From Bad Defense to Good Defense

[MichiganDad3]

I recently watched the 1995 and 1996 Arizona State games. The Huskers put 63 on ASU in the first half in 95, and laid a goose egg for the game in 96. I know Frost was still learning and getting his timing down in 96, but for you Xs & Os guys, what did ASU change? Why were they so much better? I have the same question about Minnesota last year before and after firing their Defensive Coordinator. I haven't seen such dramatic improvements in defense without significant personnel changes.

[dvdcrr]

They had Jake the Snake right?

[MichiganDad3]

Yes, Even though we scored 63 in the 1st half, Plummer was lighting us up. Almost 300 yards passing in the first half, and 21 points. All that despite being killed by the Husker DL. 

[Pedro G]

54 minutes ago, MichiganDad3 said:

Yes, Even though we scored 63 in the 1st half, Plummer was lighting us up. Almost 300 yards passing in the first half, and 21 points. All that despite being killed by the Husker DL. 

I was at that ‘95 game. Not only 63 points, NU had 505 total yards offensively in the first half. The Husker D line was hitting Jake the Snake really hard, but he hung in there and got off two or three long TD passes against our decent secondary. But the D adjusted some, and ASU didn’t get much offense going in the second half, while TO called off the dogs on offense in the second half, except the Turmanator threw a a final-play TD pass that Osborne did not want called. The ASU coach was upset about that. 

[Scarlet Overkill]

2 hours ago, MichiganDad3 said:

I recently watched the 1995 and 1996 Arizona State games. The Huskers put 63 on ASU in the first half in 95, and laid a goose egg for the game in 96. I know Frost was still learning and getting his timing down in 96, but for you Xs & Os guys, what did ASU change? Why were they so much better? I have the same question about Minnesota last year before and after firing their Defensive Coordinator. I haven't seen such dramatic improvements in defense without significant personnel changes.

 

Interested to hear any x & o related things, too.

[huskered17]

Dishman couldn't block the D-end all game. He had a windmill type of move with his arms, that threw Dishman one way or the other when he extended his arms to block. 

Stuggs or Suggs something like that. Problem was he was known for that move and still had his way.  

 

GBR!!!

[Husker in WI]

39 minutes ago, huskered17 said:

Dishman couldn't block the D-end all game. He had a windmill type of move with his arms, that threw Dishman one way or the other when he extended his arms to block. 

Stuggs or Suggs something like that. Problem was he was known for that move and still had his way.  

 

GBR!!!

 

Suggs didn't play at ASU until 2000, it wasn't him in 1996. Nothing humps out to me as a big change to make their defense that much better - the only name I recognize on the defense is Pat Tillman. Second year DC, fifth year HC. Can't say I remember anything else unique about ASU that year, they just out of nowhere had a phenomenal year.

 

They probably weren't as bad as they looked in 1995 either - we just stunned them early (11:00 am game too) and didn't let up. Their other losses were 3 points @ ranked Washington, 31 points at top-5 USC, 2 points at ranked Stanford, and 3 points in a rivalry game to Arizona.

[husker_rob]

They had a pretty active defense up front that year, from what I remember, so it's not like we were going to repeat what happened the year before. Looking at their wikipedia page for their 1996 team, they had 3 LBs and a DT taken in following draft, so that's even more stout than I would have remembered. And being stout and deep up front was really your only prayer for matching up against Nebraska in the 90s.

 

But beyond clearly having some good talent on their squad, they were another year older and just had great team chemistry, which goes a long way towards an unforeseen improvement (reminds me of Iowa, who came out of nowhere, a few years back).

 

Lastly, we were simply in disarray that night. It was a horrific game to watch. We had 6 fumbles and 3 safeties. Yes, 3. Friggin. Safeties. .... And IIRC, all of the safeties were self-imposed (a botched option pitch, a snap over Frost's head, and one more that I don't recall).

 

When you think about how bad our backfield played that night (well, center and backfield), I can only imagine that our line was probably in just as much disarray trying to block that defense that night. Mind you, I don't remember that for a fact, but our team was simply not ready to play that night. It ended up being ok, though, as that 1996 team really responded well, and by the end of the year, they were really playing about as good as anyone in the country. It took several games before that squad really meshed, though.

 

tl;dr version: Solid talent up front, great team chemistry, and one horrific, almost-unwatchable offensive game from Nebraska.

[MichiganDad3]

1 hour ago, husker_rob said:

They had a pretty active defense up front that year, from what I remember, so it's not like we were going to repeat what happened the year before. Looking at their wikipedia page for their 1996 team, they had 3 LBs and a DT taken in following draft, so that's even more stout than I would have remembered. And being stout and deep up front was really your only prayer for matching up against Nebraska in the 90s.

 

But beyond clearly having some good talent on their squad, they were another year older and just had great team chemistry, which goes a long way towards an unforeseen improvement (reminds me of Iowa, who came out of nowhere, a few years back).

 

Lastly, we were simply in disarray that night. It was a horrific game to watch. We had 6 fumbles and 3 safeties. Yes, 3. Friggin. Safeties. .... And IIRC, all of the safeties were self-imposed (a botched option pitch, a snap over Frost's head, and one more that I don't recall).

 

When you think about how bad our backfield played that night (well, center and backfield), I can only imagine that our line was probably in just as much disarray trying to block that defense that night. Mind you, I don't remember that for a fact, but our team was simply not ready to play that night. It ended up being ok, though, as that 1996 team really responded well, and by the end of the year, they were really playing about as good as anyone in the country. It took several games before that squad really meshed, though.

 

tl;dr version: Solid talent up front, great team chemistry, and one horrific, almost-unwatchable offensive game from Nebraska.

I still say we win the MNC in 1996 if either Farley doesn't get suspended or there is no flu for the Texas game.

[TGHusker]

16 hours ago, MichiganDad3 said:

I still say we win the MNC in 1996 if either Farley doesn't get suspended or there is no flu for the Texas game.

And we'd have won the 99 MNC if we didn't fumble going across the goal line at texassssss

[NUinID]

On 5/6/2019 at 7:05 AM, huskered17 said:

Dishman couldn't block the D-end all game. He had a windmill type of move with his arms, that threw Dishman one way or the other when he extended his arms to block. 

Stuggs or Suggs something like that. Problem was he was known for that move and still had his way.  

 

GBR!!!

 

It wasn't Dishman it was Adam True.  It was a surreal game for sure.  Just like the 11 AM start worked against ASU in 1995 the late start in Tempe worked against Nebraska in 96.  It wasn't like the defense played bad.  They only gave up 13 points.  The offense couldn't get out of their own way.  It was just one of those games where nothing goes right on the offence.  

[husker_rob]

21 hours ago, MichiganDad3 said:

I still say we win the MNC in 1996 if either Farley doesn't get suspended or there is no flu for the Texas game.

I tend to agree with this. Farley was one of the most electrifying players I've ever seen. It's hard to put into words how big of a hit that was to our team at that time. I thought McBride was very wise to put more speed in his absence, by bringing down Minter to play in his absence -- worked well against the Buffs. But Farley's extra strength against the run, along with the damn flu, really cost us against UT. .... Who knew it would be the beginning of a long-running nightmare against that team?

[husker_rob]

2 hours ago, NUinID said:

It wasn't like the defense played bad.  They only gave up 13 points.  The offense couldn't get out of their own way.  It was just one of those games where nothing goes right on the offence.  

So true. ASU could certainly put up points that year. But given how incredibly bad our offense played that game, and given that (IIRC) ASU scored a TD on their first drive, it was a Herculean effort by our D the rest of the way. 

[Undone]

On 5/5/2019 at 4:22 PM, MichiganDad3 said:

I have the same question about Minnesota last year before and after firing their Defensive Coordinator. I haven't seen such dramatic improvements in defense without significant personnel changes.

 

So much of it is about player motivation. A culture change often times changes the work ethic of the player and puts a drive in them to where when they step out onto the field, they "can't be beat, won't be beat."

 

We haven't had that mentality on defense for roughly 5+ seasons. I don't know whether we have it coming into this season or not; we'll see in a few months.