[Husker] Nebraska vs Kansas stats (UNCLASSIFIED)
Skylar Dodds
sklarbodds at cox.net
Wed Nov 10 16:57:07 CST 2010
I agree 100% Rod. The offense has yet to put up a decent effort against a
decent defense, IMO. With the speed we have in the backfield, I think we
make average teams look really bad, but if a team has decent speed to match
(Texas) they don't do very well, not sure what happened vs SDSU tho.
For me the rating is:
Offense: Pretty good, not really good
Defense: Really good, not great
To be fair though, I don't think we play a good defensive team again unless
we see OU in the Big XII Championship.
-----Original Message-----
From: husker-bounces at tssi.com [mailto:husker-bounces at tssi.com] On Behalf Of
Rod Wellman
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 4:45 PM
To: "Husker List"
Subject: Re: [Husker] Nebraska vs Kansas stats (UNCLASSIFIED)
Until this year's offense can consistently show up, I'd put them in the
good-to-average category, not "very good". Sure, they played lights out a
couple times (OSU, Mizzou) but they also stunk up the place a couple times
(SDSU, Texas). I'd say our defense overall has been more consistent. Not as
great as last year's which was one of those rare-i-fied company type
defenses that only come around every decade or so...but still pretty good.
Put it this way: I don't worry about the defense going into any given game.
I DO worry about the offense.
Rod W.
Sioux City, Ia.
On Nov 10, 2010, at 4:16 PM, Don Rietsch wrote:
> Skylar,
> Dave didn't post that Bo was spouting political speak, I did. I was
> repeating what Brendan Stai said on the post game "5th Quarter" show. He
> said (I can't remember the exact words) that Bo must be seething about the
> play of his defense this year. Then they laughed about Bo's comments on
how
> he thought the defense played well. Stai is the one who stated that Bo
was
> just being politically correct in his statements.
>
> I'm surprised that you have to call people childish and myopic just
because
> they disagree with you. I hate to break it to you but you are not the only
> one on this list who is allowed to have an opinion. There is a big
> difference between criticizing and discussing. Last year we had a great
> defense and an average offense (in my opinion). This year we have an
> average defense and a very good offense (in my opinion). Take away the
> dropped passes and sloppiness, we have no losses. Personally, I got more
> satisfaction out of watching last years team because I love dominating
> defenses. Now living in Detroit Lions country I get to enjoy watching Suh
> get better and better each game.
>
> I hate win loss records and the rankings. Years ago if a team won the
> majority of their games and played in a bowl they felt good about
> themselves. Now if you lose a game, its over and the season was a bust.
>
> Donnieray70
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Skylar Dodds [mailto:sklarbodds at cox.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 2:01 PM
> To: 'Don Rietsch'; 'David Strong'; husker at tssi.com
> Subject: RE: [Husker] Nebraska vs Kansas stats (UNCLASSIFIED)
>
> That's a pretty myopic view of things and a silly interpretation of what
> I've said. My response was to your implication that 'closeness' of the
ISU
> game falls squarely on the shoulders of the defense and the reason it was
a
> close game was because of the defense.
>
> Myself, Bo, Carl and pretty much everyone else have stated that the
defense
> has room for improvement, so you can lay off the childish response of "I
was
> wrong...Our defense does not
> need to play better" camp does not apply. I take issue with your claim
that
> Bo is spouting 'political speak' or 'lying' about the defense. The
> conclusion of your axe to grind was from your own admission that you do
not
> like Bo at all, not from your comment about how the defense needs to play.
>
> We have a very good, but not great defense. But our defense is CERTAINLY
> good enough to win every game and would share a very small portion of the
> blame for the ISU game. It would be much more the offense and the
starting
> field position they gave ISU all day long.
>
> Lastly, sports fans are fickle. 3 years ago, we would have drooled over a
> defense like this and now we get "The entire defense is going to have to
gut
> up and play a whole helluva lot better than it did last Saturday." We got
> spoiled last year when at the end of the year some of the best offenses
were
> unable to move the ball against us. So this year, since we're not #1 in
> scoring defense, fans complain.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Rietsch [mailto:drr at livgenmi.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 12:22 PM
> To: 'David Strong'; husker at tssi.com; 'Skylar Dodds'
> Subject: RE: [Husker] Nebraska vs Kansas stats (UNCLASSIFIED)
>
> Yup, I with Dave and am now in "The NU defense is awesome" camp. I made a
> big pitcher of Kool-Aid and drank it all in one sitting. Now we just have
to
> convince Brendan Stai to jump on board. But then what does HE know about
> football?
>
> Donnieray70
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: husker-bounces at tssi.com [mailto:husker-bounces at tssi.com] On Behalf
Of
> David Strong
> Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 11:50 AM
> To: husker at tssi.com; Skylar Dodds
> Subject: RE: [Husker] Nebraska vs Kansas stats (UNCLASSIFIED)
>
>
> Well Laughing Boy, I'll tell you what I find funny. All this venom and
> attack from you and your stooges over an innocuous comment like "the
defense
> needs to play better." Now it's an "axe to grind". Putting together
these
> long justification posts showing how our defense it really awesome. But
it
> was not work in vain. You have convinced me.
>
> I now publicly state for the record: I was wrong...Our defense does not
> need to play better.
>
> Dave
>
> --- On Wed, 11/10/10, Skylar Dodds <sklarbodds at cox.net> wrote:
>
>> From: Skylar Dodds <sklarbodds at cox.net>
>> Subject: RE: [Husker] Nebraska vs Kansas stats (UNCLASSIFIED)
>> To: husker at tssi.com
>> Date: Wednesday, November 10, 2010, 10:39 AM
>> Well, I keep getting new things to
>> laugh at!
>>
>> Our defense is in the top 25 in SCORING DEFENSE (if you're
>> wondering, this
>> is the only stat that really matters on defense). We
>> play a style of
>> defense that is designed to give up yardage ON THE GROUND,
>> but rarely give
>> up big plays and force offenses to go 10+ plays to score
>> (save for a short
>> field).
>>
>> ISU scored on short fields all day. Here's their
>> scoring drive chart:
>>
>> How they got it Start
>> Plays
>> Yards
>> Result
>> Punt into wind N47
>> 7
>> 47 TD
>> Fumble (Helu) N41
>> 4
>> 2 FG
>> Kickoff
>> I25
>> 13 75
>> TD
>> Fumble (NP)
>> N13 3
>> 13
>> TD
>> OT Start
>> N25 3
>> 25
>> TD
>>
>> So, in short. We gave up 1 drive that started in ISU
>> territory. ONE DRIVE.
>> And, we made them go 13 plays to do it. The fighting
>> Pelini's have said
>> that their defense is designed to say, if you can execute
>> perfectly for
>> 10-15 plays in a row, we'll give up the small chunks of
>> yardage.
>>
>> Was it the best performance by the defense? No. Was
>> it good enough to win?
>> 100% yes. The offense continually gave ISU short
>> fields all day and to hold
>> them to 24 points in regulation is not bad at all.
>>
>> Not to mention, 3 out of the 4 TDs came against our 2nd
>> string (true frosh)
>> and 3rd string corners and our 1st stringer will be back
>> this week. But,
>> why look at the facts? Instead let's just continue to
>> not realize what's
>> going on and play the role of arm-chair coach. Let's
>> ignore the fact that
>> our coaches took a 'worst defense in college football' and
>> 2-3 years later
>> only allowed more than 21 points twice over a stretch of
>> about 25 games.
>> Let's bury our head in the sand and complain about a
>> defense that's in the
>> top 25 in scoring defense because they're not better than
>> last year's #1
>> scoring defense that lost 4 of the biggest 'cogs' (Suh,
>> Dillard, O'Hanlan
>> <-- biggest loss IMO, Asante).
>>
>> Keep grinding your ax against Pellini and his defenses and
>> I'll keep
>> laughing.
>>
>> --
>> Skylar
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: David Strong [mailto:gbrlist at yahoo.com]
>>
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 1:08 PM
>> To: husker at tssi.com;
>> Skylar Dodds
>> Subject: RE: [Husker] Nebraska vs Kansas stats
>> (UNCLASSIFIED)
>>
>>
>> If you are done cracking up yet, I think you better check
>> on current events.
>> We just came very close to losing a game to 4-4 Iowa
>> State. In fact, we
>> would have lost if the holder had put any mustard
>> whatsoever on that pass.
>> And all the stats you want to quote don't change the fact
>> they hung 30+ on
>> our defense. When you are down to your 3rd string QB,
>> the other members of
>> the team have to assume the responsibility to play just a
>> little bit better.
>> Our defense did not. Lucky to get away with it,
>> probably can again this
>> Saturday too.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>> Wow, how quickly do we get spoiled
>>> with a Pellini defense. We gave up 24
>>> points in regulation last week, all from short
>>> fields. ISU ran about 20
>>> more plays than we did. We gave up 100 yards to
>> their
>>> RB, but it took him
>>> 33 carries. Yet "the defense better shape up".
>>>
>>> In the Cosgrove era, this would have been an inspired
>>> effort. LOL, just
>>> cracks me up.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Skylar
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> The entire defense is going to have to gut up and play
>> a
>>> whole helluva lot
>>> better than it did last Saturday.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature
> database 5608 (20101110) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
_______________________________________________
husker site list
husker at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.869 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3239 - Release Date: 11/10/10
01:34:00
More information about the husker
mailing list