The Dude
New member
What's the problem, exactly?
3-4 current player positions
- Thread starter MyBloodIsRed16
- Start date
ColoradoHusk
Donor
That was my thinking. He's probably getting asked about it all the time right now, and he posted something on Twitter.What's the problem, exactly?
Also, is it not surprising that he would be bummed about going to a 3-4? A 4-3 DE is the glamour position on the front 7. They are thinking of getting all those sacks and TFL's. A 3-4 DE is more of a grunt position, and is not very glamorous. Yes, it may be a selfish tweet, but I don't see the big deal about it. I do think he would be a better fit at a 3-4 DE, especially moving to the NFL down the road.
Last edited by a moderator:
Red Five
New member
Scratchtown
New member
You.........
Good lord, is that what anyone is saying? They are discussing 3-4 due to the possibility of being there. No one is saying its scheme. You really view yourself better than everyone else don't you.
Keep singing the same tune. It's really good for a reputation.
BigRedBuster
Active member
I don't know if you would call it scheme or not. Two coaches could run the exact same "scheme" and one might run it with success and the other run it without success. We have seen the "without" the last few years.
Husker Psycho
New member
Desperation... makes you crazy.
It'll all calm down after Scott Frost gets here... but until then... more crazy.
Last edited by a moderator:
It will be a change but you have to remember that in today's college football you are in a nickel and dime look 90% of the time against many teams. Some of our Big Ten west opponents do a lot of old school traditional looks so we would use base against them. Bama runs a 3-4 base as well, I bet they were in it 5% of the time max against Clemson or Washington.
3-4 is tough to run in college without a really strong D-Line to eat up blocks. Not a ton of teams run it. I believe K-State runs it (or did), Wisconsin does, but I am not sure of many others that do. If Riley/Devaney assesses we can run it, they must see something in the current line talent being better at the skills to translate to 3-4, as opposed to being up the field pass rushers. I don't see it, but Riley/Devaney have forgotten more about football than I know, so I'll defer to their judgment.
The problems with NU defense have not been scheme and nobody (staff included) are saying that.
However doesn't mean a change can't be made.
The twins are ideal for DE's and would stay there. The NT would be a red flag and our staff can use that as a recruiting tool. We may have a recruit out there that wasn't real impressed with Banker running the new 3-4 and this said recruit is excited about the chance to come in and fill a void at NT with our new DC.
However doesn't mean a change can't be made.
The twins are ideal for DE's and would stay there. The NT would be a red flag and our staff can use that as a recruiting tool. We may have a recruit out there that wasn't real impressed with Banker running the new 3-4 and this said recruit is excited about the chance to come in and fill a void at NT with our new DC.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mavric
Yoda
So despite the fact that Riley - and likely others in the administration - how just demonstrated that they fell that it is, in fact, significantly due to our scheme, you're still refusing to admit that.
Seems legit.
Ya, that is what I'm saying ... I'm better then everyone else ... sure. (While you agree with my comment ... that it isn't about scheme).