Nebraska defensive backs seek fast track to major improvement

[Saunders]

An examination of the Nebraska secondary indicates that it remains perhaps a year away from coming of age. There are just two seniors among 20-plus players expected on the 2016 roster, and opponents torched the Cornhuskers almost weekly through the air last season.

Don’t be so sure that they'll struggle, though.

As spring practice resumes next week following a nine-day break, the Nebraska defensive backs plan to get back to work with a confidence that belies their production from last year.

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/131705/nebraska-defensive-backs-seek-fast-track-to-major-improvement

 

[lo country]

Good article. The secondary did improve considerably as the season progressed. Throw in Gerry's comments about different verbiage between Banker and Stewart, the talk of "buy in", new system, injuries to the LB's, guys reverting back "to the old scheme", poor pass rush etc it is a recipe for the crap show we saw last year.

 

Do I expect our pass D to be top 10 next year? No. Do I expect it to be visibly improved? Yes. I think if teams figure to go air raid against the D they might be in for a surprise.

 

This is year two. Wrinkles are being ironed out. Guys are all in. Guys have much more experience. This year will be different.

[Hunter94]

Kalu (got better last year) and Gerry will anchor the defense, depends how the other guys come along........

[BigRedBuster]

Good article. The secondary did improve considerably as the season progressed. Throw in Gerry's comments about different verbiage between Banker and Stewart, the talk of "buy in", new system, injuries to the LB's, guys reverting back "to the old scheme", poor pass rush etc it is a recipe for the crap show we saw last year.

 

Do I expect our pass D to be top 10 next year? No. Do I expect it to be visibly improved? Yes. I think if teams figure to go air raid against the D they might be in for a surprise.

 

This is year two. Wrinkles are being ironed out. Guys are all in. Guys have much more experience. This year will be different.

I agree with this.

 

Last year just seemed to be a cocktail made for disaster in the secondary. Unfortunately that happened. However, we did see improvement towards the end of the year. If the changes in the coaching structure with the DBs does what it's supposed to do and all the players are more experienced and buying in more to the system, we should see big improvement.

 

PS....and an improved pass rush will help them too.

[Sargon]

Good article. The secondary did improve considerably as the season progressed. Throw in Gerry's comments about different verbiage between Banker and Stewart, the talk of "buy in", new system, injuries to the LB's, guys reverting back "to the old scheme", poor pass rush etc it is a recipe for the crap show we saw last year.

 

Do I expect our pass D to be top 10 next year? No. Do I expect it to be visibly improved? Yes. I think if teams figure to go air raid against the D they might be in for a surprise.

 

This is year two. Wrinkles are being ironed out. Guys are all in. Guys have much more experience. This year will be different.

 

[Moesker]

 

 

PS....and an improved pass rush will help them too.

 

Very important. The secondary can only cover for so long and any decent QB will pick apart a defense if he has enough time to do so.

[teachercd]

I am with BRB...the pass rush will make all the difference in the world. Last year one of the ends was basically a statue out there.

[lo country]

 

 

 

PS....and an improved pass rush will help them too.

 

Very important. The secondary can only cover for so long and any decent QB will pick apart a defense if he has enough time to do so.

 

Absolutely as important as great DB play. No DB can cover for more than a few seconds. IIRC, most QB's threw for a better completion percentage against us than most teams. DB issues? Sure. Lack of pressure? Absolutely.

 

We allowed QB's so much time back there that NU should have started charging rent for the home games....

[Dr. Strangelove]

Good article. The secondary did improve considerably as the season progressed. Throw in Gerry's comments about different verbiage between Banker and Stewart, the talk of "buy in", new system, injuries to the LB's, guys reverting back "to the old scheme", poor pass rush etc it is a recipe for the crap show we saw last year.

 

Do I expect our pass D to be top 10 next year? No. Do I expect it to be visibly improved? Yes. I think if teams figure to go air raid against the D they might be in for a surprise.

 

This is year two. Wrinkles are being ironed out. Guys are all in. Guys have much more experience. This year will be different.

I'm not sure our secondary improved much as the year went on, as much as we simply started playing teams that were incapable of taking advantage.

 

Iowa was never going to light us up through the air. I would argue that UCLA had plenty of success throwing the ball, our offense simply did a good job of keeping Rosen & Co. off the field. I do agree that the pass defense should improve, there's simply nowhere to go but up. I'm uncertain if the improvement will be enough, however, to really think they've turned some kind of corner. Hopefully I'm wrong.

[Redux]

If we don't defend the pass very well, we will surrender a lot of yards.

 

Yeah, that just happened.

[MichiganDad3]

We were so bad last year that improving is nearly a given. Baker's defenses have been mediocre at best, so I expect us to improve to around the bottom quartile in performance.

[BigRedBuster]

 

Good article. The secondary did improve considerably as the season progressed. Throw in Gerry's comments about different verbiage between Banker and Stewart, the talk of "buy in", new system, injuries to the LB's, guys reverting back "to the old scheme", poor pass rush etc it is a recipe for the crap show we saw last year.

 

Do I expect our pass D to be top 10 next year? No. Do I expect it to be visibly improved? Yes. I think if teams figure to go air raid against the D they might be in for a surprise.

 

This is year two. Wrinkles are being ironed out. Guys are all in. Guys have much more experience. This year will be different.

I'm not sure our secondary improved much as the year went on, as much as we simply started playing teams that were incapable of taking advantage.

 

Iowa was never going to light us up through the air. I would argue that UCLA had plenty of success throwing the ball, our offense simply did a good job of keeping Rosen & Co. off the field. I do agree that the pass defense should improve, there's simply nowhere to go but up. I'm uncertain if the improvement will be enough, however, to really think they've turned some kind of corner. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

 

Nat'l

Final ranking

MSU 24-39-1 348 6th

Rutgers 14-28-2 170 NR

Iowa 9-16-0 97 9th

UCLA 26-41-2 319 NR

 

Total 73-124-5 934 Yards

 

Compared to:

 

BYU 28-46-1 379 NR

USA 26-45-1 313 NR

Miami 25-42-1 379 NR

USM 26-42-0 447 NR

 

Total 105-175-3 1,518 Yards

 

 

Not sure how you can say we didn't improve.

[HuskermanMike]

 

 

Good article. The secondary did improve considerably as the season progressed. Throw in Gerry's comments about different verbiage between Banker and Stewart, the talk of "buy in", new system, injuries to the LB's, guys reverting back "to the old scheme", poor pass rush etc it is a recipe for the crap show we saw last year.

 

Do I expect our pass D to be top 10 next year? No. Do I expect it to be visibly improved? Yes. I think if teams figure to go air raid against the D they might be in for a surprise.

 

This is year two. Wrinkles are being ironed out. Guys are all in. Guys have much more experience. This year will be different.

I'm not sure our secondary improved much as the year went on, as much as we simply started playing teams that were incapable of taking advantage.

 

Iowa was never going to light us up through the air. I would argue that UCLA had plenty of success throwing the ball, our offense simply did a good job of keeping Rosen & Co. off the field. I do agree that the pass defense should improve, there's simply nowhere to go but up. I'm uncertain if the improvement will be enough, however, to really think they've turned some kind of corner. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

 

Nat'l

Final ranking

MSU 24-39-1 348 6th

Rutgers 14-28-2 170 NR

Iowa 9-16-0 97 9th

UCLA 26-41-2 319 NR

 

Total 73-124-5 934 Yards

 

Compared to:

 

BYU 28-46-1 379 NR

USA 26-45-1 313 NR

Miami 25-42-1 379 NR

USM 26-42-0 447 NR

 

Total 105-175-3 1,518 Yards

 

 

Not sure how you can say we didn't improve.

 

 

 

 

Good article. The secondary did improve considerably as the season progressed. Throw in Gerry's comments about different verbiage between Banker and Stewart, the talk of "buy in", new system, injuries to the LB's, guys reverting back "to the old scheme", poor pass rush etc it is a recipe for the crap show we saw last year.

 

Do I expect our pass D to be top 10 next year? No. Do I expect it to be visibly improved? Yes. I think if teams figure to go air raid against the D they might be in for a surprise.

 

This is year two. Wrinkles are being ironed out. Guys are all in. Guys have much more experience. This year will be different.

I'm not sure our secondary improved much as the year went on, as much as we simply started playing teams that were incapable of taking advantage.

 

Iowa was never going to light us up through the air. I would argue that UCLA had plenty of success throwing the ball, our offense simply did a good job of keeping Rosen & Co. off the field. I do agree that the pass defense should improve, there's simply nowhere to go but up. I'm uncertain if the improvement will be enough, however, to really think they've turned some kind of corner. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

 

Nat'l

Final ranking

MSU 24-39-1 348 6th

Rutgers 14-28-2 170 NR

Iowa 9-16-0 97 9th

UCLA 26-41-2 319 NR

 

Total 73-124-5 934 Yards

 

Compared to:

 

BYU 28-46-1 379 NR

USA 26-45-1 313 NR

Miami 25-42-1 379 NR

USM 26-42-0 447 NR

 

Total 105-175-3 1,518 Yards

 

 

Not sure how you can say we didn't improve.

 

Nice job finding the stats +1.

 

If our pass Defense could be about top 70 that would be a big improvement. Throw in the fact that Parella will get his D-line hungry to get sacks and that will help out the DBs tremendously. If the D-line can punish when the offensive lineman in the game that would help tremendously. It would also make the HB stay and be a blocker on passing situations which means its 7 on 4 in the back end, if we use our mlb as a spy for the qb. Basically, my point is if the D-line improves, the DBs will improve also and I think we will get more sacks/hurries on the qb this year after underachieving last year.

[Saunders]

 

 

Good article. The secondary did improve considerably as the season progressed. Throw in Gerry's comments about different verbiage between Banker and Stewart, the talk of "buy in", new system, injuries to the LB's, guys reverting back "to the old scheme", poor pass rush etc it is a recipe for the crap show we saw last year.

 

Do I expect our pass D to be top 10 next year? No. Do I expect it to be visibly improved? Yes. I think if teams figure to go air raid against the D they might be in for a surprise.

 

This is year two. Wrinkles are being ironed out. Guys are all in. Guys have much more experience. This year will be different.

I'm not sure our secondary improved much as the year went on, as much as we simply started playing teams that were incapable of taking advantage.

 

Iowa was never going to light us up through the air. I would argue that UCLA had plenty of success throwing the ball, our offense simply did a good job of keeping Rosen & Co. off the field. I do agree that the pass defense should improve, there's simply nowhere to go but up. I'm uncertain if the improvement will be enough, however, to really think they've turned some kind of corner. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

 

Nat'l

Final ranking

MSU 24-39-1 348 6th

Rutgers 14-28-2 170 NR

Iowa 9-16-0 97 9th

UCLA 26-41-2 319 NR

 

Total 73-124-5 934 Yards

 

Compared to:

 

BYU 28-46-1 379 NR

USA 26-45-1 313 NR

Miami 25-42-1 379 NR

USM 26-42-0 447 NR

 

Total 105-175-3 1,518 Yards

 

 

Not sure how you can say we didn't improve.

 

He's saying it could be just as much due to other teams not being good enough to pass it. Sparty and UCLA didn't have much problem throwing it. Rutgers was lolbad, and Iowa's offense wasn't exactly an aerial assault.

[Dr. Strangelove]

 

 

 

Good article. The secondary did improve considerably as the season progressed. Throw in Gerry's comments about different verbiage between Banker and Stewart, the talk of "buy in", new system, injuries to the LB's, guys reverting back "to the old scheme", poor pass rush etc it is a recipe for the crap show we saw last year.

 

Do I expect our pass D to be top 10 next year? No. Do I expect it to be visibly improved? Yes. I think if teams figure to go air raid against the D they might be in for a surprise.

 

This is year two. Wrinkles are being ironed out. Guys are all in. Guys have much more experience. This year will be different.

I'm not sure our secondary improved much as the year went on, as much as we simply started playing teams that were incapable of taking advantage.

 

Iowa was never going to light us up through the air. I would argue that UCLA had plenty of success throwing the ball, our offense simply did a good job of keeping Rosen & Co. off the field. I do agree that the pass defense should improve, there's simply nowhere to go but up. I'm uncertain if the improvement will be enough, however, to really think they've turned some kind of corner. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

 

Nat'l

Final ranking

MSU 24-39-1 348 6th

Rutgers 14-28-2 170 NR

Iowa 9-16-0 97 9th

UCLA 26-41-2 319 NR

 

Total 73-124-5 934 Yards

 

Compared to:

 

BYU 28-46-1 379 NR

USA 26-45-1 313 NR

Miami 25-42-1 379 NR

USM 26-42-0 447 NR

 

Total 105-175-3 1,518 Yards

 

 

Not sure how you can say we didn't improve.

 

He's saying it could be just as much due to other teams not being good enough to pass it. Sparty and UCLA didn't have much problem throwing it. Rutgers was lolbad, and Iowa's offense wasn't exactly an aerial assault.

 

Thank you.

 

My point was that the improvement statistically wasn't as much related to the secondary becoming better as much as it was the teams we were facing simply were not good enough at throwing the ball to take advantage. UCLA even with their time of possession issues still managed to gain quite a bit through the air.