Count 'Bility Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I still struggle why people let stats fool them into thinking Bo had a strong pass defense. Teams didn't have to pass, but they certainly could if they wanted to. I still struggle why people let stats fool them into thinking Bo had a strong pass defense. Teams didn't have to pass, but they certainly could if they wanted to.It's easy to have a statistically good pass defense when You allow hundreds of rushing yards Bo's good pass defenses were measured in a way in which it had nothing to due with how many times or how well a team ran the ball on him. It was measured in pass efficiency defense. Yards per completion. Or yards per attempt. So if Bo always drops 7 in coverage that can't inflate those stats? I bet it does Quote Link to comment
Dr. Strangelove Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I still struggle why people let stats fool them into thinking Bo had a strong pass defense. Teams didn't have to pass, but they certainly could if they wanted to. I still struggle why people let stats fool them into thinking Bo had a strong pass defense. Teams didn't have to pass, but they certainly could if they wanted to.It's easy to have a statistically good pass defense when You allow hundreds of rushing yards Bo's good pass defenses were measured in a way in which it had nothing to due with how many times or how well a team ran the ball on him. It was measured in pass efficiency defense. Yards per completion. Or yards per attempt. So if Bo always drops 7 in coverage that can't inflate those stats? I bet it does I'm just saying that the parameters of which his pass defense was measured factually had nothing to do with how many times a team threw or ran the ball or how successful they were at running. It was based on efficiency against the pass alone. Now, if the stat was based on average yards per game, then yes, it's inflated because it's irrelevant to hold a team to 100 yards passing a game when theyre running for 400+. But his pass defense success was based on efficiency agaisnt the pass alone. It was pretty good even when teams were throwing a lot. I always go back to Texas's '09 defense in that big 12 title game and all the prop they constantly got for having the top rushing defense, and they showed the ranks based on yards per game, which was crap because no one in the big 12 ran. That's an instance of style affecting stat. These are the reasons a lot of folks arent looking at big picture stats anymore and these efficiency ratings are starting to become all the big craze in statistical analysis. In contradiction, I agree that it was in sacrafice of defending the run. This is obvious as well. Im just pointing out a simple fact that Bo's pass defense and secondaries werent known as very good simply because "teams didnt have to pass against us" cuz that's not how it was measured. Yes, embarrasingly we showed no respect against the run against anyone. This is a great post. Measured by an efficiency standpoint, Pelini's pass defense constantly ranked among the best in college football. Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Banker talked a lot about playing a Quarters system earlier. Man-free also. Compared it to MSU. I see some growing pains, but overall, I think we might see faster tempo from some of the kids (mentally), which may have less mistakes. MSU might have been a consistently good defense lately, but they have been vulnerable. But name a defense that hasn't been. What you have to ask yourself is are the "Jimmy's and Joe's" (as Banker calls them) better than MSU's and are they better than Oregon State's? I think it's obvious that our talent is by far better than Oregon State's. As a very biased Nebraska fan, I would say our talent on D is better than MSU's too, but not by too much. Also, Banker is no Narduzzi. Overall, the team's overall excitement about the new scheme should mean something. One thing I see is that they can see themselves "fit" within the scheme. I think A LOT of them did not feel comfortable and did not feel like they "fit" in Bo's scheme. I think the player's ability to see the fit and feel comfortable within the scheme goes a long way in how they can better execute from play to play. Shilique Calhoun < Randy LT < Maliek Joel Heath < Valentine Marcus Rush > McMullen Star/Buck: Darrien Harris > Bando Mike: Taiwan Jones > Roach Sam/Will: Ed Davis > Newby/Santos Lippett & Waynes > Mitchell, Davie FS: Kurtis Drummond > Nate Gerry SS: RJ Williamson > Corey Cooper MSU 8-3. I'd say they're much more talented How can you say that be for our players are in a similar type system? Quote Link to comment
cg_8 Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I think it's obvious that our talent is by far better than Oregon State's. As a very biased Nebraska fan, I would say our talent on D is better than MSU's too, but not by too much. Shilique Calhoun < Randy LT < Maliek Joel Heath < Valentine Marcus Rush > McMullen Star/Buck: Darrien Harris > Bando Mike: Taiwan Jones > Roach Sam/Will: Ed Davis > Newby/Santos Lippett & Waynes > Mitchell, Davie FS: Kurtis Drummond > Nate Gerry SS: RJ Williamson > Corey Cooper MSU 8-3. I'd say they're much more talented I said "VERY BIASED NEBRASKA FAN" for a reason... I don't look at all these "All Big Ten" picks that most reasonable and sensible college football fans would usually look at... That makes WAAAAYYY too much sense dude! Quote Link to comment
Hedley Lamarr Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Banker talked a lot about playing a Quarters system earlier. Man-free also. Compared it to MSU. I see some growing pains, but overall, I think we might see faster tempo from some of the kids (mentally), which may have less mistakes. MSU might have been a consistently good defense lately, but they have been vulnerable. But name a defense that hasn't been. What you have to ask yourself is are the "Jimmy's and Joe's" (as Banker calls them) better than MSU's and are they better than Oregon State's? I think it's obvious that our talent is by far better than Oregon State's. As a very biased Nebraska fan, I would say our talent on D is better than MSU's too, but not by too much. Also, Banker is no Narduzzi. Overall, the team's overall excitement about the new scheme should mean something. One thing I see is that they can see themselves "fit" within the scheme. I think A LOT of them did not feel comfortable and did not feel like they "fit" in Bo's scheme. I think the player's ability to see the fit and feel comfortable within the scheme goes a long way in how they can better execute from play to play. Shilique Calhoun < Randy LT < Maliek Joel Heath < Valentine Marcus Rush > McMullen Star/Buck: Darrien Harris > Bando Mike: Taiwan Jones > Roach Sam/Will: Ed Davis > Newby/Santos Lippett & Waynes > Mitchell, Davie FS: Kurtis Drummond > Nate Gerry SS: RJ Williamson > Corey Cooper MSU 8-3. I'd say they're much more talented How can you say that be for our players are in a similar type system? Apples and Oranges are both fruit? Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Banker talked a lot about playing a Quarters system earlier. Man-free also. Compared it to MSU. I see some growing pains, but overall, I think we might see faster tempo from some of the kids (mentally), which may have less mistakes. MSU might have been a consistently good defense lately, but they have been vulnerable. But name a defense that hasn't been. What you have to ask yourself is are the "Jimmy's and Joe's" (as Banker calls them) better than MSU's and are they better than Oregon State's? I think it's obvious that our talent is by far better than Oregon State's. As a very biased Nebraska fan, I would say our talent on D is better than MSU's too, but not by too much. Also, Banker is no Narduzzi. Overall, the team's overall excitement about the new scheme should mean something. One thing I see is that they can see themselves "fit" within the scheme. I think A LOT of them did not feel comfortable and did not feel like they "fit" in Bo's scheme. I think the player's ability to see the fit and feel comfortable within the scheme goes a long way in how they can better execute from play to play. Shilique Calhoun < Randy LT < Maliek Joel Heath < Valentine Marcus Rush > McMullen Star/Buck: Darrien Harris > Bando Mike: Taiwan Jones > Roach Sam/Will: Ed Davis > Newby/Santos Lippett & Waynes > Mitchell, Davie FS: Kurtis Drummond > Nate Gerry SS: RJ Williamson > Corey Cooper MSU 8-3. I'd say they're much more talented How can you say that be for our players are in a similar type system?Apples and Oranges are both fruit?So, you take Payton mannng and put him in a triple option offense he will look just as good? BS.... Suh looked just as good with Cosgrove as his coach? Quote Link to comment
Hedley Lamarr Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Banker talked a lot about playing a Quarters system earlier. Man-free also. Compared it to MSU. I see some growing pains, but overall, I think we might see faster tempo from some of the kids (mentally), which may have less mistakes. MSU might have been a consistently good defense lately, but they have been vulnerable. But name a defense that hasn't been. What you have to ask yourself is are the "Jimmy's and Joe's" (as Banker calls them) better than MSU's and are they better than Oregon State's? I think it's obvious that our talent is by far better than Oregon State's. As a very biased Nebraska fan, I would say our talent on D is better than MSU's too, but not by too much. Also, Banker is no Narduzzi. Overall, the team's overall excitement about the new scheme should mean something. One thing I see is that they can see themselves "fit" within the scheme. I think A LOT of them did not feel comfortable and did not feel like they "fit" in Bo's scheme. I think the player's ability to see the fit and feel comfortable within the scheme goes a long way in how they can better execute from play to play. Shilique Calhoun < Randy LT < Maliek Joel Heath < Valentine Marcus Rush > McMullen Star/Buck: Darrien Harris > Bando Mike: Taiwan Jones > Roach Sam/Will: Ed Davis > Newby/Santos Lippett & Waynes > Mitchell, Davie FS: Kurtis Drummond > Nate Gerry SS: RJ Williamson > Corey Cooper MSU 8-3. I'd say they're much more talented How can you say that be for our players are in a similar type system?Apples and Oranges are both fruit?So, you take Payton mannng and put him in a triple option offense he will look just as good? BS.... Suh looked just as good with Cosgrove as his coach? Which is rounder, an Orange? Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.