ADVERTISEMENT

Interesting article on Duke's view of their loss

According to the article, NU's 3-man rush was successful. I still hate it.
 
I was there and I do not think NU used a 3 man rush frequently-am I wrong ?

We ran a good amount of it. However, we also bluffed a blitz with it (then dropped) all but 3 on at least one (and likely more) occasions. It worked beautifully. The QB read the blitz, and expected the hot throw, then saw 2-3 drop back and he had nowhere to run and nowhere to go with the ball.

I have no problem with the three man rush as long as you're not showing it pre-snap. If you show three DL, you should often bring a 4 or 5. If you show 5, you should often drop 2. The problem is when you line up in a three man rush and give them a three man rush over and over, so that they know it's coming pre-snap.

Hank has done a great job of making the blitzes and fronts unpredictable by changing things up a lot. You can do that with a veteran bunch and two excellent corners. We've been very complex on defense, and that's a sign the defensive coaches not only have confidence in their physical abilities, but their mental discipline.
 
We ran a good amount of it. However, we also bluffed a blitz with it (then dropped) all but 3 on at least one (and likely more) occasions. It worked beautifully. The QB read the blitz, and expected the hot throw, then saw 2-3 drop back and he had nowhere to run and nowhere to go with the ball.

I have no problem with the three man rush as long as you're not showing it pre-snap. If you show three DL, you should often bring a 4 or 5. If you show 5, you should often drop 2. The problem is when you line up in a three man rush and give them a three man rush over and over, so that they know it's coming pre-snap.

Hank has done a great job of making the blitzes and fronts unpredictable by changing things up a lot. You can do that with a veteran bunch and two excellent corners. We've been very complex on defense, and that's a sign the defensive coaches not only have confidence in their physical abilities, but their mental discipline.
MR,
Baring injuries, do defenses improve more over the course of a season or offenses? or is that not a thing.
I just really love watching a great defense.
 
MR,
Baring injuries, do defenses improve more over the course of a season or offenses? or is that not a thing.
I just really love watching a great defense.

It obviously depends, but the timing element of offense makes significant improvement easier there. OL and QB-WR play require more choreography (that requires more repetition) than playing defense IMO.
 
It obviously depends, but the timing element of offense makes significant improvement easier there. OL and QB-WR play require more choreography (that requires more repetition) than playing defense IMO.
I always thought that defense was the more physically demanding side of the ball and that defenses get beat up more during the season. As such, offenses get better compared to defense in that regard. Any truth to that?
 
I always thought that defense was the more physically demanding side of the ball and that defenses get beat up more during the season. As such, offenses get better compared to defense in that regard. Any truth to that?

Perhaps. Guys on both sides get pretty beat up though.
 
I always thought that defense was the more physically demanding side of the ball and that defenses get beat up more during the season. As such, offenses get better compared to defense in that regard. Any truth to that?[/QUOTE

I have often heard that Os are slower to develop and the Ds have their way at the beginning of the season while Os get better as the season goes on.
 
I still can't believe how good (and deep) our secondary is. Godwin and Matt Harris will play on Sundays, while VanHoose will have a chance too. THenry is no slouch and losing some weight has made him faster without sacrificing his run support.
 
I still can't believe how good (and deep) our secondary is. Godwin and Matt Harris will play on Sundays, while VanHoose will have a chance too. THenry is no slouch and losing some weight has made him faster without sacrificing his run support.
. . . . . and on top of THAT, several of the young guys behind them have flashed promise. Very impressed with this group, both today and moving forward.
 
Well..... all I know is that there is probably not a bigger fanbase outside of Durham for Duke this weekend than in Evanston. Beat Tech!!
 
Good analysis. What comes out of it, without specifically saying it, is, "geez, our plan was the right plan, and it would've worked if the NU defense wasn't so damn good."

usually, if you swing it out and make guys miss, you'll have some luck. But NU has been tackling so well, especially in the defensive backfield.

Van Hoose and Watkins tackle as well as McManis ever did, and he's the best tackling corner (maybe DB, though Peters has something to say there) that I've seen at nu. The same would appear to be true about Harris, but I haven't noticed him as much this year,
 
I still can't believe how good (and deep) our secondary is. Godwin and Matt Harris will play on Sundays, while VanHoose will have a chance too. THenry is no slouch and losing some weight has made him faster without sacrificing his run support.

Completely agree with this. Our corners are both outstanding and Igwebuike has been very good so far this year. KQueiro and Keith Watkins have also shown a lot in his limited time (and I've heard some good things about the young players), so I'm hoping there won't be much of drop off when we lose VanHoose and Henry next year.
 
One more agreement. All the article really said was they took what we gave them, and we stuffed it by covering downfield and then converging and tackling in space. Just a GREAT job of planning and executing. I wouldn't be surprised if they do a lot better against Ga. Tech, at least on Offense..
 
Practice @ Ga. Tech and Duke are going to be extreme this week. Should be a hell of a good game.
 
Completely agree with this. Our corners are both outstanding and Igwebuike has been very good so far this year. KQueiro and Keith Watkins have also shown a lot in his limited time (and I've heard some good things about the young players), so I'm hoping there won't be much of drop off when we lose VanHoose and Henry next year.

It's amazing to look at our depth in the secondary. Like you say, KQ and Watkins are playing very well, and it says a lot about the quality when your star 4-star recruit from last year, Parrker Westphal (albeit coming off an injury) may have been leapfrogged on the depth chart by a true freshman, Montre Hartage. The other backup at CB, Marcus McShepard, is only a sophomore and probably would've been starting on a majority of past NU teams already. There's not much of a dropoff from VanHoose/Harris to Watkins/McShepard.
 
We ran a good amount of it. However, we also bluffed a blitz with it (then dropped) all but 3 on at least one (and likely more) occasions. It worked beautifully. The QB read the blitz, and expected the hot throw, then saw 2-3 drop back and he had nowhere to run and nowhere to go with the ball.

I have no problem with the three man rush as long as you're not showing it pre-snap. If you show three DL, you should often bring a 4 or 5. If you show 5, you should often drop 2. The problem is when you line up in a three man rush and give them a three man rush over and over, so that they know it's coming pre-snap.

Hank has done a great job of making the blitzes and fronts unpredictable by changing things up a lot. You can do that with a veteran bunch and two excellent corners. We've been very complex on defense, and that's a sign the defensive coaches not only have confidence in their physical abilities, but their mental discipline.
Just reviewed the highlights at http://www.northwesternhighlights.com/ . I agree that Hankwitz on the basis of 8 minutes of highlights did a good job of mixing in 3 man rush with 4 man rushes and blitzes so Sirk never got comfortable.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT