Mr. 800k #Cashin’ Checks

[Huskers93-97]

10 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

I don't understand when ppl say this. He only had 2 years where we weren't a top 25 defense. And almost every other time we were top 10, if not top 5. 

Exactly. I am pretty sure Florida right now is sitting back thinking man are we glad we didnt let Frost bring ol Chinander with him. Mullen and Co look pretty competent.

[Undone]

1 hour ago, Huskers93-97 said:

Scott Frost: "I don't question my coaches. They know what they're doing. ... They're the right guys to do it."

 

And just after that quote this morning, Frost goes on to profess frustration in guys not being focused enough on doing their jobs. He cites being terrible on third down on defense.

 

Poor alignment and a lack of risk taking largely accounted for the poor results there - both of which fall squarely on coaching.

[TheSker]

1 minute ago, Undone said:

Poor alignment and a lack of risk taking largely accounted for the poor results there - both of which fall squarely on coaching.

Frost also said in the presser it falls on the coaches.

 

#redemptionforundone

[Vince R.]

23 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

Offensive numbers aren't quite a bit better than the defense's compared to conference peers. Defense is near the bottom in most categories.

 

Yeah I understand. I see a defense that is put in bad positions and has to hold a team scoreless for a full half, because our offense sucks. The "offensive prowess" of the staff is the main driver of this team, and I believe its struggles is hurting the psyche of this defense. Eighteen second drives and horribly timed turnovers do not help, and I am sure the defense has no trust in the offense. So when the offense is off, the functionality of this coaching staff struggles and there becomes a divide in the locker room.

 

Chinander has a really aggressive system that puts an extreme value on getting turnovers which serves as a compliment to this high powering offense. They don't care if they give up 450+, but if they get three turnovers and convert 17 pts out of it, the numbers say its a 99% chance of winning with a 40pts/per game kind of offense.  

 

I think this is the main obstacle this staff is trying to get over, and they are struggling. 

[Maized & Confused]

7 minutes ago, Vince R. said:

Chinander has a really aggressive system that puts an extreme value on getting turnovers which serves as a compliment to this high powering offense.

 

Don't most aggressive systems blitz more than a few times in a game or give less than 10 yards of cushion on a receiver when it's 3rd and about seven?

[Vince R.]

11 minutes ago, Maized & Confused said:

 

Don't most aggressive systems blitz more than a few times in a game or give less than 10 yards of cushion on a receiver when it's 3rd and about seven?

 

Well you're witnessing the struggle now. That's the issue in all of this. They don't have an offense that can answer back so they are calling the defense completely different, and it hurts the mesh of what this overall team system is designed to do. The defense has to scale back and get 4 consecutive stops, rather than playing ultra aggressive.

 

So now you're seeing 500+ yards given up and a loss, whereas all being good because you won 58-24. For this staff to function, this offense has to be prolific. I know many are going to hate reading that, but thats college football in general. You have to have that first. 

[FrantzHardySwag]

28 minutes ago, Vince R. said:

For this staff to function, this offense has to be prolific. I know many are going to hate reading that, but thats college football in general. You have to have that first. 

Idk if I agree with this......in 26 games at UCF they were 17-1 when scoring 28+ points. They were 9-0 when getting 500+ yards. In 20 games at Nebraska we are 6-7 when scoring 28+ points and 5-4 when getting 500+ yards. Offensively productive games always meant wins at UCF - at Nebraska those same games are now toss-ups. We're facing a higher level of coaching and better offenses, and our defense isn't answering the dinner bell. 

 

Take this year for example. We win every game we score over 30+ points and we're 6-2 and our two losses are against undefeated teams. Anyone complaining about that? (well probably, but that's not the point)

[Vince R.]

16 minutes ago, FrantzHardySwag said:

Idk if I agree with this......in 26 games at UCF they were 17-1 when scoring 28+ points. They were 9-0 when getting 500+ yards. In 20 games at Nebraska we are 6-7 when scoring 28+ points and 5-4 when getting 500+ yards. Offensively productive games always meant wins at UCF - at Nebraska those same games are now toss-ups. We're facing a higher level of coaching and better offenses, and our defense isn't answering the dinner bell. 

 

Take this year for example. We win every game we score over 30+ points and we're 6-2 and our two losses are against undefeated teams. Anyone complaining about that? (well probably, but that's not the point)

 

The team sucks in the red zone. Thats one of their main issues. You have to be money in there or else all the yards do not matter. Which is why you hear guys like DB talk about how stats are misleading. 

[B.B. Hemingway]

1 hour ago, Vince R. said:

 

Yeah I understand. I see a defense that is put in bad positions and has to hold a team scoreless for a full half, because our offense sucks. The "offensive prowess" of the staff is the main driver of this team, and I believe its struggles is hurting the psyche of this defense. Eighteen second drives and horribly timed turnovers do not help, and I am sure the defense has no trust in the offense. So when the offense is off, the functionality of this coaching staff struggles and there becomes a divide in the locker room.

 

Chinander has a really aggressive system that puts an extreme value on getting turnovers which serves as a compliment to this high powering offense. They don't care if they give up 450+, but if they get three turnovers and convert 17 pts out of it, the numbers say its a 99% chance of winning with a 40pts/per game kind of offense.  

 

I think this is the main obstacle this staff is trying to get over, and they are struggling. 

 

I can't bring myself to blame the offense for the poor defensive play. The offense hasn't always done them any favors, but stupid penalties, lack of any kind of pass rush, lack of turnovers, and the embarrassingly amount of missed run fits can't be blamed anymore on the offense, than the offensive struggles can be blamed on the defense.

 

There's enough blame to go around, is my point. 

[Vince R.]

19 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

I can't bring myself to blame the offense for the poor defensive play. The offense hasn't always done them any favors, but stupid penalties, lack of any kind of pass rush, lack of turnovers, and the embarrassingly amount of missed run fits can't be blamed anymore on the offense, than the offensive struggles can be blamed on the defense.

 

There's enough blame to go around, is my point. 

 

Totally, but the whole point here is that they aren't necessarily trying to be the number one defense in the country. They are trying to feed the offense more opportunities to score. Now that neither is working, the team is completely inept. But who is closer to their own benchmark? I'd say that the offense is underperforming tremendously based on expectations. The defense on the other hand, has mirrored what its expectation is much of the season, albeit a lack of pass rush. This team and coach philosophy only goes as far as the offense takes it, and thats how it is going to be.  

[B.B. Hemingway]

6 minutes ago, Vince R. said:

 

Totally, but the whole point here is that they aren't necessarily trying to be the number one defense in the country. They are trying to feed the offense more opportunities to score. Now that neither is working, the team is completely inept. But who is closer to their own benchmark? I'd say that the offense is underperforming tremendously. The Defense on the other hand, has mirrored what its expectation is much of the season, albeit a lack of pass rush. This team and coach philosophy only goes as far as the offense takes it. 

 

The offense being the driving force of the team, doesn't excuse poor play. They're not giving up a lot of points because the offense is lighting up the scoreboard, and putting them on the field more.... They're giving up a ton of points because they're bad at football.

 

I should mention, that I am in no way trying to excuse the offense this year.... Mostly pathetic.

[mnhusker]

Just like Frost wants old school husker power to combine with speed why cant we ask the same of 800K, offense will score and you need to put a bad a$$ D on the field combined with an emphasis on turnovers to feed the Offense.  

[Vince R.]

3 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

The offense being the driving force of the team, doesn't excuse poor play. They're not giving up a lot of points because the offense is lighting up the scoreboard, and putting them on the field more.... They're giving up a ton of points because they're bad at football.

 

I should mention, that I am in no way trying to excuse the offense this year.... Mostly pathetic.

 

I agree, and thats my biggest critique of this staff. Why can't we have both? But that's their dynamic and overall operation. 

[onlyHskrfaninIL]

5 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

I mean .... he doesn't.  At all.  But it's fun to say.

Ah love your snark very clever.  But actually yes they are in base defense all the time.  It's the same 2 corners on the field every play.  Who is the nickel back on this team? And dont say jojo domann he is a linebacker 

[FrantzHardySwag]

Here is what Chin focuses on by his own admission.

 

The first-year defensive coordinator cited a statistic that he calculated that shows the importance of sacks to a defense. Chinander said 93 percent of drives where a sack occurs end with no points for the offense.

The goal for Chinander’s defense is simple: get the offense the ball. 

“We don’t want guys who are making a lot of errors, but you need production,” Chinander said. “You need tackles for loss, you need sacks, you obviously need turnovers if you’re going to pair up with a Scott Frost offense. What I’m concerned with is (tackles for loss) stats, turnovers, limiting explosive plays, percentage on third down and percentage on red zone. Turnovers is king for me.”

 

Here is what we've done in conf play this year:

3rd down conversion: 13th/14

Turnovers Forced: Last

Red Zone Defense: Last

Sacks : 10th/14