Interesting discussion about NU on KU board

[Igetbored216]

I'm having a little trouble figuring how they deem Nebraska finished 4th in the Big 12 last year. I'd say definitely #2 or possibly #3. However, I thought they made some very valid points. We did lose Suh which is huge. We did lose Dillard. We did lose Turner. IMO, those are three huge losses on the D. Turner's speed and athletic ability was huge. Texas ran to the outside on Bama. They didn't have a chance against us because of Turner's speed to get up field and turn everything to the inside. The weak link on our D next year may very well be in the LB corp. If they think we don't have a QB, how do they feel about the rest of the Big 12? Gabbert may very well be the best QB in the Big 12 in 2010 unless Baylor's QB comes back with a vengeance.

Losing Suh is a big deal. Losing Dillard is a big deal. Losing Turner is not a big deal.

I would also say that losing O'Hanlon is a big deal. Not only was he our best open field tackler and was almost always in position to make a play, but he was really good at making sure everyone was lined up correctly.

 

[REDSTEEL]

I think the funniest or the most stupid comment was about a scoring defense vs yards allowed. The one KU fan stated a team is more effective having a defense giving up less yards than having one giving up less points.

The guy explained it and it was a valid point. He basically said that no specific metric is a perfect identifier of how good a defense is. The flaw in Points Allowed is that it encompasses points given up by offensive turnovers as well as run-backs on special teams. The flaw in Yards Allowed is that it doesn't measure the stat most directly related to wins, points.

I thought they had a good discussion.

I don't get some people here bashing the discussions on this site, though. Look at the KU thread - there are rational, well-thought-out posts and a couple of nonsense posts. Holding that up as some paragon of message boards while comparing them to this board... not getting it.

I sometimes wonder why some people are members here when they clearly do not respect the other members. Doesn't make a lot of sense.

And yet you never understood the idea that Callahans problems were'nt just his defense? <_<

 

[jsneb83]

I think the funniest or the most stupid comment was about a scoring defense vs yards allowed. The one KU fan stated a team is more effective having a defense giving up less yards than having one giving up less points.

The guy explained it and it was a valid point. He basically said that no specific metric is a perfect identifier of how good a defense is. The flaw in Points Allowed is that it encompasses points given up by offensive turnovers as well as run-backs on special teams. The flaw in Yards Allowed is that it doesn't measure the stat most directly related to wins, points.

I thought they had a good discussion.

I don't get some people here bashing the discussions on this site, though. Look at the KU thread - there are rational, well-thought-out posts and a couple of nonsense posts. Holding that up as some paragon of message boards while comparing them to this board... not getting it.

I sometimes wonder why some people are members here when they clearly do not respect the other members. Doesn't make a lot of sense.

But the bottom line is the Defense that keeps the other team from scoring wins. The yards against is just stats (fluff) in my opinion.

but obviously our offense didnt help matters. they're inability to stay on the field forced our defense to stay on the field much more than the other great defenses.

nebraska- 3798yds 271.3ypg 955 plays 4.0yd/play

texas- 3527yds 251.9ypg 918 plays 3.8yd/play

alabama- 3435yds 245.4ypg 842 plays 4.1yd/play

florida- 3533yds 252.4ypg 844 plays 4.2yd/play

as you can see our defense was on the field more than 100 plays more than bama and florida, and with all that extra time on the field, of course we'll give up more yards. but the impressive thing is that we only trail texas in yards/play, and you would think that fatigue would eventually set in and they would start to break down, but that never happened all season, thats what was most impressive IMO. I honestly think we were really lucky to have our defense to fall back on with our struggling offense. if we had the defense of 2008, i wouldnt have been surprised if we wouldnt have have become bowl eligible. but thats just my two cents, but this is why i truly do appreciate what this staff has done in only two short years, and that is why I am excited for next year.

 

[Huskertone14]

I don't think there are a lot of people that really got the grasp of how good and what the Nebraska defense actually did last season. How many times did our offense go 3 and out or turned the ball over and put our defense back on the field with there backs against the wall, yet still the remain the number 1 scoring defense in the Country. How many times did the Defense get the ball back for the Offense just to see them NOT capitalize. Most defenses, even the good ones would have folded over if that were to happen to them on a consistent basis like it did to Nebraska. What would have happened if Nebraska had a little more ball control, how good would they have been statistically?

I know this is bold, but I think we would have matched up better against Alabama than Texas did. I just think that our defense, and special teams would have been able to make enough plays to beat Alabama.

 

[WCHusker]

The "real" KU forum is on Scout, and they are good people-surprising good(even to Husker fans)

 

[huskerswrkhavoc]

The majority of those posts are a lot more level-headed than the posts on this board.

Gotcha rep back to 0 there.. idk why that deserves -1..... just the truth.. some of those posts are idiotic. but some of them are very well thought out.. i think the biggest thing they may not know is Lee's injury. the OP that called Turner our "other DT" is obv off, and O'Hanlon, while a big loss, is still a kid that wasn't good enough to play originally.. I like how someone there pointed that out. Some of those were spot on.