A closer look at Chinander's defenses...by the numbers

soup said:
As someone requested earlier in the thread to switch schemes up.  Chin did this on the last drive.  He switched to a Dime or Nickel defense.  And in doing so Mo Barry comes out on that defense.  That is why.

Can't complain about him not switching up schemes, and then complain about him not playing the best defenders.  Some schemes require different personal.  And that is Nebraska's biggest problem right now.  The Jimmies and Joes are not even close to the level they need to be to make the X's and O's even remotely work.
Click to expand...


We have players all over the field who had multiple D-1 offers.  Learning a new defense and how everyone fits and works together inside of it takes time.  That we should all understand. 

N'western rushed for 175 yards per game last year.  This year it's only 70 yards a game.  They could cry about not having the Jims and Joes to rush the ball.  I've not heard a single word from Fitz after a loss claiming his team "doesn't look like the other team".  They've gone ahead and recognized they can't effectively run like usual and found another way to get it done instead.  They've buckled down and completely changed their offensive identity to win games.  Isn't that good coaching, doing what's necessary even when it's not what you feel comfortable with.

What I don't understand, and was very disappointed in, was the Wisconsin post game comments.  If we have to look like Wisconsin, or UM, or tOSU to beat them then we might as well wait until we've recruited a few top 15 classes before we expect anything of these coaches.  If that's SF's mindset, and it's hard to see how it's not based on his post game comments, the players hear that too and will keep living up to the expectation their HC has set for them.  You can't tell the players during the week or pregame they can go out and win and compete with anyone and then turn around and tell the media post game the players don't stack up with the other team. 

Whether that has some truth to it or not, you always build your players up and convince them they are better than whoever they're facing.  Until that happens it looks like we'll need a team full of blue chip players for our coaches to believe the players are good enough for them to coach to wins.

 
LaunchCode said:
N'western rushed for 175 yards per game last year.  This year it's only 70 yards a game.  They could cry about not having the Jims and Joes to rush the ball.  I've not heard a single word from Fitz after a loss claiming his team "doesn't look like the other team".  They've gone ahead and recognized they can't effectively run like usual and found another way to get it done instead.  They've buckled down and completely changed their offensive identity to win games.  Isn't that good coaching, doing what's necessary even when it's not what you feel comfortable with.
Click to expand...


Considering Fitz has been the head coach at Northwestern for the past 13 years, there wouldn't be much point in him saying that.

 
HuskerNation1 said:
I did watch them play and believe they had some really good players on defense. With that said against the 4 ranked teams they played in 2017 they gave up over 34 points a game.  Some have said that is not a bad defense....my point in this thread is that Frost should be seeking to establish a Dominant defense....not one deemed "not bad" or "good enough" as long as the offense scores a ton of points. 
Click to expand...
YES. I understand things worked out for UCF last year and they went undefeated. But the reason it takes a balanced team to win a national title is because the offense cant be on their "A" game every week. So that week when your offense is struggling or maybe your playing a really good defense that is giving you trouble. You can rely on a salty defense to get you the win or keep you in the game so hopefully your offense gets going and pulls away. Thats what happened to Oregon in their big games or National Title appearances. They played a good D, their offense couldnt score their usual 40+ and they lost. Its putting all your eggs in 1 basket- offense. 

It is even tougher to replicate what UCF did by relying on your offense only when you play in a "Big Boy Conference". UCF offense was always able to excel because they played in a non P5 conference, against non P5 players and non P5 coaches. Week in and week out in the big 10 you will play a P5 coach, P5 talent on the other sideline. They will be more equipped to make you work for it week in and week out. I would like to see a balanced team that either side of the ball can carry the team if needed. 

I am not saying the UCF defense was not serviceable because it was. 25 per game is not bad. 25 a game on defense puts us at 3-3 this year. I just dont like the emphasis that is all about the offense, defense is here to set up the offense- even if that means sacrificing yards to go for the pick. etc. 

 
LaunchCode said:
We have players all over the field who had multiple D-1 offers.  Learning a new defense and how everyone fits and works together inside of it takes time.  That we should all understand. 

N'western rushed for 175 yards per game last year.  This year it's only 70 yards a game.  They could cry about not having the Jims and Joes to rush the ball.  I've not heard a single word from Fitz after a loss claiming his team "doesn't look like the other team".  They've gone ahead and recognized they can't effectively run like usual and found another way to get it done instead.  They've buckled down and completely changed their offensive identity to win games.  Isn't that good coaching, doing what's necessary even when it's not what you feel comfortable with.

What I don't understand, and was very disappointed in, was the Wisconsin post game comments.  If we have to look like Wisconsin, or UM, or tOSU to beat them then we might as well wait until we've recruited a few top 15 classes before we expect anything of these coaches.  If that's SF's mindset, and it's hard to see how it's not based on his post game comments, the players hear that too and will keep living up to the expectation their HC has set for them.  You can't tell the players during the week or pregame they can go out and win and compete with anyone and then turn around and tell the media post game the players don't stack up with the other team. 

Whether that has some truth to it or not, you always build your players up and convince them they are better than whoever they're facing.  Until that happens it looks like we'll need a team full of blue chip players for our coaches to believe the players are good enough for them to coach to wins.
Click to expand...
You don't need a team full of blue-chip players to be successful.  You do, however, need a few All-conference players, and when was the last defensive 1st team all-conference player at Nebraska?  Or even 2nd team?  Nate Gerry?  (I honestly, don't know)

 
Frott Scost said:
Here’s a tip for his defense: maybe play your best players with the game on the line. Mo Barry said in his postgame interview he was not in on the last NW drive and that he doesnt know why but he trusts his coaches decision. WTF! You have your best leader and best defensive player riding the pine with the game on the line? Inexcusable and indefensible. Not sure what personnel was on the field that drive but if MB was sitting im sure some of our other better defenders were sitting also. 
Click to expand...
i dont know about the whole drive but the play they scored the last TD on, he had tyrin ferguson and gifford rushing outside with dedrick young in the middle.  they had at least 3 safeties in (neal, dismuke, and aaron williams).  neal blitzed but started too far back too matter.  not sure who was covering on the left side, the play went to the right.

 
HuskerNation1 said:
I did watch them play and believe they had some really good players on defense. With that said against the 4 ranked teams they played in 2017 they gave up over 34 points a game.  
Click to expand...


Your entire arguements stems around 2 games. The USF game and the Memphis CCG game. They only allowed more than 24 points 4 times. Those 2 games, 30 against an FCS team in a blowout, and 27 to Auburn. Memphis was 2nd in offensive ppg and held them to just 13 in their first game.

dvdcrr said:
Traditionally an elite defense ( in American football) yields about 12 ppg. 
Click to expand...


Thats only been done once in the past 4 years.

 
Mavric said:
That's fair.  But it doesn't make much sense to compare situations a coach in his first year is facing to a coach in his 13th year.
Click to expand...


The situation I was comparing is how each coach has responded publicly after a loss.  Your point that for Fitz to blame anything on his players is an indictment on his recruiting and development which is a good point. 

That makes sense if he was deflecting blame altogether, but he actually took full responsibility for the loss.   He went so far as to say if players were losing one on one battles then the coaches needed to identify if that was due to technique or scheme and do a better job of coaching to help that player win the one on ones.  He never mentioned talent as an option for losing one on ones.  The two choices he gave, technique and scheme, places the responsibility for a player succeeding directly on the coaches.  I didn't hear him mention injuries or deflect blame and certainly didn't hear him say anything that would point a finger at the players inadequacies. 

 
I'm not sure a less relevant and less tenuous link could have been made by Mike'l. The guys on the defensive roster in 2008 make our current roster look like a Division III team.

 
It'sNotAFakeID said:
Total yards has sort of an inflated status in terms of statistical importance. 
Click to expand...
I would say that there's a very good argument that says that total yardage is much, much more important than points allowed. It shows more objectively which team is winning downs during the course of the season.

 
It'sNotAFakeID said:
Total yards has sort of an inflated status in terms of statistical importance. 
Click to expand...
I disagree for a few main reasons. If the other team is racking up yards there is a good chance a few things are happening.

1. They are at least getting in field goal range maybe every possession and get in a position to take strikes at your end zone.

2. They are moving the ball down the field- which means even if you do stop their drive they are probably punting from at least mid field which means we are starting with poor field position on our drives.

3. The longer their drives are the less possessions our offense has the ball. 

So sure yards may not always turn into points. But a good offense is also a good defense- its keep our guys off the field. Plus maybe our yards per game dont match how many points we should have because our starting field position is so bad. We string together a good drive getting 50-60 yards. Then miss a field goal- or stall out. Or get a penalty pushing us out of field goal range. Imagine if we could start some drives on the 40 or 50 if we could 3 and out someone. I bet our odds of finishing a drive go way up.

 
Back
Top