I have noticed a

[red scowl]

subtle trend between our recruiting of offensive and defensive players.

We have recruited highly touted players on both sides of the ball, but have offered more projects on the defensive side.

Alot of our good teams were lopsided as far as effectiveness in the new Millennia. Suh was the best defensive player I have ever seen, but we had a horrible offense.

We will never have the most talent, but Frosts ability as a coach, makes our offense great, and that drives our recruiting for offensive players. What I'm afraid of is that we will become a paper tiger.

Will we have the defense to support our offense?

 

[cubsker_rivals142943]

I can't imagine that we don't want to recruit the top rated guys. It seems more likely they're just not hopping on board at the rate we are seeing on offense. If we gradually improve, hopefully we'll gradually get higher rated recruits.

 

[red scowl]

I can't imagine that we don't want to recruit the top rated guys. It seems more likely they're just not hopping on board at the rate we are seeing on offense. If we gradually improve, hopefully we'll gradually get higher rated recruits.

I agree, the problem is the recruits will have too see an exciting defense. A scheme that can be dominating and is fun to play in.

We will have to produce some stats or guarantee positions, IMO, to acquire top level talent on the defense. The internet is pervasive with stats and results. I don't believe players that say they don't look at the clippings.

Some of these projects will have to perform admirably in the coming years to be in on the greater talents in the future.

Oklahoma made the playoffs again, but their team is not balanced. They will lose, and probably badly.

We cannot be lopsided because we will be doubted because our team is a blueblood.

 

[dinglefritz]

I can't imagine that we don't want to recruit the top rated guys. It seems more likely they're just not hopping on board at the rate we are seeing on offense. If we gradually improve, hopefully we'll gradually get higher rated recruits.

Nebraska hasn't been great on D since Suh left. Our offense has been pretty darned good for the most part and it's easy for an offensive player to like what they see from Frost's offense. Defense from NU that they've seen over the past 3-4 years that they've been paying attention is not a great selling point. IF we develop a couple of difference makers on D, it will change dramatically how defensive recruits view NU.

 

[3pointdog]

Win baby, win.

 

[huskerssalts]

Nebraska hasn't been great on D since Suh left. Our offense has been pretty darned good for the most part and it's easy for an offensive player to like what they see from Frost's offense. Defense from NU that they've seen over the past 3-4 years that they've been paying attention is not a great selling point. IF we develop a couple of difference makers on D, it will change dramatically how defensive recruits view NU.

I agree and disagree. When Suh was here, his senior year, we had a national caliber defense. Even a decent to good offense that year would have lead to us making a NC run of some type (not meaning we’d won but we definitely would have been making a push). But we did have some good defenses when L David was at LB, remember we had Prince A and A Dennard at CBs and J Crick and Stienkulher at DTs. We definitely had one of the best combos in shut down corners in the league that season in 2010. No one could pass worth a crap against us. That was a solid defense, maybe not elite but a very good defense that I’d love to have now. But after that, that’s when our defenses fell apart. How our defenses owned in those years, it dumb founds me how we couldn’t keep recruiting at a high level seeing those results. Simply put, Pelini could NOT recruit.

 

[TruHusker]

Somewhere along the way, the D has got to get some difference makers. Right now, we seem to have some solid players but not that players that can take a game over. Frost obviously has a rep as an innovative offensive coach and kids like that, coaches like that and parents like that. The D is simply boring and nonproductive overall. Where does a high school football player see himself fitting in on a D that is exciting to play in? Someone has to get the trend started and maybe it will take off from there. Or we could always be a good D and called the "no name" D.

 

[otismotis08]

Just need to restore the Blackshirt brand on the field.
Ever since Charlie McBride left, it's been a joke to most outside the program.
Suh is the exception, but we failed miserably in leveraging his stardom.

 

[HCHTown]

We need DL that finishes. Not makes a good effort. Not gets close. But reaches the QB and finishes. Then 3rd and 12 won’t be so terrifying. Then rest of the D can play without covering for DL that doesn’t finish.

 

[TruHusker]

We need DL that finishes. Not makes a good effort. Not gets close. But reaches the QB and finishes. Then 3rd and 12 won’t be so terrifying. Then rest of the D can play without covering for DL that doesn’t finish.

Well, you are going to be disappointed. Three linemen and four linebackers, think about it. Who makes the majority of the tackles on any D, much less a 3-4? You can get good DL and above average LB's but if you have terrible LB play, forget it. Those front three aren't covering all the ground.