SandhillshuskerW
Special Teams Player
I'm not trying to argue with you, I feel that VAST would be going from 36 to 21. 36 to 28 would be a good improvement in my mind.
How many PPG will the defense allow this year?
- Thread starter Dansker
- Start date
ColoradoHusk
Heisman Trophy Winner
I am not treating this as an argument, just a discussion. It's all good. I am fine with my own tempered expectations this year.
Dansker
Starter
I'd love to see us be in that top 20 that would be quite the turnaround. We probably win the 09, 10, 12 CCG's with Frost's offense and Bo's defense. We just haven't been able to make them go hand in hand for a very long time.
SandhillshuskerW
Special Teams Player
It's all good here too. It's always hard to tell on a discussion board. Some people just get too worked up when others don't agree with what they are saying. You very well could be right and we will improve to 28 ppg, but I really hope that I'm right and we improve to 21 ppg.
Dansker
Starter
Pretty sure this is what we had in Pelini's first year in the Big 12. If we allow 28.5 PPG in the Big 10, that might raise an alarm.
Dansker
Starter
I think we had 14 sacks all last year too. That's just horrible. I'm sure there were teams out there that had 2 players with more sacks than our entire defense. Our S&C has been improved so I'm hoping our front 7 has too. We've got to find ways to get to the quarterback and create more TFL's.
I'm curious how Chinander does this with his 3-4. Does anyone know if this is going to be strictly 3-4? I know he is versatile and knows 4-3 but I'm not sure we'll actually have a true 4th defensive lineman. Maybe a hybrid pass rusher?
I'm curious how Chinander does this with his 3-4. Does anyone know if this is going to be strictly 3-4? I know he is versatile and knows 4-3 but I'm not sure we'll actually have a true 4th defensive lineman. Maybe a hybrid pass rusher?
Chinander keeps saying no (which I strongly agree). Defenses have so many similarities that it becomes semantics.
One of those similarities is the desire to rush 4 guys. The reason is that number min-maxes your ability to cover and rush. There are 5 underneath zones. If you rush 5 guys, that either leaves only 1 deep or you can't cover all 5 underneath zones. If you rush 3 guys, 2 are double teamed and it's hard to get to the QB. So, however you get there, 4 is optimal.
How you get there is the thing. Many of these so called "3-4" defenses are just 3 guys with their hand in the dirt and 1 guy standing up. The fact he's standing up doesn't make it a totally different front. The real difference you'll see is this upright guy will be a more natural wide rusher while the opposite guy will be in something like a 5 tech. Bo did the same thing, but with 2 defensive ends, so it was called a 4-3. When you combine over/under fronts the difference between a 3-4 and 4-3 often becomes what you desire to call it.
One thing you'll see in this defense, I think, is pressure from a 3 tech. A lot of the "attacking 4-3" defenses of old were 4-3 under fronts that had great 3 techs that got up field. Warren Sapp is a great example. Ben Stille or Carlos Davis come to mind as guys that could potentially pressure from this position. This is where positional nomenclature gets kinda dumb. In a lot of the multiple front defenses of today, this guy could be a 5 tech on one play and a 3 tech on another. Traditionally we called 5 techs defensive ends and 3 techs defensive tackles.
cheekygeek
Starter
You know whose defense allowed 28 in 2017? Akron. (73rd in the country)
Kansas State just made #50 by allowing 25.2 (including a bowl game).
Ahead of Kansas St. last year, from the Big 10, were:
Minnesota at #36 with 22.8
Purdue at #24 with 20.5
Northwestern #20 with 20.1
Michigan State #19 with 20.0
Iowa tied at #17 with 19.9
Ohio St tied at #15 with 19.0
Michigan #13 with 18.8
Wisconsin #3 with 13.9
However, I’d say that having to face Scott Frost’s offense in 2017 had a negative impact on your ranking.
Note: Troy came in at #7 with 18.5
I think it is pretty clear that we probably need to get to the 19 - 20 range to be in contention for National Championships again, though it could be higher if our offensive numbers are leading the nation (as UCF showed last year).
The Big Ten has some terrible offenses so their numbers get skewed low. I guess that's a factor in favor of a lower number for prediction's sake.
What I really care about is getting stops. Ultimately, what's important is looking at the difference between our offensive production and our opponents, but when we are talking national title runs there are moments when all that matters is getting that one stop. Northern Illinois is a good example. Overcame the turnovers to get the lead back, but couldn't get the stop when needed. Season in a nutshell.
What I really care about is getting stops. Ultimately, what's important is looking at the difference between our offensive production and our opponents, but when we are talking national title runs there are moments when all that matters is getting that one stop. Northern Illinois is a good example. Overcame the turnovers to get the lead back, but couldn't get the stop when needed. Season in a nutshell.
cheekygeek
Starter
I’m reminded of SF’s quote that won him his opening NU press conference:
https://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/12/03/scott-frost-im-hoping-the-big-ten-has-to-modify-their-system-for-us/
https://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/12/03/scott-frost-im-hoping-the-big-ten-has-to-modify-their-system-for-us/
desertshox
All-Conference
23.5
84HuskerLaw
All-Conference
I am not a coach so my understanding of a lot of the terminoloy thrown around (3 tech vs 5 tech, etc), is "ify' at best. I am sure my sense of the difference betwen a 5-2, a 4-3 and a 3-4 may be simplistic but I see it more as a variance is the position or pre-snap location of the front seven defenders primarily. Perhaps there are major differences in the technique or movements of each of the defenders depending on the offensive formation, the action of the offensive play as it develops and the responses of each defender thereto. What once were called 'rush ends' which I think of as the two outside defenders in a 5-2 alignment, become defensive ends in a 4-3 and I guess a 3-4 as well. My observation is that in most 4-3 alignments, you tend to have 2 bigger defensive tackles flanked by 2 outside 'rush ends that appear to be about half way between defensive tackles and typical linebackers. Of course, as with any position on either side of the line of scrimmage, the bigger and stronger and faster the better. But speed and agility and ability to tackle and get off blocks comes FIRST and you sacrifice size if need be to keep those other traits maximized.
DTs are typically employed to occupy as many of the offensive linemen as they can while attempting to push the line of scrimmage forward and clog up the middle and contain the outside as muc as possible. The fewer the number of big strong DT types the better they must be. Without the big guys dominating up front, most team will simply overpower using big RBs and a powerful O line to push their way down the field. As most coaches say, conentional wisdom guided by decades of experience is - stop the run first. If you can't, your almost doomed to lose the game. If you have a player or two of Suh capabilities, then you're going to have a great defense normally because the offense can't get enough one on one battles between blockers and tacklers, leaving unblocked LBs,. safeties, etc to crash in to disrupt, etc. So if you don't have "SUHs", then you better have great LBs and outstanding cover corners and great tackling safeties to do most of the tackling, etc.
Whether rush ends, LBs, defensive ends, or even secondary players come up near the line of scrimmage, or play back further, the defense is always looking for ways to avoid blockers and attack whomever has or gets the ball after the snap. In the 5-2, maintaining good 'gap control' to limit the holes in the defensive front line is critical because if a ball carrier finds a hole, there are not many guys between him and the endzone. I prefer the 4-3 alignment (as I said ' pre-snap positioning') as the comromise or best of both features of the 3-4 and 5-2. Unless you could have 2 Suhs, 2 John Duttons and 2 Grant Wistroms to rotate in and out to run the 3 man front. Ideally, you'd have 2 Wistroms and 2 Suhs. But if you have that many D linemen, you'd could run any of the fronts and dominate games consistantly against almost any team or any offensive scheme.
As they say, it's not the X & Os, its the Jimmys and Joes! I welcome any 'corrections' or suggestions on where I am wrong on the foregoing basics.
DTs are typically employed to occupy as many of the offensive linemen as they can while attempting to push the line of scrimmage forward and clog up the middle and contain the outside as muc as possible. The fewer the number of big strong DT types the better they must be. Without the big guys dominating up front, most team will simply overpower using big RBs and a powerful O line to push their way down the field. As most coaches say, conentional wisdom guided by decades of experience is - stop the run first. If you can't, your almost doomed to lose the game. If you have a player or two of Suh capabilities, then you're going to have a great defense normally because the offense can't get enough one on one battles between blockers and tacklers, leaving unblocked LBs,. safeties, etc to crash in to disrupt, etc. So if you don't have "SUHs", then you better have great LBs and outstanding cover corners and great tackling safeties to do most of the tackling, etc.
Whether rush ends, LBs, defensive ends, or even secondary players come up near the line of scrimmage, or play back further, the defense is always looking for ways to avoid blockers and attack whomever has or gets the ball after the snap. In the 5-2, maintaining good 'gap control' to limit the holes in the defensive front line is critical because if a ball carrier finds a hole, there are not many guys between him and the endzone. I prefer the 4-3 alignment (as I said ' pre-snap positioning') as the comromise or best of both features of the 3-4 and 5-2. Unless you could have 2 Suhs, 2 John Duttons and 2 Grant Wistroms to rotate in and out to run the 3 man front. Ideally, you'd have 2 Wistroms and 2 Suhs. But if you have that many D linemen, you'd could run any of the fronts and dominate games consistantly against almost any team or any offensive scheme.
As they say, it's not the X & Os, its the Jimmys and Joes! I welcome any 'corrections' or suggestions on where I am wrong on the foregoing basics.
Dansker
Starter
We need more stops and we need to shutdown opposing offense'. I think that can be attainable. Wisconsin and tOSU could present some challenges. I could see a few close games with the outcome hinging on our defense.
Honestly, all I want to see is our D hold them to one point less than we score........I just want to win again.
A new staff, a lot of young guys and first time starters potentially getting their first starts, and seeing how team went Madden on us more times than I can count or care to remember, I'll go with 28 PPG. I'm really looking forward to seeing what the guys do when punched in the mouth or when Wisky runs a jet sweep that goes for like 65 yards.... Spring and fall are great for building confidence and trust in the system and each other, BUT you never know where you're at until it's real......No moral victories, but to not have any teams score in the 40-50 range would be huge.
A new staff, a lot of young guys and first time starters potentially getting their first starts, and seeing how team went Madden on us more times than I can count or care to remember, I'll go with 28 PPG. I'm really looking forward to seeing what the guys do when punched in the mouth or when Wisky runs a jet sweep that goes for like 65 yards.... Spring and fall are great for building confidence and trust in the system and each other, BUT you never know where you're at until it's real......No moral victories, but to not have any teams score in the 40-50 range would be huge.