Defense, the numbers don’t lie

[Pedro Guerrero]

Yikes! Nice defensive numbers.

http://www.omaha.com/article/20111013/BIGRED/710139710/1001#chatelain-defense-the-numbers-don-t-lie

[Saunders]

This is what he should have been writing last week, but good article.

[knapplc]

This is what he should have been writing last week, but good article.

 

Dirk asked a couple of days ago on Twitter what he should write about next, and listed off several things, none of which were related to the defense. My response:

 

@dirkchatelain The elephant in the room! Diagnose the defense! Why is nobody talking about the defense?

 

I've been meaning to post a big, long thread about the defense, and I was going to title it "Diagnosing the Defense," but to date I haven't had time to write it. Work is hectic right now.

[NUance]

@dirkchatelain The elephant in the room! Diagnose the defense! Why is nobody talking about the defense?

WTF? Nobody talking about defense? I thought *everybody* was talking about defense. And not in a good way.

[caveman99]

I find those numbers interesting. The biggest issue IMO on the passing first downs Dirk mentions is mobile QB's rolling out and keeping plays alive. The D seems to have a big issue maintaining contain and holding coverage for that long. On one hand I would be more inclined to blame the front 7 as it is nearly impossible for any DB to cover for more than 5 seconds, but then again there are the flat out blown coverages....................

[knapplc]

@dirkchatelain The elephant in the room! Diagnose the defense! Why is nobody talking about the defense?

WTF? Nobody talking about defense? I thought *everybody* was talking about defense. And not in a good way.

Everybody where? News articles are probably 3:1 about the offense. Threads here at HuskerBoard are at least at that ratio, and I would say threads specifically about Taylor are 5:1 or greater than threads about the defense.

 

 

[NUance]

@dirkchatelain The elephant in the room! Diagnose the defense! Why is nobody talking about the defense?

WTF? Nobody talking about defense? I thought *everybody* was talking about defense. And not in a good way.

Everybody where? News articles are probably 3:1 about the offense. Threads here at HuskerBoard are at least at that ratio, and I would say threads specifically about Taylor are 5:1 or greater than threads about the defense.

Well, everybody that matters is. Like me!

[knapplc]

I think, in general, it's easier to talk about the offense, which is why people usually do. I get the impression from many conversations that the nuances (no pun intended) of the defense are harder to grasp. For example, so many of us simply presumed O'Hanlon blew coverage on that late play at VA Tech years ago, then someone came in and explained his responsibilities to us and we were all like, "Oh... OK."

 

 

[caveman99]

I think, in general, it's easier to talk about the offense, which is why people usually do. I get the impression from many conversations that the nuances (no pun intended) of the defense are harder to grasp. For example, so many of us simply presumed O'Hanlon blew coverage on that late play at VA Tech years ago, then someone came in and explained his responsibilities to us and we were all like, "Oh... OK."

Except that Marvin himself said O'Hanlon messed up.

[DJR313]

I think the numbers to this point aren't great, but I look for many more slugfests in conference to bring those numbers down. Washington was held to 17 through the first 52 minutes until the Defense decided to take a nap, which normally does not happen, and Wisconsin was a nightmare that I equate to the 04 Texas Tech game which will skew the numbers a bit.

 

I look for the D to get well in the well-timed bye week. They will rally around Crick going down. They just need to stop waiting for someone to make a play, but need to go out and make one happen. Minnesota, Michigan State, Iowa and Penn State will probably not get in the 20's. Michigan and Northwestern are the 2 teams that have offenses that scare me. This will not be Pelini's best or worst defense here, but will be servicable by the end of the season, I believe.

[knapplc]

I think, in general, it's easier to talk about the offense, which is why people usually do. I get the impression from many conversations that the nuances (no pun intended) of the defense are harder to grasp. For example, so many of us simply presumed O'Hanlon blew coverage on that late play at VA Tech years ago, then someone came in and explained his responsibilities to us and we were all like, "Oh... OK."

Except that Marvin himself said O'Hanlon messed up.

But, and this is the point, nobody here knew why until that defense was explained. One pull-quote from an article doesn't mean people grasp the subtleties of defense.

[JJ Husker]

Yes. It is amazing that there are all these threads and media coverage of the offense and Martinez in particular. I guess an ugly throwing motion and some questionable play calling in bad situations will generate talk but it has been painfully obvious to me and many other posters here that the defense is 98% of our serious problems. As bad offensively as the game at wiscy was, if anyone expects us to outscore 48 pts against a team of that caliber they are delusional. The D has been horrendous with only a handful of intermittent individual bright spots ala Lavonte. The fundementals are bad and I am really beginning to suspect the overall theory and scheme may need to change to make allowances for our youthful secondary, lack of size, confusing lack of speed, and glaring inability to get any kind of pass rush. Luckily the things I don't doubt are our players skill and desire and the ability of our coaches to recognize the issues. I just don't understand what is taking them so long to make more changes than simply a body here or there.

[nebraskaart]

Love the Husker "Rant". Here's a snid bit from it.

 

"For a 5 1/2 quarter stretch of the last 2 games, including the last 3 qtrs of Wisconsin and the first 2 1/2 against Ohio State, Nebraska was outscored.....62-9. However, during the other positive 2 1/2 qtrs, Nebraska outscored Wiscy and OSU, 48-7. Yes we are 5-1 but all is not well in Huskerland. Are We Dr. Jeckyll....or Hyde? Do we dance like Fred Flinstone?....or like Fred Astaire?

 

Polar opposites....The first half was the worst prepared Husker team, excluding clueless Callahan, and execution of game plan that I had ever witnessed.... and the 2nd half was it's...... Antartica."

[SnowBigRed]

I'm not a defensive genius by any means, but I guess I just don't understand why Nebraska had to change the defense to a more traditional 4-3 set. I just don't buy the whole Big 10 being more physical than the Big 12 talk. I think they should have stuck with what they know, what they are good at, the 4-2-5 look. Surely the Pelinis can scheme around the more physical teams (Wiscy, OSU, Iowa) and still be able to keep up with the more spread teams (UM, NW). I just don't understand why Nebraska needed to completely scrap what they were good at just to "fit in" to the new conference. They don't have to do the same thing as everybody else.

 

Have Dennard, SJB, at corners, maybe Smith and Osborne at safeties (both of which are pretty good sized safeties) and Stafford at the rover, monster, peso, whatever they call it. Stafford is damn near as big as David. Need to find one more LB that covers a lot of ground and is a sure tackler, and then whichever 4 DL they want. It sure would be nice to have a guy like Phil Dillard to roam the middle a little, but I just don't know if there is a guy like that on the team.

 

I guess I'm just a firm believer in doing what you know and what you are used to, rather than changing it all up just for the sake of changing. NU has recruited for the 4-2-5 for the past few years, and those are the types of guys they have, so use them to their strengths. Then again, maybe NU makes the switch to a traditional 4-3 and has great success with it. At that point, I will eat my words.

[Enhance]

I find it ridiculous that Chatelain has to include "IN MY OPINION" near the header of the article.