Jump to content

HuskerBoard Predictor  

12 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Player: Jeffrey M'ba

Hometown: Oakdale, Connecticut

School: St. Thomas More

Position: Defensive Tackle

Height: 6-6

Weight: 315

40 Time

Power 5 Offers: Arizona, Boston College, Florida, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Nebraska, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Tennessee, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Visits

 

Twitter

 

247 Composite: #319 Overall; #31 DT; .8950; :FourStar:

 

Rivals: :ThreeStar:
247: #39 DT; :ThreeStar:
ESPN: 

 

Hudl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... We must REALLY not like our depth on the line if we're willing to add two spots late. That is concerning. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Atbone95 said:

... We must REALLY not like our depth on the line if we're willing to add two spots late. That is concerning. 

Depth for 2020 and beyond. Graduating a lot after the 2019 season.

  • Plus1 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Atbone95 said:

... We must REALLY not like our depth on the line if we're willing to add two spots late. That is concerning. 

This is the B1G. Take lineman all day for depth and competition. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Atbone95 said:

... We must REALLY not like our depth on the line if we're willing to add two spots late. That is concerning. 

 

16 hours ago, Thanks_Tom RR said:

Depth for 2020 and beyond. Graduating a lot after the 2019 season.

 

I also think Chins sees the need to run more 4-3 and/or packages w/ 2 DTs in the Big Ten due to style of play. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bugeater17 said:

 

 

I also think Chins sees the need to run more 4-3 and/or packages w/ 2 DTs in the Big Ten due to style of play. 

Wisconsin runs a lot of 3 fronts and does just fine stopping the run.  We just need the right guys to be able to play it.  

  • Plus1 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this league it is a huge advantage if you can go 3, even 4 deep in the middle of the line. Having a fresh guy who you trust late in games is invaluable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A thought occurs here: Get this guy and Piper can start out at OG. Happy with Daniels, Green, and M’ba holding down the nose for next year. 

 

Anytime you have the ability to add quality size and athleticism on the OL/DL you take it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, bugeater17 said:

 

 

I also think Chins sees the need to run more 4-3 and/or packages w/ 2 DTs in the Big Ten due to style of play. 

 

What are you calling a DT in his scheme? Our 4i/5 techs could be starting 3 techs in other schemes, and will move between the three readily in ours.

 

 

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you tell me who still will careeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

 

Aww man, got hit with the confused already?!?  Lil M'Ba=MmmBop anyone??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, brophog said:

What are you calling a DT in his scheme? Our 4i/5 techs could be starting 3 techs in other schemes, and will move between the three readily in ours.

 

3-4 DTs and 4/5 techs in a 4-3 are not the same player.  I mean.... they can be.  But the ideal is different for those two positions.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bugeater17 said:

I also think Chins sees the need to run more 4-3 and/or packages w/ 2 DTs in the Big Ten due to style of play. 

 

This is possible.  I think it's mostly just depth.  After this year, we'll have Jahkeem Green, Damion Daniels and possibly/probably Piper.  You want at least two to rotate and at least one more for depth if someone were to get hurt.  So getting one more HS guy now gives that guy and Piper for sure a year in the weight room before they'd be needed.  Then even if they weren't really playing as RS Freshmen the following year we'd have some good depth built for the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

3-4 DTs and 4/5 techs in a 4-3 are not the same player.  I mean.... they can be.  But the ideal is different for those two positions.

 

 

As we’ve discussed before, trying to discuss these things in terms of a 3-4 or 4-3 is a pointless exercise. That’s why I avoid it, and actively encourage others to avoid it. Those terms have no meaning in a modern defense. 

 

What’s “ideal” varies greatly by coordinator. I’m not going to pretend there are only two defenses. Certainly in some defenses there is a great deal of difference in what they want between a 3 tech and 5 tech. In a lot of cases, though, that 5 tech will play a lot of 3 tech against the one back systems so common today.

 

 

Edit:

 

In our system, it’s easiest to keep it simple. We basically have two broad defensive line categories, guys that play NT and guys that don’t. You will certainly see guys like Khalil or Stille play multiple techs even against the same opponent. Unless we had depth issues, like what forced Carlos to the nose last year, you wouldn’t expect to see someone like Darrion on an outside technique. 

 

 

 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nebfanatic said:

In this league it is a huge advantage if you can go 3, even 4 deep in the middle of the line. Having a fresh guy who you trust late in games is invaluable.

 

I would say it’s that way in every league, wouldn’t you? The biggest challenge in this league is the diversity of offenses faced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, brophog said:

As we’ve discussed before, trying to discuss these things in terms of a 3-4 or 4-3 is a pointless exercise. That’s why I avoid it, and actively encourage others to avoid it. Those terms have no meaning in a modern defense. 

 

You can make that assertion, but that doesn't mean it's true.  Yes, there are adjustments and variations of both so there are similarities.  But that doesn't mean it's a meaningless or pointless.  Many people have talked for two years about us not having the right type of guys for a 3-4.  3-4 DTs are not the same as 4-3 DTs.  3-4 DEs are not the same as 4-3 DEs.  That doesn't mean you can't play the defense.  But to really make either work the way they are supposed to you need a different type of athlete.  That's why despite having guys like the Davis twins - who are 4-3 DTs but closer to 3-4 DEs - Frost's staff is looking everywhere for DTs for his 3-4.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

You can make that assertion, but that doesn't mean it's true.  Yes, there are adjustments and variations of both so there are similarities.  

 

 

This is my problem right here. When you say “both”, that implies there are two. There are so many more than two defensive structures, and lots of ways of describing things. A term like 4-3 is not only confusing in the modern parlance, but horribly inaccurate to describe a defense that against today’s offenses will rarely have such a structure by personnel or alignment.

 

Quote

3-4 DEs are not the same as 4-3 DEs

 

Here is a familiar example to showcase.

 

Bo Pelini commonly used a 5 tech DE. Just about everyone here would say he ran a “4-3”, yet a 5 tech is the most commonly associated technique for a “3-4 DE”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, brophog said:

This is my problem right here. When you say “both”, that implies there are two. There are so many more than two defensive structures, and lots of ways of describing things. A term like 4-3 is not only confusing in the modern parlance, but horribly inaccurate to describe a defense that against today’s offenses will rarely have such a structure by personnel or alignment.

 

I realize there are more.  I was talking about two different ones which would be "both" when talking about them together.

 

I already said there are a bunch a variations and overlap.  There are similarities and crossover.  But that' doesn't make them the same.

 

I think you're way too hung up on semantics instead of looking at the big picture.  You're missing the forest for the trees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mavric said:

 

I realize there are more.  I was talking about two different ones which would be "both" when talking about them together.

 

I already said there are a bunch a variations and overlap.  There are similarities and crossover.  But that' doesn't make them the same.

 

I think you're way too hung up on semantics instead of looking at the big picture.  You're missing the forest for the trees.

 

 

What two different defenses are you talking about? Banker’s defense vs Pelini’s defense are two definable constructs. 3-4 vs 4-3 are not.  It’s messy and inexact and then everybody just plays Nickel anyhow. ;)

 

I’m sorry, I don’t what “big picture” you’re looking at. I know there are a lot of semantics, but that’s football these days. Not long ago we had teams that played one front and were easy to describe but those days are gone.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Atbone95 said:

f#&% me man - I'm gunna have to stop posting, I must lead the board in eye rolls lately. 

 

 Think my record is 22 right now. I don’t know, but no one is close. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After this year we are losing 3 of top 5 kids in rotation. Have some good young talent along with Stille with one more year. One more NT would be a great addition since Banks might be a DE or OT in the future. 

 

Daniels

K. Davis

C. Davis 

Neal 

Vainuku 

-

20'

NT: Daniels, Green 

DE: Stille, Thomas...Rogers, Robinson, Wildeman, Walker

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this may answer some of the questions from above:

 

He was originally a Class of 2019 commit to Virginia.  However he (presumably) didn't qualify so he reclassified to 2020 and decommitted.

 

His 247 ranking has remained basically the same.  But he was a four-star on Rivals last year but is only a three-star now.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×