Setting Benchmarks for the '09 Blackshirts
11 comments so far
June 19, 2009 by
Last July Darren wrote a great piece detailing what he thought it would take defensively for Nebraska to meet expectations under Bo Pelini in year one. The general consensus for the Huskers heading into 2008 seemed to be about eight wins and, based on the stats from 2007, it looked like the Blackshirts would have to give up 14-17 fewer points a game to get there.
They got there in terms of wins but fell a little short on the scoring defense ledger, improving by "only" 9.36 points per game. While it's difficult to forecast national trends, either offensively or defensively, ultimately this is a good sign when you consider that overall the Blackshirts barely got back to being an average Nebraska defense during this decade, yet still improved by four wins in one of the strongest years the Big 12 has ever seen.
There are a lot of different ways to measure a defense's effectiveness, but in my mind defense at its most basic comes down to how many yards you allow, how many scores you give up and how many games you can change via turnovers. Below is a chart detailing Nebraska's national rank and per game averages in each of those categories from 2000 through 2008:
Compare 2008's defensive statistics with the overall average from this decade and it's clear that Nebraska got back to being, well, average. That largely supports what most of us saw on the field last fall: A clearly improved defense from the abomination that was 2007, but nothing that was going to go down in Blackshirts lore. In short, it was good enough.
Given the questions marks on offense heading into the upcoming season, almost any preseason assessment of Nebraska is going to have to lean heavily on continued defensive improvement but this time Nebraska might need a defense that can carry a few games. Not merely competent, but dominant for stretches. The average Blackshirts defense in the aughts has resulted in 8.22 wins and while that wouldn't be catastrophic in year two, it's probably at least a game shy of what's expected. While the North title seems like the primary goal right now, eventually the Huskers are looking to join the ranks of Texas and Oklahoma so for our purposes I'll set winning the Big 12 as the ultimate goal and knock both goals out with one shot. What does Nebraska need to do defensively to be in the running? Here's my best guess:
TOTAL DEFENSE
Conference wide, Big 12 offenses were almost exactly as proficient in 2008 (439.4 ypg) as they were in 2007 (438.1 ypg) but Nebraska improved their yards allowed average by nearly 127 yards per game to finish second in the conference last year. This is the number that most closely resembles the average over the past nine seasons and probably Pelini's biggest success in 2008. The fact that the Husker's average this decade was good enough for second in the conference says a lot about how crazy offensive production has gone in the Big 12 of late and forecasting any massive improvement in this category seems overly ambitious, but Nebraska doesn't need a massive improvement here.
The last five Big 12 champions have given up an average of 319.1 YPG defensively so the Blackshirts should be looking to shave about 30 yards per game off their average. That seems like a small number--no big deal, just three or four fewer first downs a game--but Nebraska was already pretty stout on third down conversions last year and no Big 12 team has averaged fewer than 338 over the past two seasons. Assuming that the Husker offense isn't a total dud, I think any improvement at all will be enough to keep the Huskers in elite company so will just round things off nice and neat and say...
Benchmark: < 350 YPG
SCORING DEFENSE
Big 12 teams scored about 2.2 more points per game last year over the previous season. Simply by not sticking his play sheet in his pants, or maybe there was some coaching involved, Pelini was able to cut 9.36 points off Nebraska's total. Again, with all of the big arms, devastating runners and super receivers returning this year in the conference, there's no reason to think that the Big 12 will experience any major drop off in points scored but there is some room for improvement on Nebraska's part.
Since 2004, the Big 12 champion has allowed an average of 19.06 points per game on defense but that number has been steadily climbing. The 2004 Sooners won the conference giving up 16.8 PPG. The 2008 Sooners won it giving up 24.5 PPG. Of course, with their offense last year Oklahoma could afford to give up a few more points and Nebraska certainly isn't guaranteed any increased offensive production. An improvement of 10 fewer points per game would represent a huge leap forward for the defense, but much less than that requires a lot of faith in a new quarterback and an unproven receiving corps. Splitting the difference seems like the bare minimum but with a lot left to be sorted out offensively?
Benchmark: < 22 PPG (i.e. give up one fewer touchdown per game)
TURNOVER MARGIN
It's the topic that just won't go away--Nebraska's historic struggles winning the turnover battle--but for good reason: there's no single area with more room for improvement or more of a direct impact on winning football games than turnover margin. Go back to the chart above detailing the Blackshirts stats since 2000 and you'll see almost a direct correlation between turnovers and victories. In the three years the Huskers had a positive per game average they won 10, 11, and 10 games. The three years they averaged a deficit of more than one turnover per game? Five, seven and five wins--the three worst seasons since 1968. Averaging between 0 and -1 turnovers per game is the gray area, the average of eight or nine wins so it's entirely possible that Nebraska could win the North simply by breaking even.
But if Nebraska is to take another step forward breaking even seems absolutely essential in 2009. The five year conference champion average is .598 but given Nebraska's history in this category I'm going to go even higher than that.
Benchmark: > +1.0 turnovers per game
Last year the Blackshirts were a decent bunch, maybe even damn good considering the atrocities of 2007 but you never got the sense that Pelini, the team or the fans were truly satisfied. Every one knew that the defense could get better and every one also knows that they'll have to do just that in the season to come. Last year was the offense's year to shoulder the load, this year the onus falls on the defense.
How much better they'll need to be is a tricky proposition, but two months out 350, 22, and 1 seem like good places to start.
Did you enjoy this article?
Get Husker news by email
Follow us on Twitter
Related Stories: Defense
Post a comment
Ty Jun 19 09
Interesting article and take. I think the benchmarks are most achievable in the following order: takeaways, yards, points allowed. Remember, we call them "takeaways" now because we impose our will on the other team according to Pelini. Yards allowed would obviously be achieveable since we did it last year, the defense is better, the scheme is more second nature and we'll be playing against some teams breaking in new QBs or coaches. The points allowed, I DO NOT think is achievable. 21 points in the conference is sometimes one quarter. I think anything under 28 points is still a pretty good day when you average the higher powered offenses against the average offenses. That said, if we can keep the non-conference games low, benefit from new QBs at TTU and MU, keep BU, ISU, and KSU where they should be then even the third goal might be reachable for 2009. If we went 3 for 3, I think we'd be happy with the season.
darren Jun 19 09
This is a great scorecard, Brandon. If the Huskers check each box on your list, it's easy to imagine them being successful.
I would also argue that "rush yards allowed" is an important metric within that total defense number. The tried and true recipe is - stop the run, make a team one dimensional, then go sack the quarterback.
Also, since sacks are categorized as negative rushes for an offense in college, that rush yards allowed stat can also be sort of an inverted way to measure success against the pass... because it can be outrageously bolstered by multiple sack games.
caveman99 Jun 19 09
This article seems to fit nicely after the article on the Statistical Mean, I think it shows that NU's mean for most D categories is much better than the median of 60. I like the targets you set except for 1, total yards. 350 is what the team gave up in 2008, and while it is the mean over the last 8 years, the yards against averages for the 10+ win seasons were all at 322 or better. The 8 and 9 win seasons under Callahan were in the 330 range, only season above 7 wins giving up more than 333 yards a game was last year. With that in mind, I think for NU to show improvement as a team 9-10 wins are needed and I don't think 350 against will cut it. I agree with your assertion that a reduction of 30 yards against per game would be noticeable and I think would be a better target. Maybe look at 320-330 yards against as a good defense this year.
Brandon Jun 19 09
caveman99,
You're probably right. I may have been too forgiving in terms of yards allowed. LY Texas led the conference at 342 YPG and maybe I weighted that too heavily as "a trend upwards". In 2007 OU won the conference giving up 338/g. Kansas had the best total defense that year at 317/g but they didn't play OU, Texas or Tech and faced nobody better than Toledo in the nonconference.
As for your comment from a few days back regarding the mean for "good teams," I'm interested in that idea and took some cursory looks at the information. Do you (or anyone else who cares to jump in) have any suggestions as far as what categories to look at?
The NCAA.com statistical database only goes back to 2000 so we'd be limited by that timeframe, but as a starting point for the categories we might use this Terry Bowden piece.
James Moore Jun 19 09
Brandon,
Great piece and I agree with all of your points here. Best part of it is that these goals are WELL attainable. The Blackshirts will have the added element of surprise this year. This is still a fairly young bunch too. Let's hope Turner can reemerge as a presence on one end, we force some turnovers, and our secondary grows. After all, they went through a pretty tough lineup of explosive offenses last year. Now they are more comfortable with the system, their assignments, the guy next to them, and a year wiser we should see some considerable improvement from them as a unit. Part of creating turnovers is getting to the QB and we HAVE to be able to do that this year with our Defensive Line. If Turner & Allen cannot generate consistent pressure one-on-one with Suh (guaranteed double) then our secondary and linebackers will be under additonal pressure to carry out assignments for longer and in our conference that's just not good with the speed and talent at the skill positions. . .
Any thoughts from anyone on the state of the secondary in terms of depth and starters? What are our expectations there? And my final question is whom will become the starting Linebackers for us?
caveman99 Jun 19 09
Fascinating article, thanks for the link! I think the chart that Terry uses pretty much covers all of the areas that we fans and pundits seem to argue over, though it doesn't include Special Teams which is surprising being as he was a former coach. I think ST's get overlooked WAY too much. What I find fascinating are the 5 categories that are relevant to success according to the chart, Rushing D (#1 factor), Scoring D (#2 factor), Total D (tied for #3 factor), Turnovers Gained (tied for #3 factor), and Turnover Margin (#5 factor). No single offensive category had relevance for more than 6 teams! Only Scoring O (relevant for 5 teams) and 3rd Down Conversion Rate (relevant for 6 teams, were even close to the relevant Defensive Statistics. This gives me more confidence than ever that we will see a rise to prominance by NU. Bo is in the middle of turning the Blackshirts into a great unit again in a conference where everyone is still fixated on Offense. Yes you see a couple of teams like KSU and KU going to a Nickle Package Base, but it is 1 whole year after Bo has started and Bo has had 2 whole recruiting classes already in house for his needs. These teams are trying to get their first, after maybe starting to address it last year.
caveman99 Jun 19 09
James Moore,
Based on the way the team ended the Spring I think going into the fall the LB's look like this:
WILL
1. Matt May
2. Alonzo Whaley
MIKE
1. Colton Koehler
2. Will Compton (Though I think this maybe more of an "OR" case on the official 2-deep
BUCK
1. Sean Fisher
2. Micah Kreikemeier
Regarding how well the DB's will do, well I think there is reason to be optimistic. Several comments in the press through out the Spring about how the D was intercepting the ball a lot this year, much more than last year. More talented depth through out with Blue, Dennard, and Gomes really pushing West and Amukamara. Safety looks good also. Asante had a good Spring and Hagg and Thenarse seem to be battling for the other spot. RFr. PJ Smith's name kept coming up from the coaches as someone who really impressed them. We could see a lot of minutes for him this year also. RFr. Courtney Osborne also seemed to impress. I am excited, especially with the pressure the front 4 should be able to provide.
Bill in Iowa Jun 20 09
You also have to figure in Blake Lawrence, Matt May, and Phillip Dillard. I think Blake, if healthy, will start, at least the beginning of the year. I don't know what the deal is with Dillard, I think the suspicion is that he did not show up to spring ball in shape. If he gets it together, keeps his weight down, he starts, at least at the beginning of the season. He has too much experience to sit. I think the coaches were a little miffed at him and probably wanted to fire a warning shot across his bow...if you don't work you don't start and we don't care if you are a senior.
Bill in Iowa Jun 20 09
Good article Brandon. If the blackshirts live up to these goals it would put the D among the top 1-2 of the Big 12. Can you even believe you are setting that as an expectation in Pelini's 2nd year! I don't think its too unrealistic though, but it would be a remarkable turn around. This year is really going to be fun to watch the D perform after 1 year in the system. The comments from spring were how players felt like they knew their assignments well and could just play technique without second guessing themselves. It could be why the secondary was more aggressive challenging for interceptions. And I think it means the blackshirts meet this goal of +1 this year in takeaways.
caveman99 Jun 20 09
Bill,
I agree about Matt May, hence I put him as my choice to be the starter at WILL. His speed is a huge advantage for Bo, allows Bo the advantages of a Heavy Nickle Set that you see KSU and KU going to, but still be able to have the majority of the advantages of the 4-3. May can be adjusted into pure coverage and act as the Nickle Back without tipping the opposing team off about the change in play call due to personnel substitution. Yet he is big enough to play LB in a more traditional 4-3 set. I think we will still see Hagg in NB spot a lot, but if May can hold up in WILL as a hybrid type then Hagg could focus on Safety and Bo has a huge tactical advantage. I am not sure about Lawrence yet, if healthy he jumps up to the top of the WILL depth chart. He is working out with the team in Summer Conditioning, but the jury is still out if he will be allowed to compete. He has had what 3 concussions in 18 months now? He has a lot of talent, but I am not sure he will be able to contribute unfortunately.
Greg Morrow Jun 21 09
Reeling in the blowout losses somewhat, will improve the per game points average. Keeping Mizzou and Okie in the 30's and T-Tech in the upper 20's accounts for about 50 points spread over the season, right there. Tech wasn't a blowout, obviously, and Nebraska beat Kansas, but trading away with those teams into the 30's isn't a winning hand, either.
Which is why some people think the team will be better, even if the record doesn't prove it.
Possibly, the defense could improve similarly to how the offense improved from '04 to '05, just by having another year in the system.
There are hints that the secondary is more confident. Rumored to be, anyway. Confidence is such a must, when trying to eke out an extra turnover. Whether having the audacity to lunge in front of the receiver, or punching the ball out of the erstwhile ball carrier, Nebraska has to have guys who want to do that.
Another good sign from last year, was players swarming to the ball more. You didn't see the dreaded Matador defense, quite as much as '07. I saw O'Hanlon trying to make up for someone else's blown coverages. That shouldn't happen, as much. It's still college football, though.
Couple a swarming D with some needed athletic audacity to "ram the sword through" so to speak, could make the defense fun to watch.
I've pointed out in personal conversations and read some references to the fact that Nebraska's had some pretty productive recruiting classes, these last 4. Overall, a level up from other Northern teams.
Who knows? Maybe Nebraska can make that athletic leap, this year.