BTN: B1G West Defensive Back Unit Rankings

[lo country]

Davie was benched against Miami, and we still got bombed on by every QB except Beathard, and the Rutgers guys.

I defended Davie then and agree.

 

[Redux]

I think its funny that some on this board attributed our early season secondary issues to a lack of talent, they were disproven by the end of the year when this same group did a great job against a very talent UCLA group of receivers.

With a years experience in the scheme under their belts, and the additions of Jackson and the other good DB's coming off redshirt, this should be a fun unit to watch.

Daniel Davies and Jonathan Rose didn't play at the end of the year so they're not wrong.

J. Rose was a consensus 4 star recruit, ranked 8th among CBs in his HS class. For perspective, his composite 247 ranking out of HS was higher than any of our current commits.

I hardly think athletic ability was the problem in the secondary last year.

Umm, I thought you were on record as saying that recruiting hype was not something to get excited about?

 

[cm husker]

I think its funny that some on this board attributed our early season secondary issues to a lack of talent, they were disproven by the end of the year when this same group did a great job against a very talent UCLA group of receivers.

With a years experience in the scheme under their belts, and the additions of Jackson and the other good DB's coming off redshirt, this should be a fun unit to watch.

Daniel Davies and Jonathan Rose didn't play at the end of the year so they're not wrong.

J. Rose was a consensus 4 star recruit, ranked 8th among CBs in his HS class. For perspective, his composite 247 ranking out of HS was higher than any of our current commits.

I hardly think athletic ability was the problem in the secondary last year.

Umm, I thought you were on record as saying that recruiting hype was not something to get excited about?

I'm saying clowns who want to blame players and talk about "addition by subtraction" and "everything is awesome!!11!1!!!1! (because of current recruiting)" dont get to have it both ways.
When I'm evaluating a collapse on defense, and I see evidence of good athletes (like we have with Davie et al) and a history of poor products from coaches, I'm going to give our Husker athletes the benefit of the doubt each and every time.

 

[lo country]

I think its funny that some on this board attributed our early season secondary issues to a lack of talent, they were disproven by the end of the year when this same group did a great job against a very talent UCLA group of receivers.

With a years experience in the scheme under their belts, and the additions of Jackson and the other good DB's coming off redshirt, this should be a fun unit to watch.

Daniel Davies and Jonathan Rose didn't play at the end of the year so they're not wrong.

J. Rose was a consensus 4 star recruit, ranked 8th among CBs in his HS class. For perspective, his composite 247 ranking out of HS was higher than any of our current commits.

I hardly think athletic ability was the problem in the secondary last year.

Umm, I thought you were on record as saying that recruiting hype was not something to get excited about?

I'm saying clowns who want to blame players and talk about "addition by subtraction" and "everything is awesome!!11!1!!!1! (because of current recruiting)" dont get to have it both ways.
When I'm evaluating a collapse on defense, and I see evidence of good athletes (like we have with Davie et al) and a history of poor products from coaches, I'm going to give our Husker athletes the benefit of the doubt each and every time.

That was me. I think some on the DL played to not get hurt. Protect their draft stock. Good for them. I also think some of them might have issues with the firing of Bo. I think we now have the potential to have a great DL. I am very pleased with the new DL coach. So yea, addition by subtraction. We have the potential to be much better than last year IMO. My comments were not a dig at the athleticism of guys, nor a defense of the staff. I've beat the Stewart and MB horse to death...... as well as MR....I also defended Davie all season after seeing us continually get beat regardless who was in at CB..........

 

[DrunkOffPunch]

I think its funny that some on this board attributed our early season secondary issues to a lack of talent, they were disproven by the end of the year when this same group did a great job against a very talent UCLA group of receivers.

With a years experience in the scheme under their belts, and the additions of Jackson and the other good DB's coming off redshirt, this should be a fun unit to watch.

Daniel Davies and Jonathan Rose didn't play at the end of the year so they're not wrong.

Daniel Davie lit it up athletically at pro day - and had one of the best performances at a neutral NFL sponsored testing site nationwide - believe he also signed an FA contract. J. Rose was a consensus 4 star recruit, ranked 8th among CBs in his HS class. For perspective, his composite 247 ranking out of HS was higher than any of our current commits.

I hardly think athletic ability was the problem in the secondary last year.

Wow. Cool. Athletic ability does not equal talent. Also where did I say they weren't athletic? I saw Davies run at state track. You either misread something or you're looking for an arguement where there isn't one.

 

[GBRFAN]

I think its funny that some on this board attributed our early season secondary issues to a lack of talent, they were disproven by the end of the year when this same group did a great job against a very talent UCLA group of receivers.

With a years experience in the scheme under their belts, and the additions of Jackson and the other good DB's coming off redshirt, this should be a fun unit to watch.

Daniel Davies and Jonathan Rose didn't play at the end of the year so they're not wrong.

Daniel Davie lit it up athletically at pro day - and had one of the best performances at a neutral NFL sponsored testing site nationwide - believe he also signed an FA contract. J. Rose was a consensus 4 star recruit, ranked 8th among CBs in his HS class. For perspective, his composite 247 ranking out of HS was higher than any of our current commits.

I hardly think athletic ability was the problem in the secondary last year.

Wow. Cool. Athletic ability does not equal talent. Also where did I say they weren't athletic? I saw Davies run at state track. You either misread something or you're looking for an arguement where there isn't one.

Bing Bing Bing - we have a winner!!!

 

[Mavric]

I think its funny that some on this board attributed our early season secondary issues to a lack of talent, they were disproven by the end of the year when this same group did a great job against a very talent UCLA group of receivers.

With a years experience in the scheme under their belts, and the additions of Jackson and the other good DB's coming off redshirt, this should be a fun unit to watch.

Since when is giving up 320 yards 3 tds and a 65% completion percentage disproving anything of that nature?

Yeah, and they only had the ball for 20 minutes.

The only reason our defense looked even a little better was because our offense did a great job keeping them on the sideline.

 

[cm husker]

I think its funny that some on this board attributed our early season secondary issues to a lack of talent, they were disproven by the end of the year when this same group did a great job against a very talent UCLA group of receivers.

With a years experience in the scheme under their belts, and the additions of Jackson and the other good DB's coming off redshirt, this should be a fun unit to watch.

Daniel Davies and Jonathan Rose didn't play at the end of the year so they're not wrong.

Daniel Davie lit it up athletically at pro day - and had one of the best performances at a neutral NFL sponsored testing site nationwide - believe he also signed an FA contract. J. Rose was a consensus 4 star recruit, ranked 8th among CBs in his HS class. For perspective, his composite 247 ranking out of HS was higher than any of our current commits.

I hardly think athletic ability was the problem in the secondary last year.

Wow. Cool. Athletic ability does not equal talent. Also where did I say they weren't athletic? I saw Davies run at state track. You either misread something or you're looking for an arguement where there isn't one.

Ah, so our players aren't unathletic, they are untalented.

The lengths some will go to to justify and excuse awful coaching performances is astounding.

 

[DrunkOffPunch]

I think its funny that some on this board attributed our early season secondary issues to a lack of talent, they were disproven by the end of the year when this same group did a great job against a very talent UCLA group of receivers.

With a years experience in the scheme under their belts, and the additions of Jackson and the other good DB's coming off redshirt, this should be a fun unit to watch.

Daniel Davies and Jonathan Rose didn't play at the end of the year so they're not wrong.

Daniel Davie lit it up athletically at pro day - and had one of the best performances at a neutral NFL sponsored testing site nationwide - believe he also signed an FA contract. J. Rose was a consensus 4 star recruit, ranked 8th among CBs in his HS class. For perspective, his composite 247 ranking out of HS was higher than any of our current commits.

I hardly think athletic ability was the problem in the secondary last year.

Wow. Cool. Athletic ability does not equal talent. Also where did I say they weren't athletic? I saw Davies run at state track. You either misread something or you're looking for an arguement where there isn't one.

Ah, so our players aren't unathletic, they are untalented.
The lengths some will go to to justify and excuse awful coaching performances is astounding.

No. Kalu and Jones were just better than Davies and Rose.

 

[GBRFAN]

Time of possession is a silly stat and very misleading. A 3 and out passing takes about 20 seconds while a 3 and out running takes about 2 minutes - they both have the same outcome and the amount of time that the players are on the field are the exact same. Now if you are trying to shorten or lengthen a game that is different. However, looking at total play count gives a much clearer picture. UCLA threw the ball 41 times and that paints a much clearer picture then saying that their time of possession was 20 minutes.

 

[Mavric]

Time of possession is a silly stat and very misleading. A 3 and out passing takes about 20 seconds while a 3 and out running takes about 2 minutes - they both have the same outcome and the amount of time that the players are on the field are the exact same. Now if you are trying to shorten or lengthen a game that is different. However, looking at total play count gives a much clearer picture. UCLA threw the ball 41 times and that paints a much clearer picture then saying that their time of possession was 20 minutes.

OK. They threw the ball 41 times and averaged 7.8 yards per pass attempt. For the year, we gave up 7.5 yards per pass attempt which was good for #84 in the country. 7.8 yards per pass attempt would have been #96 in the country.

So now that we've looked at it your way, does that make our defense good or bad in that game?

 

[GBRFAN]

Time of possession is a silly stat and very misleading. A 3 and out passing takes about 20 seconds while a 3 and out running takes about 2 minutes - they both have the same outcome and the amount of time that the players are on the field are the exact same. Now if you are trying to shorten or lengthen a game that is different. However, looking at total play count gives a much clearer picture. UCLA threw the ball 41 times and that paints a much clearer picture then saying that their time of possession was 20 minutes.

OK. They threw the ball 41 times and averaged 7.8 yards per pass attempt. For the year, we gave up 7.5 yards per pass attempt which was good for #84 in the country. 7.8 yards per pass attempt would have been #96 in the country.

So now that we've looked at it your way, does that make our defense good or bad in that game?

Think you answered your own question. Pretty average assuming your numbers are right. At no point since the bowl game did I say anything about how we played in that game with the exception of something towards it being a big win for us and don't over read into the future of our run game because UCLA was pretty bad at run defense.

My point was that I get tired of hearing about time of possession because it is very misleading.

 

[cm husker]

Time of possession is a silly stat and very misleading. A 3 and out passing takes about 20 seconds while a 3 and out running takes about 2 minutes - they both have the same outcome and the amount of time that the players are on the field are the exact same. Now if you are trying to shorten or lengthen a game that is different. However, looking at total play count gives a much clearer picture. UCLA threw the ball 41 times and that paints a much clearer picture then saying that their time of possession was 20 minutes.

OK. They threw the ball 41 times and averaged 7.8 yards per pass attempt. For the year, we gave up 7.5 yards per pass attempt which was good for #84 in the country. 7.8 yards per pass attempt would have been #96 in the country.

So now that we've looked at it your way, does that make our defense good or bad in that game?

Think you answered your own question. Pretty average assuming your numbers are right. At no point since the bowl game did I say anything about how we played in that game with the exception of something towards it being a big win for us and don't over read into the future of our run game because UCLA was pretty bad at run defense.

My point was that I get tired of hearing about time of possession because it is very misleading.

84th in the country is average now?