SBNation: Suh's Rams call to mind one of college footballs best defenses

[Saunders]

 

Quote

 

On Oct. 8, 2009, my understanding of football changed.
 

To that point, most of the writing I had done about offense and defense revolved around scheme and structure. 4-3 vs. 3-4 vs. 4-2-5. Spread vs. pro-style vs. triple option. We lean on these terms as stylistic short hand, but that’s all they are. So much of what you do, in both structure and tactics within structure, is based on matchups. And if you have a single, drastic advantage, you can build really creative things off of that.

On the second Thursday of October, I watched Nebraska operate out of a base dime defense. Its starting lineup listed two defensive ends, two defensive tackles, a middle linebacker, two cornerbacks, and four safeties.

 

This wasn’t a philosophical decision. Head coach Bo Pelini and his coordinator brother Carl weren’t attempting to revolutionize football defense. They were simply exploiting the biggest matchup advantage college football has seen in the 2000s.

One of their defensive tackles was Ndamukong Suh. No other matchup mattered.

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2018/3/27/17166318/ndamukong-suh-los-angeles-rams-aaron-donald

 

 

[TGHusker]

2 hours ago, Saunders said:

 

 

 

^^^ Quote from the article.   Man that was such an amazing D - if only we had a servicable O - NC.  In the "IFs and BUTs" catagory, it makes me wonder what would have happened wt Bo's career & NU's fortunes if he had gotten Texas off our back, won the CC, and won a NC that year

 

 

Quote

 

That Nebraska dime defense — the Pelinis would begin calling it the “Peso” defense the following spring — finished 2009 ranked No. 1 in Def. S&P+.

Suh not only had 20.5 tackles for loss, the double-teams he commanded set the table for tackle Jared Crick to make 12.5 and end Barry Turner to add 12 more.

Without blitzing, the Huskers’ four linemen thoroughly defeated any opposing line (even eventual BCS runner-up Texas’), and in pass-rushing situations, teams had no choice but to keep the running back in as a sixth blocker. That created a 7-on-5 advantage for the rest of the defense, 7-on-4 if the QB wasn’t a runner. A secondary that featured future pros Prince Amukamara, Larry Asante, Dejon Gomes, Eric Hagg, and Alfonzo Dennard didn’t need that much help, but got it anyway.

Eventual BCS runner-up Texas nearly fell victim to one of the most dominant individual performances we’ll ever see: Suh’s 11-tackle, 4.5-sack destruction in the Big 12 title game. Nebraska allowed 31 points to Texas Tech but otherwise only 8.8 points per game. Only one opponent (Colorado) averaged even 5 yards per play.

 

 

[Xmas32]

One of the great 'What Ifs' of Husker football history.  At the same time, I do wonder if the fact that the offense was so average actually forced the defense to elevate their play that they otherwise might not have.  Knowing that in big games you had virtually zero room for error and still delivering nearly every time was awesome.  It's hard to describe how awesome that '09 defense was if you didn't see it live.  The best thing I can come up with was it was like playing someone in Tecmo Bowl who guesses your play right every time on defense and you don't have Bo Jackson to bail you out.

[Redux]

If Nebraska had an Offense in 2009, we would have gone 11-1 on the regular season (I just don't see any way we don't piss away the T-Tech game).  Withan offense, we would have steamrolled Texas by double digits.  We would have faced Alabama in the title game, it would have been absolutely epic.

 

But think, we carry that momentum into 2010.  We aren't pissed at the Big 12 for screwing us because they couldn't have/wouldn't have.  We probably never accept that B1G offer, but Missouri does if we pass on it.  Colorado leaves and we are in a 10 team Big 12.  The 2010 season goes a couple games better than it actually did, thr Texas game obviously comes to mind.  What if that massive shift of the Texas schools go ahead and make that PAC 12 deal?  What would have happened to Nebraska?  Maybe the Big Ten already added a couple Eastern schools or got ND etc.  We wouldn't have gone West, and the ACC makes little sense.

 

If you look at it from several angles, Nebraska wasn't far off from ending up in the SEC.

[HoustonSker]

4 hours ago, TGHusker said:

 

^^^ Quote from the article.   Man that was such an amazing D - if only we had a servicable O - NC.  In the "IFs and BUTs" catagory, it makes me wonder what would have happened wt Bo's career & NU's fortunes if he had gotten Texas off our back, won the CC, and won a NC that year

 

 

 

Damn it, there was some serious talent on that D, mid 90s level talent.  

[Moiraine]

5 hours ago, TGHusker said:

 

^^^ Quote from the article.   Man that was such an amazing D - if only we had a servicable O - NC.  In the "IFs and BUTs" catagory, it makes me wonder what would have happened wt Bo's career & NU's fortunes if he had gotten Texas off our back, won the CC, and won a NC that year

 

 

Might've been as long as Stoops. Maybe it would've relaxed him a little too.

[Landlord]

3 hours ago, Redux said:

If Nebraska had an Offense in 2009, we would have gone 11-1 on the regular season (I just don't see any way we don't piss away the T-Tech game).  Withan offense, we would have steamrolled Texas by double digits.  We would have faced Alabama in the title game, it would have been absolutely epic.

 

But think, we carry that momentum into 2010.  We aren't pissed at the Big 12 for screwing us because they couldn't have/wouldn't have.  We probably never accept that B1G offer, but Missouri does if we pass on it.  Colorado leaves and we are in a 10 team Big 12.  The 2010 season goes a couple games better than it actually did, thr Texas game obviously comes to mind.  What if that massive shift of the Texas schools go ahead and make that PAC 12 deal?  What would have happened to Nebraska?  Maybe the Big Ten already added a couple Eastern schools or got ND etc.  We wouldn't have gone West, and the ACC makes little sense.

 

If you look at it from several angles, Nebraska wasn't far off from ending up in the SEC.

 

 

I think we still take the B1G offer regardless of whether we won the 2009 conference championship. Doesn't factor in at all imo

[Redux]

20 minutes ago, Landlord said:

I think we still take the B1G offer regardless of whether we won the 2009 conference championship. Doesn't factor in at all imo

 

I think the 2009 Conference Championship is the straw that broke the camels back.  TO was the driving force that got us out, I doubt he pushes us in that direction if that game doesn't finish in controversy.

[Landlord]

3 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

I think the 2009 Conference Championship is the straw that broke the camels back.  TO was the driving force that got us out, I doubt he pushes us in that direction if that game doesn't finish in controversy.

 

 

That implies that TO made an impulsive decision based off of something pretty inconsequential, instead of making a wise, big-picture decision with foresight of an unstable future. I think TO was playing chess compared to the checkers of the rest of the Big XII, rather than just making a reactionary decision because we were once again Texas' bitch.

[Redux]

A straw would imply it was one thing among many, not impulsive.

[brophog]

1 hour ago, Redux said:

A straw would imply it was one thing among many, not impulsive.

 

True. 

 

But the real debate at that time was about conference survival, and it's hard to envision, regardless of the results of that game, Nebraska being in a position to survive as what we now consider a P5 school in the Big 12 had half a dozen schools actually left the Big 12 at that time. It's very possible, had those schools left at that time, that there are now four and not five power conferences, and very possible Nebraska joins the Big 10, anyhow.

 

Of all of the schools that eventually left, Nebraska is unique in this regard. Nebraska is also unique in that they were given an ultimatum....agree to the conditions of the conference, which tended to favor Texas, or get out. Nebraska decided to be proactive and leave, rather than let their fate be decided by others.

 

Rather than a "final straw" scenario, I could better see that game maybe having enough of an impact that it may have swung the eternal power struggle enough to Nebraska to avoid being more or less forced out. At the time, it was very one sided towards Texas, though. And, it's not a stretch to say it had been since Texas joined the conference. Even in an ideal scenario portraying Nebraska as conference darlings, flipping positions with Texas, remember Nebraska was being utterly destroyed in matters of conference voting. And, while Nebraska does well in regards to athletic revenue, Texas and Ohio St are in an entirely separate realm from the rest of college football.

 

In the 2010-2011 school year, Texas had a revenue of about 150 million, 18.5 million more than second place (Ohio St). They were way ahead of anyone in the country, much less the conference. That equates to a lot of power when it comes to conference politics and realignment. To me, they were such an economic juggernaut at the time and therefore were wielding so much power, an alternate ending to that game or that season doesn't change the relative positions of the schools enough to alter the final outcome. Obviously we know this now in hindsight, but it's worth noting anyhow...Texas took their downturn not long after that season, but they still remained huge at the box office. That suggests, for purposes of this discussion, that Nebraska wasn't likely to see much of a relative change to Texas in this regard had that season flipped. 

 

For me, to put more credence into this alternate reality theory, I have to see results of that game/season altering Texas' supreme position of power and envisioning Texas not looking to push around Nebraska in matters of conference voting and potential realignment. The history of the Big 12 conference simply doesn't suggest that would happen. Texas joined at the height of Nebraska's conference influence and still got their way on nearly every matter that separated the schools.

 

 

[Landlord]

brophog touched on good points I didn't dive into. Us winning the '09 championship wouldn't have changed, in my opinion, the 6 schools in the conference flirting with the Pac XII, Texas going ahead with the Longhorn Network, and also wouldn't have changed the Texas favoring landscape that we were given an ultimatum in committing to while others were shopping around.

Edited March 29, 2018 by Landlord

[Redux]

It's easy to say now looking back that our path to the Big Ten was one of destiny.  I don't feel it was as flat a road as indicated.  In all likelihood, it was our best and most suitable option if it were still an option in the hypothetical.  But in my opinion, why would Nebraska leave a conference that it just won in 2009 and likely wins in 2010?  I say likely wins because any minor change likely eliminates Martinez getting hurt against Mizzou, take that out of the equation and 2010 is a different monster.

 

If Colorado leaves and Mizzou leaves, the Big 12 still probably adds TCU and MAYBE West Virginia to get back to 12 and everything is super for the most part.   A reformed Big 12 that we stayed a part of perhaps sees a restructuring and perhaps our yearly game with OU is reintroduced as a way to keep us should offers from the North and South come our way.  But if the Big 12 implodes and we are left stranded then the Big Ten, if not full at 14 or so by this scenario, likely still wants us.  If it does not, the SEC is probably our new home.

 

Luckily we were proactive, but when considering what if scenarios I like to consider ideas that have a different outcome than the one we actually had.

Edited March 29, 2018 by Redux

[brophog]

5 hours ago, Redux said:

It's easy to say now looking back that our path to the Big Ten was one of destiny.  I don't feel it was as flat a road as indicated. 

 

Do six teams still threaten to join the PAC? That's a major catalyst, and external to the other variables.

[Redux]

3 minutes ago, brophog said:

 

Do six teams still threaten to join the PAC? That's a major catalyst, and external to the other variables.

 

I think A&M's flirtation with the SEC during that really threw a wrench in the gears seeing as they were kind of essential to locking down the Texas market.  Ultimately the LHN killed it, but I think there would definitely have still been an attempt made to shift things that way.  The PAC 12 would have been stupid not to try.