DefenderAO Posted November 15, 2018 Share Posted November 15, 2018 There are a few tangential topics about it but wanted the board's thoughts directly here as I'm having difficulty piece-milling all comments so far. It's clear the coaching staff values offensive possessions, field position, and turnovers. All directly relate to a defense. Why does Frost/Chin not focus on having a Suh-Like defense AND stress turnovers? Chin's "bend" philosophy has a lot of flex to it, and it gives up tons of yards. I'd hate to be in the NC or conference champ hunt and blame a loss on "we couldn't take the ball away." It seems like a very risky philosophy vs the out-hustle, out-scheme, out-athlete, shut-you-down style that wins regardless of TO's. Am I missing it? Can't you crush teams with 3 and outs, maybe get a TO, and score 55? The first presser that we complain about no turnovers, coming into the game undefeated, will be a little frustrating. ETA - See OSU vs Oregon's NC game a few years ago. Not exactly the same, but you get a powerful, disciplined O and feel pressured to take the ball to get a "stop," and it can turn out poorly. Quote Link to comment
DrunkOffPunch Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 31 minutes ago, DefenderAO said: Why does Frost/Chin not focus on having a Suh-Like defense AND stress turnovers? What is a Suh-like defense? Because it sounds like you’re arguing for better recruitment/development. Scheme isn’t what made that defense so dominant. Quote Link to comment
gobiggergoredder Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 Need players. I know this is a message board, but it’s really that simple. Need more explosive and fast athletes across the board. Defensive depth is also why special teams have been a struggle. 4 1 Quote Link to comment
olddominionhusker Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 48 minutes ago, DefenderAO said: There are a few tangential topics about it but wanted the board's thoughts directly here as I'm having difficulty piece-milling all comments so far. It's clear the coaching staff values offensive possessions, field position, and turnovers. All directly relate to a defense. Why does Frost/Chin not focus on having a Suh-Like defense AND stress turnovers? Chin's "bend" philosophy has a lot of flex to it, and it gives up tons of yards. I'd hate to be in the NC or conference champ hunt and blame a loss on "we couldn't take the ball away." It seems like a very risky philosophy vs the out-hustle, out-scheme, out-athlete, shut-you-down style that wins regardless of TO's. Am I missing it? Can't you crush teams with 3 and outs, maybe get a TO, and score 55? The first presser that we complain about no turnovers, coming into the game undefeated, will be a little frustrating. ETA - See OSU vs Oregon's NC game a few years ago. Not exactly the same, but you get a powerful, disciplined O and feel pressured to take the ball to get a "stop," and it can turn out poorly. So a few things. Even since Suhs time here the game has changed significantly. The rules and the way they are enforced heavily favor the offense now. Then you have the uptempo style Frost wants to play on O which has your Defense on the field more with less rest. Also I don’t think Chins defense is a bend defense. It’s an aggressive defense that seeks turnovers but will give up some big plays. I think that will become more apparent when he has the athletes he needs to run it correctly. 3 1 Quote Link to comment
4skers89 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 I believe their philosophy includes keeping the other team from getting 1st downs. I seem to recall Chin mentioning a stat about getting TFL's and how that made it difficult for the offense to convert on 3rd down. That seems strange given how many 3rd and longs our opponents converted this season. I'm not sure their emphasis on turnovers this season is that they rely on them as much as we've been so terrible in previous years they needed to improve. They do talk about turnovers a lot though. Quote Link to comment
Husker03 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 Scott was a safety in the NFL, if you think he doesn’t value defense I think you would be mistaken. I think it’s more of philosophy of, take with the game will give you. As mentioned above, currently the rules heavily favor the offense. Good news, Scott runs one of the best offense of scheme’s in the country, and as such can recruit premiere athletes that want to come play in it. Defense, no matter the scheme, just isn’t a sexy sell to anybody, and as such I think these coaches just understand they will probably not ever get all of the best defense of players signed on. I guarantee if you offered them a Suh, Amukamara, and Lavonte for next years team, they would not say no. They just know they can be in the driver seat on offense, so they’re going to focus there for now. Nobody is conceding to having a crappy defense, they are just being realistic with in the confines of Nebraska football as it currently stands. Quote Link to comment
Huskers93-97 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 I do get what the OP is saying to a degree. There has been teams throughout history that have scored 45-50 points a game and also had a great defense. 95-97 huskers scores fast and often and managed great D also usc and Texas in 2000s accomplished both bama doing both now just saying it’s been done before why not strive for both? Quote Link to comment
Moiraine Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 Just now, Huskers93-97 said: just saying it’s been done before why not strive for both? They haven't said they aren't, and I find it unlikely they are going to keep giving up this amount of yards. Quote Link to comment
Huskers93-97 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 53 minutes ago, Moiraine said: They haven't said they aren't, and I find it unlikely they are going to keep giving up this amount of yards. I think many fans have formed that conclusion because of what the coaches have emphasized which is more discussion about maybe giving up some yards and pushing for turnovers. Instead of talking about just disciplined sound assignments and getting a 3 and out. I think a 3 and out accomplishes the same thing as a pick. Gets your offense back on the field. Plus in my mind a disciplined solid D seems more reliable than counting on turnovers 1 Quote Link to comment
DefenderAO Posted November 16, 2018 Author Share Posted November 16, 2018 2 hours ago, DrunkOffPunch said: What is a Suh-like defense? Because it sounds like you’re arguing for better recruitment/development. Scheme isn’t what made that defense so dominant. Recruiting philosophy and different points of emphasis than I hear from Chin. I listen to every presser and he stresses getting the ball back for the O. I like the philosophy but almost appears an over-dependence on that area of D. Maybe his approach is assumptive that yes, he's getting talent upgrades and knows better schemes than Tre Neal vs Jumbo packages will work better longer term. Quote Link to comment
DefenderAO Posted November 16, 2018 Author Share Posted November 16, 2018 5 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said: I think many fans have formed that conclusion because of what the coaches have emphasized which is more discussion about maybe giving up some yards and pushing for turnovers. Instead of talking about just disciplined sound assignments and getting a 3 and out. I think a 3 and out accomplishes the same thing as a pick. Gets your offense back on the field. And part of conclusions are empiricism; Chin had good athletes at UCF but a lot of yards and a couple close games that Frost's offense and ST won. I'm reserving judgement until more athletes get here, but I'm stating things I've seen from UCF and pressers. And as mentioned, watching Bama vs LSU showed me it can be done in this day. Granted, it's the unicorn Bama, but they dominate defensively and then score in every way possible (this year). Quote Link to comment
Huskers93-97 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 3 minutes ago, DefenderAO said: Recruiting philosophy and different points of emphasis than I hear from Chin. I listen to every presser and he stresses getting the ball back for the O. I like the philosophy but almost appears an over-dependence on that area of D. Maybe his approach is assumptive that yes, he's getting talent upgrades and knows better schemes than Tre Neal vs Jumbo packages will work better longer term. I get your point. I agree. It seems the emphasis is reliant on a turnover. A solid disciplined D seems more reliable than hoping for turnovers. I would rather have our O paired with Michigan state D. That’s a national title combo 1 Quote Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 Maybe because they’ve been here the sum total of one year, don’t have the talent they need on that side of the ball yet and there only so many things they can magically transform in such a short period of time. 1 Quote Link to comment
LumberJackSker Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 Good lord people they dont even have the personnel to run their defense yet. They are recruiting their first full class right now. They have been starting two converted safeties at olb in a 3-4 Defense. They're not choosing to be bad at defense they just dont have the personnel. If they get the talent and body types they need to run a 3-4 its not like chin is going to instruct the defense to keep giving up points. I'm pretty sure if they consistently force turn overs and make tfls then the points and yards will go down as well. Its year 1 with below average talent learning a new defense just because there's an red N on the helmet doesn't mean they are automatically going to be good. 3 3 2 Quote Link to comment
lo country Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 8 minutes ago, LumberJackSker said: Good lord people they dont even have the personnel to run their defense yet. They are recruiting their first full class right now. They have been starting two converted safeties at olb in a 3-4 Defense. They're not choosing to be bad at defense they just dont have the personnel. If they get the talent and body types they need to run a 3-4 its not like chin is going to instruct the defense to keep giving up points. I'm pretty sure if they consistently force turn overs and make tfls then the points and yards will go down as well. Its year 1 with below average talent learning a new defense just because there's an red N on the helmet doesn't mean they are automatically going to be good. To add, outside of Mo, we are really lacking at LB. We don't have a true starting NT for a 3-4. No average + edge rusher etc.....A great O and sh!tty D don't have to go hand in hand......We can have an explosive up tempo O and a shut down D. Watching the games, many times our D has made mistakes in the execution of said scheme. ie missed tackle, over pursues, bite on fakes etc....The bright side is no denying we have improved as the season has progressed. We are recruiting talent and looking at the Juco route for contributors....Not to say I'm sold on Chin, but it's year one.......I like what Frost has done so far. 2 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.