Projecting Defensive Depth Chart

[Middle-aged_Ball_Coach]

I get the 'Going Cowboy' deal, but I don't always agree that it's a bad thing.

I was an instinctive player and ALWAYS went to the ball.

I got chastised a bit early on when I didn't hold the edge on a play...but still made a tackle, but that went away pretty quickly.

You mentioned 'Extraordinary' HS linebackers and safeties living on the edge and making plays and I completely agree. I was very ordinary, but lived on the edge and consistently made tackles behind the line. Call it gut, instinct, whatever, it just happened.

I never got to see what that looks like at the next level, but I've watched others played like that.

It also looks foreign now because the offenses are so different. We didn't have the same options to think about, which absolutely makes a difference.

I think that I mostly agree, but I reserve the right to be cantankerous later if it suits my fancy.

If you want to know what it looks like at the next level, Lavonte David showed us all what it looks like at its best. Watch one of those games where he has a bajillion tackles, yet Bo and the defensive coaches have a hard time paying him a compliment. The "few things he needs to clean up" were always code words for "he made the tackle, but he wasn't where he should have been when he did it." Luke Kuechly is another guy who comes to mind. He'd shoot a gap behind a play going to the outside instead of scraping over the top (as he was almost certainly coached to do), but then he'd slice through and make a tackle for loss, so how do you get upset with him?

I don't think that it's possible to be a truly great LB at any level without having that gut instinct. Have you ever read Malcolm Gladwell? I can't remember which book (Blink?), but he talked about "thin slicing" where an expert is able to instantaneously analyze things at a level that's unexplainable, even to other "experts." I've had a handful of players like that. They made me look good. When those guys were also athletic and watched game film like addicts, they played at the next level.

 

[CrabHusker]

I think that I mostly agree, but I reserve the right to be cantankerous later if it suits my fancy.

If you want to know what it looks like at the next level, Lavonte David showed us all what it looks like at its best. Watch one of those games where he has a bajillion tackles, yet Bo and the defensive coaches have a hard time paying him a compliment. The "few things he needs to clean up" were always code words for "he made the tackle, but he wasn't where he should have been when he did it." Luke Kuechly is another guy who comes to mind. He'd shoot a gap behind a play going to the outside instead of scraping over the top (as he was almost certainly coached to do), but then he'd slice through and make a tackle for loss, so how do you get upset with him?

I don't think that it's possible to be a truly great LB at any level without having that gut instinct. Have you ever read Malcolm Gladwell? I can't remember which book (Blink?), but he talked about "thin slicing" where an expert is able to instantaneously analyze things at a level that's unexplainable, even to other "experts." I've had a handful of players like that. They made me look good. When those guys were also athletic and watched game film like addicts, they played at the next level.

David had/has it all. Instinct and ridiculous speed. That can make up for a lot of 'Not being where you're supposed to be'. I didn't have anywhere near his kind of speed. I did make some 'Cowboy' plays though.

I remember sitting in film study the week after game with out head coach/DC and my position coach and they're asking me why I did this or why I did that.....on plays that were successful from a defensive standpoint. One in particular was a strip/sack where I'd went against the flow of the play on the backside and split a gap that shouldn't have been there between the guard and center....away from the direction of the play. If I was doing what everything told me to do from the defense we were in to my reads on the play based on watching their film from previous games to the same formation and play they'd run repeatedly during the game, I'd have stayed parallel to the line and moved laterally with the play across the field. They ran a lot of Pro Formation, TE and even some double TE to the wide wide formations and almost every time the flow would be to that side. So much so we cheated me at MIKE over toward the Strong Side LB which made me running into the gap on the other side of the center look that much goofier. EVERY indication was that the play was going to be a toss sweep to the wide side of the field, which it would have been. I shouldn't have been involved in anything unless the RB cut back toward the middle of the field or I had to chase him down because the SLB or DE missed the tackle. Instead I shoot a gap on the back side and hit the QB before he's taken two steps toward the running back to toss. On film it looked like we'd called an inside run blitz because I'm running AT the line immediately at the snap....with no read that would have led me to think the play was going there. It was a perfect storm. The guard takes his first step at the snap, the QB doesn't momentarily hesitate and I'm running directly into the back of our DT and have no bearing on the play at all. Might be sitting a play or two after that. The way Crouch or Frost used to move at the snap, I'd have been fifteen feet behind them by the time I got into the backfield. Luck plays a role too I guess.

"Why did you do that?"

I kept saying "I don't know."and it drove them nuts.

They thought I'd keyed on something I could communicate that they weren't seeing and I guess it was the gap in the line that shouldn't have been. It's not like I thought 'Oh, hey look. The guard was half a step slow and I can squirt through there and be running behind the play like a dumb ass instead of having a shot at making a tackle. Lizard brain? I don't know. If it sets up the same way 100 times do I make the tackle or end up out of the play the other 99 times? I don't know that either.

I remember specific plays where the read WAS why I did what I did (which was most of the time because I wasn't good enough not to stick to the plan most of the time). One school NEVER ran the fullback. The only time he'd be involved in the play was a play action fake. I read the fake, dropped back in coverage and made the pick when he tried to throw to the slot in a crossing pattern underneath, but it all made sense. Read the key and did what I was taught.

 

[Middle-aged_Ball_Coach]

"Why did you do that?"

I kept saying "I don't know."and it drove them nuts.

If you think it drives the coaches nuts when you can't explain why you made a great play, how about when you can't explain why you weren't where you were supposed to be? One of the great strengths of old school option football was that sooner or later the defenders that went cowboy would pay for it with a big play TD. It's still true, but it's not as obvious as it used to be when pretty much everyone watching fairly well knew who had what assignments on an option play.

The year before I went back to work at my alma mater as an assistant, the team was knocked out of the 2nd round of the playoffs by the eventual state champion. On the opening kickoff their stud DE all but decapitated our leading rusher, who was knocked out of the game. On the first play from scrimmage, our team ran a speed option away from him, but he ran down the QB from behind before he cleared the TE and turned upfield. For the second play they tried running an option at him, but he took an angle on the mesh between the QB and the FB so that he knocked both backwards for a loss while both were still holding onto the ball. Some guys can get away with taking chances that don't work for others. As I understand from that guy's coach, he wasn't exactly a Mensa member, and he couldn't explain why he did anything that he did, but I watched their game film from that entire season, and that kid was never wrong about what he did.

 

[CrabHusker]

If you think it drives the coaches nuts when you can't explain why you made a great play, how about when you can't explain why you weren't where you were supposed to be? One of the great strengths of old school option football was that sooner or later the defenders that went cowboy would pay for it with a big play TD. It's still true, but it's not as obvious as it used to be when pretty much everyone watching fairly well knew who had what assignments on an option play.

The year before I went back to work at my alma mater as an assistant, the team was knocked out of the 2nd round of the playoffs by the eventual state champion. On the opening kickoff their stud DE all but decapitated our leading rusher, who was knocked out of the game. On the first play from scrimmage, our team ran a speed option away from him, but he ran down the QB from behind before he cleared the TE and turned upfield. For the second play they tried running an option at him, but he took an angle on the mesh between the QB and the FB so that he knocked both backwards for a loss while both were still holding onto the ball. Some guys can get away with taking chances that don't work for others. As I understand from that guy's coach, he wasn't exactly a Mensa member, and he couldn't explain why he did anything that he did, but I watched their game film from that entire season, and that kid was never wrong about what he did.

So true and since the bulk of our schedule at the time was against some form of option football, my cowboy was limited. Like you said, you bail on an assignment against the Wishbone or the Veer at the linebacker position and if you're lucky a safety is making the tackle. We played a couple of teams that were heavy on the pro sets and passing offense and I would ad lib a lot more. Back then you didn't see as many HS aged QB's who could drop dimes. We had room for error.

Yeah, I saw a few of those. Marc Munford was a kid that was always in the right place in High School, even if it wasn't where he was supposed to be. Not that he wasn't a smart football player though. 'Nose for the football' should have been his middle name. He was as fast as me and 40lbs heavier....in high school.

Funny you mention going back to your alma mater to coach. My one year at the High School level was at my high school a little over a decade after I graduated. Even then the game had changed. Only a couple schools still ran option and very few had gotten any good at passing the ball, though that was the craze.

 

[Middle-aged_Ball_Coach]

Funny you mention going back to your alma mater to coach. My one year at the High School level was at my high school a little over a decade after I graduated. Even then the game had changed. Only a couple schools still ran option and very few had gotten any good at passing the ball, though that was the craze.

My experience was surreal because I had grown up playing an offense that always included option, but we were never really an option team except for the very brief time when I was in at QB. Fast forward a decade and a half where I had been trying to get a program started in the late 90s with what was basically a stripped-down version of the Bellotti Oregon offense before Bellotti was running his offense at Oregon, and then I ended up back at my alma mater ... where they had shifted to Wishbone!?! We'd run Wishbone there for one year (when I was a 7th grader), and it was cool to come back 20 years later and find the same base plays, same numbering system, same nomenclature (e.g., two lead blocking RBs = "Blast" not "Iso"), but an entirely new coaching staff that had absolutely no connection to the school from when I had been there. I suddenly found myself in 2002 getting to coach Wishbone QBs. It was a breath of fresh air.

 

[ramsker]

I made up for my lack of speed with a well-honed level of poor instincts . . . lethal combination.

 

[HuskerFaith]

David had/has it all. Instinct and ridiculous speed. That can make up for a lot of 'Not being where you're supposed to be'. I didn't have anywhere near his kind of speed. I did make some 'Cowboy' plays though.

I remember sitting in film study the week after game with out head coach/DC and my position coach and they're asking me why I did this or why I did that.....on plays that were successful from a defensive standpoint. One in particular was a strip/sack where I'd went against the flow of the play on the backside and split a gap that shouldn't have been there between the guard and center....away from the direction of the play. If I was doing what everything told me to do from the defense we were in to my reads on the play based on watching their film from previous games to the same formation and play they'd run repeatedly during the game, I'd have stayed parallel to the line and moved laterally with the play across the field. They ran a lot of Pro Formation, TE and even some double TE to the wide wide formations and almost every time the flow would be to that side. So much so we cheated me at MIKE over toward the Strong Side LB which made me running into the gap on the other side of the center look that much goofier. EVERY indication was that the play was going to be a toss sweep to the wide side of the field, which it would have been. I shouldn't have been involved in anything unless the RB cut back toward the middle of the field or I had to chase him down because the SLB or DE missed the tackle. Instead I shoot a gap on the back side and hit the QB before he's taken two steps toward the running back to toss. On film it looked like we'd called an inside run blitz because I'm running AT the line immediately at the snap....with no read that would have led me to think the play was going there. It was a perfect storm. The guard takes his first step at the snap, the QB doesn't momentarily hesitate and I'm running directly into the back of our DT and have no bearing on the play at all. Might be sitting a play or two after that. The way Crouch or Frost used to move at the snap, I'd have been fifteen feet behind them by the time I got into the backfield. Luck plays a role too I guess.

"Why did you do that?"

I kept saying "I don't know."and it drove them nuts.

They thought I'd keyed on something I could communicate that they weren't seeing and I guess it was the gap in the line that shouldn't have been. It's not like I thought 'Oh, hey look. The guard was half a step slow and I can squirt through there and be running behind the play like a dumb ass instead of having a shot at making a tackle. Lizard brain? I don't know. If it sets up the same way 100 times do I make the tackle or end up out of the play the other 99 times? I don't know that either.

I remember specific plays where the read WAS why I did what I did (which was most of the time because I wasn't good enough not to stick to the plan most of the time). One school NEVER ran the fullback. The only time he'd be sinvolved in the play was a play action fake. I read the fake, dropped back in coverage and made the pick when he tried to throw to the slot in a crossing pattern underneath, but it all made sense. Read the key and did what I was taught.

Is this what you saw from Luke Reimers? I know he had limited playing time in the Maryland game. But he would shoot through a gap like a cannon and make a spectacular play. Was he cowboying it? Was he blitzing? Was it just a fabulous reaction? Was he lucky? Would like both of you to comment Please (crab and middle) Thx

 

[CrabHusker]

My experience was surreal because I had grown up playing an offense that always included option, but we were never really an option team except for the very brief time when I was in at QB. Fast forward a decade and a half where I had been trying to get a program started in the late 90s with what was basically a stripped-down version of the Bellotti Oregon offense before Bellotti was running his offense at Oregon, and then I ended up back at my alma mater ... where they had shifted to Wishbone!?! We'd run Wishbone there for one year (when I was a 7th grader), and it was cool to come back 20 years later and find the same base plays, same numbering system, same nomenclature (e.g., two lead blocking RBs = "Blast" not "Iso"), but an entirely new coaching staff that had absolutely no connection to the school from when I had been there. I suddenly found myself in 2002 getting to coach Wishbone QBs. It was a breath of fresh air.

They were much simpler offenses and defenses, but you still had to be on your game to make them work, or stop them.

I miss those days.

 

[CrabHusker]

Is this what you saw from Luke Reimers? I know he had limited playing time in the Maryland game. But he would shoot through a gap like a cannon and make a spectacular play. Was he cowboying it? Was he blitzing? Was it just a fabulous reaction? Was he lucky? Would like both of you to comment Please (crab and middle) Thx

I remember he was playing fast, which surprised me for a kid who hadn't been on the field much, but I'd be full of it if I said I remember specific plays. I'll have to go back and watch the game.

In general the 'Instinctive' linebacker play of late has been lacking. 2018 was a good year in that regard for Barry and Gifford, but Gifford was gone and Barry didn't follow it up with a solid 2019. I saw flashes from Domann and Honas, but nothing consistent. Most of the 2019 season was watching guys overrun, fill the wrong gap and/or in general be a step slow with a really good group of lineman in front of them.

Honas, Domann, Nelson, Tannor and Miller all need to play better football if Nebraska is going to have a winning season this fall.

Maybe guys like Reimers, Gunnerson, Heinrich or Hannah will take a step forward this fall as well. It needs to happen because it's likely to be a muddy mess on the line for a bit.

Cowboy or not, we need play makers at all four linebacker positions.

 

[Middle-aged_Ball_Coach]

Is this what you saw from Luke Reimers? I know he had limited playing time in the Maryland game. But he would shoot through a gap like a cannon and make a spectacular play. Was he cowboying it? Was he blitzing? Was it just a fabulous reaction? Was he lucky? Would like both of you to comment Please (crab and middle) Thx

From the limited snaps that we saw with Reimers, he looked great. He would be what Fisher means by a "fast blinker." He processes what's happening quickly, and he is athletic, so he makes plays. I can't believe we got this guy to walk on.

2018 was a good year in that regard for Barry and Gifford, but Gifford was gone and Barry didn't follow it up with a solid 2019.

Barry was asked to do more in 2019 than he was in 2018, and I think that he might be a good example of the other side of "going cowboy" in that he would have destroyed people doing that in high school, but when he was wrong at Nebraska, he didn't have the quickness to cover ground to erase his mistakes. I think that he had to do a lot more thinking and analyzing last year versus 2018. It also makes me a little nervous that even with his struggles, neither Honas nor Miller were promoted over him to take that burden off, so (in theory) we could actually be worse at that this year. I don't think we will, though. I think that Miller is a lot better ILB than what he's shown so far, and he looked pretty good last year.

Cowboy or not, we need play makers at all four linebacker positions.

I agree with this. It bothered me that nobody could beat out Alex Davis last year. (In fairness, we have to acknowledge that he was improving a lot as he learned the game, but still.) I got the sense that the coaching staff had to choose between a hard-working guy who did everything that he was asked to do (A. Davis) or other guys who were quicker and more instinctual, but who weren't getting it done in other areas. Somebody needs to step up and lead.

 

[NUinID]

From the limited snaps that we saw with Reimers, he looked great. He would be what Fisher means by a "fast blinker." He processes what's happening quickly, and he is athletic, so he makes plays. I can't believe we got this guy to walk on.


Barry was asked to do more in 2019 than he was in 2018, and I think that he might be a good example of the other side of "going cowboy" in that he would have destroyed people doing that in high school, but when he was wrong at Nebraska, he didn't have the quickness to cover ground to erase his mistakes. I think that he had to do a lot more thinking and analyzing last year versus 2018. It also makes me a little nervous that even with his struggles, neither Honas nor Miller were promoted over him to take that burden off, so (in theory) we could actually be worse at that this year. I don't think we will, though. I think that Miller is a lot better ILB than what he's shown so far, and he looked pretty good last year.



I agree with this. It bothered me that nobody could beat out Alex Davis last year. (In fairness, we have to acknowledge that he was improving a lot as he learned the game, but still.) I got the sense that the coaching staff had to choose between a hard-working guy who did everything that he was asked to do (A. Davis) or other guys who were quicker and more instinctual, but who weren't getting it done in other areas. Somebody needs to step up and lead.

IMO Reimers needs to be in the top 4 at ILB. Love his instincts, love his burst. Just needs a little more wt to handle the pounding in there. I think Honas will be a lot better this year. For some guys when they have the ACL it takes a lot longer to really get back. I am sure medically he was 100%, but he wasn't quite all the way back mentally. Last year was Millers first full year inside and he started looking a lot better by the end of the year.

Unfortunately A. Davis never lived up to what he was suppose to be. He was night and day better from the beginning of the season till the end, but was still the 4th best LB starting.

 

[CrabHusker]

Barry was asked to do more in 2019 than he was in 2018, and I think that he might be a good example of the other side of "going cowboy" in that he would have destroyed people doing that in high school, but when he was wrong at Nebraska, he didn't have the quickness to cover ground to erase his mistakes. I think that he had to do a lot more thinking and analyzing last year versus 2018. It also makes me a little nervous that even with his struggles, neither Honas nor Miller were promoted over him to take that burden off, so (in theory) we could actually be worse at that this year. I don't think we will, though. I think that Miller is a lot better ILB than what he's shown so far, and he looked pretty good last year.

Barry did everything slower last year, no question. It's a recurring theme for Nebraska's defense though, not just Barry or the linebacking crew. Too often they look like they're running through the flow chart in their head instead of playing football. You mention Miller and I 100% are. I'll be shocked if he's not head and shoulders above the Miller we saw in 2019. Honas? He's a cowboy that looks to me like he can't play straight up football within a framework. Make him play his reads and stay in the defense and he's not effective despite being gifted physically.

I agree with this. It bothered me that nobody could beat out Alex Davis last year. (In fairness, we have to acknowledge that he was improving a lot as he learned the game, but still.) I got the sense that the coaching staff had to choose between a hard-working guy who did everything that he was asked to do (A. Davis) or other guys who were quicker and more instinctual, but who weren't getting it done in other areas. Somebody needs to step up and lead.

Yeah, I never understood the Davis thing. Yes he did improve the second half of last year and was a serviceable player by years end. Actually made some real football plays the last few weeks, but man I have no idea how someone else could't unseat him. If it really was because he was BETTER than those behind him......I'm not hopeful.

Granted, a year can make a difference. Kids mature physically and mentally and things can just click. Yes indeed, someone....several someones need to step up.

 

[HuskerFaith]

I remember he was playing fast, which surprised me for a kid who hadn't been on the field much, but I'd be full of it if I said I remember specific plays. I'll have to go back and watch the game.

In general the 'Instinctive' linebacker play of late has been lacking. 2018 was a good year in that regard for Barry and Gifford, but Gifford was gone and Barry didn't follow it up with a solid 2019. I saw flashes from Domann and Honas, but nothing consistent. Most of the 2019 season was watching guys overrun, fill the wrong gap and/or in general be a step slow with a really good group of lineman in front of them.

Honas, Domann, Nelson, Tannor and Miller all need to play better football if Nebraska is going to have a winning season this fall.

Maybe guys like Reimers, Gunnerson, Heinrich or Hannah will take a step forward this fall as well. It needs to happen because it's likely to be a muddy mess on the line for a bit.

Cowboy or not, we need play makers at all four linebacker positions.

I went back and watched it. Okay ..... he had one spectacular play. In my mind I thought to myself “that’s what I’m talking about”. I exaggerated everything in my own wishful thinking. Anyway, I hope we have flashes of that from our linebackers this year.

 

[CrabHusker]

I went back and watched it. Okay ..... he had one spectacular play. In my mind I thought to myself “that’s what I’m talking about”. I exaggerated everything in my own wishful thinking. Anyway, I hope we have flashes of that from our linebackers this year.

Easy to do.

The Maryland game was the kind of dominance we used to expect on a weekly basis from Nebraska.

So on Reimers, a true Freshman walk on, making the travel roster, playing and making plays is something. I like his motor and he's physically gifted. He's still young and raw, but he's starting in a good place.

 

[Kwajsker]

I am also starting to wonder about our ability to get 11 guys to the ball each play. That was stated a lot as an expectation, but often it felt like our 2nd/3rd/4th guys were a tad slow, resulting in a yard or two here and first down there. Was that true, or just how it felt?