Mavric Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 1 hour ago, brophog said: A lot like Colorado last year, we covered up some deficiencies with pressure. That's called "good defense" Quote Link to comment
brophog Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 Just now, Mavric said: That's called "good defense" Let’s hope next week that I’m the one eating crow and not you. Quote Link to comment
ColoradoHusk Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 On Cam Taylor’s INT in the 4th quarter, I told my son “watch for the slot receiver on the slant”. The QB threw a bad pass behind the receiver, and Taylor made the pick off the tipped ball. At first glance, I thought that was just a terrible throw by the QB. Now it wasn’t a good throw, but the safety (I think Dismuke) had read the play and was coming down hard on the slant route. Maybe the QB saw the safety, which forced a bad throw. I don’t know, but it was great to see Cam make the play on the tipped ball. That’s still good defense. EDIT: As soon as I posted this, the Michigan CB dropped a sure pick 6 after the QB just threw the ball up in the air to nobody. Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 6 minutes ago, brophog said: Let’s hope next week that I’m the one eating crow and not you. Eating crow for what? I'm pretty sure getting pressure will still be considered good defense next week. Quote Link to comment
brophog Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 3 minutes ago, Mavric said: Eating crow for what? I'm pretty sure getting pressure will still be considered good defense next week. My statement was that the pressure covered up deficiencies, not that pressure is poor defense. Colorado is much more capable of exploiting that than we saw today. Quote Link to comment
brophog Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 10 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said: On Cam Taylor’s INT in the 4th quarter, I told my son “watch for the slot receiver on the slant”. The QB threw a bad pass behind the receiver, and Taylor made the pick off the tipped ball. At first glance, I thought that was just a terrible throw by the QB. Now it wasn’t a good throw, but the safety (I think Dismuke) had read the play and was coming down hard on the slant route. Maybe the QB saw the safety, which forced a bad throw. I don’t know, but it was great to see Cam make the play on the tipped ball. That’s still good defense. They were hitting that spot just underneath the Safety all day, because the OLB to that side was rushing and the ILB can’t get there. Good read to recognize it was coming and take it away. Quote Link to comment
4skers89 Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 1 minute ago, brophog said: My statement was that the pressure covered up deficiencies, not that pressure is poor defense. Colorado is much more capable of exploiting that than we saw today. I think we'll probably get sick of hearing the names Shenault and Nixon next week. Hopefully we can get enough pressure to limit the damage, stop their rushing and outscore them. Quote Link to comment
brophog Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 11 minutes ago, 4skers89 said: I think we'll probably get sick of hearing the names Shenault and Nixon next week. I’m hoping that’s not the case. Colorado doesn’t have a great offense, but they have a QB that is much better than we saw today and playmakers that punish missed tackles. I liked the defense overall today, I just don’t agree it was “really, really good”. It was an improvement, particularly in terms of effort and aggression, but we’ve had this tendency in recent years to jump onboard whatever side of the ball was better and lambast the other side forgetting there was good and bad on both sides. Quote Link to comment
Undone Posted September 1, 2019 Author Share Posted September 1, 2019 1 hour ago, brophog said: From the conversations we had about last year, your reaction today is expected. You were happy when we blitzed and not happy when we didn’t. Agreed. This is in direct correlation to playing in a 3-4. If given a choice, I would switch to a 4-3 yesterday. Because I believe that Frost has the recruiting prowess to pull off landing a stud defensive end every other class. I do not like playing a 3-4 in a run-heavy conference. But if that's what we're going to do, then 1-2 or those backers has to be blitzing regularly. Unless of course one of your three down linemen is N Suh...which is not the case for this team. Quote Link to comment
vpshelton Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 In modern college football, you don't need to be great on D you just need to be solid and have some explosiveness on O, which Frost brings 2 Quote Link to comment
brophog Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 15 minutes ago, Undone said: Agreed. This is in direct correlation to playing in a 3-4. If given a choice, I would switch to a 4-3 yesterday. Because I believe that Frost has the recruiting prowess to pull off landing a stud defensive end every other class. I do not like playing a 3-4 in a run-heavy conference. But if that's what we're going to do, then 1-2 or those backers has to be blitzing regularly. Unless of course one of your three down linemen is N Suh...which is not the case for this team. This is the core of so many arguments I’ve had on this site, to the point I don’t find it useful to even discuss much. We are still based in a 4 man rush like practically everyone else. Alex Davis just doesn’t have his hand on the ground. We will go to an even front with something like Stille/Khalil inside with two OLB and it’s functionally no different than in a 4-3 defense under the same conditions. We may bring 2 OLB down into a 50 on first down, another team may go to a 4-3 under front. When you hear Tuioti describe what he wants in body types, he wants a nose, an under tackle (like a 3 tech), and defensive end bodies (he differentiates the two sides by body type). Chinander doesn’t refer to this as a 3-4 because it’s a multi-front defense. We may be arguing semantics at times, but I (like many) don’t use the word blitz unless it’s more than 4 rushers. I’ll tend to not use it at all, really, and just refer to an outside rusher as an edge rusher to avoid confusion. So what I would consider a base rush already has one OLB with pass rush responsibilities. Right now, that’s guys like Alex and Nelson. 1 Quote Link to comment
HuskermanMike Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 I wasn't really watching for him at all but did Ferguson play much? We might have some solid depth at olb with Tannor, Davis, Ferg, Domann, and Nelson. Domann looked really good and hopefully, the others match his intensity and play. Quote Link to comment
Stone Cold Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 1 hour ago, vpshelton said: In modern college football, you don't need to be great on D you just need to be solid and have some explosiveness on O, which Frost brings Alot of people dont like the idea of modern football at nebraska. We like the old school smash it in your face, run it up the gut, blitz every play kind of team. Quote Link to comment
brophog Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 8 minutes ago, HuskermanMike said: I wasn't really watching for him at all but did Ferguson play much? He played with a few different combinations, but they seemed to go away from his side a lot so you didn’t hear his name. 1 Quote Link to comment
Nebfanatic Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 2 hours ago, ColoradoHusk said: While it would be great to have more constant pressure from the d-line, part of the appeal of the 3-4 is that it allows for blitzes from a lot of different positions. Chin called a number of blitzes last year, and the blitzer didn’t get to the QB. That wasn’t the case today. I would attribute some of that to the D Line commanding blocks. 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.