Rewatched Game- Defensive Thoughts

[admo]

1. The windows Brett Smith put the ball into were just insane. He might be the most impressive QB we see this year. EDIT: Just saw a stat that in Smith's last 5 games he has an 17:1 TD/INT ratio....that's accuracy.

2. The last TD for Wyo should have not happened...Moss was bear hugged as he about got by this blocker and was about to get Smith. That was a terrible missed call.

3. Banderas was more aggressive than Santos.

4. There were times we had 5 of 6 guys in the box where guys were first time contributors.

5. Gerry is the athlete we thought he was. When he lets himself play he is relentless.

6. After game was not impressed with Ankrah....but he I take that back now, he played well.

7. Randle was equally disappointing 2nd time....just didn't see "it".

8. Our DE's really got in there, the problem was breaking down and not letting Smith sidestep them as they flew by.

9. Gregory is an athletic force, chasing down WR's 10-15 yards down field.

10. VV show he CAN be the DT we all have been looking for.

 

Seriously, the pocket presence that Smith showed was amazing. But even more amazing than that was the windows he put the ball in. There were multiple throws (5ish) that if it the ball is 1ft behind or short we are picking it off. And I promise that every QB we face won't be able to put the ball in places he did.

 

I feel cautiously optimistic after watching the game. The O put the D is some bad spots late in the game.

11) any thoughts as to why they were getting like 8-9 yds a pop in the ground game? That worries me, alot.

 

Yes. In the first half, MLB Santos was pretty much out on an island. We played nickel & dime mostly with 2-high safeties. In the second half we brought one of the safeties up into the box to help against the run. Not every play though. WYO then adjusted by running when they saw Jackson stay back, and passed when he move up into the box. The corners played soft press. Also when Smith broke his long run in the second quarter, there was absolutely no one in the middle of the field. Same thing for the RB in 1st quarter. In the third quarter we got a big break when they snapped the ball over Smith's head. The inside screen was there with the left half of the field empty. He didn't have enough time to recover and make the throw. That cost them 7 points if not 3.

[The Dude]

McKewon was on USC this afternoon, and he and Severe were saying that the D blitzed quite a bit, but the blitzes were uneffective.

Pretty good description of the bowl game too.

[ColoradoHusk]

McKewon was on USC this afternoon, and he and Severe were saying that the D blitzed quite a bit, but the blitzes were uneffective.

Pretty good description of the bowl game too.

They mentioned the Georgia game, as an example of Bo showing blitz tendencies. They mentioned a 3rd and 13 where Bo blitzed, and Georgia hit a big play on it.

[ZRod]

11) any thoughts as to why they were getting like 8-9 yds a pop in the ground game? That worries me, alot.

Nebraska did not plan on Wyoming running the ball as much as they did. Which nobody would if you have watched the Wyoming offense at all in the last couple years. You could see for much of the first quarter the defense was not respecting the run what so ever and Wyoming did a great job of getting matchups they wanted when they wanted to run the ball. It came down to Wyoming's gameplan more than Nebraska's ability to stop the run. In the second half they stuffed a lot more runs and only allowed minimal gains except maybe a couple plays.

 

Pretty much every team can run on us. Bo's scheme is ripe to be run on, that's why we frequently get the ball shoved down our throats by teams that aren't even good at running the ball. It's not really gameplan. A team sees it's very easy to run on us so they continue to do so.

Totally false.

 

It was sloppy line play and poor LB/DB play. In the first quarter VV was rushing up the field without regard to where the ball carrier was going and the LBs and DBs were just tacking poor angles on their flow, or not keeping leverage on their blockers. VV and the others settled more as the game went on. If you take away the longs runs from Smith and their running back, I think they were both crappy plays on our part, they only average about 4.5ypc, not that great but better the the 7.3 listed for the game.

 

Like I said in another thread the QB runs don't bother me so much because they're are going to happen and we've proven in the past that unless he's a freak athlete we'll be fine.

[admo]

11) any thoughts as to why they were getting like 8-9 yds a pop in the ground game? That worries me, alot.

Nebraska did not plan on Wyoming running the ball as much as they did. Which nobody would if you have watched the Wyoming offense at all in the last couple years. You could see for much of the first quarter the defense was not respecting the run what so ever and Wyoming did a great job of getting matchups they wanted when they wanted to run the ball. It came down to Wyoming's gameplan more than Nebraska's ability to stop the run. In the second half they stuffed a lot more runs and only allowed minimal gains except maybe a couple plays.

 

Pretty much every team can run on us. Bo's scheme is ripe to be run on, that's why we frequently get the ball shoved down our throats by teams that aren't even good at running the ball. It's not really gameplan. A team sees it's very easy to run on us so they continue to do so.

Totally false.

 

It was sloppy line play and poor LB/DB play. In the first quarter VV was rushing up the field without regard to where the ball carrier was going and the LBs and DBs were just tacking poor angles on their flow, or not keeping leverage on their blockers. VV and the others settled more as the game went on. If you take away the longs runs from Smith and their running back, I think they were both crappy plays on our part, they only average about 4.5ypc, not that great but better the the 7.3 listed for the game.

 

Like I said in another thread the QB runs don't bother me so much because they're are going to happen and we've proven in the past that unless he's a freak athlete we'll be fine.

LOL no you can't take away those runs because, they really did happen. It is averaged in for a reason. Just because WYO did not score on those two runs, they did score a touchdown on each drive that they occurred on. That's fourteen points and those runs were a big part of it. Got to average it in unfortunately.

[alwayshusking]

11) any thoughts as to why they were getting like 8-9 yds a pop in the ground game? That worries me, alot.

Nebraska did not plan on Wyoming running the ball as much as they did. Which nobody would if you have watched the Wyoming offense at all in the last couple years. You could see for much of the first quarter the defense was not respecting the run what so ever and Wyoming did a great job of getting matchups they wanted when they wanted to run the ball. It came down to Wyoming's gameplan more than Nebraska's ability to stop the run. In the second half they stuffed a lot more runs and only allowed minimal gains except maybe a couple plays.

 

Pretty much every team can run on us. Bo's scheme is ripe to be run on, that's why we frequently get the ball shoved down our throats by teams that aren't even good at running the ball. It's not really gameplan. A team sees it's very easy to run on us so they continue to do so.

Totally false.

 

It was sloppy line play and poor LB/DB play. In the first quarter VV was rushing up the field without regard to where the ball carrier was going and the LBs and DBs were just tacking poor angles on their flow, or not keeping leverage on their blockers. VV and the others settled more as the game went on. If you take away the longs runs from Smith and their running back, I think they were both crappy plays on our part, they only average about 4.5ypc, not that great but better the the 7.3 listed for the game.

 

Like I said in another thread the QB runs don't bother me so much because they're are going to happen and we've proven in the past that unless he's a freak athlete we'll be fine.

 

What's totally false? Bo's scheme is weak against the run. How he thinks he can win in the run game when we are outnumbered by 2 is pure delusion. He could cheat the numbers game when we had Suh, but he can't anymore. He needs to commit to stopping the run with more players in the box specifically up the middle.

 

The only years we've been good against the run was 2008-2009 (Suh). We'll be soft against the run until he changes his philosophy and commits to stopping the run.

 

Nebraska's Rush defense rank nationally

 

2008 21st

2009 9th

2010 63rd

2011 64th

2012 90th

2013 94th (currently)

[The Dude]

We can't invent a new reality just because the actual chain of events don't suit our fancy.

[walksalone]

What's totally false? Bo's scheme is weak against the run. How he thinks he can win in the run game when we are outnumbered by 2 is pure delusion. He could cheat the numbers game when we had Suh, but he can't anymore. He needs to commit to stopping the run with more players in the box specifically up the middle.

 

The only years we've been good against the run was 2008-2009 (Suh). We'll be soft against the run until he changes his philosophy and commits to stopping the run.

 

Nebraska's Rush defense rank nationally

 

2008 21st

2009 9th

2010 63rd

2011 64th

2012 90th

2013 94th (currently)

 

I can see where you're coming from, I understand and share a lot of the same skepticisims, you gotta remember we had a pertty brutal schedule past couple years. If we don't see an improvement this year, then there are some questions that need to be answered...

[ZRod]

LOL no you can't take away those runs because, they really did happen. It is averaged in for a reason. Just because WYO did not score on those two runs, they did score a touchdown on each drive that they occurred on. That's fourteen points and those runs were a big part of it. Got to average it in unfortunately.

LOL they're called outliers LOL! I'm not all about throwing statistics out there without background.

[The Dude]

Giving up big plays has been one of the biggest problems with this defense, we can't just pretend those big plays don't happen because it makes the average look better.

 

I mean you can, but it's not going to fix the problem.

 

 

 

edit: and saying teams haven't been taking advantage of our poor run defense is a complete crock of poopy.

[admo]

11) any thoughts as to why they were getting like 8-9 yds a pop in the ground game? That worries me, alot.

Nebraska did not plan on Wyoming running the ball as much as they did. Which nobody would if you have watched the Wyoming offense at all in the last couple years. You could see for much of the first quarter the defense was not respecting the run what so ever and Wyoming did a great job of getting matchups they wanted when they wanted to run the ball. It came down to Wyoming's gameplan more than Nebraska's ability to stop the run. In the second half they stuffed a lot more runs and only allowed minimal gains except maybe a couple plays.

 

Pretty much every team can run on us. Bo's scheme is ripe to be run on, that's why we frequently get the ball shoved down our throats by teams that aren't even good at running the ball. It's not really gameplan. A team sees it's very easy to run on us so they continue to do so.

Totally false.

 

It was sloppy line play and poor LB/DB play. In the first quarter VV was rushing up the field without regard to where the ball carrier was going and the LBs and DBs were just tacking poor angles on their flow, or not keeping leverage on their blockers. VV and the others settled more as the game went on. If you take away the longs runs from Smith and their running back, I think they were both crappy plays on our part, they only average about 4.5ypc, not that great but better the the 7.3 listed for the game.

 

Like I said in another thread the QB runs don't bother me so much because they're are going to happen and we've proven in the past that unless he's a freak athlete we'll be fine.

 

What's totally false? Bo's scheme is weak against the run. How he thinks he can win in the run game when we are outnumbered by 2 is pure delusion. He could cheat the numbers game when we had Suh, but he can't anymore. He needs to commit to stopping the run with more players in the box specifically up the middle.

 

The only years we've been good against the run was 2008-2009 (Suh). We'll be soft against the run until he changes his philosophy and commits to stopping the run.

 

Nebraska's Rush defense rank nationally

 

2008 21st

2009 9th

2010 63rd

2011 64th

2012 90th

2013 94th (currently)

 

Soft against the run? You would be correct. Commit to stopping the run? I'm all for that. It's highly unlikely that a full commitment to heavy pass coverage will take a back seat in strategy. That's why we see a lot of nickel and dime coverage with just 5 or 6 in the box. Exploiting that with pistol set formation and running the ball seems to be fortunate theme. Works even better with a mobile QB.

[ZRod]

Giving up big plays has been one of the biggest problems with this defense, we can't just pretend those big plays don't happen because it makes the average look better.

 

I mean you can, but it's not going to fix the problem.

That's not really what I was getting at. Yeah they're a problem but if you address the breakdowns associated with those plays then we improve quite a bit is basically what I'm trying to say.

[Enhance]

Addison, it's perfectly acceptable to take out outliers/anomalies as a separate way to analyze data. If a running back runs 25 times a game for 100 yards, but one of those runs was for 75 yards, that means the other 24 runs netted only 25 yards total (slightly over a yard per play). So yes, an "average" includes all the data, but if you really look at the data (in my scenario) you see that the running back really struggled save one play.

 

There's nothing wrong with that analysis as long as you don't discount other forms of data. Hell, even professional statistical analysts look at data without outliers or pure averages. True averages can be very misleading.

[admo]

LOL no you can't take away those runs because, they really did happen. It is averaged in for a reason. Just because WYO did not score on those two runs, they did score a touchdown on each drive that they occurred on. That's fourteen points and those runs were a big part of it. Got to average it in unfortunately.

LOL they're called outliers LOL! I'm not all about throwing statistics out there without background.

 

LOL yeah I hear ya. I do think this D has better talent this year and agree with you that these guys will improve as they get more reps and settled in.

[alwayshusking]

Throw out our big plays and we lose. It's silly to throw out a team's most successful plays. We gave up 28 plays of 10 yards or more in the game. We were gashed continually on the ground and through the air.