-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
HuskerMax readers can save 50% on Omaha Steaks .
Biggest Problem: Defense
- Thread starter Crusty
- Start date
1995
- Missouri Time of Possession - 35 minutes 16 seconds
- Nebraska Time of Possession - 24 minutes 44 seconds
Final score, Nebraska 57, Missouri 0
Missouri 39 yards rushing, 83 yards passing.
TOP has nothing to do with it. Its all about talent.
Bottom Line: If our team had the 1995 defense, we could win games with defense despite SF's face paced offense (which at this point is not very faced paced at all)...and our defense would not be rated 111 in the nation.
If our defense gets more talent we won't be seeing opponents make 3rd and 10 with ease and our opponents will not score as much.
Last edited:
Philly402
Recruit
That's an anomaly.
You cant really compare anything the 95 team did to many college football teams ever.
Typically, if you run a high pace offense your defense will give up more points. The key is getting takeaways. TOP can be a huge factor depending on how the game is going.
Well I am not to sure about "face Paced" offense, but ok. Finding one game in 95 where someone else had TOP on us does not change the point. In the mid 90s DONU had an edge on TOP far more than they did not.
Our offense is not generally faced paced at this time. They only go faced paced in spurts. If you have watched UCF play this year, you will see a truly faced paced offense.
I agree, I have not seen many (if any) faced- paced offenses play sterling defense, but I don't see why they can't.
So the question is, if the 95 defense was ours this season, where would they rank nationally in total defense?
Last edited:
I am not playing your silly game. Go play with yourself.
I
inthedeed
Guest
the defense thru my eyes has improved as the year has progressed. I think with the overall talent and depth we currently have, that is about all we can ask or get.
So the question is, if the 95 defense was ours this season, where would they rank nationally in total defense?
Offenses have evolved. Would the 95 defense struggle with the spread offenses? All the QBs are running their offenses from the shotgun now.
This year Wisconsin had 370 yards rushing against us and 163 yards passing. Jonathan Taylor had a personal best 221 yards rushing.
What would Wisconsin's offensive stats have looked like if they had faced our 1995 defense this year in Madison?
Would they have scored 41 points?
Last edited:
Other than Wisconsin doesn't everyone in our conference run a no-huddle, hurry-up offense? I believe Wisconsin is the only team in the B1G that still huddles up.
That being the case, we are not at a TOP disadvantage.
I am not convinced that a no-huddle team can't have a top 10 defense...especially now that nearly every offense in CF is no-huddle.
If you have a defense that can consistently get 3 and outs, there is no way they are going to be on the field very long during a game, and there is no way that you will need to score a bunch of points in order to win.
Can you have a no-huddle, faced-paced offense and at the same time have a defense that consistently pitches 3 and outs?
The answer is yes, absolutely! But we won't have one unless we get more talent.
Depth is important, but when you talk depth, you are actually talking about TALENT in terms of quantity.
Last edited:
Against Minnesota we could have easily beat them in TOP, not that it really matters for that particular game. We were up and snapping the ball with upwards of 25 seconds on the play clock. I get that Frost wants to be up-tempo at all times but I hope they start to burn some clock with a lead and in good field position. Maybe someone can explain the logic to me, but not running down the clock when you have the lead, up in down and distance, and on your opponent's side of the field seems a little confusing. I could be completely wrong, I'm obviously not a coach and not in Frost's stratosphere, I just wonder what the logic is.
But depth is actually talent....talent in significant quantity.
@Paramus berry makes a good point in answer to your question about no Huddle. Many teams do run a no huddle but that is mostly about making it difficult to situationally substitute. However they still snap the ball with 10 or less seconds on the clock. So the same amount of clock per play is utilized. The Chip Kelly, HCSF style of no huddle is predicated on snapping the ball with no more than 10-12 seconds having run off the clock. This also keeps teams from substituting but also does not allow them to get set with the players that are on the team. This wears them out both mentally and physically. This also leads to a very low TOP even when scoring a lot of points.
To your question of talent vs depth. It is a chicken and egg question. We need better starting talent but we also need talented depth. So it is not either, or, it is both.
Ah, the Queen of Hearts has spoke again about our D Coordinator ... 'off with his head!'
