Bobinski approving of Tech’s progress

[awbuzz]

A realistic view from the AD. Nice to see!

 

[GT Man]

You are absolutely right in that when we blitz " half of the time it costs us", and when we don't blitz more than half the time it costs us. Its the 3rd and 20s that we give up that I can't stand.

What about at least showing blitz a few times? At least make em think it could happen...

 

[daBuzz]

A touchdown is the same amount of points, no matter how fast you score it. If the odds of a stop go up, even if it looks uglier, isn't it worth it?

Even if we were to concur that your assumption is correct that the odds of a stop go up on a blitz, you're only talking about the odds of a stop on that one play. But when you blitz, the odds of a big play definitely increase. So you're increasing the odds of giving up 7 points on the play. At least if you make them play dink and dunk, you increase the number of plays where your defense has the possibility of causing a fumble, making a stop, or getting an interception. Also, there's the very real possibility of the offense simply not making a play...dropping a pass, overthrowing a receiver, holding penalty, illegal procedure, etc etc.

If it were as simple as you propose, why wouldn't every defense blitz on every play? FWIW, we'll get to see such a defense this week. TENUTA BLITZ!!!

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Blitzes force quick throws which, more often than not, are off their mark. The 4th and 6 td we gave up to UNC was a perfectly placed deep ball. That was a very nice throw. Our blitzing lb in the middle had to go around some trash at the LOS before closing on the qb and that was the difference. If not for that, we most likely get the sack. At the very least, we force a bad throw.

 

[Yella-Britches]

No, Roof's conservatism cost us dearly the last two games. I sincerely disagree with the assertion that he knows what he's doing.

Wreck - I wonder - and this is a true question because I don't know the answer - what was CTR's style of play while at Penn State - was he overly conservative? I heard that they were a top-rated defense in the BIG 10 at the time so it could/should be an indication of how much defensive coaching knowledge he would display with different athletes...

 

[slugboy]

Even if we were to concur that your assumption is correct that the odds of a stop go up on a blitz, you're only talking about the odds of a stop on that one play. But when you blitz, the odds of a big play definitely increase. So you're increasing the odds of giving up 7 points on the play. At least if you make them play dink and dunk, you increase the number of plays where your defense has the possibility of causing a fumble, making a stop, or getting an interception. Also, there's the very real possibility of the offense simply not making a play...dropping a pass, overthrowing a receiver, holding penalty, illegal procedure, etc etc.

If it were as simple as you propose, why wouldn't every defense blitz on every play? FWIW, we'll get to see such a defense this week. TENUTA BLITZ!!!

I'm not saying it's simple. If we were a solid defense on 3rd and long, I'd agree, but we're not getting the stops a conservative defense needs to be effective. And blitzing doesn't always mean sending 5 or more--zone blitzes at least confuse the other offense. Crossing the middle against Duke and UNC, we weren't close enough to the receivers to make them drop anything, and not putting much pressure on. We're not forcing many punts, sometimes none, and rarely a field goal.

I thought I'd check the numbers and see how we're doing. We're the 116th ranked defense in points per drive allowed, at about 3 points per drive. We don't make our opponents punt (ranked #122 by punts/score, #127 by punts/play--nearly last in the NCAA). We give up 6.6 yards/play. Takeaways seems to be the only way we stop the other team (we're #20).

There are a couple of reasons we lost to Duke and UNC, but giving the ball away on offense was a big part of it (link, -3 margin to Duke, even with UNC). I think most anyone would have been happy blitzing more against UNC at the end--at least we would have had time to come back.

I think this team is better off gambling more on defense this year.

 

[takethepoints]

I think the AD is right about our D. Think back over the last two games. Yes, we got burned and there were too many long 3rd conversions. But on a lot of those we were bringing the house and just barely missed sacks as a result. That tells me that the schemes are ok, but that, as yet, we don't have the horses up front to make them work effectively when we'd like. Having so many of our top DBs coming back from being out a long time with injury hasn't helped either, though Golden and Johnson are both getting better each week. I expect we'll see real improvement next year and that, with the right amount of effort, even this year.

 

[hdgtfan]

It worked well for us today but Pitt doesn't have a very good passing QB. IIRC, his completion percentage was somewhere around 55% for the season before today.

FWIW, I expect us to have more trouble versus the pass with Virginia, Clemson (assuming Watson is back by then) and UGA. NC State doesn't appear to be very good but I haven't seen them play so I won't make a judgement on them.

Possible problem for us is that NC state does have a decent QB I believe

Have not seen them play but have read that this QB may be the type which generally creates problems for our D, maybe a shootout?