***The Nebraska Defense - Blackshirts 2020***

Husker in WI said:
That's a pretty small and carefully selected sample size. The best rush defenses by YPC allowed in the SEC are both 3-4, Florida and Georgia. The only decent defenses in the Big 12 (TCU, Iowa State, and Baylor) run 3 man fronts. Chinander may be an issue, but the 3-4 defense itself isn't. I don't agree with a lot of the Chins hate, but I get it because our defense has had some terrible games.

What is it about the 4-3 that people think would magically make us better at stopping the run? Saying "4 guys to eat up blockers instead of 3" is a gross oversimplification. We almost always have 4 or 5 on the line,  and guys like Alex Davis/Garrett Nelson are as big as 4-3 DEs. We've just sucked at filling gaps, and that's a fundamental part of every defense. The 4-3 doesn't fix our issue there. A new coach might, but this would be more on Ruud/Dewitt than Chins - and they let Dewitt go. Most of the issues I've seen don't look like scheme issues - this isn't Bo asking our relatively nonathletic LBs to catch Melvin Gordon starting flat footed when he has a head of steam on a jet sweep. It's guys just losing leverage or overrunning their assignments. There have absolutely been some questionable defensive playcalls, but I don't think that's been the biggest issue for run D.
Click to expand...
I believe the issue is what the article at the beginning of the thread and Chinander’s trying to figure out....rush ends.

 In a 4 -3 you have two rush end specialist on the field every play and one more bigger body on the line.  Which is of paramount importance in the B10....more bigger athletic bodies.  

Chinander’s trying to address this with one smaller athletic body.  Which he usually has them running down field away from the quarterback to cover a back or tightened.  So right back to the problem of 3 on 5 and QBs with all day to throw.   
 

The SEC is full of NFL talent and top notch DCs.  I think Chinander’s D would be better in the B12.  It’s the wrong fit for the B10 football.

When Nebraska had great Defenses in the past we always has 2 talented D ends.  We will never be able to recruit those types again in a 3-4.

The most talented B10 team OSU runs a 4-3 and is consistently recruiting and getting D ends to the NFL.  You know like we used to.

 
SFW said:
I believe the issue is what the article at the beginning of the thread and Chinander’s trying to figure out....rush ends.

 In a 4 -3 you have two rush end specialist on the field every play and one more bigger body on the line.  Which is of paramount importance in the B10....more bigger athletic bodies.  

Chinander’s trying to address this with one smaller athletic body.  Which he usually has them running down field away from the quarterback to cover a back or tightened.  So right back to the problem of 3 on 5 and QBs with all day to throw.   
 

The SEC is full of NFL talent and top notch DCs.  I think Chinander’s D would be better in the B12.  It’s the wrong fit for the B10 football.

When Nebraska had great Defenses in the past we always has 2 talented D ends.  We will never be able to recruit those types again in a 3-4.

The most talented B10 team OSU runs a 4-3 and is consistently recruiting and getting D ends to the NFL.  You know like we used to.
Click to expand...


So that sounds more like a recruiting issue then.If we had DE's like Ohio State, they would be just fine as OLBs. We're not Ohio State, and will probably never recruit like them. There's a stronger correlation between touted DE/OLB prospects going to winning programs than them going to 4-3 or 3-4 schools. Impact edge rushers aren't avoiding us because we run a 3-4, they're avoiding us because we've been bad and they have better offers.

I'm not trying to claim your opinion is invalid or anything, a lot of people want us to switch back to a 4-3. I'm just trying to understand rationale people have there. Sure, we could swap out one of our OLBs for a slightly bigger DE - but again, they're not much bigger than the 255/260 at one of our OLB positions. And generally we'd want the other DE and the NT smaller than in a 3-4, so if anything we're sacrificing beef on the line. And if you're saying both of the 4-3 ends should be rush specialists, I'm really concerned about the run.

We rarely rush just 3, so I don't see the downside or the offense not being sure which side the OLB is coming from as opposed to knowing which 4 are coming barring a blitz. The point I definitely agree with you on is we've lacked a good rush guy. But moving to a 4-3 doesn't make one appear, and I don't believe it makes one any easier to recruit. And I think the guys we're starting to bring in (Tannor, Nelson, Gunnerson, Butler, Cooper) could be successful as a 4-3 End or 3-4 OLB.

 
  • Plus1
Reactions: Toe
Husker in WI said:
I'm not trying to claim your opinion is invalid or anything, a lot of people want us to switch back to a 4-3. I'm just t

We rarely rush just 3, so I don't see the downside or the offense not being sure which side the OLB is coming from as opposed to knowing which 4 are coming barring a blitz.
Click to expand...
When the game was on the line multiple times last year we only brought 3 guys sometime we rushed an undersized hybrid linebacker.   Usually easy to figure out where it was coming from.  
 

In my opinion a blitz should be bringing 6-7 guys, when teams go empty back field.  I’d like D 7-8, and yes 9 D-players on the line. Make the quarterback try to figure out, in a split second whose coming and who is dropping.  So, with our lack of talent,  I’d like to see 4 of those players being bigger bodies.  On obvious run situations I definitely want at least 4 bigger bodies on the line. 
 

Since joining the big ten speed hasn’t been the issue, it’s been size.  We simply get pushed around against the run and against the pass QBs have all day to throw.

Putting more safety-hybrid -linebackers isn’t the answer.  If it were OSU, PSU, MINN, MSU,  MICH, NW would be doing it.  
 

I guess Chinander’s just smarter than them.

 
SFW said:
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/film-room/2019/film-room-ravens-defense
 

This style of defense I want.  QBs can’t figure out whose coming and whose dropping.  Good DCs know QBs with time will kill you.

Yes I know we’re not the ravens but put all that undersized speed to work.  
 

8 guys in Zone coverage is a QBs wet dream.  
Click to expand...


If you listen to what Chin says when he talks about his defense this is exactly what he describes. The ravens run a hybrid defense that isn't a true 3-4 or 4-3 they are in and out of both. That's exactly what Chin says he wants. So, then the issues aren't us running a 3-4 it's us not executing a hybrid defense scheme well.

 
My concern (probably too simplistically stated) is that with the 3-4 vs Big Ten O lines, which tend to be bigger bulldozer types generally,  defensive front line needs to be a monster DT and two undersigned DT types as DEs.  The OLBs, essentially playing as DEs from the old 5-2, except lined up another yard or two off the line of scrimmage, seem to be size variable from LB to DE I guess.  ILBs seem to be sized from big Safeties to small LBs.  

With only three in front - most are too big to be speed rushers and yet too small to defeat big OL blockers. they get overrun on run plays and cant get to the QB on passes. It is also tough to keep run plays turned inside the tackles without gaping wholes either side of the NT.  The LBs are too hefty to have speed to pass cover and run down RBs and close holes before a 4 yard gain results.  And blitzing from 3 yards off the LOS is rarely good if you dont run about 4.4 forty. 

Now all the Defense experts can explain where my simple ideas are wrong.  I sometimes thot we could benefit from some 5-2 setups on run downs with our lack of monster DTs.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
WyoHusker56 said:
If you listen to what Chin says when he talks about his defense this is exactly what he describes. The ravens run a hybrid defense that isn't a true 3-4 or 4-3 they are in and out of both. That's exactly what Chin says he wants. So, then the issues aren't us running a 3-4 it's us not executing a hybrid defense scheme well.
Click to expand...
Talk from Chinander is cheep.  We rarely blitz.  We never put 7,8,9 players the line and make the QB make an instant decision on whose coming and whose dropping.
 

With big risks come big rewards.  Chinander’s 3-4 is too conservative, what is he afraid of?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The video is the style of D I want.   
I don’t care what it’s called...although, I believe the Ravens, as do most NFL teams run a 4 man front.
Putting all the bodies on the line Of scrimmage makes life miserable for QBs.  




 
SFW said:
The video is the style of D I want.   
I don’t care what it’s called...although, I believe the Ravens, as do most NFL teams run a 4 man front.
Putting all the bodies on the line Of scrimmage makes life miserable for QBs. 
Click to expand...


This is false, as is much of what you are claiming.

A lot of credit for popularizing the 3-4 is most likely due to the success the Pittsburgh Steelers have had over the years they have utilized it. As of this year, there are 17 NFL teams that operate out of a 3-4 base defense, and only 15 that operate out of a 4-3.

When comparing the Pro Football Focus defensive rankings for teams that ran the 4-3 v. the 3-4, a few interesting things pop up. Looking at the overall rankings, the difference between the median 3-4 team and 4-3 was .5, for run defense it was 3.5, for pass defense 1.3 and pass coverage -4.4.

...

None of the numbers are really low enough to conclude anything for sure. They tend to suggest that 3-4  base do a better job of stopping the run and rushing the passer, but it could have just been a bit of a lucky year. One reason why the link between base defense and performance is not very strong is that teams just don’t use it that much.

We may never get an exact answer to the question, because there may not be one. Teams can succeed in either base defense. It most likely comes to coaches and the players themselves. Still, you can bet that if a definitive answer ever does rise, that half of the NFL’s teams will be making the switch, ASAP.
Click to expand...


Link (emphasis added)

 
  • Plus1
Reactions: Toe
Toe said:
I imagine Ruud has to be feeling some heat heading into this season...
Click to expand...
I would agree, but Ruud has had minimal depth and talent at the MLB position in his first 2 years. Barry was pretty overrated, Miller is decent, and Honas was coming back from a knee injury in 2019.  They just need better players at the MLB spot. 

 
Nebraska has so many personnel issues I'm not sure if chin is good enough of a DC. Linebacker was such a mess last year that they essentially wasted 3 starting lineman that will be in nfl camps, 2 of which were drafted.  

 
  • Plus1
Reactions: Toe
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top