Knapplc I get what you are saying. I also did say "for the most part". When we were up 14-7 against Wisconsin, didn't we have a stop and a chance to go up by 2 scores? What happened? Actually what happened twice before the half? Doesn't that kind of demoralize a team and a defense? The last 3 drives before the half were INT, INT and missed FG. When exactly did this game get out of hand? Oh yeah the very first drive after the half? INT. How am I wrong again?
I figured you were going to bring up the INTs and I almost mentioned that as well. My only point about that is, if INTs/turnovers demoralize a defense, shouldn't TDs & field goals pump them up? We were scoring against Fresno and Washington, yet they still gave up a bunch of yards. Same for Northwestern, same for Michigan. That point has to work both ways.
OR, you could also say that the fact that the defense couldn't/wouldn't stop Wiscy and Michigan demoralized the offense, and they gave up.
Personally, I think each guy who straps on the helmet, whether they're on offense, defense or special teams, should pull himself up by his own bootstraps and do his part. It is demoralizing when the guy on the other side of the ball isn't doing his part - either throwing interceptions, dropping passes, fumbling the ball, whatever. Holding, pass interference, etc - they all are a drain to the other side of the ball. But that stuff happens.
Our 2009 defense, which did feature a freak in Ndamukong Suh, granted, was the poster-child for ignoring the other side of the ball and just doing what they were supposed to do. That 2009 offense was horrid, but the defense - not just Suh - played fantastic, all year long.
I think if the offense says they sucked because the defense couldn't stop anyone, or the defense says they sucked because the offense couldn't score, that's doing too much finger-pointing, and not enough responsibility-taking. Gotta take responsibility.