Defensive Play

[TheSker]

9 minutes ago, Undone said:

But if Iowa does to us what Minnesota did I'll be pretty fed up with our defensive coaching staff's ability to prepare its team to play against the run in this conference. 

I'd have no issue agreeing that Wisconsin's defensive staff is better as a unit than ours.  This is Ruud's first real full time coaching gig.

 

In the same breath, all this proclaiming our scheme sucks (on either side of the ball) is not true.

 

Right now, I'd side with Husker in WI that execution is problematic.  And yes, that ultimately falls on the coaches.

 

If Heinrich, Jackson and others aren't performing better in the future, then yes Frost will need to make some decisions.

 

It's not going to be a secret the rest of this season that our LBs aren't good at their fits.

[TheSker]

19 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

So we've switched from last year's excuse that our defense is talentless.

 

This year's excuse is that a year and a half isn't enough time under Chinander's tutelage to coach two Frost recruits (Tannor & Miller) and two Riley recruits (Davis & Barry) into a decent squad.

 

Tell me the minimum number of seasons that a Frost recruit has under Chinander's coaching before this excuse runs out. I'm not being sarcastic - please put a number on it by your own standards.

 

I personally can force myself to put a salve on my psyche and tell myself that the number of seasons is "two." Meaning that next year, I expect to field a decent linebacker corps. I don't give a flying f*** that JoJo was a Riley recruit; he's a decent player. He'll be a senior, and Miller/Tannor will be juniors. So sure, maybe Henrich is out there as a true freshman and obviously you'll have to give him quite a bit of leeway there...but 3/4 of the squad will be upperclassmen.

No excuses of any kind next year in my opinion.

I would also add that this same staff developed Shaquem Griffin into a pretty good LB.

[Undone]

19 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

The fact that our LB corps is made up of more Frost guys than Riley guys should tell you there is an issue.

 

That statement is false. Alex Davis & Mo Barry are listed as starters and both committed in 2015. So, it's 50/50 (with the other two being Miller & Tannor, of course recruited by Frost).

 

Still interested in hearing you (or anyone else) answer the question, at a minimum just to entertain the question itself: How many years is the minimum number of years under Chinander's coaching staff to no longer use the excuse that "_________ just needs more time in Chinander's system?"

[Undone]

6 minutes ago, TheSker said:

I would also add that this same staff developed Shaquem Griffin into a pretty good LB.

 

And remind me again: How many seasons did Chinander work with Shaquem Griffin? Ah yes; two. He had been coached by Chinander for a year and a half at the point at which he was considered "a good player."

 

That's the same amount of time the rest of these guys here have been coached by this staff.

 

See how many holes there are in all of these excuses?

[TheSker]

2 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

That statement is false. Alex Davis & Mo Barry are listed as starters and both committed in 2015. So, it's 50/50 (with the other two being Miller & Tannor, of course recruited by Frost).

 

Still interested in hearing you (or anyone else) answer the question, at a minimum just to entertain the question itself: How many years is the minimum number of years under Chinander's coaching staff to no longer use the excuse that "_________ just needs more time in Chinander's system?"

At UCF the answer was two.

 

At Nebraska the answer is more than two.

[Undone]

Just now, TheSker said:

At UCF the answer was two.

 

At Nebraska the answer is more than two.

 

We have acknowledged that the goal posts have been moved.

Thank you for the confirmation.

[TheSker]

1 minute ago, Undone said:

 

And remind me again: How many seasons did Chinander work with Shaquem Griffin?

 

See how many holes there are in all of these excuses?

Dude, you can use the word "excuse" all day when acting demanding with this staff.

 

UCF had better talent walking in than Nebraska, and Griffin would certainly be part of that.

 

We have a good staff....including Chinander and Ruud.

 

But if "excuse" is your favorite word, keep it flowing.....it's a message board after all....

3 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

We have acknowledged that the goal posts have been moved.

Thank you for the confirmation.

If so, they are your goal posts.

[Undone]

2 minutes ago, TheSker said:

UCF had better talent walking in than Nebraska, and Griffin would certainly be part of that.

 

Just looked him up on 24/7 Sports:

 

Still confident on that statement?

 

I'll back off on singling people out. I apologize as I'm sure I'm coming off to most as an a$$ here.

 

Something we're doing with our defense this season isn't working. That's where I'm roughly at. And it is very frustrating.

[Husker in WI]

3 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

We have acknowledged that the goal posts have been moved.

Thank you for the confirmation.

 

I'd say UCF just turned around fast than anyone expected, for a lot of reasons. And those expectations for timelines shouldn't have come with the staff. I'd say 3 years, and I think I would've said the same if I were a UCF fan when this staff was hired. The fact that they beat the expectations once doesn't mean they figured it out and can fix a different team faster.

[TheSker]

1 minute ago, Undone said:

 

Just looked him up on 24/7 Sports:

 

Still confident on that statement?

Yes

[Undone]

1 minute ago, Husker in WI said:

I'd say 3 years, and I think I would've said the same if I were a UCF fan when this staff was hired.

 

Heading into the third season or heading into the fourth season? Genuinely asking.

[Undone]

4 minutes ago, TheSker said:

Yes

 

Genuinely asking: Are high school recruiting rankings then to be completely, 100% thrown out in this conversation? 

 

In other words, should we completely throw out the data I looked up on Wisconsin's starting linebackers? Because if we did that...what criteria are we even talking about when we say that Wisconsin "plays above their recruiting ranking?" What do we attribute their good play to? Not to good coaching?

Then what would it boil down to? Whatever's in the water in Madison? Tell me if the point I'm driving at is clear to you, please - regardless if you despise my premise or not.

[WyoHusker56]

18 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

That statement is false. Alex Davis & Mo Barry are listed as starters and both committed in 2015. So, it's 50/50 (with the other two being Miller & Tannor, of course recruited by Frost).

 

Still interested in hearing you (or anyone else) answer the question, at a minimum just to entertain the question itself: How many years is the minimum number of years under Chinander's coaching staff to no longer use the excuse that "_________ just needs more time in Chinander's system?"

 

Miller came to NU in 2016 so he was Riley. Did you mean Honas?

[TheSker]

2 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

Genuinely asking: Are high school recruiting rankings then to be completely, 100% thrown out in this conversation? 

 

In other words, should we completely throw out the data I looked up on Wisconsin's starting linebackers? Because if we did that...what criteria are we even talking about when we say that Wisconsin "plays above their recruiting ranking?" What do we attribute their good play to? Not to good coaching?

Then what would it boil down to? Whatever's in the water in Madison?

I guess I don't find it hard to understand why this year's Wisconsin defensive players perform better than this year's Husker players.

[Husker in WI]

Just now, Undone said:

 

Heading into the third season or heading into the fourth season? Genuinely asking.

 

Ha, I was intentionally vague because I'm not sure. I guess heading into the 3rd season, because that's 3 spring camps, 3 fall camps, and 2 full years to develop guys and recruit over those who don't cut it. I don't expect to be a top 10 defense next year, but I expect to force teams to run more than 3-4 different run plays to beat us. And for the turnovers to not entirely dry up in conference play.

 

I also don't think we'll ever really have a talent v. scheme v. coaching v. execution answer for the problems, it's a mix. And we can use recruiting rankings to show you don't need highly rated guys, but just saying player X was a low rated gem doesn't mean our similarly rated player Y is. Right now we don't have highly rated players or a scheme that has been taught long term, or the time to have developed these guys. I think all of those matter, and if you have enough of one piece you can compensate for lacking in the others.