From a young OL scout team player

[carlfense]

I think I'm going to be very tired of the Crick is going to be the next Suh talk. Honestly, it sounds ridiculous. I think Crick will be a very good player. Suh was great/elite.

 

It reminds me of the "Zac Lee will make everyone forget about Joe Ganz" talk that I fought all last year . . . except this one is even more implausible.

 

The reality of the situation is that we will almost certainly take a step back on the DL next year.

 

 

except crick has already played at a level near suhs....... and is clearly a better player then suh was as a sophmore(its not even remotely close) trust me.... I'm skeptical too, but its not like these claims are totally unfounded

 

But he played at a level near Suh (if you are referring to his tackling, tfl, etc. statistics) at least partially because Suh was absorbing double and triple teams and leaving Crick to work 1 on 1 with an o-lineman. Crick's stats will probably not be as good this year because HE is going to be the one getting double teamed.

[cscott2win]

And who thought Ahman Green would end up better than Lawrence Phillips? Crick had a bigger influence as a sophmore than Suh had as a junior. We all started this year with Steinkuhler playing beside Suh. Where did this Crick guy come from? Dillard doesn't even play the first 2 weeks. O'Hanlon getting thrown under the bus after the V Tech game. Some players really stepped it up. I look for a lot more next year but a more overall balanced group. Nebraska's defense will be pretty strong at all positions with more depth next season. Can't wait!!

[robsker]

I think I'm going to be very tired of the Crick is going to be the next Suh talk. Honestly, it sounds ridiculous. I think Crick will be a very good player. Suh was great/elite.

 

It reminds me of the "Zac Lee will make everyone forget about Joe Ganz" talk that I fought all last year . . . except this one is even more implausible.

 

The reality of the situation is that we will almost certainly take a step back on the DL next year.

 

 

Well... I'd expect that Pierre Allen will be improved next year over where he was this year. Also, Crick will be improved. That is two of the four positions improved... with certainty. Meredith will replace Turner and honestly, I'd expect that to be a modest step up over last year --- or, at the very least, equal with last year. The overall depth will be improved with Ankrah coming in and the other younger players. the only position taking a step backwards is the position vacated by Suh and taken by Steinkuhler. And Steinkuhler will still be very, very good. So.... as Pelini has said himself --- and I will parrot and agree with --- our DL stands to be somewhat improved next year --- 3 of the 4 positions will improve and depth will improve --- and Steinkuhler is really good.

[carlfense]

I think I'm going to be very tired of the Crick is going to be the next Suh talk. Honestly, it sounds ridiculous. I think Crick will be a very good player. Suh was great/elite.

 

It reminds me of the "Zac Lee will make everyone forget about Joe Ganz" talk that I fought all last year . . . except this one is even more implausible.

 

The reality of the situation is that we will almost certainly take a step back on the DL next year.

 

 

Well... I'd expect that Pierre Allen will be improved next year over where he was this year. Also, Crick will be improved. That is two of the four positions improved... with certainty. Meredith will replace Turner and honestly, I'd expect that to be a modest step up over last year --- or, at the very least, equal with last year. The overall depth will be improved with Ankrah coming in and the other younger players. the only position taking a step backwards is the position vacated by Suh and taken by Steinkuhler. And Steinkuhler will still be very, very good. So.... as Pelini has said himself --- and I will parrot and agree with --- our DL stands to be somewhat improved next year --- 3 of the 4 positions will improve and depth will improve --- and Steinkuhler is really good.

 

Really?

 

We sound like Missouri fans when they expected to have a more productive offense after losing Chase Daniel, Maclin, and Coffman to the NFL.

 

I'm all for optimism . . . but to believe that our DL will IMPROVE after losing one of the greatest defensive tackles in college football history AND a starting defensive end is completely irrational. Bookmark this post. Our defensive line will take a step backwards next year (but will still be solid.) At the end of the season we will review the statistics (Tackles, Tackles for loss, hurries, sacks, passes broken up) and they will be worse than this year.

[knapplc]

Really?

 

We sound like Missouri fans when they expected to have a more productive offense after losing Chase Daniel, Maclin, and Coffman to the NFL.

 

I'm all for optimism . . . but to believe that our DL will IMPROVE after losing one of the greatest defensive tackles in college football history AND a starting defensive end is completely irrational. Bookmark this post. Our defensive line will take a step backwards next year (but will still be solid.) At the end of the season we will review the statistics (Tackles, Tackles for loss, hurries, sacks, passes broken up) and they will be worse than this year.

 

I think there's a strong case for an improved D Line, though:

 

 

Allen > Allen

Steinkuhler < Suh

Crick > Crick

Meredith > Turner

 

2010 Allen and Crick should be better than 2009 Allen and Crick. Meredith showed way more hustle than Turner last year, and while it's obvious Stein will be a step down from Suh (or two or three steps down), he won't be so horrible that it'll be a gaping hole in our line. Also, coaches were really high on Terrance Moore's revival from an early-season injury, saying he was back at 100% sometime around the Colorado game or so. Moore could, maybe, start over Steinkuhler.

 

Ankrah will be to the DEs what Meredith was this year, and when Allen graduates next year, God help our opponents when they have to face a line of Meredith, Steinkuhler, Crick and Ankrah in two years, especially backed up by Juniors Compton and Fisher.

 

Because if you think our D Line will be good in 2010, you haven't seen anything yet.

[carlfense]

Really?

 

We sound like Missouri fans when they expected to have a more productive offense after losing Chase Daniel, Maclin, and Coffman to the NFL.

 

I'm all for optimism . . . but to believe that our DL will IMPROVE after losing one of the greatest defensive tackles in college football history AND a starting defensive end is completely irrational. Bookmark this post. Our defensive line will take a step backwards next year (but will still be solid.) At the end of the season we will review the statistics (Tackles, Tackles for loss, hurries, sacks, passes broken up) and they will be worse than this year.

 

I think there's a strong case for an improved D Line, though:

 

 

Allen > Allen

Steinkuhler < Suh

Crick > Crick

Meredith > Turner

 

2010 Allen and Crick should be better than 2009 Allen and Crick. Meredith showed way more hustle than Turner last year, and while it's obvious Stein will be a step down from Suh (or two or three steps down), he won't be so horrible that it'll be a gaping hole in our line. Also, coaches were really high on Terrance Moore's revival from an early-season injury, saying he was back at 100% sometime around the Colorado game or so. Moore could, maybe, start over Steinkuhler.

 

Ankrah will be to the DEs what Meredith was this year, and when Allen graduates next year, God help our opponents when they have to face a line of Meredith, Steinkuhler, Crick and Ankrah in two years, especially backed up by Juniors Compton and Fisher.

 

Because if you think our D Line will be good in 2010, you haven't seen anything yet.

Here's where I see the problem though:

 

Crick (with Suh next to him) > Crick (without Suh next to him.)

 

Crick can improve his game significantly next year . . . and still be less productive. Now Crick is going to be facing double teams.

[WVhuskerXX]

Ankrah will be to the DEs what Meredith was this year,

 

Knapplc, Great analysis. The only thing I want to point out is that I feel that Ankrah next year will be better than Meredith was this year. My reasoning is that I believe Ankrah will bring more of a pass rushing presence. I may be way off on this, but I would love to see Ankrah subbed in for Meredith on obvious pass downs. Or even slide Meredith down to DT on third and longs. This would allow more flexibility with stunting with more mobile lineman.

[typ3kal]

Really?

 

We sound like Missouri fans when they expected to have a more productive offense after losing Chase Daniel, Maclin, and Coffman to the NFL.

 

I'm all for optimism . . . but to believe that our DL will IMPROVE after losing one of the greatest defensive tackles in college football history AND a starting defensive end is completely irrational. Bookmark this post. Our defensive line will take a step backwards next year (but will still be solid.) At the end of the season we will review the statistics (Tackles, Tackles for loss, hurries, sacks, passes broken up) and they will be worse than this year.

 

I think there's a strong case for an improved D Line, though:

 

 

Allen > Allen

Steinkuhler < Suh

Crick > Crick

Meredith > Turner

 

2010 Allen and Crick should be better than 2009 Allen and Crick. Meredith showed way more hustle than Turner last year, and while it's obvious Stein will be a step down from Suh (or two or three steps down), he won't be so horrible that it'll be a gaping hole in our line. Also, coaches were really high on Terrance Moore's revival from an early-season injury, saying he was back at 100% sometime around the Colorado game or so. Moore could, maybe, start over Steinkuhler.

 

Ankrah will be to the DEs what Meredith was this year, and when Allen graduates next year, God help our opponents when they have to face a line of Meredith, Steinkuhler, Crick and Ankrah in two years, especially backed up by Juniors Compton and Fisher.

 

Because if you think our D Line will be good in 2010, you haven't seen anything yet.

Here's where I see the problem though:

 

Crick (with Suh next to him) > Crick (without Suh next to him.)

 

Crick can improve his game significantly next year . . . and still be less productive. Now Crick is going to be facing double teams.

 

 

Agree totally, but the big ? mark about the line this year is how much Baker can step up. If Baker plays as well as Crick did this last season then the line should take a step forward assuming crick plays at the same level this coming season.

[junior4949]

And who thought Ahman Green would end up better than Lawrence Phillips? Crick had a bigger influence as a sophmore than Suh had as a junior. We all started this year with Steinkuhler playing beside Suh. Where did this Crick guy come from? Dillard doesn't even play the first 2 weeks. O'Hanlon getting thrown under the bus after the V Tech game. Some players really stepped it up. I look for a lot more next year but a more overall balanced group. Nebraska's defense will be pretty strong at all positions with more depth next season. Can't wait!!

 

You can put me in the camp that though Ahman would be better than Phillips. Look how they started their careers. Phillips as a frosh was behind Benning. It wasn't until Benning started putting the rock on the carpet frequently that Phillips passed him by. Also, Phillips from day one never had his head screwed on straight. I knew one of his tutors that said TO was always coming over while they were studying telling Phillips to stay out of trouble even when he was a frosh. Ahman always had his head screwed on straight and kept his mouth shut.

 

I agree with Carlfense here. I think next year after the bowl game, the stats will clearly show the DL saw no improvement to a step backwards. You don't take the leader from a defense who may have been the best to ever play the position here and not take a step sideways to backwards the following year. As great as Frost was at QB, we took a step backward in 1996. It was like the Giants trying to replace LT. You just don't take steps forward when replacing one of the greatest players ever to grace Memorial Stadium.

[melscott62]

I think I'm going to be very tired of the Crick is going to be the next Suh talk. Honestly, it sounds ridiculous. I think Crick will be a very good player. Suh was great/elite.

 

It reminds me of the "Zac Lee will make everyone forget about Joe Ganz" talk that I fought all last year . . . except this one is even more implausible.

 

The reality of the situation is that we will almost certainly take a step back on the DL next year.

 

 

except crick has already played at a level near suhs....... and is clearly a better player then suh was as a sophmore(its not even remotely close) trust me.... I'm skeptical too, but its not like these claims are totally unfounded

 

But he played at a level near Suh (if you are referring to his tackling, tfl, etc. statistics) at least partially because Suh was absorbing double and triple teams and leaving Crick to work 1 on 1 with an o-lineman. Crick's stats will probably not be as good this year because HE is going to be the one getting double teamed.

 

I think crick will have a better supporting cast around him than suh did. baker, allen, ankarah is going to be a handful. esp with a loaded secondary and improving lb. Again I dont see it happening, But you have to admit there is a chance a realistic chance.

[carlfense]

I think I'm going to be very tired of the Crick is going to be the next Suh talk. Honestly, it sounds ridiculous. I think Crick will be a very good player. Suh was great/elite.

 

It reminds me of the "Zac Lee will make everyone forget about Joe Ganz" talk that I fought all last year . . . except this one is even more implausible.

 

The reality of the situation is that we will almost certainly take a step back on the DL next year.

 

 

except crick has already played at a level near suhs....... and is clearly a better player then suh was as a sophmore(its not even remotely close) trust me.... I'm skeptical too, but its not like these claims are totally unfounded

 

But he played at a level near Suh (if you are referring to his tackling, tfl, etc. statistics) at least partially because Suh was absorbing double and triple teams and leaving Crick to work 1 on 1 with an o-lineman. Crick's stats will probably not be as good this year because HE is going to be the one getting double teamed.

 

I think crick will have a better supporting cast around him than suh did. baker, allen, ankarah is going to be a handful. esp with a loaded secondary and improving lb. Again I dont see it happening, But you have to admit there is a chance a realistic chance.

 

So you are saying that Suh had a worse supporting cast because Crick and Allen weren't that good? And then you immediately say that Crick (who was apparently a sub-par supporting cast member) will have a BETTER supporting cast composed of Allen (who was apparently a sub-par supporting cast member) and a redshirt freshman and sophomore? Pardon me for seeing that as inconsistent. Not to mention that Suh was head and shoulders the best of the bunch.

 

No, I will not admit that there is a realistic chance that the DL will be better. There is an extremely slim chance (i.e. less than 10% . . . probably considerably so.)

[RedDenver]

Really?

 

We sound like Missouri fans when they expected to have a more productive offense after losing Chase Daniel, Maclin, and Coffman to the NFL.

 

I'm all for optimism . . . but to believe that our DL will IMPROVE after losing one of the greatest defensive tackles in college football history AND a starting defensive end is completely irrational. Bookmark this post. Our defensive line will take a step backwards next year (but will still be solid.) At the end of the season we will review the statistics (Tackles, Tackles for loss, hurries, sacks, passes broken up) and they will be worse than this year.

This. I just don't understand how anybody can reasonably say that our DL will be better. Our LB's can certainly be better, and the secondary could be a little better (only a little because of how well they played this season). The overall defense could be better (and the coaches have said they expect it), but I doubt even that will be true. We had the best defense in the country (IMO) and one of the best EVER at NU. And the DL was one of the best ever. And we had possibly the best DT ever. I just don't understand where the projected improvement is to come from.

 

As for this analysis:

Allen > Allen

Steinkuhler < Suh

Crick > Crick

Meredith > Turner

I'd argue (using the same notation):

Allen > Allen

Steinkuhler (or Moore/etc.) <<< Suh

Crick > Crick

Meredith (or Ankrah/Williams/etc.) <= Turner

[robsker]

I think I'm going to be very tired of the Crick is going to be the next Suh talk. Honestly, it sounds ridiculous. I think Crick will be a very good player. Suh was great/elite.

 

It reminds me of the "Zac Lee will make everyone forget about Joe Ganz" talk that I fought all last year . . . except this one is even more implausible.

 

The reality of the situation is that we will almost certainly take a step back on the DL next year.

 

 

Well... I'd expect that Pierre Allen will be improved next year over where he was this year. Also, Crick will be improved. That is two of the four positions improved... with certainty. Meredith will replace Turner and honestly, I'd expect that to be a modest step up over last year --- or, at the very least, equal with last year. The overall depth will be improved with Ankrah coming in and the other younger players. the only position taking a step backwards is the position vacated by Suh and taken by Steinkuhler. And Steinkuhler will still be very, very good. So.... as Pelini has said himself --- and I will parrot and agree with --- our DL stands to be somewhat improved next year --- 3 of the 4 positions will improve and depth will improve --- and Steinkuhler is really good.

 

Really?

 

We sound like Missouri fans when they expected to have a more productive offense after losing Chase Daniel, Maclin, and Coffman to the NFL.

 

I'm all for optimism . . . but to believe that our DL will IMPROVE after losing one of the greatest defensive tackles in college football history AND a starting defensive end is completely irrational. Bookmark this post. Our defensive line will take a step backwards next year (but will still be solid.) At the end of the season we will review the statistics (Tackles, Tackles for loss, hurries, sacks, passes broken up) and they will be worse than this year.

 

 

Irrational, certainly not. Unless, of course, you think that Bo Pelini is irrational as well --- for he has been quoted as saying he thinks, overall, that not only will the defense in general be better next year but also that even the DL will be better. Maybe he is into hyperbloe --- maybe. (By the way, I am at work so don't bother asking me to find his quote somewhere, but I have read his quote several time --- and there is no doubt that Bo thinks the DL will improve).

 

Certainly Crick and Allen improve, Meredith will equal or better Turner, and Ankrah and Moore bring some real quality depth. Losing Suh hurts, certainly --- but every position other than his will improve. And his replacement will be (we think) really, really good. Steinkuhler is, I suppose, a key here. if he is the load he is expected to be, then Crick will likely not face as many double teams as many predict --- or, if he does, then Steinkuhler shines one-on-one.

 

To say that such a prediction is irrational.... is, well... certainly indefensible. To say that it is perhaps more likely that the DL will be different than, but comparable, to last years is certainly reasonable an alternative. Even to say that a slight drop-off is more likely is as well is a reasonable alternative. All three possibilities are fairly likely. None of the three scenarios are unlikely. The only unlikely alternatives are massive improvement or a massive drop-off --- such would be, indeed, irrational.

 

Still... I go with Bo and predict modest improvement of the unit (and the defense in general).

[carlfense]

I think I'm going to be very tired of the Crick is going to be the next Suh talk. Honestly, it sounds ridiculous. I think Crick will be a very good player. Suh was great/elite.

 

It reminds me of the "Zac Lee will make everyone forget about Joe Ganz" talk that I fought all last year . . . except this one is even more implausible.

 

The reality of the situation is that we will almost certainly take a step back on the DL next year.

 

 

Well... I'd expect that Pierre Allen will be improved next year over where he was this year. Also, Crick will be improved. That is two of the four positions improved... with certainty. Meredith will replace Turner and honestly, I'd expect that to be a modest step up over last year --- or, at the very least, equal with last year. The overall depth will be improved with Ankrah coming in and the other younger players. the only position taking a step backwards is the position vacated by Suh and taken by Steinkuhler. And Steinkuhler will still be very, very good. So.... as Pelini has said himself --- and I will parrot and agree with --- our DL stands to be somewhat improved next year --- 3 of the 4 positions will improve and depth will improve --- and Steinkuhler is really good.

 

Really?

 

We sound like Missouri fans when they expected to have a more productive offense after losing Chase Daniel, Maclin, and Coffman to the NFL.

 

I'm all for optimism . . . but to believe that our DL will IMPROVE after losing one of the greatest defensive tackles in college football history AND a starting defensive end is completely irrational. Bookmark this post. Our defensive line will take a step backwards next year (but will still be solid.) At the end of the season we will review the statistics (Tackles, Tackles for loss, hurries, sacks, passes broken up) and they will be worse than this year.

 

 

Irrational, certainly not. Unless, of course, you think that Bo Pelini is irrational as well --- for he has been quoted as saying he thinks, overall, that not only will the defense in general be better next year but also that even the DL will be better. Maybe he is into hyperbloe --- maybe. (By the way, I am at work so don't bother asking me to find his quote somewhere, but I have read his quote several time --- and there is no doubt that Bo thinks the DL will improve).

 

Certainly Crick and Allen improve, Meredith will equal or better Turner, and Ankrah and Moore bring some real quality depth. Losing Suh hurts, certainly --- but every position other than his will improve. And his replacement will be (we think) really, really good. Steinkuhler is, I suppose, a key here. if he is the load he is expected to be, then Crick will likely not face as many double teams as many predict --- or, if he does, then Steinkuhler shines one-on-one.

 

To say that such a prediction is irrational.... is, well... certainly indefensible. To say that it is perhaps more likely that the DL will be different than, but comparable, to last years is certainly reasonable an alternative. Even to say that a slight drop-off is more likely is as well is a reasonable alternative. All three possibilities are fairly likely. None of the three scenarios are unlikely. The only unlikely alternatives are massive improvement or a massive drop-off --- such would be, indeed, irrational.

 

Still... I go with Bo and predict modest improvement of the unit (and the defense in general).

Regarding the bolded section: Do you have a link for this? I don't think I have ever seen where Bo said that he expects the DL to be better. I heard the "I expect the defense to be five times better" quote many times, but I've never seen him directly address the DL.

 

I do remember Carl addressing the DL and saying that you don't just replace a player like Suh, and that the entire defensive line would have to step up significantly to replace his productivity.

 

Edit: Are you really arguing that our DL statistics next year will be better than this year? I don't ever bet money . . . but that would be something I would want to wager on. Semantics aside, there is a much greater chance that our DL is worse next year than the chance that the DL will be better.

[knapplc]

As for this analysis:

Allen > Allen

Steinkuhler < Suh

Crick > Crick

Meredith > Turner

I'd argue (using the same notation):

Allen > Allen

Steinkuhler (or Moore/etc.) <<< Suh

Crick > Crick

Meredith (or Ankrah/Williams/etc.) <= Turner

You didn't watch Turner much if you think Meredith won't walk in and be as good or better. Meredith started zero games to Turner's 14 and has stats that are half as good in just spot duty. I can't find a breakdown of plays each saw, but if I could I will guarantee that, per play, Meredith out-performed Turner. No question.

 

And while I can't cite anything to disagree with your <<<Suh assessment, I don't think the dropoff is going to be that pronounced. Stein is getting a lot of love. Moore is a stud with an injury problem. I'm not going to pretend either is remotely comparable to Suh, but it won't be like a black hole suddenly developed.

 

Crick will be improved with a year of starting under his belt. I don't think anyone is debating that.

 

Allen should be better with a year under his belt. I think he regressed slightly from 2008 to 2009, having trouble shedding blocks and making plays, and hopefully that's addressed in the offseason.