Nebraska defense wants to be a strength
- Thread starter Abdullah the Butcher
- Start date
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
I agree. but, that doesn't discount the fact we were low on numbers for LBs due to the style of D we played in the Big 12. And, when I say that, I mean true depth at the position. Not just numbers.
Last edited by a moderator:
Redux
Assistant Coach
Count 'Bility
Banned
Zoogs. It's not being stated as the only reason. it wasnt. And I try not to use it as an excuse, though I know it comes off like that at times. But it was a pretty big factor. It changed a lot of things and directions of the program. It just needs to be known that it did have an impact, because I know of folks that think it didnt, or shouldnt have.
Landlord
Banned
I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I am skeptical.
Because Texas A&M went through a conference change and improved from 7-5 to 11-2 against all new unscouted teams that played a different kind of football than the Big XII.
Freaking Missouri sucked their first year in the SEC (although not a lot worse than they had been), but one year later had their best season in school history.
Those are the only two marquee examples, I guess, but they exist. I don't know.
NUpolo8
Banned
The conference change really needs to stop being used as an excuse. If anything, it exposed how poor at planning the staff was
Chaddyboxer
Banned
All 3 had mobile QB's.....something that NEB and many solid defenses have had trouble with. Narduzzi at Michigan St has done well against Braxton Miller...however, Taylor had very solid games against the Spartans despite the turnovers.
zoogs
Assistant Coach
I agree with Landlord. A&M and Mizzou are good examples. And I wonder, just how much base defense (3 LBs) do B1G teams really have to play? ... it's not like a spread formations or multiple receivers are unheard of or even uncommon in this conference, right?
Plus, we did have fewer guys, maybe, for 2.5 starting positions. But not that few.
2011 (5): David Sr, Compton Jr, Whaley Jr, Fisher Jr, Martin Jr (a great year for this group)
2012 (6): Compton Sr, Fisher Sr, Whaley Sr, Zaire Jr, Santos RFr, Pirman RFr
2013 (8): Zaire Jr, Rose RFr, Newby Fr, Gerry Fr, Afalava RFr, Santos So, Banderas Fr, Pirman So
...out of the scholarship group, plus a couple of depth guys or walk-ons who earned some time like Matthew May (Sr-'11). It shouldn't have kicked our butt. And I don't think it did. I agree with you guys that switching conferences isn't nothing -- it obviously is not the same as not switching. But I disagree that it comes close to being a major factor.
And three full recruiting cycles after the switch to the B1G is when we finally have numbers in the LB group ... five of which are freshmen, three of them true freshmen. These are recruiting issues that are unrelated to switching conferences.
To finish on a positive note, though, I like all the players we have going into next year, 2013 finally saw the DL start to return to form, etc. It's just that any struggles we had transitioning to the B1G I'd put squarely on coaching/recruiting...whether that was planning out the classes, picking up the right kinds of players, and so on. It wasn't not enough time to adjust. There was plenty of time, esp. thanks to David & co.
Plus, we did have fewer guys, maybe, for 2.5 starting positions. But not that few.
2011 (5): David Sr, Compton Jr, Whaley Jr, Fisher Jr, Martin Jr (a great year for this group)
2012 (6): Compton Sr, Fisher Sr, Whaley Sr, Zaire Jr, Santos RFr, Pirman RFr
2013 (8): Zaire Jr, Rose RFr, Newby Fr, Gerry Fr, Afalava RFr, Santos So, Banderas Fr, Pirman So
...out of the scholarship group, plus a couple of depth guys or walk-ons who earned some time like Matthew May (Sr-'11). It shouldn't have kicked our butt. And I don't think it did. I agree with you guys that switching conferences isn't nothing -- it obviously is not the same as not switching. But I disagree that it comes close to being a major factor.
And three full recruiting cycles after the switch to the B1G is when we finally have numbers in the LB group ... five of which are freshmen, three of them true freshmen. These are recruiting issues that are unrelated to switching conferences.
To finish on a positive note, though, I like all the players we have going into next year, 2013 finally saw the DL start to return to form, etc. It's just that any struggles we had transitioning to the B1G I'd put squarely on coaching/recruiting...whether that was planning out the classes, picking up the right kinds of players, and so on. It wasn't not enough time to adjust. There was plenty of time, esp. thanks to David & co.
Last edited by a moderator:
Landlord
Banned
One solid game***
And Russel Wilson had all but 32 rushing yards against us, 21 of them coming on one play.
Not making a point, just being an anal-retentive snot.
Redux
Assistant Coach
Count 'Bility
Banned
Texas A&M had Manziel. And a poor defense. Without Manziel, I'm not sure. And Missouri has to do this pretty consisntently to prove to me that last year wasnt a fluke like their other, what, 1? 2? great seasons under Pinkel? Hell, we beat Georgia too. That's just my opinion.
Redux
Assistant Coach
Nobody wants to admit that the SEC was kinda mediocre last year. I didnt really see one squad outta the SEC thT was overly impressive. Bama was pretty good but had bad moments. Auburn was pretty good but got beat by FSU that quite honestly wasnt the most impressive team week in and week out. Mizzou.........yeah Mizzou. Georgia was right up there with those teams in terms of competetiveness and they were almost as banged up as we were. I really think the SEC could be on the downslide back to regularity.
Count 'Bility
Banned
A&M lost 2 games in 2012. lost 4 in 2013. Still have not won their division yet, which Nebraska did in their second year, in route to a 10-2 reg season. So I guess i'm failing to see what A&M has done that is so much more impressive than Nebraska in their 1st two years. Sure, it's the SEC (yayhoo!) and they beat Bama. But as a whole, what else?
And as far as Missouri goes, look at their year one. And I'll stand by what I said earlier. I need to see more of 2013 in future years to not be able to claim that as a fluke, esp in a year when it appeared that no one wanted to win their division.
And as far as Missouri goes, look at their year one. And I'll stand by what I said earlier. I need to see more of 2013 in future years to not be able to claim that as a fluke, esp in a year when it appeared that no one wanted to win their division.
Landlord
Banned
They finished the season ranked #5
They beat four ranked teams including a complete beatdown of #12 Oklahoma
They beat the #1 team in the country
Their only two losses were by a combined 8 points against two more ranked teams