For Comparison....

[Husker in WI]

He did take over a defense giving up 38 points a game and turned them into the best defense in the country in year 2. Not sure of another turnaround that drastic. Of course that team was loaded with defensive talent. I'd venture to guess we would look a bit better with those players on our team.

Yeah, I had forgotten just how bad 2007 was. And how good 2009 was. But they did start regressing immediately after '09 as well, from 10 ppg > 17 > 24, and then they settled in the 24-27 range. So I'd prefer something a little more sustainable, which Chinander may or may not be building.

 

[Nebfanatic]

Yeah, I had forgotten just how bad 2007 was. And how good 2009 was. But they did start regressing immediately after '09 as well, from 10 ppg > 17 > 24, and then they settled in the 24-27 range. So I'd prefer something a little more sustainable, which Chinander may or may not be building.

Yup, after talents like Suh, Prince, Haag, and Dejon Gomes left things weren't quite as great. I just figured someone may bring it up given the question you posed but it was a bit of a mirage and of course no one is ever hiring Carl again. 

I am not 100% on Chinander either but we are getting better and I think the talent we are bringing in on that side is closer to what we had talent wise in 09. Alot of potential at all 3 levels.

 

[twofittyonred]

No, I'm just calling BS on the "Minnesota and Syracuse fired their DCs, so should we!" arguments because those are entirely different situations. That was Syracuse's DCs 4th year and they were getting worse. Minny's DC took over a defense giving up 14 fewer points per game than the one Chinander inherited, and made them 9 points per game worse in year 2. I just understand the situation Chins inherited, and think the improvement is enough to not fire him for now.

Find me another example of a guy taking over a 36ppg defense, or even close to that, and having them completely turned around in year 2.

The problem is, chins Defense WONT get any better..  He took over 2 teams (UCF and Nebraska) with bottom of the barrel defenses and improved them..  UCF was 37.7 ppg the previous year he took over Nebraska 36.4...  YES, he brought both teams off the bottom but his second year ended worse then his first at UFC and after wisconsin and Iowa run it up on us we will probably end Chins year two worst then his first here as well.  Chins bend but dont break, (well we might break, yep we broke) defense will NEVER be a top 25 defense..  period..

 

[Husker in WI]

The problem is, chins Defense WONT get any better..  He took over 2 teams (UCF and Nebraska) with bottom of the barrel defenses and improved them..  UCF was 37.7 ppg the previous year he took over Nebraska 36.4...  YES, he brought both teams off the bottom but his second year ended worse then his first at UFC and after wisconsin and Iowa run it up on us we will probably end Chins year two worst then his first here as well.  Chins bend but dont break, (well we might break, yep we broke) defense will NEVER be a top 25 defense..  period..

There is little evidence his defenses won't improve, and there is admittedly little that they will. His year 2 at UCF ended very similar to year 1 numbers wise, and literally ended with a solid performance against a top ten team. I'm willing to wait through year 3. And I don't know anyone else calling this a bend but don't break defense.. The coaches have alluded to not being able to blitz as much as they want because of injuries/personnel, and we still blitz way more than Diaco. That was a defense built on bending all the way back to the end zone.

 

[twofittyonred]

There is little evidence his defenses won't improve, and there is admittedly little that they will. His year 2 at UCF ended very similar to year 1 numbers wise, and literally ended with a solid performance against a top ten team. I'm willing to wait through year 3. And I don't know anyone else calling this a bend but don't break defense.. The coaches have alluded to not being able to blitz as much as they want because of injuries/personnel, and we still blitz way more than Diaco. That was a defense built on bending all the way back to the end zone.

I'm not calling for Chins head, thats for Frost to decide to live and die by... I'm just saying his defense will NEVER work unless HCSF get his offense scoring 50+ points a game and that offense is the only reason it survived at UCF

 

[Husker in WI]

I'm not calling for Chins head, thats for Frost to decide to live and die by... I'm just saying his defense will NEVER work unless HCSF get his offense scoring 50+ points a game and that offense is the only reason it survived at UCF

Right, and I'm just saying we don't have enough evidence to declare that his defense will never work.

 

[twofittyonred]

Right, and I'm just saying we don't have enough evidence to declare that his defense will never work.

I think 6 yrs worth is enough... do you need 10..??  12..??

 

[Husker in WI]

I think 6 yrs worth is enough... do you need 10..??  12..??

Are you including his work as the OLB coach for Oregon? Because I am definitely not, that's absurd. And 4 is enough in one place, but not when you're starting from scratch between years 2 and 3. I think you need at least 3 years for a DC in a rebuild.

And what evidence in the 4 years are you claiming means his defense can't work? His defenses have improved every year other than year 2 at UCF, and that one was essentially a plateau not a regression. I don't care if you disagree with me when I think it will get better with Chins. I just want it to be acknowledged that these are opinions on both sides, and saying things like his defense WONT get better and will NEVER work aren't really supported by the small sample we have. I would argue the data we do have leans more towards it getting better, but I'm not going to fault people for not buying it. I will fault people for claiming the opposite when I don't see any proof of that.

 

[twofittyonred]

Are you including his work as the OLB coach for Oregon? Because I am definitely not, that's absurd. And 4 is enough in one place, but not when you're starting from scratch between years 2 and 3. I think you need at least 3 years for a DC in a rebuild.

And what evidence in the 4 years are you claiming means his defense can't work? His defenses have improved every year other than year 2 at UCF, and that one was essentially a plateau not a regression. I don't care if you disagree with me when I think it will get better with Chins. I just want it to be acknowledged that these are opinions on both sides, and saying things like his defense WONT get better and will NEVER work aren't really supported by the small sample we have. I would argue the data we do have leans more towards it getting better, but I'm not going to fault people for not buying it. I will fault people for claiming the opposite when I don't see any proof of that.

Even after stats show a regression from year 1 to year 2 at both schools..??    Again, you have shown you are okay with mediocrity and willing to defend it...  Enjoy your yellow sky..

 

[Husker in WI]

Even after stats show a regression from year 1 to year 2 at both schools..??    Again, you have shown you are okay with mediocrity and willing to defend it...  Enjoy your yellow sky..

Again, they have not regressed statistically this year. Maybe they will have after the last 3 games, but so far they are still better this year. At worst, it would be similar to year 1 whether it's a slight increase or decrease. Given the turnover and state of our program when he got here 3 years seems reasonable. 

 

[twofittyonred]

Again, they have not regressed statistically this year. Maybe they will have after the last 3 games, but so far they are still better this year. At worst, it would be similar to year 1 whether it's a slight increase or decrease. Given the turnover and state of our program when he got here 3 years seems reasonable. 

Again... you are missing the point....  30 PPG is NOT going to get you anywhere but dragging the bottom in this conference...  I can see you having this argument if we were at 10 -15 Maybe even 20... But we are not...

 

[alexhortdog95]

Again, they have not regressed statistically this year. Maybe they will have after the last 3 games, but so far they are still better this year. At worst, it would be similar to year 1 whether it's a slight increase or decrease. Given the turnover and state of our program when he got here 3 years seems reasonable. 

Again... you are missing the point....  30 PPG is NOT going to get you anywhere but dragging the bottom in this conference...  I can see you having this argument if we were at 10 -15 Maybe even 20... But we are not...

Been a couple of days, but here's a few thoughts I've chewed on....

For everyone (including myself) quoting stats - we have to be careful.  Stats can be very misleading.  For example -







These are the stats of two different quarterbacks. 

One's team is 7-1, the other's team is 5-3.

They've played the same number of games, thrown the same number of Interceptions, are averaging the exact same yards per attempt, and even have very similar rushing yards.  But you see one is completing over 64% of his passes, and the other isn't completing 60% of theirs.

So, how do these two QBs stats equate into wins and losses?  Timing.

For example - ONE of these QBs threw 4 interceptions in a single game, in which the opponent scored 13 points off those turnovers.  That opponent won by 10 points.

The other QB has just managed games, and yes, they've won extremely ugly, but they've won games.

See, it's not about how many points per game an offense scores, or how many yards a defense is giving up.

Against Indiana, Huskers had over 500 yards total offense.  They rushed for over 200 yards.  They threw for almost 300 yards.  And they still lost the game.

Against Purdue, they won the turnover battle.  They had two blocked punts.  Their average starting field position was their own 46 yard line.  And they still lost the game.

Again, after chewing on my original post (and admitting being a bit stat-struck), it's not about where a team's defense or offense ranks.  That's just bluster and minutiae. 

The real question is - are you winning football games? 

People have been questioning how Clemson has been winning football games all year long, and, if you've watched them play this year, it's shown that they're still fine tuning some things.  Outside of the game on the 28th, if you've watched any Ohio State game, you weren't surprised with what happened on the 28th.

Last year, the Buckeyes were winning football games quite ugly, and their loss to Purdue was even uglier.  But that team was 13-1 and went to the Rose Bowl.  Also, last year, Nebraska was losing games but showing promise, which prompted folks to think that they were going to contend for a conference title this year.  Neither of those teams are on the same trajectories they were on last year.

So I go back to one thing - and this all falls on the shoulders of the head guy: 

Are you winning football games?  If the answer is "NO," then you've got questions to answer.

By the way - if you couldn't have guessed - Mr 65.7% is one Sam Ehlinger. 

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/sam-ehlinger-1/gamelog/2019/

Mr. 59.3% is one Desmond Ridder for the 7-1 division leading Cincinnati Bearcats.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/desmond-ridder-1/gamelog/2019/

And yes, I enjoyed watching all 4 of Ehlinger's picks over and over again, because, well, Texas.

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2019/10/26/freshman-duggan-shines-as-tcu-knocks-off-no-15-texas-37-27/40443747/

 

[Husker in WI]

I agree with you on stats being misleading in general. You can almost always find some stat to try and back up your opinion. But we have other posters here insisting points allowed is the only stat that matters for the defense, and trying to throw out all others. So that has become the stat referenced for the defense at least.

I will say a perfect example of misleading stats would be saying 2 QBs with the same YPA, # of INTs, and rushing yards and games played are at all similar. The difference in completion percentage is huge, and the number of attempts as well. 7 INTs in 199 attempts is not at all similar to 7 in 303 attempts. There are huge differences beyond the fact that one is winning and one is not.

Obviously the real question is are we winning or not, but a lot of peoples' suggested fix is addressing the defense - so the defensive stats aren't meaningless.

 

[alexhortdog95]

Obviously the real question is are we winning or not, but a lot of peoples' suggested fix is addressing the defense - so the defensive stats aren't meaningless.

Having coached for 7 years on both sides of the ball myself, I can tell you - it's easier to tweak defenses than it is offense.  Offensive football is always a work in progress because of the many rules that govern it.  That being said - you need at least two things to make those changes:

Skill set to teach and scheme it

Hosses to run it.

 

[I am I]

I think it goes directly what I said in the “what did we learn” thread immediately after the game. 

Our team cant put it together at the same time. Then Frost himself said as much in his presser a couple hours later. If we get 125yds (of our 500) and 65% completion after turnovers/blocked punts we win easily.  If our D holds on 1 of 3 drives we win ugly. 

Once our O actually compliments our D and vice versa we won’t be up 14-3 or 17-0 we’ll be up 21 or 24-3. Just gotta put it ALL together, even for 2 quarters. 

BTW, I appreciate all you stat geeks looking this stuff up, it just confirms my personal eye test. So thanks for digging stuff up!!