne days and the constants that were the heart of the program, this gives me hope that this staff realizes what is lacking today. Osborne said himself that having that upperclassman leadership was vital when playing on the road. When keeping a team sharp after big wins. Paraphrasing, he said to Bob Costas, it was what was missing before that run in the 1990s. Having special players that took control was as big a reason as any why Nebraska went 60-3 from 1993-1997 with three National Championships.
 
Having the same offense and coaches intact back then, was a much easier proposition than the past decade’s attempts. Osborne always said it was those little things that tripped you up. Starting a freshman at quarterback and underclassmen in the lines, meant that the little things were bypassed for expediency. It showed in the penalties and missed assignments too often. Teaching the underclassman was a problem, but having to teach a young coaching staff a new system every season wasn’t a recipe for excellence.

Leadership/ownership from players is exactly what I’ve been hoping for out of this team for years. So far, running back Rex Burkhead and linebacker Will Compton appear to be leading the charge. While neither one of these guys will be mistaken for the Peter brothers (Jason and Christian) or Grant Wistrom, opening up the communication and clearing up any conflict is absolutely essential for these guys to really function as a unified team.

What was said is immaterial but I’m glad the players feel comfortable with their coaches and their teammates to step up and say the things that most likely need to be said. It could create some resentment but hopefully it will lead to unity. So maybe this will be a good step forward for Pelini and the team.

There is plenty of reason to be skeptical until the approach works but I agree with the crux of Shatel’s message. Players have to be the ones to decide how they’re going to play. If I may use an old cliché, coaches can only show players the door, but the players have to open it. The Hail Mary play from Connor Shaw to Alshon Jeffrey at the end of the first half of the Capital One Bowl is the perfect example. I know the coaches told the players, right before that play, to get behind Jeffrey and not let him behind them. What happened? Nobody gets behind him and they score a touchdown.

Mental errors, miscommunication, etc., the focus just wasn't there on a Hail Mary - the most basic of defensive schemes. It’s one thing if a players leaps in the end zone and makes an amazing catch, but to straight up not get behind a receiver and let him just fall into the end zone is unacceptable. Since college football pass interference penalties are only 15-yards as opposed to spot foul penalties, you given the receiver a subway-style mugging before you let him catch the ball.

I realize that feel good stories are nice this time of year because this team has far to go. However, at least they are trying to figure out how to get better. That cannot hurt.

Peter makes good points but sometime devoid of reality

As a University of Nebraska alum that blogs, reads the internet stories, listens to podcasts, etc. from 1,500 miles away from Lincoln, NE, I find it mildly amazing and amusing how a segment of fans blindly agree with every bit of analysis on the present state program given by players from the Huskers spectacular run from 1993-1997.


In case you have been living an igloo the last 20 years, the Huskers went 60-3 during that stretch of time, winning of their five National Championships in school history.

Two Huskers from that era that prominently talk in the public domain are former Nebraska All-American defensive tackle Jason Peter and former running back Damon Benning. Before you read any further, this blog has nothing to do with criticizing their contributions during their time as players. So, if you disagree with something I say just remember that statements like, “Who the hell are you, Mr. Blogger. These guys did X, Y and Z as players and the Huskers won National Titles.”

While I think Benning and Peter make more good points than bad, the crux of their message is the same over and over: “We did things different in 1995 and it worked better, now, let me point out everything that’s wrong with the program now.”

Peter recently appeared as a guest on NET’s Big Red Wrapup with Kevin Kugler and Adrian Fiala. Peter addressed a number of things from former Husker offensive lineman Matt Slauson (now a New York Jet) publically criticizing another former Husker Ndamukong Suh (now a Detroit Lions defensive tackle).

Suh has been criticized in the media and by other players for his aggressive style of play and has been fined a total of $42,500 by the league for three violations in the first year-and-a-half of his career. The most recent episode came during the third quarter of the Lions’ Thanksgiving game against Green Bay. Suh pushed Packers’ offensive lineman Evan Dietrich-Smith's head into the ground three times, then stomped on him. All of this took place after the whistle to end the play was blown. Suh was penalized for unnecessary roughness and ejected from the game.

The NFL suspended Suh for two games without pay. In a recent New York Times interview, Slauson said that Suh needs to have a strong message sent to get him under control. Suh wasn’t considered a head case by NFL scouts after a celebrated career at Nebraska that didn’t include any on-field incidents, but Slauson said Suh was a different player in practice while in college.

Slauson said there were at least two ugly incidents involving Suh and other players during practice at Nebraska that Slauson witnessed but that went unreported. Slauson said “I prefer not to say” when asked if those two practice incidents involved Suh stomping on teammates' limbs or similar cheap shots. As a result of those acts and Suh’s generally unpredictable temper, Slauson said Suh wasn’t popular at all with his college teammates.

“He was well-respected for his ability, but everybody kind of knew who he was,” Slauson said. “He wasn’t well-liked.”

Peter went on to refer to Slauson as a “slob” for throwing Suh under the bus for leaking in-house matters in public. Preaching trust and brotherhood is all well and good but it ignores the fact that Suh’s actions have been flat out asinine.

Peter also added that head coach Bo Pelini’s idea of rotating captains is a bad idea that needs to go. That point I could not agree with more. You need vocal leaders among players because eventually the coach preaching the same message becomes stale. Whereas, if a peer preaches the same message as the coach, then the coach’s message carries much more weight. I don’t necessary think it has to be a senior because having four years in the program should guarantee nothing but it should at least be a junior. The point of the matter is that for anyone player to develop into a leader, he needs to be able to settle into that role.

Peter also alluded to the fact that it was time for sophomore quarterback Taylor Martinez to grow up and do things like go to press conferences and actually answer questions. Kugler and Fiala, however, defended Martinez saying that he has improved in that area this year. I see the merits of both because while Martinez has improved, he is not where he needs to be. However, the question begs, with Martinez’s aloof personality, how media savvy will he ever be?

On one hand, I’m all for the wisdom of lending an ear to the 90’s crew. They were a special breed of warrior who could teach today’s lightweights a thing or three about focus, brotherhood, sacrifice, effort and love for the game. It’s pretty hard to dispute the results of the '93-'97 run of a 60-3 record.
Kugler/Fiala and Peter, however, are in two different positions. The former knows they can’t articulate their points like Peter because it’s not their personality and they risk losing their job, thus distancing themselves from the coaching staff. Peter, however, has more latitude because he is a guest host and there are still large factions of fans that remember his contributions as a player. He never has sugar coated anything 15 years ago, so why start now.
What I was really surprised by is Peter advocating for Charlie McBride to come back and coach the defensive line. Peter said that McBride has had his knees done and is willing to come back and “light a fire under the d-line.” I have nothing but respect for McBride’s contributions in his 23 years (18 as a defensive coordinator) on the Nebraska coaching staff but he last coached in 1999.
What the Peters and Bennings of the world need to realize is that we're in a different era in college football now. True, the team that blocks and tackles better wins more often than not but teams can’t give out 500 scholarships and hoard all the good players.
I seem to recall that a certain football coach is now our athletic director, namely. If he thinks the Pelini Regime is so radically inferior to the mid-90's squads, he’d make a move. I’m not saying he’d fire Pelini but he’d probably offer some “strong suggestions.”
Peter and Benning have earned the right as a former player to make comments. However, I also believe that things that happened 15-20 years ago really have no bearing on today. Way too much has changed especially the player them self. No different than when you hear your father say “when I was a kid.” It doesn’t matter if it was your father or your grandfather or his father, times change. You may be hard pressed to find any business that does things the same today as they did 20 years ago.