Huskerlambs
Five-Star Recruit
Yikes, maybe our defense WON'T be better next year without 3 of the top 64 draftees, but then again, Crick was never healthy.
NFL combine
- Thread starter Hooked on Huskers
- Start date
Sadly, Crick was a non factor even when he played. IMO, he was probably hurt all year. Fonzie missed half the season and really didn't get into his groove until around game 9. David? He will be missed incredibly. I think he was the heart and soul of that team and single handedly got us the wins against Penn St and Ohio St.
Our D line had quite a few folks get some playing time last year, same with the DB's. Our LB spot concerns me more than anything. Compton started to find his groove and should be good. After that, it is a crap shoot. Some good recruits, but can they be ready in time. Same with the RSFresh. Would like to see Bo either "dumb" down the system to get the younger kids in immediately or have Cooper, SJB etc line up like Super D in 2003 to give the opposing teams OC something to really worry about.
kchusker_chris
All-American
I think the DL put a lot of pressure on both units (DBs,LBs) with the way they played. If they even had a marginal pass rush it changes everything. Any QB will make your defensive backfield look bad when they have 6-8 seconds of protection. Any QB can scramble and pick up yards on your LBs when he has that much time to make a decision. Any RB can put up rushing numbers when the OL can read our DL and easily push them into the secondary.
As bad as the D was last year, in all areas...I firmly believe a lot of that lied on the DL. Just like a lot of the dominance in the 09' backfield can be attributed to the DL IMO.
knapplc
International Man of Mystery
I've been rewatching some 2011 games over the last couple of weeks, and frankly, our DL scheme sucks. We all know about the "contain" concept that Bo has in place, but from what I've seen this is a detriment, not a positive, to the overall effectiveness of the D. Without pressure on the QB, in passing downs the contain theory just creates time for the QB to find a receiver. Several times I've watched Ankrah beat his man, only to "stay home" in contain rather than push the advantage to the QB. Eric Martin was rarely set loose to wreak havoc - his forte.
I have some hopes that the point of bringing in Rick Kaczenski will change this philosophy. We'll see.
NUance
Assistant Coach
I wonder if that's Kaz's call--to go away from the 2-gap DT responsibility? I hope so. I'm not to happy with our D-line play, but I could see keeping the 2-gap in place if we'd gamble once in a while with blitzes and stunting. We did some of that last year. But not enough to be much of a threat.
kchusker_chris
All-American
I don't remember this 2-gap thing being so disfunctional in 09' (Suh) or even 10'. I can't imagine it was the Big10, because we saw it against everyone from Fresno to South Carolina. Crick/Stien were putting pressure on QBs in 10'. It certainly didn't look as bad as it did in 11'. My fear is that it was giving JP the entire DL that caused the shift to a more conservative defensive front...in which case giving him the entire defense to turn conservative is scary.
Last edited by a moderator:
knapplc
International Man of Mystery
We play a weird defense. I'll have to go back and concentrate on who's taking what responsibilities, but Carl said before the Washington game that we don't play a two-gap. His quote was:
LINK
I can see where Carl is coming from, but I think the result of our scheming is that things have just gotten muddled, and it kills the aggressive nature of our D Line. Several times in non-con games I saw a D Lineman bust through, make contact with the ball-carrier, then whiff on the tackle. It's almost as if they have so much on their minds they forget to just attack the ball.
LINK
I can see where Carl is coming from, but I think the result of our scheming is that things have just gotten muddled, and it kills the aggressive nature of our D Line. Several times in non-con games I saw a D Lineman bust through, make contact with the ball-carrier, then whiff on the tackle. It's almost as if they have so much on their minds they forget to just attack the ball.
Last edited by a moderator:
NUance
Assistant Coach
I think part of the problem is due to Suh. Having him wreak havoc on the line makes a DC look like a genius no matter what scheme he runs. Then when our superhuman wrecking machine goes off to the Detroit Lions our DC can't figure out why the same defensive plays no longer work.
Last edited by a moderator:
kchusker_chris
All-American
But if you look at 10' stats Crick led the team in TFL's with 14.5. In 2011, the highest DT was Stein with 5. The DT's totalled 10 TFLs last year. In 09' Suh led the team with 20.5, Crick followed with 12.5. Going from 93 TFLS in 09', to 56 in 11' hurts. That's 3-4 a game. Sacks were 44 in 09', 31 in 10', 21 in 11'.
Those are some really bad trends when it comes to putting pressure on a QB. It can't all be tallent. There is just too large of a disparity.
81st in Sacks
103rd in TFLs
That's scheme IMO.
Those are some really bad trends when it comes to putting pressure on a QB. It can't all be tallent. There is just too large of a disparity.
81st in Sacks
103rd in TFLs
That's scheme IMO.
Last edited by a moderator:
knapplc
International Man of Mystery
Absolutely agree, Chris. Scheme is the glaring factor there, despite the dropoff in talent. Teams with far worse talent than we fielded last year had far better stats.
So what if your opponent breaks off the odd 20-yard run? Mobile QBs do that, and you can't spend all your energy praying they don't run on you. You have to get in their face, put constant pressure on them, and make them make decisions. Our scheme is soft, and opposing QBs are far too often far too comfortable against us.
This is also a major factor in our plummet in turnovers gained, from 21st in 2009 to 49th in 2010 down to 91st in 2011. Without pressure on the QB you don't get interceptions, you don't force mistakes, and in general you don't stress your opponent.
So what if your opponent breaks off the odd 20-yard run? Mobile QBs do that, and you can't spend all your energy praying they don't run on you. You have to get in their face, put constant pressure on them, and make them make decisions. Our scheme is soft, and opposing QBs are far too often far too comfortable against us.
This is also a major factor in our plummet in turnovers gained, from 21st in 2009 to 49th in 2010 down to 91st in 2011. Without pressure on the QB you don't get interceptions, you don't force mistakes, and in general you don't stress your opponent.
Treand3
All-Conference
This. Many QBs are placed in a bind when they have to make quick decisions. Looking back at the Sugar Bowl I absolutely loved how VT attacked Robinson, too bad some coaching made their efforts in vain. If most QBs are given 5+ seconds to find a receiver, most of the time they'll to that or will have a running lane. As far as mobile QBs go, we've seen more in one collective season than we have any other, at least in recent memory (Wilson, Miller, Colter, Robinson and Shaw. Maybe could add Price as well)
Last edited by a moderator:
Saunders
Heisman Trophy Winner
Bingo. Remember how MSU shut down D-Rob? They blitzed him and had guys in his face the whole time.
knapplc
International Man of Mystery
As did Iowa, two years in a row.
And we just hired their D-Line coach.
Coincidence..... or more?
Treand3
All-Conference
I'll take the latter.As did Iowa, two years in a row.
And we just hired their D-Line coach.
Coincidence..... or more?
kchusker_chris
All-American
Remember how every team shuts down Taylor? Load the box, blitz him the whole time. It's tough to get in a rhythm. It's ironic that we have, for 2 years now...watched defenses frequently shut down Taylor by loading the box yet, even though I can't remember the last time we neutralized a mobile QB, we refuse to do it. What's that definition of insanity again....?....