Defensive Scheme

[beanman]

Does anyone else feel like our defense would play with more agression, intensity and swagger if we switched from our 2-gap scheme and incorporated more blitzes? I watch our defense and it makes me want to puke. Remember the old days when we used to beat the crap out of the opposing QB and get in his head early? Does anything fire up the team like a big hit? I have seen more big hits from our wide receivers than I have from the entire defense this year. I just don't think anyone is intimidated by our Defense when they play us. And I don't think they were last year either. In 2009 we had Suh so that alone put the fear into them.

What are your thoughts?

 

[Hercules]

There's nothing wrong with our scheme - it's been proven against better offenses in the Big 12 than in the Big 10, and I have very little doubt that opposing QBs have feared our defense ever since we killed Colt McCoy's Heisman Trophy run. Last year we made NFL QBs like Nathan Enderle, Blaine Gabbert, and Jake Locker look extremely silly, and that was without Suh.

Our scheme works. The Pelinis know what they're doing. The players have to execute. Against Michigan State, they prepared the right way and they executed. Against Northwestern, they didn't. It's that simple.

 

[Husker Richard]

There's nothing wrong with our scheme - it's been proven against better offenses in the Big 12 than in the Big 10, and I have very little doubt that opposing QBs have feared our defense ever since we killed Colt McCoy's Heisman Trophy run. Last year we made NFL QBs like Nathan Enderle, Blaine Gabbert, and Jake Locker look extremely silly, and that was without Suh.

Our scheme works. The Pelinis know what they're doing. The players have to execute. Against Michigan State, they prepared the right way and they executed. Against Northwestern, they didn't. It's that simple.

But with Prince, Gomes, and Hagg.

Right now, we don't have the personnel for this scheme. If we're not going to get pressure, we sure as hell better be able to cover. Currently we can't do either.

 

[Hercules]

There's nothing wrong with our scheme - it's been proven against better offenses in the Big 12 than in the Big 10, and I have very little doubt that opposing QBs have feared our defense ever since we killed Colt McCoy's Heisman Trophy run. Last year we made NFL QBs like Nathan Enderle, Blaine Gabbert, and Jake Locker look extremely silly, and that was without Suh.

Our scheme works. The Pelinis know what they're doing. The players have to execute. Against Michigan State, they prepared the right way and they executed. Against Northwestern, they didn't. It's that simple.

But with Prince, Gomes, and Hagg.

Right now, we don't have the personnel for this scheme. If we're not going to get pressure, we sure as hell better be able to cover. Currently we can't do either.

It's not about personnel, it's about execution. Northwestern has some playmakers, but Jeremy Ebert and Kain Colter are not the playmakers that Keyshawn Martin and BJ Cunningham are. Against Michigan State, you saw guys like Lance Thorell and Ciante Evans jumping routes - they knew what was going to happen before it happened. Against Northwestern, it wasn't their athleticism that was exploited, it was either their lack of preparation before the game or their lack of focus during the game.

As poorly as those guys played, our defensive line also got their butts kicked on that final drive - and that has nothing to do with personnel either. You're talking about the same Crick-less d-line that dominated Michigan State last week. They were perhaps more thin this week in terms of their depth, but that would be a problem in any scheme.

This reactionary nonsense is so annoying. As soon as a loss happens, people who know nothing about the game of football start shouting, "We gotta change the scheme!" or "We gotta change coaches!" or "We gotta change QBs!" Sometimes, you just have to get better at what you're trying to do.

 

[beanman]

There's nothing wrong with our scheme - it's been proven against better offenses in the Big 12 than in the Big 10, and I have very little doubt that opposing QBs have feared our defense ever since we killed Colt McCoy's Heisman Trophy run. Last year we made NFL QBs like Nathan Enderle, Blaine Gabbert, and Jake Locker look extremely silly, and that was without Suh.

Our scheme works. The Pelinis know what they're doing. The players have to execute. Against Michigan State, they prepared the right way and they executed. Against Northwestern, they didn't. It's that simple.

But with Prince, Gomes, and Hagg.

Right now, we don't have the personnel for this scheme. If we're not going to get pressure, we sure as hell better be able to cover. Currently we can't do either.

It's not about personnel, it's about execution. Northwestern has some playmakers, but Jeremy Ebert and Kain Colter are not the playmakers that Keyshawn Martin and BJ Cunningham are. Against Michigan State, you saw guys like Lance Thorell and Ciante Evans jumping routes - they knew what was going to happen before it happened. Against Northwestern, it wasn't their athleticism that was exploited, it was either their lack of preparation before the game or their lack of focus during the game.

As poorly as those guys played, our defensive line also got their butts kicked on that final drive - and that has nothing to do with personnel either. You're talking about the same Crick-less d-line that dominated Michigan State last week. They were perhaps more thin this week in terms of their depth, but that would be a problem in any scheme.

This reactionary nonsense is so annoying. As soon as a loss happens, people who know nothing about the game of football start shouting, "We gotta change the scheme!" or "We gotta change coaches!" or "We gotta change QBs!" Sometimes, you just have to get better at what you're trying to do.

How is this reactionary nonsense. Our D has sucked every game this season save that one day against Michigan Statewhere their offensive coordinater did us a big favor with his playcalling. (and that glorified scrimmage against Minnesota)

And thank you for establishing that none of us know anything about the game of football. The fact of the matter is decent running teams have been gashing this team.

 

[Hercules]

There's nothing wrong with our scheme - it's been proven against better offenses in the Big 12 than in the Big 10, and I have very little doubt that opposing QBs have feared our defense ever since we killed Colt McCoy's Heisman Trophy run. Last year we made NFL QBs like Nathan Enderle, Blaine Gabbert, and Jake Locker look extremely silly, and that was without Suh.

Our scheme works. The Pelinis know what they're doing. The players have to execute. Against Michigan State, they prepared the right way and they executed. Against Northwestern, they didn't. It's that simple.

But with Prince, Gomes, and Hagg.

Right now, we don't have the personnel for this scheme. If we're not going to get pressure, we sure as hell better be able to cover. Currently we can't do either.

It's not about personnel, it's about execution. Northwestern has some playmakers, but Jeremy Ebert and Kain Colter are not the playmakers that Keyshawn Martin and BJ Cunningham are. Against Michigan State, you saw guys like Lance Thorell and Ciante Evans jumping routes - they knew what was going to happen before it happened. Against Northwestern, it wasn't their athleticism that was exploited, it was either their lack of preparation before the game or their lack of focus during the game.

As poorly as those guys played, our defensive line also got their butts kicked on that final drive - and that has nothing to do with personnel either. You're talking about the same Crick-less d-line that dominated Michigan State last week. They were perhaps more thin this week in terms of their depth, but that would be a problem in any scheme.

This reactionary nonsense is so annoying. As soon as a loss happens, people who know nothing about the game of football start shouting, "We gotta change the scheme!" or "We gotta change coaches!" or "We gotta change QBs!" Sometimes, you just have to get better at what you're trying to do.

How is this reactionary nonsense. Our D has sucked every game this season save that one day against Michigan Statewhere their offensive coordinater did us a big favor with his playcalling. (and that glorified scrimmage against Minnesota)

And thank you for establishing that none of us know anything about the game of football. The fact of the matter is decent running teams have been gashing this team.

I won't argue that the defense has struggled this year. I think it's ridiculous to blame it on the scheme that people were lauding as innovative the last few years. It is ridiculous to blame it on a scheme that kept us in the top 10 nationally in defense over the previous two years when we were playing better offenses then we're playing now.

It's about execution.

 

[beanman]

There's nothing wrong with our scheme - it's been proven against better offenses in the Big 12 than in the Big 10, and I have very little doubt that opposing QBs have feared our defense ever since we killed Colt McCoy's Heisman Trophy run. Last year we made NFL QBs like Nathan Enderle, Blaine Gabbert, and Jake Locker look extremely silly, and that was without Suh.

Our scheme works. The Pelinis know what they're doing. The players have to execute. Against Michigan State, they prepared the right way and they executed. Against Northwestern, they didn't. It's that simple.

But with Prince, Gomes, and Hagg.

Right now, we don't have the personnel for this scheme. If we're not going to get pressure, we sure as hell better be able to cover. Currently we can't do either.

It's not about personnel, it's about execution. Northwestern has some playmakers, but Jeremy Ebert and Kain Colter are not the playmakers that Keyshawn Martin and BJ Cunningham are. Against Michigan State, you saw guys like Lance Thorell and Ciante Evans jumping routes - they knew what was going to happen before it happened. Against Northwestern, it wasn't their athleticism that was exploited, it was either their lack of preparation before the game or their lack of focus during the game.

As poorly as those guys played, our defensive line also got their butts kicked on that final drive - and that has nothing to do with personnel either. You're talking about the same Crick-less d-line that dominated Michigan State last week. They were perhaps more thin this week in terms of their depth, but that would be a problem in any scheme.

This reactionary nonsense is so annoying. As soon as a loss happens, people who know nothing about the game of football start shouting, "We gotta change the scheme!" or "We gotta change coaches!" or "We gotta change QBs!" Sometimes, you just have to get better at what you're trying to do.

How is this reactionary nonsense. Our D has sucked every game this season save that one day against Michigan Statewhere their offensive coordinater did us a big favor with his playcalling. (and that glorified scrimmage against Minnesota)

And thank you for establishing that none of us know anything about the game of football. The fact of the matter is decent running teams have been gashing this team.

I won't argue that the defense has struggled this year. I think it's ridiculous to blame it on the scheme that people were lauding as innovative the last few years. It is ridiculous to blame it on a scheme that kept us in the top 10 nationally in defense over the previous two years when we were playing better offenses then we're playing now.

It's about execution.

So when Cally had Joe Dailey as QB do you agree that perhaps he should have transitioned into the WCO differently instead of diving headfirst into an offensive attack that didn't fit his personnel's strengths? Can't the same be said for our defense? We don't have the size/strength on the defensive line or the LBs (other than David) to run this scheme against the offenses we are seeing this year. I cringe when I think about us trying to stop Iowa's physical running back.

 

[Enhance]

So when Cally had Joe Dailey as QB do you agree that perhaps he should have transitioned into the WCO differently instead of diving headfirst into an offensive attack that didn't fit his personnel's strengths? Can't the same be said for our defense? We don't have the size/strength on the defensive line or the LBs (other than David) to run this scheme against the offenses we are seeing this year. I cringe when I think about us trying to stop Iowa's physical running back.

I agree with Hercules. This comes down to execution, more or less. I said in another thread that I think our scheme isn't benefiting us, which I still believe, but I believe more that it's an execution problem. Hercules is right - the same defense that was lauded the last two years is now being looked down upon because the players aren't executing correctly.

You don't just change your entire defensive scheme in a season. The coaches knew coming into the Big 10 things would be different, but Northwestern is arguably the most Big 12-esque team we faced this year, and we couldn't keep their offense from picking up yards. By the end of this season I'm sure they'll evaluate the direction they need to go, but you can't do many drastic things at this point. If one has the same scheme in place that's been successful in the past, and it's unsuccessful, that falls purely on the shoulders of the coaches preparing the team and the players executing the game plan.

There's no way to deny that most of the diatribe being spouted on this board right now is just reactionary. Furthermore, there's no way to deny that Hercules is right in another regard - most people on this forum don't know near the amount about football as the coaches do, and I have no problem admitting that I'm one of those people. That doesn't mean coaches are always right or can't make mistakes, however it does mean their judgment is far more valuable than our own. I'm not saying we can't criticize or offer suggestions, but the manner by which people are offering suggestions is just embarrassing to look at right now.

A week ago, Nebraska beats a top 15 team, everybody loves Bo, Burkhead and Martinez. A week later they lose to an unranked opponent, and some people want Bo fired. That's extremely reactionary.

 

[Norhusker]

Northwestern exposed our lack of ability to stop the run. I expect the rest of our opponents will look closely at what they did. I wouldn't be surprised at all if we lose the final 3 games of the season. Simple reasoning actually if you allow 4-5 yards per carry and/or throw in a high percentage of pass completions to boot.

 

[corncraze]

There's nothing wrong with our scheme - it's been proven against better offenses in the Big 12 than in the Big 10, and I have very little doubt that opposing QBs have feared our defense ever since we killed Colt McCoy's Heisman Trophy run. Last year we made NFL QBs like Nathan Enderle, Blaine Gabbert, and Jake Locker look extremely silly, and that was without Suh.

Our scheme works. The Pelinis know what they're doing. The players have to execute. Against Michigan State, they prepared the right way and they executed. Against Northwestern, they didn't. It's that simple.

But with Prince, Gomes, and Hagg.

Right now, we don't have the personnel for this scheme. If we're not going to get pressure, we sure as hell better be able to cover. Currently we can't do either.

If this is what you believe, then the question is, when do we start to have the personnel for this scheme?

 

[In the Deed the Glory]

There's nothing wrong with our scheme - it's been proven against better offenses in the Big 12 than in the Big 10, and I have very little doubt that opposing QBs have feared our defense ever since we killed Colt McCoy's Heisman Trophy run. Last year we made NFL QBs like Nathan Enderle, Blaine Gabbert, and Jake Locker look extremely silly, and that was without Suh.

Our scheme works. The Pelinis know what they're doing. The players have to execute. Against Michigan State, they prepared the right way and they executed. Against Northwestern, they didn't. It's that simple.

But with Prince, Gomes, and Hagg.

Right now, we don't have the personnel for this scheme. If we're not going to get pressure, we sure as hell better be able to cover. Currently we can't do either.

Okay, I'll bite. Please quickly explain to me the "scheme" that Bo runs. I mean you must have an excellent understanding of it to make a comment like that right? Or is it that you really don't know what you are talking about?

 

[In the Deed the Glory]

Does anyone else feel like our defense would play with more agression, intensity and swagger if we switched from our 2-gap scheme and incorporated more blitzes? I watch our defense and it makes me want to puke. Remember the old days when we used to beat the crap out of the opposing QB and get in his head early? Does anything fire up the team like a big hit? I have seen more big hits from our wide receivers than I have from the entire defense this year. I just don't think anyone is intimidated by our Defense when they play us. And I don't think they were last year either. In 2009 we had Suh so that alone put the fear into them.

What are your thoughts?

Now to the thread question, which I like.

I wonder about this as well. I know we went to the 2 gap against the spread teams to allow for more coverage on short to intermediate routes. I noticed that when teams put a quick player in the slot we don't jam well at all, mainly because we are way off of the receivers in the slot this season. I don't know if we are doing that for the nickel to have an angle for run support or if we haven't found that guy that can play bump and run at the nickel.

Secondly, I am perplexed by the simplicity of the coverages this year in the secondary. Usually it is creative and disguised and hard to read for a QB with movement at the last minute. We have changed a lot. We used to play straight zone, now we are playing zone man under giving constant safety help which works because David can cover any TE and Compton is underrated in coverage. I would guess this decision came for run support as LB that are matched up man on RBs can react to the run faster.

If Baker continues to improve like he has the last two weeks the 2 gap will be excellent again and this will be a moot point.