Blackshirts back??

[Scratchtown]

It could be decent, but not 2009 or 2010 good just yet.

I think you could see similar numbers. Considering the nature of offense in the Big12 as compared to the Big10...but like you said it won't be that level, but we may achieve those numbers.

 

[ericdolph]

I look forward to the defense this season as well. Most of the younger guys have some decent experience from last year and the dline will wreak some more havoc. Hopefully our O improves on turnovers while putting up some early leads against the tougher teams allowing the D to play with a more aggressive approach. Bo's defenses can be scary good when we rush the passer well.

Bo's or Tom's or Bob's...don't care who the coach is, I so long to have another scary D. Think of names like Glover, Dutton, Wistrom, Sandman, Polk, Suh and on and on...those guys were just plain terrifying to opponents I imagine. Just watched a youtube highlight video of Carlos Polk, to the tune of "Hall of the Mountain King". On more than one play, it looks like the runner just give up and stops rather than getting hit. That's the kind of scary I want to see. Not dirty, just clean and clearly violent.

I agree. A feared defense again would be a dream come true.

 

[Hunter94]

I look forward to the defense this season as well. Most of the younger guys have some decent experience from last year and the dline will wreak some more havoc. Hopefully our O improves on turnovers while putting up some early leads against the tougher teams allowing the D to play with a more aggressive approach. Bo's defenses can be scary good when we rush the passer well.

Bo's or Tom's or Bob's...don't care who the coach is, I so long to have another scary D. Think of names like Glover, Dutton, Wistrom, Sandman, Polk, Suh and on and on...those guys were just plain terrifying to opponents I imagine. Just watched a youtube highlight video of Carlos Polk, to the tune of "Hall of the Mountain King". On more than one play, it looks like the runner just give up and stops rather than getting hit. That's the kind of scary I want to see. Not dirty, just clean and clearly violent.

I agree. A feared defense again would be a dream come true.

serviceable with some key stops would be nice...anything more than that would be a bonus.

 

[The King]

Crick was a DT. The DEs were Turner and Allen in 09. Gregory is probably our best DE since Wistrom.......or at least since Rucker or VandenBosch.

Crock and Suh were both DTs. And I said DE is our weak position. But our best player happens to be a DE (Gregory) and he doesn't have anything close to a Suh like impact; thus, we need better depth than we did with Suh, because Suh was just that good.

You're comparing one's first year and sophomore year to the other's senior year.

Suh had one really good game as a junior against Kansas with 12 tackles, 3 TFL and 2.5 sacks.

If you look at Randy Gregory's numbers throughout the season they are pretty darn comparable. Whose is whose?

Player 1

76 tackles - 16 TFL - 7.5 Sacks

Player 2

65 tackles - 16 TFL - 9.5 Sacks

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is much harder to be a dominant DT (stat wise) than it is to be a dominant DE, stat wise, is it not? Gregory's job is to get after the QB - Suh's job was to stuff the run, take up blockers, then make a play (albeit that he just got after the QB every time - but that is an anomaly for a DT, is it not?)

Aside from that (which I could very easily be wrong, but I think DT is probably one of the tougher places to play as in Bo's scheme, DT's don't usually rack up tackles or sacks. They eat up blocks so linebackers can.) I'd say they are pretty even stat wise.

In addition, I was comparing those years because the OP was comparing THAT year to THIS year. I can't magically make Suh worse than was in 09 and magically make Gregory a senior in this coming year playing at his best. He wanted to compare this years defense to the 2009 defense. That's what I did.

 

[HeyBurke]

Crick was a DT. The DEs were Turner and Allen in 09. Gregory is probably our best DE since Wistrom.......or at least since Rucker or VandenBosch.

Crock and Suh were both DTs. And I said DE is our weak position. But our best player happens to be a DE (Gregory) and he doesn't have anything close to a Suh like impact; thus, we need better depth than we did with Suh, because Suh was just that good.

You're comparing one's first year and sophomore year to the other's senior year.

Suh had one really good game as a junior against Kansas with 12 tackles, 3 TFL and 2.5 sacks.

If you look at Randy Gregory's numbers throughout the season they are pretty darn comparable. Whose is whose?

Player 1

76 tackles - 16 TFL - 7.5 Sacks

Player 2

65 tackles - 16 TFL - 9.5 Sacks

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is much harder to be a dominant DT (stat wise) than it is to be a dominant DE, stat wise, is it not? Gregory's job is to get after the QB - Suh's job was to stuff the run, take up blockers, then make a play (albeit that he just got after the QB every time - but that is an anomaly for a DT, is it not?)

Aside from that (which I could very easily be wrong, but I think DT is probably one of the tougher places to play as in Bo's scheme, DT's don't usually rack up tackles or sacks. They eat up blocks so linebackers can.) I'd say they are pretty even stat wise.

In addition, I was comparing those years because the OP was comparing THAT year to THIS year. I can't magically make Suh worse than was in 09 and magically make Gregory a senior in this coming year playing at his best. He wanted to compare this years defense to the 2009 defense. That's what I did.

In most defenses, DTs aren't expected rack up the stats. They exist to wreak havoc on the run game and maintain gap integrity so the LBs can make most of the tackles. Bo's defense is different in that he expects his DTs to make plays that you would normally expect out of DE, such as rushing the passer and racking up tackles. That's one of the reasons Suh and Crick were able to put up such monster numbers. Yes, they obviously were better than most anyone on the field trying to defend them, but they were also given the responsibility and freedom to make plays that DTs aren't usually expected to make.

 

[Count 'Bility]

Carriker was great. But is frequently forgotten, because he played during a very forgetful era.

 

[walksalone]

These guys have the potential to be really scary, and I think that's what many of us have missed. But the variable is youth and if they can stay healthy...

 

[AngryHusker88]

Posted 20 March 2014 - 03:28 PM
The King, on 20 March 2014 - 02:47 PM, said:

No because our DL depth is pretty short especially at DE, with Keels and Natter being an unknown. Hell, we just heard that Collins was moved to DE just for extra reps.

Corner is still pretty slim and inexperienced. We'll see how Cockrell and Mosley react. Davie coming back would be huge, but that's not gonna happen.

The middle of our defense is pretty formidable, young, and set for the future with S, LB, and DT.

In sum, our 2 deep is solid enough to be a top 10 defense. Our top 3/4 guys (in case of injury) are not. But we are clearly on the right track, especially athletically.

I'm going to agree and disagree with a couple of things here. I agree that our defense most likely will not be as good as 2009, but it could be top 20 which is good enough. I disagree that we won't be as good because of depth issues on the d-line. We had basically no depth in 2009 on the d-line. Suh and Crick played virtually every snap of every game that year. We may not be super deep, but we are definitely deeper than that year.

We were very deep and very solid in the secondary in 2009 that was a strength. We may not be that deep in the secondary.

I disagree that Nebraska was very deep in the secondary in 2009...we weren't deep at all. Conference play & beyond we primarily had 6 DBs on the field (Prince Amukamara, Alfonzo Dennard, Matt O'Hanlon, Larry Asante, Dejon Gomes, Eric Hagg). When Dennard went down against KState, we had to use Anthony West (who had a tendency to get burned). If O'Hanlon, Asante, Gomes, or Hagg would've went down (I remember all of them staying healthy all year), I don't think we had anyone who could've stepped in & performed at the same or similar level.

The 2009 Blackshirts weren't deep at all...at any position...but they didn't need to be.

 

[Blackshirt96]

Crick was a DT. The DEs were Turner and Allen in 09. Gregory is probably our best DE since Wistrom.......or at least since Rucker or VandenBosch.

Crock and Suh were both DTs. And I said DE is our weak position. But our best player happens to be a DE (Gregory) and he doesn't have anything close to a Suh like impact; thus, we need better depth than we did with Suh, because Suh was just that good.

You're comparing one's first year and sophomore year to the other's senior year.

Suh had one really good game as a junior against Kansas with 12 tackles, 3 TFL and 2.5 sacks.

If you look at Randy Gregory's numbers throughout the season they are pretty darn comparable. Whose is whose?

Player 1

76 tackles - 16 TFL - 7.5 Sacks

Player 2

65 tackles - 16 TFL - 9.5 Sacks

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is much harder to be a dominant DT (stat wise) than it is to be a dominant DE, stat wise, is it not? Gregory's job is to get after the QB - Suh's job was to stuff the run, take up blockers, then make a play (albeit that he just got after the QB every time - but that is an anomaly for a DT, is it not?)

Aside from that (which I could very easily be wrong, but I think DT is probably one of the tougher places to play as in Bo's scheme, DT's don't usually rack up tackles or sacks. They eat up blocks so linebackers can.) I'd say they are pretty even stat wise.

In addition, I was comparing those years because the OP was comparing THAT year to THIS year. I can't magically make Suh worse than was in 09 and magically make Gregory a senior in this coming year playing at his best. He wanted to compare this years defense to the 2009 defense. That's what I did.

In most defenses, DTs aren't expected rack up the stats. They exist to wreak havoc on the run game and maintain gap integrity so the LBs can make most of the tackles. Bo's defense is different in that he expects his DTs to make plays that you would normally expect out of DE, such as rushing the passer and racking up tackles. That's one of the reasons Suh and Crick were able to put up such monster numbers. Yes, they obviously were better than most anyone on the field trying to defend them, but they were also given the responsibility and freedom to make plays that DTs aren't usually expected to make.

This is incorrect. The DT's in Pelini's defense are to take on 2 gaps not get after the QB's. Suh was such a beast he could take on a double team & still make a play in those gaps. He was also fast enough that when a play did not go to one of his gaps he could chase the play down. His stats were so good because of the down field coverage & closing speed.

 

[kchusker_chris]

“Every day, we strive to be like those Iowa guys he had, that group he had at Iowa, the meanest guys in the Big Ten at the time. We just want to be that group.”

Always nice to see Huskers trying to reach the standards set by Iowa...

 

[Count 'Bility]

“Every day, we strive to be like those Iowa guys he had, that group he had at Iowa, the meanest guys in the Big Ten at the time. We just want to be that group.”

Always nice to see Huskers trying to reach the standards set by Iowa...

They had the most veteran and probably best all around linebacker core in the conference last year. So it is what it is I guess.

 

[StPaulHusker]

“Every day, we strive to be like those Iowa guys he had, that group he had at Iowa, the meanest guys in the Big Ten at the time. We just want to be that group.”

Always nice to see Huskers trying to reach the standards set by Iowa...

They had the most veteran and probably best all around linebacker core in the conference last year. So it is what it is I guess.

Those LB's were very, very good for Iowa. There is no shame in watching film of that group and want to be like that.

 

[Treand3]

“Every day, we strive to be like those Iowa guys he had, that group he had at Iowa, the meanest guys in the Big Ten at the time. We just want to be that group.”

Always nice to see Huskers trying to reach the standards set by Iowa...

They had the most veteran and probably best all around linebacker core in the conference last year. So it is what it is I guess.

Those LB's were very, very good for Iowa. There is no shame in watching film of that group and want to be like that.

I agree. It made their defense formidable and it will be interesting to see what happens this season without them.

 

[QMany]

“Every day, we strive to be like those Iowa guys he had, that group he had at Iowa, the meanest guys in the Big Ten at the time. We just want to be that group.”

Always nice to see Huskers trying to reach the standards set by Iowa...

Kaczenski had three DL get drafted in one year, including a Top-20 pick and All-American. He had some formidable defensive lines. I'm fine with striving for those standards, regardless of school.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I understand though. I hate Bama too, but..............