ADVERTISEMENT

Why we need to stay the course with this D scheme

newAD

Head Coach
Oct 14, 2007
11,293
6,301
113
Omaha
Is the D struggling? Of course.

Is Nebraska giving up lots of yards through the air? YEP.

Should there be a change. Abso-freaking-lutely not.

If Nebraska were still in the B12, Bo would probably still be here. I'll give the man credit where credit is due. His peso and dime D was pretty good against spread teams (of course he had talent through 2010).

Bo was too stubborn to realize his match up zone was vulnerable against power teams.

This current scheme when ran with the right athletes works in the BIG. See Michigan State.

In the west division Nebraska must beat:
Wisky
Minnesota
Northwestern

Nebraska struggled against NW and got lucky in 2 of the 3 wins.

Wisky has absolutely bitch slapped us in 3 of 4, and bitch slapped doesn't adequately explain how bad it was.

The most hard to take for me is losing the last 2 to Minne-freaking-sota.

Wisky isn't changing what they do on O. Kill and Fitzgerald are at their schools as long as they want to.

So, what does Nebraska have to do to win the division? Stop the damn running game.
Stopping the run since 2012 has been a chore to say the least, not to mention that Nebraska was the joke of the country after the championship game in 2012 and after Melvin Gordon needed oxygen after running for a quarter mile last year.

This D is designed to try to take away the run first. In return, you are playing a lot of cover zero and one one one match ups. You WILL give up passing yards, but if you have to get beat one way or the other, I'd much prefer to have a team have to beat us through the air vs the completely helpless feeling of watching Wisky run through us like a Jr High team, or watching Minnesota slowly jam it down or throats and be unable to stop it. You have zero chance to win when that is happening.

I've said it before, we will struggle this year. You can't expect MSU type D performances, when the secondary responsibilities are such a drastic change. We've got some young but potentially talented CBs, who for the most part are not being helped by a great pass rush. These things are not Banker's fault.

So yes we gave up a lot of yards today, but I can make an argument that had the offense not had to settle on 5 drives for field goals in the first half, USM might have been so demoralized after half that they don't make a run. USM also had to pull out all the stops (onside kick, fake punt, and a pathetic flop that got rewarded) to make the game interesting.

So new staff, new schemes on both sides, no depth at OL, DE, LB, injury issues at DL and LB, and a lot of youth at CB, and we are 2-2, with a hail mary and OT loss.

So freaking face reality and chill out. I'm hoping and praying for 4 more wins so we make postseason, get to practice in December, and build for the future.
 
Is the D struggling? Of course.

So new staff, new schemes on both sides, no depth at OL, DE, LB, injury issues at DL and LB, and a lot of youth at CB, and we are 2-2, with a hail mary and OT loss.

.
Agree with all except I think we have OL depth. Hard to tell if they don't play.
 
In theory I agree, but Nebraska is still giving up 3.4 yard per rush (and this is factoring in the game yesterday). Teams haven't needed to rush against us because with no pass rush they've been able to do what they want through the air.
 
We probably need to run more intense press coverage to disrupt the receivers route running & timing if we want to play the secondary the way Narduzzi does it.

I do think we have the talent to do this. The prior staff certainly recruited guys capable of running tight press man coverage.

Something is missing then, in either technique or coaching of how those guys are approaching things in the secondary.
 
I agree. We are stopping the run. Back in the 90's, the plan was always to stop the run first and make a team one dimensional. I think that philosophy is still the way to go. Third and short, fourth and short... this defense has proven itself pretty stingy in short yardage situations. That's a tale-tell sign of a good defense. As far as pass defense goes, I think they will get better.
 
We probably need to run more intense press coverage to disrupt the receivers route running & timing if we want to play the secondary the way Narduzzi does it.

I do think we have the talent to do this. The prior staff certainly recruited guys capable of running tight press man coverage.

Something is missing then, in either technique or coaching of how those guys are approaching things in the secondary.
Pick your poison when it comes to scheme and technique. IMO, the problems in the secondary stem in part from issues in front of them that are making them do things to try to cover those issues. Freedom is going to be a good player and he appears to be our best DE at this point, but he IS a freshman. McMullen is a run stopper but he hasn't been able to get a rush on the QB. Our linebackers are not B1G caliber at this point. Young is going to be good but he's a freshman. Gifford may be a good one someday but he IS a freshman playing his first fall at linebacker. Bando and MRI I doubt will be full strength the rest of the year. S Miss absolutely ABUSED our linebackers in that second half. Thank God we have the walkons we have to try to plug the holes BUT there is a reason they were walkons. In MOST cases they are guys that maybe lack some of the athleticism that it takes to play at a high level in the B1G. ONE inexperienced guy at linebacker could be a disaster for your defense and WE ARE PLAYING THREE now. Losing a backup in Newby was just further disaster. We are so screwed at linebacker and it is affecting EVERYTHING we do on defense. I've been posting since spring that we couldn't afford a single injury at linebacker and now we have THREE. We're screwed and if somehow Banker figures out a way to piece it together and make it work with the guys we have left, he deserves to be coach of the year.
 
Agree with the need to stop the run To win in the big ten. Not sure we have the players yet to run this defense. You need DE's that force quick passing plays, safety and corners that have size and speed. I don't a think we have many race horses in the barn, a few too many nags.
 
Excellent. I wish we had more depth at LB. I wish our corners were shut down. I wish our OL was better. That being said, I like the future. Adjustments are being made and we are doing what it takes to win ball games. As long as we are competitive I can handle the losses. I don't like them, but knowing that we have an adult at the helm puts me at ease.

Awesome post, newAD!
 
  • Like
Reactions: dinglefritz
This kind of level headed posting must not be tolerated! I am outraged that you are not outraged!
 
OP, it's good to see that someone has some intelligence on this board. Seattle Seahawks run the same defense, best D in the league. I can't remember if it was Ralph Brown or who that said this D isn't much different from what McBride ran. You have to have corners you can put on an island.
 
Struggling corners plus decimated LB pan. Not good.
 
OP, it's good to see that someone has some intelligence on this board. Seattle Seahawks run the same defense, best D in the league. I can't remember if it was Ralph Brown or who that said this D isn't much different from what McBride ran. You have to have corners you can put on an island.
That's good to hear support from Ralph Brown, and hopefully with a little time and less injuries, the supporting cast will be there for the DB's
 
Good comment newAD

The more I look at the new defensive concept the more I like it. We could just be going through growing pains. The new defensive scheme may even help with recruiting.
 
OP, it's good to see that someone has some intelligence on this board. Seattle Seahawks run the same defense, best D in the league. I can't remember if it was Ralph Brown or who that said this D isn't much different from what McBride ran. You have to have corners you can put on an island.

And a four man rush to pressure the quarterback. It all starts there cause a corner can only cover for around four seconds. Any longer and he's in trouble.
 
Not sure I totally agree.

You've got two position coaches who have been coordinators and may have some good ideas as to how to adjust the scheme to fit the talent.

My concern about this defense from the start is that you trade getting picked apart by short/mid-range passing game for stopping the run. So instead of shutting down Illinois, and getting run over by Wisconsin, we slow down Wisconsin and get picked apart by Illinois. We'll see what happens next week, Lunt can sling it, and unless we adjust he's going to take advantage of 1v1 coverage on the outside, and lbs in mismatches on the inside.

In the future, I think this scheme is better for Nebraska - so long as the staff can recruit. I hate to concede the point, but on the defensive side of the ball, Bo left the cupboard embarrassingly bare. This is a tough defense to run when your pass rush isn't getting home (exception is a guy we had playing tight end 10 months ago). It's a tough defense to run when you have inexperienced linebackers running around picks, trying to cover backs and slot receivers. It's a tough defense to run when you have db's used to getting help that are now standing on an island. With the current talent/depth at end and lb, it's going to be tough to run the scheme with no adjustments.

Right now, I think the best 11 defenders fit best in an odd front nickel package. Stewart is a 3-4 guy and maybe Banker leans on him to change things up and get the best players on the field.

Just to demonstrate the thought:
Collins and McM are perfect 3-4 ends, 92 and 44 are fit that role as back-ups
VV is a 3-4 nose, when healthy you can't move him - 55 is could fill that role too.
Freedom, Gangwash, and Newby look like they could play as the stand up end - move them around and have the disrupt in the back field
Pick 2 healthy backers, pray they don't fall apart
5 dbs - based on situation - 3 safteys early down and short yard, 24 and 27 look like they could play in the box - 3 corners in passing downs

They're so thin at d-end and linebacker, getting more d-tackles and db's on the field may help solidify some of the issues we've seen.

It would be tough to scrap the defense and do something new, but the current defense isn't working and if the staff wants to win 8 or 9 games this year they're going to have to do something different.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT