PFF grades the defense against OU

[lo country]

Holding OU to 23, it surprised me that the grades for a lot of the defenders was as low as it was.  Based on the score and just watching the game, I thought we did good.  PFF breaks down the missed tackles and some other categories that better explains the grades...Some poor run defense and tackling hurt the DL.  Mentioned, as posters have said, CTB had his worst game of the season.  ILB had some issues as well. I think this is a direct reflection of our 3-4 scheme.  If they are not eating blocks, the OL gets to the 2nd level and makes work hard for our ILB's.  OU did do a great job of pulling their line man and getting good matchups...

 

I still think the D has improved dramatically since Frost and Co arrived....

 

https://nebraska.rivals.com/news/pff-snap-counts-and-grades-for-nebraska-s-defense-vs-oklahoma

[Hagg]

We knocked them down one notch in the AP poll.

[JJ Husker]

I’m not sure what to make of this.  All of their notes about missed tackles, lack of pressure, general bad run defense, etc are spot on. But considering who we were playing and the end result, it seemed as if the D played one of it’s better games.

 

I guess if we’re going to say a couple missed kicks, special teams gaffes and bonehead penalties kept us from winning, we also have to say that better run defense could’ve flipped this to the W column as well. Kind of hard to believe (or not really) that we didn’t get beat by OU as much as we beat ourselves, again. That would be very encouraging if we were showing any signs of correcting the kicking, special teams and penalty issues.

[lo country]

Just now, JJ Husker said:

I’m not sure what to make of this.  All of their notes about missed tackles, lack of pressure, general bad run defense, etc are spot on. But considering who we were playing and the end result, it seemed as if the D played one of it’s better games.

 

I guess if we’re going to say a couple missed kicks, special teams gaffes and bonehead penalties kept us from winning, we also have to say that better run defense could’ve flipped this to the W column as well. Kind of hard to believe (or not really) that we didn’t get beat by OU as much as we beat ourselves, again. That would be very encouraging if we were showing any signs of correcting the kicking, special teams and penalty issues.

I thought the grades would have been the highest all season based on the points allowed, their prolific offense, ranking etc.....Surprised we kept it that close TBH. I think that losing Honas hurt from an experience and depth standpoint.  Get a solid edge rusher and some depth at LB will help moving forward.  But in the B1G, stop the run, win the game...  

 

 

[admo]

Graded out 23-16.  Not too shabby in my book. 

 

(Suppose to lose 63-14).  I think the Huskers can build off this one, far more than they will be credited for.

 

[Mavric]

2 hours ago, lo country said:

I thought the grades would have been the highest all season based on the points allowed, their prolific offense, ranking etc.....Surprised we kept it that close TBH. I think that losing Honas hurt from an experience and depth standpoint.  Get a solid edge rusher and some depth at LB will help moving forward.  But in the B1G, stop the run, win the game...  

 

Our run defense and tackling grades were not good.  Watching the game again now and we missed a lot of tackles.

 

But it pretty much confirms what Frost has said since he got here:  It's all about chunk plays.  It's so much easier to score when you get chunks.  Which is pretty obvious.  But when you make the other team have to go 10-12-14 plays to score, that's very difficult.  We did a good job limiting big plays.  They got some yards in the running game - a lot of times we could have stopped them for 1-2 yards but they'd break a tackle and get 6-8.  But they still had to grind it out and we'd get a negative play or a penalty to get them stopped.

[MyBloodIsRed16]

8 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

Our run defense and tackling grades were not good.  Watching the game again now and we missed a lot of tackles.

 

But it pretty much confirms what Frost has said since he got here:  It's all about chunk plays.  It's so much easier to score when you get chunks.  Which is pretty obvious.  But when you make the other team have to go 10-12-14 plays to score, that's very difficult.  We did a good job limiting big plays.  They got some yards in the running game - a lot of times we could have stopped them for 1-2 yards but they'd break a tackle and get 6-8.  But they still had to grind it out and we'd get a negative play or a penalty to get them stopped.

As a whole I think the defense played pretty well but I was noticing the missed tackles during the game.  Like, routine tackles.  I think our LB crew is better in coverage than past years but their tackling is not where I would like it to be.  

[RedDenver]

PFF grading is pretty suspect. Not really any different than other analysts' opinions.

[Mavric]

3 hours ago, RedDenver said:

PFF grading is pretty suspect. Not really any different than other analysts' opinions.

 

Based on what?

[RedDenver]

2 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Based on what?

Suspect based on their past ratings, particularly of AM last week, and their lack of transparency of how and why they give different grades. Why should they be taken any more seriously than the LJS grades, for example?

[Mavric]

59 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Suspect based on their past ratings, particularly of AM last week, and their lack of transparency of how and why they give different grades. Why should they be taken any more seriously than the LJS grades, for example?

 

Because they are evaluating each individual play, assigning a grade then aggregating that over the game.  Just just watching the game as it happens and giving a blanket grade based on how they felt.

 

I don't know what you're looking for on transparency.  It impossible to give an exhaustive breakdown.  But they give a pretty good overview of how they go about grading.

[RedDenver]

32 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Because they are evaluating each individual play, assigning a grade then aggregating that over the game.  Just just watching the game as it happens and giving a blanket grade based on how they felt.

 

I don't know what you're looking for on transparency.  It impossible to give an exhaustive breakdown.  But they give a pretty good overview of how they go about grading.

They give an overview, but not what the metrics for evaluation are or name any of the analysts doing the evaluations. It's just another way to form a subjective opinion, like Herbstreit or Bayless saying they watched film and then giving a player a grade.

 

It's not that I think PFF is doing something terrible but rather that I don't find their analysis any more accurate or enlightening than anyone else, so equal as suspect as other analysts giving out grades.

[RedDenver]

Let's just say I'm extremely skeptical of PFF's claims:

Quote

PFF grading is both descriptive and predictive, and in many cases, we’ve debunked myths about traditional stats, showing that the production grade is a better indicator of what happened on the field and what will happen going forward.

 

[thatguy]

5 hours ago, RedDenver said:

PFF grading is pretty suspect. Not really any different than other analysts' opinions.

Not really. you could argue that the metrics are suspect, but at the end of the day, they are using the same standard for all teams, and those standards are pretty objective. a missed tackle is a missed tackle, regardless of opponent or scheme. if our linebackers (heinrich, for example) made their tackles, we likely don't lose that game. if deontae williams doesn't miss his sack, we likely score more than 16. that's it. on the whole, we held them to low points, but on the micro level, we could have done much much better on defense.

 

that's why the national sentiment on Nebraska seems to be shifting from we're "trash" to we're "not too far off".

[RedDenver]

1 minute ago, thatguy said:

Not really. you could argue that the metrics are suspect, but at the end of the day, they are using the same standard for all teams, and those standards are pretty objective. a missed tackle is a missed tackle, regardless of opponent or scheme. if our linebackers (heinrich, for example) made their tackles, we likely don't lose that game. if deontae williams doesn't miss his sack, we likely score more than 16. that's it. on the whole, we held them to low points, but on the micro level, we could have done much much better on defense.

What's a missed tackle worth in points? If it's not an exact metric, then how do analysts A and B use the same grading scale for missed tackles? The answer is it's a subjective analysis aka an opinion on performance, so it's not an objective standard.

 

If Herbstreit or one of the other analysts had given AM a mediocre grade for his performance last week, I'd have criticized them too and not had as much confidence in their analysis going forward, the same as I'm doing with PFF.