Definitely ok to question our D. WIth as much as they improved last year, they still had some deficiency. 3rd down was always a crap shoot and there were a few times when we needed stops and couldn't get it. It was a good start, but they are far from nasty at this point. Also 100% on secondary. This aspect scares me a little bit.
Defensive depth chart
- Thread starter inWV
- Start date
Well and if we are honest the B10 offensives were crap we faced besides Michigan/Maryland. I think our best performance was Maryland who avg just shy of 30 ppl and we made it a slugfest 10-13. Still cannot believe we lost that game.
The wind helped.
That was the one game I questioned Tony White’s experience coaching in the elements.
We were consistently playing soft zone 8 yards off the line in the 3rd quarter with the wind at our backs and it cost us.
Little thing I hope improves this year and beyond.
So, we have basically the same players this year. That means last year they were the weakness of the defense?
Serious question, how are we supposed to consistently have a legit pass rush with a 3 man front and no blitzing? Is that a fair standard to hold them to?
I need to find the stats for 3rd down opponents conversion pct, but with breakdowns by down and distance as well as by quarter. In the overall numbers, Nebraska was in the mid 40's in that pct. I would bet the 4th quarter numbers were not that good, and specifically late in 4th quarters. I don't necessarily think it was fatigue that was the difference. I am of the opinion that Nebraska played more base D, with little to no blitzes in those 3rd down scenarios. If that were to be proven accurate, I am not sure whether that would be from a lack of confidence in the secondary to play man up or just the offensive formation that dictated more base D.
With 4th down conversions Nebraska actually ranked in the top 15 allowing 9 conversions in 23 attempts, again I would love to see the data with distance to go and at what point in the game the 9 conversions took place. 2 of the conversions were against Michigan, so those are irrelevant but the remaining 7 could have been the difference between 5-7 and 6-6 or 7-5.
If anyone has a site with that info, I would love to see it.
With 4th down conversions Nebraska actually ranked in the top 15 allowing 9 conversions in 23 attempts, again I would love to see the data with distance to go and at what point in the game the 9 conversions took place. 2 of the conversions were against Michigan, so those are irrelevant but the remaining 7 could have been the difference between 5-7 and 6-6 or 7-5.
If anyone has a site with that info, I would love to see it.
So a blitz, for most teams, is once 5 guys are rushing.
NU hardly ever just brings 3 but they do, at times.
The thing with a 3 man front is the O has to guess who the 4th rusher is...if you bring 5, that makes it even more interesting.
Now, with that said, some teams only count rushers if they "have their hand in the dirt"
But, NU and most teams, bring 4-5, I am guessing on 75% of their plays. 6 is where it gets really interesting because you really can't play zone with just 5 guys
Thanks, I get that, but it’s still only 3 from the DL unless we are using a 4 man front… and his complaint is that with 3 down linemen and at best an LB we aren’t getting pressure.
My question is what is the expectation with this arrangement? @huntered contends our DL is the weakest. What is the expectation for the 3 DL? Should they, along with an LB, be consistently making stops?
Was thinking the same thing.
I would think outside of UCS ands OSU, everyone we play is below average or in bottom half of P5 in passing game. Part of that is QB, as mentioned. The other part is they lack dynamic athletes at WR for most of teams we play.
If we stay healthy in secondary we will be good. If we lose a starter or two I think that quickly become P5 average at best unless they hit a HR on one of the fliers they have taken (which happens sometimes with good staffs).
Assuming this defense stays healthy they will put up some good numbers next year. Partly because they are good and very experienced and partly because we play 6-7 really poor offenses.
For sure. I wonder if he has someone on staff he would promote that knows the system, or would he have to go outside the team.
seems like we have a 4 man pass rush most of the time on obvious pass plays. when we rush 3 it just takes too long and wr's coming open all over the place. middling qbs look like Heisman candidates.
I agree. When we rush 3 it is not fair to expect them to contain the offense. When we rush 4, we should have better success, but if they are in max protect, it’s still gonna be challenging to get to the QB.
I guess I disagree that the DL is the weak point of the defense. They may not be Peter brothers, Wistrom and Tomich, but they aren’t a bunch of Cam Merediths either…
So, you did not answer my question above.
We have basically the same players on the D Line this year. So that means with your logic the DL was the week point of the defense last year, right?
Easy with numbers.
Seriously had a guy last year on here tell me that teams didn’t have to cover up 4 receivers with 4 dudes.
Cam averaged 58 tackles per season his last three years. He was not effective playing out of position when Baker ganked his knee.
Can was the first guy that came to mind, could have used another, but didn’t try to hard to come up with someone else.
Last year everyone was bitching about the offense and loving the defense. Three months from first kickoff and now there is bitching because the defense does not have a 5 star and Tony White might leave even though his defense was not really that good last year.
Good Lord.
Good Lord.
Ha...I mean...when I would coach some freshmen B games I would bring 8 and drop 3...it worked a lot...in freshmen B games! Haha
Define not really that good. I mean from a Nebraska standard the last 10 years they were pretty good. Did you expect top 10 in 1 year?
You mean like, bitching about the offense coughing up the ball, giving the other team short field and our D still stopped them? You mean winning games and having the opportunity to win other games in spite of our offense?
They were pretty damn good, considering the offense didn’t help them out.
and with a competent offense that hopefully doesn't put them in quite as many giant holes it will help them even more. There is going to be turnovers with a freshman QB but I don't see him being as bad as the group last year as a whole.
We did lose some significant starters from last year's defense. This is not the same exact group of players. We are also thin in the secondary, as others have noted, and so any injury there is going to hurt. There is also the fact that, as improved as our defense was last year, we still had trouble getting off the field on third down and, more importantly, there were several games where the defense needed to make a stop in the 4ht quarter and did not.
I remain in a big "wait and see" mode with regard to our defense. We are also going to be very, very inexperienced at the QB spot. If DR falters and we end up with HH at QB we are in trouble. A ton of pieces have to come together for us to have a break out season. This is a very hard season to predict. We could go 10-2 or 5-7. Going to be a very interesting year. Our first two games will tell us a lot.
I remain in a big "wait and see" mode with regard to our defense. We are also going to be very, very inexperienced at the QB spot. If DR falters and we end up with HH at QB we are in trouble. A ton of pieces have to come together for us to have a break out season. This is a very hard season to predict. We could go 10-2 or 5-7. Going to be a very interesting year. Our first two games will tell us a lot.
I agree with you here. Moving away from D, the other biggest deficiency is the RB spot. For wanting to the ball I would have thought we would have over recruited the position. Outside of EJ the rest are just a ton of unknowns and honestly not that great of a group. I think Rahmir is serviceable when he is able to see the field, but still has lacked production. Gabe looked a ton better as a Frosh when he still had quickness and lateral movement.... The RB is truly a lacking position right now.
I still believe the entire team is a "wait and see" project. Special teams have not been special, true freshman QB and an offense that could not get out of its own way last year and while it was a good D, there are questions that will need to be answered.
I am not sure what the first game will tell us, playing a three win team and us presumably starting a new QB could be interesting. We could stumble around trying to get our sea legs under us this first game. It would seem to make sense that you go after our QB, no matter who it is especially a young freshman. I think the first game will show more about what we can expect from our offense and the second game against CU will give us a clue on our D. Sanders is legit at throwing the ball, no way disagrees with that. Sure they gave up lots of sacks but they are explosive in the air and until we prove we can compete with a good secondary and make they pay for throwing 50+ passes, it will continue to be our weakness. People make a lot of the mix and match of our DB's but the truth is we need corners who can cover and safeties who can come and support, I think we are unproven in the first and can improve in the second. Time will tell.