Joel Klatt Top 25

[brophog]

58 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

That was my next question.  What has our defense done?  They were decent last year overall.  But, they have room for improvement in getting turnovers.

 

There is a lot of randomness to turnovers, that's why they fluctuate year to year so much.

 

In terms of what you can control, you control so much more on offense than defense. There are things you can do on defense to try to help your odds, like getting more pressure with only 4 to allow yourself to play more zone so your eyes are on the QB. Getting more hats to the ball so you can have a better opportunity to strip it, those sorts of things. By and large, though, the things that increase your chances on defense are just products of playing better defense.

 

The offense, from whichever side you look at it, has to create opportunities for a turnover to happen.

[teachercd]

I mean, turnovers for the offense will be way down, period, we know that.  Say it is even 10 less, that will be HUGE.

 

Passing game will be better, running game will be "worse" just because there won't be the QB run game.

 

Defense will be solid, mostly because of the front 3 and the lame teams they play.

 

NU will be favored in probably 7 games and the only double digit dog games they are in is vs OSU and USC.

 

Wisconsin and Iowa will both b 3 either way.  

[Head Coach Scott Frost]

I wouldn't put us in yet and would make us earn it, but I appreciate the positive national attention.

[brophog]

2 hours ago, teachercd said:

I mean, turnovers for the offense will be way down, period, we know that.  Say it is even 10 less, that will be HUGE.

 

This is going to sound insane, but it's a testament to how bad things were. -10 isn't that big of an improvement. That still ranks 93rd last year in turnovers lost.

That number needs to be -20 or so, and that's actually very achievable.

 

2 hours ago, teachercd said:

Passing game will be better, running game will be "worse" just because there won't be the QB run game.

 

It's hard to say on the impact of the QB run game. Yes, it helped at times to move the ball and it generated a few big plays, but it led to a lot of those turnovers. 3 fumbles in the Purdue game alone were on QB runs.

 

 Nebraska the past few years has run the ball pretty good until the opponent decides they are not. Once the other team starts rolling down defenders and loading the box the run game shuts off, and it becomes a game of hoping you pop a big play somewhere. Last year, because of the QB run game more of those popped than the year prior, but unfavorable box counts were still hugely responsible for the anemic offense.

 

A better spaced field, like we saw this spring, I think will not only counter any gains there may have been with the QB run game, but make the overall running game better. The game becomes 6 on 6 and first contact is 3-4 yards downfield and it's up to the RB to beat someone. That scenario is more controllable for Satterfield because he's accustomed to using the screen and RPO game to control defenders much better than he is trying to sequence run plays to control defenders.

 

I also think we have some big bodied receivers and tight ends that will create a lot of issues for those conflict linebackers and nickels and help control the Safeties. We can play like a 12 personnel team, but those two "tight ends" are a very athletic Fidone who can line up at various spots and a 220 lb receiver and then still put 2 speedsters out there that you have to somehow account for. There is a lot of room for creativity with personnel and alignment and Satterfield can be a pretty creative playcaller. I think we will see him much more in his element this year.

 

Overall, what I think will likely happen is the run game will be more than fine against average or so defensive lines, but may struggle some against the very top end units because they can make up the numbers through talent. Man on man, though, when we're plus 1 or even against most defenses I like this line and it'll be up to Satterfield and staff to put them in the best possible position for success.

 

[Red Five]

6 hours ago, brophog said:

Because turnovers regress to the mean

 

We've been waiting for turnovers to regress to the mean for most of 20 years.  It's gonna be a hell of a run we're going to have to go on to even out.

 

Turnover margin

2023 #132 -1.42/game

2022 #92 -0.25/game

2021 #95 -0.42/game

2020 #123 -1.38/game

2019 #61 0.00/game

2018 #83 -0.17/game

2017 #106 -0.58/game

2016 #34 0.38/game

2015 #113 -0.92/game

2014 #75 -0.15/game

2013 #119 -0.85/game

2012 #108 --0.86/game

2011 #67 -0.08/game

2010 #61-0.07/game

2009 #33 0.36/game

 

https://cfbstats.com/2023/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category12/sort01.html

[I am I]

Every single year there is a thread that goes kinda like this:

 

“what are you looking for” or “rank your order” that will contribute to the W/L for the Cornhuskers…

 

every year I have said, without fail:

turnovers and penalties.  And every year without fail we lose both categories. And we lose games (and tons of close games). 
 

I don’t give a s#!t how our spring game looked or weapons we might have or defense plays hard blah blah blah. Take care of the ball and don’t have untimely penalties. 

[brophog]

RE: Red Five

 

Those stats show Nebraska has not been great at turnover margin over most of the past 20 years, but they show that turnovers, even for Nebraska, have a ton of year on year variance. Look at how many times in that list there is a 30 or 40 place jump one way or the other year to year.

 

Our goal is not to regress to the mean. Our goal is to become #1 in that list every year. That list actually shows quite well what it means for turnovers as a stat to regress to the mean.

 

 

[Vince R.]

9 hours ago, Undone said:

For us to actually be one of the top 25 teams in the country, there'd be a huge assumption that we've pretty much completely ditched the problem with turnovers & false starts in one offseason.

 

I find it really hard to believe that will be the case, but hopefully we at least put a big dent in the problem.

 

If we can hand the ball off right, we would knock out half of them. 

[brophog]

8 hours ago, I am I said:

turnovers and penalties.  And every year without fail we lose both categories. And we lose games (and tons of close games). 
 

I don’t give a s#!t how our spring game looked or weapons we might have or defense plays hard blah blah blah. Take care of the ball and don’t have untimely penalties. 

 

Penalties really don't correlate with wins. Certainly some untimely ones can have a major impact, based on situation. Passive penalties, like procedure penalties, have little upside. Aggressive penalties, like pass interference or holding, could be argued to be offset by the gains made in being aggressive. Last year, the top team in penalties was Michigan, but their championship opponent, Washington, ranked 126 in flags per game. It's funny, but it doesn't mean much, there's no particularly correlative value to wins and penalties across the teams.

 

Turnovers are why you should care about weapons and defense and blah blah blah. We all know turnovers have a high win correlation, but why? At the end of the day, they're really just explosive plays by the defense. The defending team was already going to get the ball back because it's an alternate possession game, so getting the ball back isn't what's valuable. It's the combination of your opponent not scoring and field position.

 

We really shouldn't think of turnovers and turnover margin as what's important. It should really be explosive play margin, of which turnovers should be considered a part.

[BaytownHusker]

19 hours ago, teachercd said:

I mean, turnovers for the offense will be way down, period, we know that.  Say it is even 10 less, that will be HUGE.

 

Passing game will be better, running game will be "worse" just because there won't be the QB run game.

 

Defense will be solid, mostly because of the front 3 and the lame teams they play.

 

NU will be favored in probably 7 games and the only double digit dog games they are in is vs OSU and USC.

 

Wisconsin and Iowa will both b 3 either way.  

 

I can agree the QR rushing numbers wont be there,. but i find it hard pressed to say our un game wont be as good if not improved by a potentially explosive passing attack.

 

But now if the passing is terrible then yeah run game probably takes a hit.

 

But i for one am kind of excited to see DR running a offense the whole game with our #1s. I think game 2-3 him and the wr's go off.  

 

Ok I'm out of Kool aide. 

[teachercd]

1 hour ago, BaytownHusker said:

 

I can agree the QR rushing numbers wont be there,. but i find it hard pressed to say our un game wont be as good if not improved by a potentially explosive passing attack.

 

But now if the passing is terrible then yeah run game probably takes a hit.

 

But i for one am kind of excited to see DR running a offense the whole game with our #1s. I think game 2-3 him and the wr's go off.  

 

Ok I'm out of Kool aide. 

Yeah, if the passing game is a true threat it could open up the run, hopefully! 

[brophog]

35 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Yeah, if the passing game is a true threat it could open up the run, hopefully! 

 

I don't think you even have to be that good at passing and it is often more how you set things up. Satterfield at times in his past gets real infatuated with compression sets with 27 tight ends. You can be really good at passing out of that stuff and they're still going to load the box just because you loaded the box. Meanwhile there's more than a good chance if you put a WR on the boundary they gonna send someone out there to cover him.

 

Obviously it helps to have a QB like Raiola that can spray the field and receivers that can threaten but there's been a lot of QBs over the years that could create enough space to run the ball and rarely threw the ball more than 10 yards down the field. It's my opinion that if you're running into 8 man boxes it's because you allowed the defense to put 8 men there.

[DrinkinwitTerrellFarley]

19 hours ago, Red Five said:

 

We've been waiting for turnovers to regress to the mean for most of 20 years.  It's gonna be a hell of a run we're going to have to go on to even out.

 

Turnover margin

2023 #132 -1.42/game

2022 #92 -0.25/game

2021 #95 -0.42/game

2020 #123 -1.38/game

2019 #61 0.00/game

2018 #83 -0.17/game

2017 #106 -0.58/game

2016 #34 0.38/game

2015 #113 -0.92/game

2014 #75 -0.15/game

2013 #119 -0.85/game

2012 #108 --0.86/game

2011 #67 -0.08/game

2010 #61-0.07/game

2009 #33 0.36/game

 

https://cfbstats.com/2023/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category12/sort01.html

But what if they have another 2003 season or two or three on defense to help balance it out?  #RhuleAid

[Mavric]

23 hours ago, I am I said:

Every single year there is a thread that goes kinda like this:

 

“what are you looking for” or “rank your order” that will contribute to the W/L for the Cornhuskers…

 

every year I have said, without fail:

turnovers and penalties.  And every year without fail we lose both categories. And we lose games (and tons of close games). 
 

I don’t give a s#!t how our spring game looked or weapons we might have or defense plays hard blah blah blah. Take care of the ball and don’t have untimely penalties. 

 

Here's the thing though.  Both of those are magnified when you lose a lot of close games.

 

Turnovers, yes, we've been terrible.

 

But we've actually been pretty respectable on penalties for the past three years.

 

2021 - #35 in penalties per game; #32 in yards per game

2022 - #39 & #26

2023 - #32 & #27

 

Nothing to throw a parade for but upper third to quarter isn't nearly as bad as people seem to think we are.

 

And we were even a little better than down down the stretch last year.  Even though we lost them all.

[Undone]

On 5/8/2024 at 4:00 PM, brophog said:

It's my opinion that if you're running into 8 man boxes it's because you allowed the defense to put 8 men there.

 

This. So much this.

 

I am maybe too obsessed with the words Rhule used in his introductory press conference for us: "We're not going to be a spread offense." That's fine; labels in football are often times a function of artistic impression.

 

But if we've got receivers that can fire off the snap and get open we sure as hell better not be bunching up too much.

 

If you really, really want to run the ball out of tight sets, try to motion into those tight sets sometimes. Don't just do it all the time from a set formation because it's what you do. Marcus needs to evolve and set up some creativity that springs the wideouts open (not just the tight ends).

 

Inb4 someone says that he tried last year but the QB's sucked too much to do it.