Great defense without great talent

[JTrain]

2011 was the first year that the majority of the top defensive contributors were Bo's recruits. Here are our national rankings since then:

Total Defense

2011: 37th

2012: 35th

2013: 40th

Scoring Defense

2011: 42nd

2012: 58th

2013: 50th

Here is a list of BCS AQ conference members who have had top 20 finishes in at least one of these categories during that time:

Alabama

Cincinnati

Connecticut

Florida

Florida St.

Georgia

Illinois

Iowa

Louisville

LSU

Miami (FL)

Michigan

Michigan St.

Mississippi St.

Notre Dame

Oklahoma

Oklahoma St.

Oregon

Penn St.

Pittsburgh

Rutgers

South Carolina

Stanford

Temple

Texas

UCF

USC

Vanderbilt

Virginia Tech

Wisconsin

Teams in red are great recruiting schools whose average classes have ranked in the top 20 in the past six years. The rest are not, yet have still managed at least one great defense.

So, will we finally break through in 2014? And if so, how/why? Will we have a defensive team with great talent like 2009 and 2010, or will Bo and Pap find a way to make a great defense out of talent that is merely good?

 

[AngryHusker88]

I expect Nebraska to be stingy on defense next year.

 

[huskerinacaveman]

I think the whole recruiting thing is a crap shoot.

There isn't any real way to know how good someone is going to be.

There is definitely a method to it, but I would say that lesser known recruits become better players more often then high caliper players pan out.

 

[jaws]

I think the whole recruiting thing is a crap shoot.

There isn't any real way to know how good someone is going to be.

There is definitely a method to it, but I would say that lesser known recruits become better players more often then high caliper players pan out.

I would love to hear any information to back that last statement up. It may be a crap shoot, but if you look at the last 5 years, the top 10 teams they were full of 4 and 5 star recruits. There are some schools that don't fit the mold but the teams that are constantly at the top recruit the best on a national scale. Maybe the reason why you can make that last statement is because there are less 4 and 5 star guys than lesser known recruits thus making it seem like they don't pan out.

 

[huskerinacaveman]

I think the whole recruiting thing is a crap shoot.

There isn't any real way to know how good someone is going to be.

There is definitely a method to it, but I would say that lesser known recruits become better players more often then high caliper players pan out.

I would love to hear any information to back that last statement up. It may be a crap shoot, but if you look at the last 5 years, the top 10 teams they were full of 4 and 5 star recruits. There are some schools that don't fit the mold but the teams that are constantly at the top recruit the best on a national scale. Maybe the reason why you can make that last statement is because there are less 4 and 5 star guys than lesser known recruits thus making it seem like they don't pan out.

This is going to take some time.

 

[BigRedBuster]

It has been hashed and rehashed on here dozens of times that the first few recruiting classes for Bo were not good especially on the defensive side of the ball. More specifically the D line.

That has improved drastically and those recruits came into this year extremely young with no experience. We saw drastic improvement as the year went on. That will carry over into next year even more when we add some of the JUCO players we have recruited.

Also, if you wait a couple months, this will be discussed again.

 

[Landlord]

There is definitely a method to it, but I would say that lesser known recruits become better players more often then high caliper players pan out.

That's because there are more of them. A LOT more of them.

Most everyone knows our first few recruiting classes were lame ducks. Most of those players have cycled through the system by now, and the last two, maybe three years have brought in good talent.

The key to championships from a personnel standpoint is quality depth. Do we have it? Time will tell - some positions seem stacked, others have big question marks. Right now I see us around a Top 20-25 defense in 2014.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I know the Georgia offense was dessimated with injuries this year as we were, but their oline was still in good shape. Their injuries was primarily skilled guys. With that said, our Dline dominated their oline all afternoon. Including Thad Randle, whom I very happy for to get to go out playing the best game of his career. I'm very encouraged on the direction of the defense right now.

 

[Landlord]

I know the Georgia offense was dessimated with injuries this year as we were, but their oline was still in good shape. Their injuries was primarily skilled guys. With that said, our Dline dominated their oline all afternoon. Including Thad Randle, whom I very happy for to get to go out playing the best game of his career. I'm very encouraged on the direction of the defense right now.

We've known for a few years that our guys can put it all in and rise up for a gutsy performance one time - we saw the same thing vs South Carolina and against Georgia last year, with worse and outmanned talent.

It's a matter of putting it together for 4 quarters, and then putting it together for 14 games. The bowl game was a good sign but we shouldn't act like we haven't seen it before. I'm cautiously optimistic.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I know the Georgia offense was dessimated with injuries this year as we were, but their oline was still in good shape. Their injuries was primarily skilled guys. With that said, our Dline dominated their oline all afternoon. Including Thad Randle, whom I very happy for to get to go out playing the best game of his career. I'm very encouraged on the direction of the defense right now.

We've known for a few years that our guys can put it all in and rise up for a gutsy performance one time - we saw the same thing vs South Carolina and against Georgia last year, with worse and outmanned talent.

It's a matter of putting it together for 4 quarters, and then putting it together for 14 games. The bowl game was a good sign but we shouldn't act like we haven't seen it before. I'm cautiously optimistic.

I havent seen us manhandle a high caliber offensive line like that in a long time. I know we manhandled Michigan, but we werent the only ones who did that this year. This Georgia offensive line was the anchor of a unit that was blowing up SEC defenses all year long, and our unit made up of freshmen, sophmores, and a senior without any knees didnt just hold up, but they completely dictated the line of scrimmage for 4 quarters. I just havent seen that in a while. I honestly have to go back to the Texas CCG in '09.

 

[BaytownHusker]

Alabama

Cincinnati

Connecticut

Florida

Florida St.

Georgia

Illinois

Iowa

Louisville

LSU

Miami (FL)

Michigan

Michigan St.

Mississippi St.

Notre Dame

Oklahoma

Oklahoma St.

Oregon

Penn St.

Pittsburgh

Rutgers

South Carolina

Stanford

Temple

Texas

UCF

USC

Vanderbilt

Virginia Tech

Wisconsin

Teams in grean I find it very hard to say that they had GREAT defenses. now they may have been decent stat wise due to their schedules and who they play. You put them up againt top teams and their Def doesnt look so great.

 

[Danimal]

Can go through our defensive recruit-classes and it's easy to tell why the D went down hill in '11, hit bottom with a real shortage on talent in '12, and struggled with inexperienced in '13. I think we start seeing an upswing in '14 with a good amount of talent and experience. Of course it will help if our scoring D isn't getting blown-up by the O turning the rock over.

 

[huskerinacaveman]

I think the whole recruiting thing is a crap shoot.

There isn't any real way to know how good someone is going to be.

There is definitely a method to it, but I would say that lesser known recruits become better players more often then high caliper players pan out.

I would love to hear any information to back that last statement up. It may be a crap shoot, but if you look at the last 5 years, the top 10 teams they were full of 4 and 5 star recruits. There are some schools that don't fit the mold but the teams that are constantly at the top recruit the best on a national scale. Maybe the reason why you can make that last statement is because there are less 4 and 5 star guys than lesser known recruits thus making it seem like they don't pan out.

You are right sir, its more of a perceived notion I guess. Though, I only really looked at how often 5* were drafted and how many games they played in.

 

[jaws]

I think the whole recruiting thing is a crap shoot.

There isn't any real way to know how good someone is going to be.

There is definitely a method to it, but I would say that lesser known recruits become better players more often then high caliper players pan out.

I would love to hear any information to back that last statement up. It may be a crap shoot, but if you look at the last 5 years, the top 10 teams they were full of 4 and 5 star recruits. There are some schools that don't fit the mold but the teams that are constantly at the top recruit the best on a national scale. Maybe the reason why you can make that last statement is because there are less 4 and 5 star guys than lesser known recruits thus making it seem like they don't pan out.

Ameer Abdullah was a 3* and the least heralded of the RB recruits of his class. There ya go.

I hope you were kidding with that statement. You can't just use one example and come to a conclusion.

AJ Green was the #2 WR coming out of HS (5*) behind Julio Jones. Great, but that doesn't tell me that all 5* guys will succeed.

You recruit the best for whatever system you are running and hope they pan out. Usually you are taking less of a risk athletically on 5* guys than 3* guys.

 

[NUance]

So, will we finally break through in 2014? And if so, how/why? Will we have a defensive team with great talent like 2009 and 2010, or will Bo and Pap find a way to make a great defense out of talent that is merely good?

I don't think so. One reason is that Bo doesn't seem to be particularly concerned with defensive stats during our non-conf warm-up games at the beginning of the season. Look at this past year. Wyoming racked up 600 yards and 35 points. South Dakota State had 465 yards and 20 points. (We did pin Southern Miss' ears back--but UCLA, our one decent non-conf game ran up and down the field on us.) To have a good statistical year we would need to hold these non-conf teams to about half this production. Instead, I think Bo is more concerned about playing a bland defense in our first couple of non-conf games that doesn't give anything away on film to the later B1G teams we play. Just look back at how much more aggressive we were at going for the QB in our last couple of games vs. our first four games. At least that's my theory. (Or maybe we had so many new starters that we didn't play as aggressive at the beginning of the year?? It could be that.)