Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
BC Post Game Melt Down Thread
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="slugboy" data-source="post: 756211" data-attributes="member: 282"><p>I thought this was wry humor, but people took this literally. Johnson did this when Groh was DC and repeated it under Roof. The defense might have looked marginally better, but “much better” is a massive stretch, and it at best approached mediocre under Kelley.</p><p></p><p>The DL is mostly underclassmen. Having some seniority helps their development. i.e. the other 9-10 guys on the defense will bear the brunt of that change. But the defense was awful yesterday and against Clemson.</p><p></p><p>If you asked another coach at another program, they’d call this a rebuild. Many of them did at the time. I’ll agree with you on the defense, though—I’d expect them to be better than last year, at least. </p><p></p><p>I thought BC points per opportunity would be a lot worse. Havoc numbers were awful. We failed to get sacks and tackles for loss, and we should have. The numbers don’t tell the story on how bad a game this was defensively (to me, at least).</p><p></p><p>Even without the three turnovers, BC was getting points on almost every drive.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>With a few exceptions, the tackling in the secondary was worse. Curry was second on the team in tackling. Quez Jackson was first, Carpenter and Thomas followed. Lockhart and Domineck led the DL in tackles, but they were way down the list. Tackles were heavy in the secondary.</p><p>In a defense where the linemen occupy the ol and the linebackers are supposed to make the tackles, that’s OK, but the amount of tackles coming from the front 4 is low—and when it comes from the front 6, it’s probably the linebacker making the tackle. Our defense isn’t one where the front 4 occupy the linemen in front of them (like a 3-4), so the low number of front 4 tackles isn’t good. I’ve been told you don’t want your safety as your leading tackler, and that’s what we had.</p><p>The DBs got screened and blocked effectively by BC, and sometimes by each other. On the BC scoring play where Curry was beaten to the edge, the WR had stoned the CB on that side, and the safeties weren’t able to make the play either. Curry and Domineck were the only two close enough to even miss a tackle, just like you said.</p><p><a href="https://www.espn.com/college-football/boxscore?gameId=401234617" target="_blank">https://www.espn.com/college-football/boxscore?gameId=401234617</a></p><p></p><p>Collins has a big job squaring away the defense before the next game and before the end of the season. It’s hit obvious territory</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="slugboy, post: 756211, member: 282"] I thought this was wry humor, but people took this literally. Johnson did this when Groh was DC and repeated it under Roof. The defense might have looked marginally better, but “much better” is a massive stretch, and it at best approached mediocre under Kelley. The DL is mostly underclassmen. Having some seniority helps their development. i.e. the other 9-10 guys on the defense will bear the brunt of that change. But the defense was awful yesterday and against Clemson. If you asked another coach at another program, they’d call this a rebuild. Many of them did at the time. I’ll agree with you on the defense, though—I’d expect them to be better than last year, at least. I thought BC points per opportunity would be a lot worse. Havoc numbers were awful. We failed to get sacks and tackles for loss, and we should have. The numbers don’t tell the story on how bad a game this was defensively (to me, at least). Even without the three turnovers, BC was getting points on almost every drive. With a few exceptions, the tackling in the secondary was worse. Curry was second on the team in tackling. Quez Jackson was first, Carpenter and Thomas followed. Lockhart and Domineck led the DL in tackles, but they were way down the list. Tackles were heavy in the secondary. In a defense where the linemen occupy the ol and the linebackers are supposed to make the tackles, that’s OK, but the amount of tackles coming from the front 4 is low—and when it comes from the front 6, it’s probably the linebacker making the tackle. Our defense isn’t one where the front 4 occupy the linemen in front of them (like a 3-4), so the low number of front 4 tackles isn’t good. I’ve been told you don’t want your safety as your leading tackler, and that’s what we had. The DBs got screened and blocked effectively by BC, and sometimes by each other. On the BC scoring play where Curry was beaten to the edge, the WR had stoned the CB on that side, and the safeties weren’t able to make the play either. Curry and Domineck were the only two close enough to even miss a tackle, just like you said. [URL]https://www.espn.com/college-football/boxscore?gameId=401234617[/URL] Collins has a big job squaring away the defense before the next game and before the end of the season. It’s hit obvious territory [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What jersey number did Justin Thomas wear?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
BC Post Game Melt Down Thread
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top