Defensive Philosophy

RedDenver said:
I'm not sure I understand the concern. In an alternate possession game, shouldn't the #1 priority of a defense be getting the possession back to it's offense?
Click to expand...
#2 priority might be where on the field they give it back.  I think that point has already been brought up. Would we be ok having a weak defense that allows a team to drive the field as long as we can force a fumble on our 10 yard line? Doesn’t sound like a recipe for success.

 
4skers89 said:
#2 priority might be where on the field they give it back.  I think that point has already been brought up. Would we be ok having a weak defense that allows a team to drive the field as long as we can force a fumble on our 10 yard line? Doesn’t sound like a recipe for success.
Click to expand...
It sounds like a better recipe than letting them kick a FG.

The question isn't whether the coaches want a dominant defense - of course they'd prefer that - but what their philosophy is. Getting the ball back to the offense is a better priority than limiting yards in an alternate possession game.

 
We have a handful of players on offense that are considered NFL level talent. Can that be said for anyone on the defense at this point?

There’s your answer. 

Need more time to recruit/develop. Right now our defense’s best chance at getting stops is via turnovers or big plays so hence the emphasis on that.

 
Husker03 said:
 Scott was a safety in the NFL, if you think he doesn’t value defense I think you  would be mistaken.  I think it’s more of philosophy of, take with the game will give you.  As mentioned above, currently the rules heavily favor the offense.  Good news, Scott runs one of the best offense of scheme’s in the country,  and as such can recruit premiere athletes that want to come play in it.  Defense, no matter the scheme, just isn’t a sexy sell to anybody,  and as such I think these coaches just understand they will probably not ever get all of the best defense of players signed on.  I guarantee if you offered them a Suh, Amukamara, and Lavonte for next years team, they would not say no.  They just know they can be in the driver seat on offense, so they’re going to focus there for now.   Nobody is conceding to having a crappy defense, they are just being realistic with in the confines of Nebraska football as it currently stands. 
Click to expand...
Also Frost in his early assistant coaching years was a DC. I am thinking Northern Iowa, but I am not sure. I would like to think an attacking defense would have more appeal to recruits versus one that is not.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedDenver said:
It sounds like a better recipe than letting them kick a FG.

The question isn't whether the coaches want a dominant defense - of course they'd prefer that - but what their philosophy is. Getting the ball back to the offense is a better priority than limiting yards in an alternate possession game.
Click to expand...


Great points in this thread. I think talent does need to be addressed as many state.

I have seen defenses ride players for 25 yards trying to punch a ball out instead of tackling. It’s clear that a coach on that team preached turnovers. And I don’t want the future recipe to keeping up with the Huskers as “just don’t turn it over”. This is obviously simplified hyperbole but am curious how defensive points of emphasis translate to future success against the likes of Clemson and Bama

 
DefenderAO said:
Great points in this thread. I think talent does need to be addressed as many state.

I have seen defenses ride players for 25 yards trying to punch a ball out instead of tackling. It’s clear that a coach on that team preached turnovers. And I don’t want the future recipe to keeping up with the Huskers as “just don’t turn it over”. This is obviously simplified hyperbole but am curious how defensive points of emphasis translate to future success against the likes of Clemson and Bama
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think talent is much more important on defense than offense, and we need a lot more talent on defense than what we have.

I don't recall a single time a Husker has been trying to punch out a ball while being carried for 25 yards. Maybe you have an example, but I think that's more hyperbole than actual concern.

Nebraska won't make a bowl game, so trying to imagine the Huskers competing with Clemson or Alabama is wild speculation on any of our parts. You can look at our performance against tOSU to get some idea though it's a small sample size. I think the better way to approach defensive philosophy is to try and compare our defense to teams with similar talent. I don't know of a site that breaks down roster talent between offense and defense, just the recruiting sites that do it for each class.

 
gobiggergoredder said:
Need players.
Click to expand...
Yep.

I think it's fair to say Nebraska isn't anywhere near their ceiling with this current group of players. If you could take this group of guys, rewind four years, put them in this scheme, and deliver a four year dose of Duval's S&C, you'd have a very different looking group right now.

Since that's impossible, we have to rely on raw talent coming in and developing.

 
Enhance said:
Yep.

I think it's fair to say Nebraska isn't anywhere near their ceiling with this current group of players. If you could take this group of guys, rewind four years, put them in this scheme, and deliver a four year dose of Duval's S&C, you'd have a very different looking group right now.

Since that's impossible, we have to rely on raw talent coming in and developing.
Click to expand...


Yeah, even what an off season did for Ziggy is unreal.  2-4 years if it and you transform people.  Now recruit higher baseline athletes and we're watching football after January

 
Back
Top