DL Depth...we have 8 guys coming into the fold

[foutsrouts]

Of course there's no absolute age limit, but the NCAA stupidly has rules in place that try to keep guys in their upper twenties from playing for fear that they would have a competitive advantage. Somehow I think Sarge has a year or two before he has to try on his first pair of Depends.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Run defense:

-ranked #64 in the country last year, giving up 163.25 per game

-ranked #102 in the country in yard per attempt allowed, giving up 4.97 per attempt

When team needed to run against us last year, they were able to do so.

Pass defense

-ranked #87 in the country last year, giving up 251.5 per game

-ranked #87 in sacks, 1.58 per game

The pressure wasn't great, so teams were able to throw on us.

Again, I'm of the school that says "coverage sacks" are largely baloney. Your defense is either disrupting the opposing offense's timing or it isn't.

The offense has the advantage on each play because it knows where the play is designed to go. If you are not knocking receivers off their routes, and pushing the o-line into the quarterback and his blockers, receivers will eventually get open.

You could have all receivers covered and still not get a sack, i.e., when the quarterback then runs for positive yardage despite the coverage, or dumps off a pass for positive yardage to a running back, H-back, or tight end, schemed to block a little then release.

Consistent successful pressure prevents the quarterback from doing any of the three. Pressure prevents him from going through his reads, it seals off any exit he might have, and it is fast enough to eliminate releasing blockers who are eligible to receive.

So, what does it all mean? It goes back to the very basic tenet of football which says, "The team able to dominate the line wins the game."

We do not have players dominating the line. Have we really had a defensive linemen since the Brandon Kennedy era where an offense was forced to account for one of our defensive linemen on every play with more than one blocker?

Include everyone in the analysis - Dickey last squads, Dodge's, the two so far under McCarney.

We just haven't been good enough on the line. We have a couple of big bodies - but are they just that, or are they dangerous enough to warrant two blockers, play in and play out? I still don't think we have a defensive lineman of that stature.

Edited February 11, 2013 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

By the way, this isn't just an idictment of us. Look at Texas and Oklahoma's run defense of late; both have been bad. I accept that defensive linemen are difficult to find. But...a ten year drought?

This is where coaches not named Nick Saban have to be really creative in their defensive game plans. If you don't have the hosses up front, and know you are not going to have them, what are you doing in your scheme to create that pressure to disrupt the offense's timing play in and play out?

[MeanGreenTexan]

Run defense:

-ranked #64 in the country last year, giving up 163.25 per game

-ranked #102 in the country in yard per attempt allowed, giving up 4.97 per attempt

When team needed to run against us last year, they were able to do so.

Pass defense

-ranked #87 in the country last year, giving up 251.5 per game

-ranked #87 in sacks, 1.58 per game

The pressure wasn't great, so teams were able to throw on us.

Again, I'm of the school that says "coverage sacks" are largely baloney. Your defense is either disrupting the opposing offense's timing or it isn't.

The offense has the advantage on each play because it knows where the play is designed to go. If you are not knocking receivers off their routes, and pushing the o-line into the quarterback and his blockers, receivers will eventually get open.

You could have all receivers covered and still not get a sack, i.e., when the quarterback then runs for positive yardage despite the coverage, or dumps off a pass for positive yardage to a running back, H-back, or tight end, schemed to block a little then release.

Consistent successful pressure prevents the quarterback from doing any of the three. Pressure prevents him from going through his reads, it seals off any exit he might have, and it is fast enough to eliminate releasing blockers who are eligible to receive.

So, what does it all mean? It goes back to the very basic tenet of football which says, "The team able to dominate the line wins the game."

We do not have players dominating the line. Have we really had a defensive linemen since the Brandon Kennedy era where an offense was forced to account for one of our defensive linemen on every play with more than one blocker?

Include everyone in the analysis - Dickey last squads, Dodge's, the two so far under McCarney.

We just haven't been good enough on the line. We have a couple of big bodies - but are they just that, or are they dangerous enough to warrant two blockers, play in and play out? I still don't think we have a defensive lineman of that stature.

d-linemen aren't jamming receivers at the line.

Again, this is not an either/or argument. It can't be. Both the D-Line and your secondary (and your LB's) must be excellent in pass plays. You can have the best d-line in the world and if your secondary can't cover, you're going to get burned on quick slants, quick outs, and bubble screens.

And maybe Shavod Atkinson required some extra help. He was probably the best DT we've had since Booger.

[foutsrouts]

I would contend that there's a guy on our OL who has the size, strength, quickness, and aggression to switch over to the dark side and have the impact that we're looking for. Hope our coaches find him.

[Mean Green 93-98]

I would contend that there's a guy on our OL who has the size, strength, quickness, and aggression to switch over to the dark side and have the impact that we're looking for. Hope our coaches find him.

Are you thinking of someone in particular?

[UNTLifer]

I would contend that there's a guy on our OL who has the size, strength, quickness, and aggression to switch over to the dark side and have the impact that we're looking for. Hope our coaches find him.

I would ask, "Who?"

[Charlie NT 73]

I think Foutsrouts could be referring to this guy:

http://www.meangreensports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=9053&SPID=562&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=1800&ATCLID=205180810&Q_SEASON=2013

[Graddean]

What makes me optimistic is our willingness to redshirt freshman linemen. In the Osborne days at Nebraska, freshman linemen, especially offensive line, were routinely redshirted. Their line was full of fourth and fifth year players. I know we would all like to have five star players ready to go day one, but we know, realistically, that is not going to happen. I take this as a very good sign. What I really look forward to is the day we sign three and four star players who are redshirted because the guys ahead of them keep them off the field.