Maize n Brew Big Ten Preview 2013: NU needs to stop run

E

Eric the Red

Team HuskerBoard
In the grand scheme of things, the success or failure of the 2013 season will be determined by whether or not the Huskers can make significant improvements in stopping the run. As followers of Big Ten football, we've heard the "run the ball and stop the run" formula for success over and over again, as if there are no other elements in the complicated and sometimes wacky game that is college football.

http://www.maizenbrew.com/2013/7/22/4544208/nebraska-cornhuskers-big-ten-college-football-taylor-martinez-bo-pelini

 
I like it when an article comes out that echoes the same sentiment of our defense that I said a little over a month ago.

Conclusions

Nebraska's defense in 2012 wasn't up to the caliber of defenses which have been fielded in the past, even as recent as in Pelini's tenure (2009 and 2010). However, it wasn't as bad as a lot of fans made it out to be. Losses tend to stick in the mind and memory more so than wins, so while it is understandable, it is wrong. Nebraska's defense in 2012 was good more times than it was bad, as the 10 teams we beat were held under their normal pass yards per completion, pass to touchdown percentage, rushing yards per carry, and rush attempts to touchdown percentage statistics. That being said, when a leak started in Nebraska's defense, the whole dam burst in a matter of seconds; teams who were victorious against Nebraska saw a dramatic increase in pass yards per completion, pass to touchdown percentage, rush yards per carry, and rush to touchdown percentage. Furthermore, it appears that the teams who were successful against Nebraska picked up on the fact that the way to attack Nebraska is through the running game, not the passing game. These teams had nearly 5 more rushes per game against NU as well as nearly 4 less passes per game against NU.
Click to expand...
 
Nebraska's defense in 2012 was good more times than it was bad . . .
Click to expand...
Not sure what the significance of such a statement is supposed to be.

That's like saying our offensive line was good at pass blocking more often than they were bad. Or that a kicker made more kicks than he missed (even the worst kickers do that).

Or that Jefferey Dahmer didn't kill most of the people he met.

Uh, ok.

 
The Dude said:
Nebraska's defense in 2012 was good more times than it was bad . . .
Click to expand...
Not sure what the significance of such a statement is supposed to be.

That's like saying our offensive line was good at pass blocking more often than they were bad. Or that a kicker made more kicks than he missed (even the worst kickers do that).

Or that Jefferey Dahmer didn't kill most of the people he met.

Uh, ok.
Click to expand...

The inference of the statement is that our defense was above average, which it was.

If you have a 3 point scale - good, neutral, bad, with +1, 0, and -1 as point values, and you plot more points on the good side than on the bad side, you come out with a positive value.

 
The Dude said:
Exactly. Dahmer wasn't such a bad guy.
Click to expand...

Different standards of measurement and different established median averages.

Do you really not get this or are you being an obtuse troll and I am taking the bait because man this is some dense ignorance.

 
There is a perception that Nebraska's defense was bad period and the only reason we won 10 games (7 in conference) was because of our offense. More specifically, that our rush defense wasn't good at all in any game we played.

I think that perception is wrong. That's why, a couple of months ago, I ran those stats and found that in our wins (which we had 10 of them), our defense held opponents under their statistical average in both rushing and passing. Which implies that Nebraska's defense was good more times than it was bad. But in our losses (which we had 4 of them), our defense--both rush and pass--was flat out awful. That implies that when a leak started to occur in Nebraska's defense, the whole dam burst, and it bursted rather quickly.

 
Bye Bye Big XII said:
There is a perception that Nebraska's defense was bad period and the only reason we won 10 games (7 in conference) was because of our offense. More specifically, that our rush defense wasn't good at all in any game we played.

I think that perception is wrong. That's why, a couple of months ago, I ran those stats and found that in our wins (which we had 10 of them), our defense held opponents under their statistical average in both rushing and passing. Which implies that Nebraska's defense was good more times than it was bad. But in our losses (which we had 4 of them), our defense--both rush and pass--was flat out awful. That implies that when a leak started to occur in Nebraska's defense, the whole dam burst, and it bursted rather quickly.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't even go that far. It was solid in the 2nd half of the UCLA game, and held up well through 3 quarters of the Georgia game. There were a total of about 6-8 quarters of probably the worst rush defense I've seen in years. Unfortunately that was enough. We talk about the talent level, but w/ the exception of the UCLA game...the defense could never get mentally back into a game after it got out of control.

 
kchusker_chris said:
Bye Bye Big XII said:
There is a perception that Nebraska's defense was bad period and the only reason we won 10 games (7 in conference) was because of our offense. More specifically, that our rush defense wasn't good at all in any game we played.

I think that perception is wrong. That's why, a couple of months ago, I ran those stats and found that in our wins (which we had 10 of them), our defense held opponents under their statistical average in both rushing and passing. Which implies that Nebraska's defense was good more times than it was bad. But in our losses (which we had 4 of them), our defense--both rush and pass--was flat out awful. That implies that when a leak started to occur in Nebraska's defense, the whole dam burst, and it bursted rather quickly.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't even go that far. It was solid in the 2nd half of the UCLA game, and held up well through 3 quarters of the Georgia game. There were a total of about 6-8 quarters of probably the worst rush defense I've seen in years. Unfortunately that was enough. We talk about the talent level, but w/ the exception of the UCLA game...the defense could never get mentally back into a game after it got out of control.
Click to expand...

We had stretches of very solid play early in games, Ohio State and Georgia, to be specific. But it seemed like once Braxtyn had that run for Ohio State and once Georgia seemed to find some offense in the second half... we were suddenly clueless. Hard to figure. Then there was the UCLA game and the Wisky CCG game where we never seemed to truly limit the opposing offense.

 
kchusker_chris said:
Bye Bye Big XII said:
There is a perception that Nebraska's defense was bad period and the only reason we won 10 games (7 in conference) was because of our offense. More specifically, that our rush defense wasn't good at all in any game we played.

I think that perception is wrong. That's why, a couple of months ago, I ran those stats and found that in our wins (which we had 10 of them), our defense held opponents under their statistical average in both rushing and passing. Which implies that Nebraska's defense was good more times than it was bad. But in our losses (which we had 4 of them), our defense--both rush and pass--was flat out awful. That implies that when a leak started to occur in Nebraska's defense, the whole dam burst, and it bursted rather quickly.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't even go that far. It was solid in the 2nd half of the UCLA game, and held up well through 3 quarters of the Georgia game. There were a total of about 6-8 quarters of probably the worst rush defense I've seen in years. Unfortunately that was enough. We talk about the talent level, but w/ the exception of the UCLA game...the defense could never get mentally back into a game after it got out of control.
Click to expand...
Didn't the defense "get mentally back into a game" in the comebacks against Wisky, NW, MSU, and PSU? We fell behind by double digits in all those games and the defense must have gotten some late stops for us to win.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top