Red Five
New member
Isn't being a fan hoping that the guys who replace the previous years starters are better (even if facts tell you otherwise)?
Banker Looks to Limit Explosive Plays
- Thread starter Mavric
- Start date
Hayseed
New member
I want to let it be known that I'm for addition by addition .....or multiplication even.
Husker Psycho
New member
"Trying to limit big plays on defense is probably a good idea" - Capt. Obvious
Great comments.
This board is starting to come alive again.
YAY !!!!!!!!
Last edited by a moderator:
Dagerow
New member
After explains we need to limit big plays, he proceeded to explain the keys to his defense. I'll quote it for you:
"What-What happens is, the-the-the centre has-has the ball first. And-And-And the quarterback will say, "Hike." That's when the c-center puts the ball in-into the hands of the quarterback. So what [we] do is, [wes] start tacklin' the quarterback, unless he give the ball to-to s-somebody else, in which case, [wes] try to tackle that person."
"What-What happens is, the-the-the centre has-has the ball first. And-And-And the quarterback will say, "Hike." That's when the c-center puts the ball in-into the hands of the quarterback. So what [we] do is, [wes] start tacklin' the quarterback, unless he give the ball to-to s-somebody else, in which case, [wes] try to tackle that person."
Last edited by a moderator:
marko polo
New member
RedDenver
New member
lo country
Mods
This might be the single biggest impact this year. That's what I'm hoping for anyway.
Saunders
Administrator
That stat is a bit of a mirage. Our YPC allowed was in the 30's, and we faced the least amount of rushes in the entire country. We also ranked in the 50's in Rushing TD's allowed. Bill C's preview on NU will be out next week, and I'm sure he'll show it better via numbers, but NU ranked so high in rush D because teams bombed all over us through the air.
Last edited by a moderator:
Red Five
New member
Sure, we were top 10 in rush yards/game. But we were 32nd in yards/rush. Still not too bad. We also had the fewest rush attempts/game against us.
But the pass rush was non-existent. We were 79th in sacks/game. And 83rd in tackles for loss/game.
84HuskerLaw
New member
Yes, we had a pretty good run defense and our pass rush was mediocre or less which put too much pressure on our secondary and that led to far too many successful pass plays against us. This led inevitably to few punt returns as team punted us deep into our own territory and forced far too many fair catches by Westercamp etal because the high risk to returns too close to our own end zone. And, too many successful pass plays put our opponents into or near our red zone and those possessions will, over the long haul, lead to far to many points given up. A weak pass rush also contributed to the subpar interceptions and fumble recoveries by our D as well. Disrupting the backfield is the single best way to 'create turnovers' by making handoffs riskier and forcing the QB into passing errors and to deflected balls and poor decisions generally. Hitting the QB quicker means less time to throw which means less time to maintain tighter coverages aiding the secondary. A great defense as we all know is the sum of its parts and when any part(s) are subpar, the opponents will naturally tend to want to take advantage. Sometimes you can hide and conceal these weaknesses, especially early in the season when opposing coaches may still be unaware of the weak links, etc. Nate Gerry is a difference maker most of the time. Opponents will attack the substitutes who replace starters as it is only to be expected that injuries and replacements are not as good as the starters.
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster
Active member
If people are so bored with the subject, why are you wasting your time reading it?
"Trying to limit big plays on defense is probably a good idea" - Capt. ObviousGreat comments.
This board is starting to come alive again.
YAY !!!!!!!!
huKSer
New member
Yes, we had a pretty good run defense and our pass rush was mediocre or less which put too much pressure on our secondary and that led to far too many successful pass plays against us. This led inevitably to few punt returns as team punted us deep into our own territory and forced far too many fair catches by Westercamp etal because the high risk to returns too close to our own end zone. And, too many successful pass plays put our opponents into or near our red zone and those possessions will, over the long haul, lead to far to many points given up.
A weak pass rush also contributed to the subpar interceptions and fumble recoveries by our D as well. Disrupting the backfield is the single best way to 'create turnovers' by making handoffs riskier and forcing the QB into passing errors and to deflected balls and poor decisions generally. Hitting the QB quicker means less time to throw which means less time to maintain tighter coverages aiding the secondary.
A great defense as we all know is the sum of its parts and when any part(s) are subpar, the opponents will naturally tend to want to take advantage. Sometimes you can hide and conceal these weaknesses, especially early in the season when opposing coaches may still be unaware of the weak links, etc. Nate Gerry is a difference maker most of the time. Opponents will attack the substitutes who replace starters as it is only to be expected that injuries and replacements are not as good as the starters.
Husker Psycho
New member
Because there's more truth in their comments than there is in the other comments being made.If people are so bored with the subject, why are you wasting your time reading it?
"Trying to limit big plays on defense is probably a good idea" - Capt. ObviousGreat comments.
This board is starting to come alive again.
YAY !!!!!!!!
The whole "addition by subtraction" thing is nonsense and these people realized it and called it out.
These are smart fans.. and I applaud comments from smart fans.
Last edited by a moderator: