Secondary play...

What are you going to do, defend the pass or defend the run? I wish we could do both.

Gave up 11 yards on the ground today and got a few sacks. Dialed up some corner blitzes.

But 450 yards in the air is 100 too, too much. Even against a team like USM that has a pretty good passing game.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
admo said:
What are you going to do, defend the pass or defend the run? I wish we could do both.

Gave up 11 yards on the ground today and got a few sacks. Dialed up some corner blitzes.

But 450 yards in the air is 100 too, too much. Even against a team like USM that has a pretty good passing game.
Click to expand...
You can, in moderation. You don't have to be top 25 in both, but top 40 would be quite sufficient. There's something fundamentally wrong with this current scheme.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
admo said:
What are you going to do, defend the pass or defend the run? I wish we could do both.

Gave up 11 yards on the ground today and got a few sacks. Dialed up some corner blitzes.

But 450 yards in the air is 100 too, too much. Even against a team like USM that has a pretty good passing game.
Click to expand...
Michigan did

 
It'sNotAFakeID said:
Maybe we don't have the horses to run Banker's scheme, and if that's the case, Banker needs to adjust the scheme to better fit his players. Something that Riley said they were going to do when they came here. Something that we've seen from the offense, but have yet to see from the defense.

Now, we're going into B1G play which has more teams who are comfortable running the football; teams who have offensive philosophies that play into the strength of our defense. That doesn't mean they're going to not throw and I don't doubt many of these teams are looking at Nebraska film and saying "We should throw it more, our running game be damned."
Click to expand...
I guess he didn't have them in his Pac-12 days either.

 
Dr. Strangelove said:
It'sNotAFakeID said:
Maybe we don't have the horses to run Banker's scheme, and if that's the case, Banker needs to adjust the scheme to better fit his players. Something that Riley said they were going to do when they came here. Something that we've seen from the offense, but have yet to see from the defense.

Now, we're going into B1G play which has more teams who are comfortable running the football; teams who have offensive philosophies that play into the strength of our defense. That doesn't mean they're going to not throw and I don't doubt many of these teams are looking at Nebraska film and saying "We should throw it more, our running game be damned."
Click to expand...
I guess he didn't have them in his Pac-12 days either.
Click to expand...
I mentioned this in a chat earlier, but you'd think that by coaching in the Pac-12 who has a lot of good QBs and is all about passing, that Banker would be able to stop the pass. Guess not so far.

 
teachercd said:
admo said:
What are you going to do, defend the pass or defend the run? I wish we could do both.

Gave up 11 yards on the ground today and got a few sacks. Dialed up some corner blitzes.

But 450 yards in the air is 100 too, too much. Even against a team like USM that has a pretty good passing game.
Click to expand...
Michigan did
Click to expand...
Did what? Did they play BYU first game of the year?

 
teachercd said:
admo said:
What are you going to do, defend the pass or defend the run? I wish we could do both.

Gave up 11 yards on the ground today and got a few sacks. Dialed up some corner blitzes.

But 450 yards in the air is 100 too, too much. Even against a team like USM that has a pretty good passing game.
Click to expand...
Michigan did
Click to expand...
Michigan shut out a team that got the Huskers for 33 (albeit with a Hail Mary) and a bunch of yards. New coaches, new schemes, different results. Who's in better shape at this point, Michigan or Nebraska?

 
saunders45 said:
admo said:
What are you going to do, defend the pass or defend the run? I wish we could do both.

Gave up 11 yards on the ground today and got a few sacks. Dialed up some corner blitzes.

But 450 yards in the air is 100 too, too much. Even against a team like USM that has a pretty good passing game.
Click to expand...
You can, in moderation. You don't have to be top 25 in both, but top 40 would be quite sufficient. There's something fundamentally wrong with this current scheme.
Click to expand...
I agree. I feel way better about our run support. And then I see awful pass coverage. They need to go the drawing board because it's disappointing so far.

 
saunders45 said:
We now have the worst secondary in the country. Indiana was 128th last week, but since they held Wake Forest to 245 yards, we passed them.

We are giving up 380 passing yards per game.Worst in the nation. We're worst in the nation at plays over 20 yards passing (hint, not the LB's).

But please, tell me how it's not the scheme, and it's the players.
Click to expand...
Th LB can't stop the run, so the safeties have to come up and help. The LB can't stop the crossing routes so the secondary has to help setting up islands on the outside. Ip am agreeing with you on scheme, but we do have a talent deficiency as well.

 
huskerfan92 said:
That also gave up the most pass plays of 20+ yards in the Big 10 last year. I feel our pass defense would've been a lot worse last year if teams couldn't run at will against us
Click to expand...
There's a lot of truth to this.

In the Deed the Glory said:
saunders45 said:
We now have the worst secondary in the country. Indiana was 128th last week, but since they held Wake Forest to 245 yards, we passed them.

We are giving up 380 passing yards per game.Worst in the nation. We're worst in the nation at plays over 20 yards passing (hint, not the LB's).

But please, tell me how it's not the scheme, and it's the players.
Click to expand...
Th LB can't stop the run, so the safeties have to come up and help. The LB can't stop the crossing routes so the secondary has to help setting up islands on the outside. Ip am agreeing with you on scheme, but we do have a talent deficiency as well.
Click to expand...
Exactly right.

Look, Banker's D isn't shy about its willingness to give up the pass to stop the run. The problem is that the weakness to the pass is being exaggerated because (1) we have no pass rushers (except maybe Freedom), (2) we don't have the corners to run man-to-man single coverage, and (3) our LBs can't cover the underneath routes.

I think Banker's scheme is a much worse fit of our existing personnel than what Riley is trying to run on O.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
In the Deed the Glory said:
Th LB can't stop the run, so the safeties have to come up and help. The LB can't stop the crossing routes so the secondary has to help setting up islands on the outside. Ip am agreeing with you on scheme, but we do have a talent deficiency as well.
Click to expand...
We gave up 11 yards on 23 carries. I think you can try to balance that out, just a little bit.

 
Back
Top