Clemson's Defensive Numbers Over-hyped?

[Enhance]

I don't want to take anything away from the Clemson defense. They play some damn good ball. I don't think it's fair to say though, given what I've been reading, Clemson's defense is vastly superior to some of the B12 defenses.

Nebraska played 7 teams with offenses ranked in the top 50, and played 3 teams with offenses ranked in the top 10. Clemson played 3 teams with offenses ranked in the Top 50, and zero teams with offenses ranked in the top 10. The two teams CU played with better than average offenses (FSU and Bama) they gave up 41 and 34 points respectively. I will give CU the fact that they did have some serious turmoil and a coaching change, but still, the numbers don't lie. I don't like hearing that the B12 "doesn't play defense" when we have to deal with these extremely powerful high-ranking offenses. Given a couple years and Bo's great defensive mindset, I think NU could make a name for themselves defensively in the B12.

In the latter half of the season, the reason NU gave up points to the weaker offenses was by shooting themselves in the foot. We gave KSU 14 points from an interception and a ridiculous kick off return. Despite two big plays for Colorado, they were held to less than 150 yards in the second half and only scored 1 offensive TD in the second half. Colorado got 14 points thanks to NU miscues and our weak secondary.

tl:dr I think if Clemson had to play the offenses that Nebraska had to play, their defensive numbers would be significantly worse.

 

[RedDenver]

I put some stats to that effect in another thread. But the converse is also true, that CU's offense played statistically better defenses and should get the same benefit of the doubt as NU's defense.

 

[mmmtodd]

I put some stats to that effect in another thread. But the converse is also true, that CU's offense played statistically better defenses and should get the same benefit of the doubt as NU's defense.

the thing that bugs me is the acc's parody. they want to say they are a great conference because theyre all so well matched. the big 12 hasnt had such a great showing being 6-8 in bcs games since '98. anyone want to throw out a guess as to what the acc had been in that time period?

1-9.

 

[ClemBert]

I don't want to over-hype the Clemson defense. Previous points I made had more to do with the question of what squad should you be more fearful of, the Clemson D or the O? I would say that our D has done a more than adequate job to get us to a 11-1 or 10-2 record. It has been our O that has failed miserably in many of our games. Alabama for example, you can see that our D was on the field all day. Why? Because our O was going 3 and out. This has happened time and time again where our D has been out there a significant portion of the time because the O was going 3 and out. To compound the problem the O was yielding turnovers at the worst possible time...oftentimes well within our our territory. It is really hard to blame our D when we turn the ball over many a time on our own 20 yard line.

With that said, our D isn't a world beater but IS adequate. If our O can move the ball on y'all then it should be a good game for us otherwise its going to be a long day.

 

[Enhance]

I put some stats to that effect in another thread. But the converse is also true, that CU's offense played statistically better defenses and should get the same benefit of the doubt as NU's defense.

I see what you're saying but in my eyes that doesn't take away from how their defense plays. Yes, their offense has probably played statistically better defenses (i'm not sure I haven't looked up the numbers) but that still leaves the fact that their defense didn't necessarily play the greatest of offenses.

And I still think it boils down to offensive prowess. With how dominant the Big 12 is offensively, I don't think anybody could have been able to survive the onslaught and come out with a top 25 defense.

 

[killer cacti]

I put some stats to that effect in another thread. But the converse is also true, that CU's offense played statistically better defenses and should get the same benefit of the doubt as NU's defense.

I see what you're saying but in my eyes that doesn't take away from how their defense plays. Yes, their offense has probably played statistically better defenses (i'm not sure I haven't looked up the numbers) but that still leaves the fact that their defense didn't necessarily play the greatest of offenses.

And I still think it boils down to offensive prowess. With how dominant the Big 12 is offensively, I don't think anybody could have been able to survive the onslaught and come out with a top 25 defense.

I totally agree with that. Playing Texas, Oklahoma, Ok State, Texas Tech, Mizzou, and others in the Big 12 (not sure who you guys played this year from the south without looking) will make your defensive stats look worse than they probably were. To quote Will Muschamp, "Stats are for losers, I like to win." That's what it really comes down to, and Nebraska went 8-4 in a great conference. I will say though, Clemson's defense showed a noticeable difference after Dabo took over, and showed a greater toughness. But to compare stats with a offensively-handicapped ACC (minus GT) to an offensive juggernaut conference that is the Big 12 is comparing apples and oranges. Should be a physical game, and a good one at that.

 

[HuskerTrucker]

With the offensive fire power that the Big 12 has this year, it is really hard to judge much from any Big 12 teams defensive numbers. Everyone was throwing up big numbers. When Ganz has a year like he did this year, and don't even get mentioned for all-conference QB, it tells you just how strong other teams offensive numbers were.

I think it would be hard to judge a Big 12 team's defense. I think it is easier to get a idea of where an ACC's offense or defense is by looking at the numbers because they played teams that were more in the norm range on both sides of the ball. I think the SEC's numbers would be harder to judge than the ACC's because they had so much defensive strength that would have skewed the other teams offensive numbers like our defensive numbers were skewed by all the offense thrown against us.

Bottom line, it will be hard to judge much until we get to the game...then hopefully it will be a well played game by each team, and the better team comes out on top. It is hard to say what will happen.

 

[Enhance]

With the offensive fire power that the Big 12 has this year, it is really hard to judge much from any Big 12 teams defensive numbers. Everyone was throwing up big numbers. When Ganz has a year like he did this year, and don't even get mentioned for all-conference QB, it tells you just how strong other teams offensive numbers were.

I think it would be hard to judge a Big 12 team's defense. I think it is easier to get a idea of where an ACC's offense or defense is by looking at the numbers because they played teams that were more in the norm range on both sides of the ball. I think the SEC's numbers would be harder to judge than the ACC's because they had so much defensive strength that would have skewed the other teams offensive numbers like our defensive numbers were skewed by all the offense thrown against us.

Bottom line, it will be hard to judge much until we get to the game...then hopefully it will be a well played game by each team, and the better team comes out on top. It is hard to say what will happen.

I stand by that, as well. Stats mean nothing on game day. 1996 Fiesta Bowl with Florida vs. Nebraska anyone? Nebraska was a five point underdog and Florida was supposed to have an evenly matched defense and even stronger offense than what we had.

We all know how that game turned out for Florida.

 

[PenthouseTiger]

With the offensive fire power that the Big 12 has this year, it is really hard to judge much from any Big 12 teams defensive numbers. Everyone was throwing up big numbers. When Ganz has a year like he did this year, and don't even get mentioned for all-conference QB, it tells you just how strong other teams offensive numbers were.

I think it would be hard to judge a Big 12 team's defense. I think it is easier to get a idea of where an ACC's offense or defense is by looking at the numbers because they played teams that were more in the norm range on both sides of the ball. I think the SEC's numbers would be harder to judge than the ACC's because they had so much defensive strength that would have skewed the other teams offensive numbers like our defensive numbers were skewed by all the offense thrown against us.

Bottom line, it will be hard to judge much until we get to the game...then hopefully it will be a well played game by each team, and the better team comes out on top. It is hard to say what will happen.

I stand by that, as well. Stats mean nothing on game day. 1996 Fiesta Bowl with Florida vs. Nebraska anyone? Nebraska was a five point underdog and Florida was supposed to have an evenly matched defense and even stronger offense than what we had.

We all know how that game turned out for Florida.

I mean no offense whatsoever in saying this, but you guys live in the mid 90's like we live in the 80's.

 

[caveman99]

With the offensive fire power that the Big 12 has this year, it is really hard to judge much from any Big 12 teams defensive numbers. Everyone was throwing up big numbers. When Ganz has a year like he did this year, and don't even get mentioned for all-conference QB, it tells you just how strong other teams offensive numbers were.

I think it would be hard to judge a Big 12 team's defense. I think it is easier to get a idea of where an ACC's offense or defense is by looking at the numbers because they played teams that were more in the norm range on both sides of the ball. I think the SEC's numbers would be harder to judge than the ACC's because they had so much defensive strength that would have skewed the other teams offensive numbers like our defensive numbers were skewed by all the offense thrown against us.

Bottom line, it will be hard to judge much until we get to the game...then hopefully it will be a well played game by each team, and the better team comes out on top. It is hard to say what will happen.

I stand by that, as well. Stats mean nothing on game day. 1996 Fiesta Bowl with Florida vs. Nebraska anyone? Nebraska was a five point underdog and Florida was supposed to have an evenly matched defense and even stronger offense than what we had.

We all know how that game turned out for Florida.

I mean no offense whatsoever in saying this, but you guys live in the mid 90's like we live in the 80's.

Pretty much!

 

[Enhance]

I mean no offense whatsoever in saying this, but you guys live in the mid 90's like we live in the 80's.

It's not like 90's was that along ago. Nebraska was still pretty dominant all the way up till 2002. Besides, the 1995 Husker team was arguably the best college football team to ever play the game and the 90's was a great decade for Husker Football. We just miss it so much! lol

I'm going to keep talking about the 90's decade until we win 4 championships in one decade :restore

You're right though. We all need to get lives.

 

[redout22]

Maybe a little but they sure will be good in a couple of years because of guys like Daquan Bowers

 

[PenthouseTiger]

Maybe a little but they sure will be good in a couple of years because of guys like Daquan Bowers

If Da'Quan can live up to be even close to as good as our last #93(Gaines Adams, think Suh but more of a beast), I'll be ecstatic.

 

[OLDMAN]

Maybe a little but they sure will be good in a couple of years because of guys like Daquan Bowers

If Da'Quan can live up to be even close to as good as our last #93(Gaines Adams, think Suh but more of a beast), I'll be ecstatic.

I hate when people discuss football like they do baseball stats.

The reason baseball nuts discuss stats is to cover up the fact that it's a boring sport.

Have to generate some sort of interest!

I prefer to discuss football in observations as to what I will see and not how many yards etc a team makes.

 

[PenthouseTiger]

Maybe a little but they sure will be good in a couple of years because of guys like Daquan Bowers

If Da'Quan can live up to be even close to as good as our last #93(Gaines Adams, think Suh but more of a beast), I'll be ecstatic.

I'm sorry, but where were any stats referenced in the section that you quoted? maybe I missed something.