Charles kelly

[33jacket]

You with me on a Chad Glasgow from TCU?

Or similar. I mentioned chad 2-3 years ago. So yes.

I think we need to look at the zimmer tree too or the johnson over scheme.

 

[Skeptic]

Eh. Cck good for assistant. Not dc. Would be disappointed. Sorry but for me I watch his D and style and not bought in. Just me. But we can do better for 800k at dc that roof and cck. Just think we need a particular niche style and scheme here.

Btw. It will be telling jimbo doesnt bring kelly with him.

I always wonder -- and I am not stirring the pot here; I am genuinely curious -- what someone might actually mean by a "particular niche style and scheme". With 11 players there seem limited alignments -- I thought the 4-2-5 took it about as far as reason would allow -- as well as crashing or skating LBs. So what are you specifically calling for? (I read this a.m. that Willie Taggert, going to FSU, "created" his "Gulf Coast Offense." Really? When Chad Morris actually created it he was a HS coach, then Tulsa I think before Clemson and SMU. In short, hardly a unique or a niche offense anymore, just different route trees apparently.) I am Roof Agnostic since with the exception of some NFL players his first year Johnson has had three or four DCs including a former NFL coordinator, and every defense has been terrible. Roof was hardly responsible for the early schemes. (Groh's apparently was so unique nobody could understand it.) So what are you suggesting?

 

[tech_wreck47]

I always wonder -- and I am not stirring the pot here; I am genuinely curious -- what someone might actually mean by a "particular niche style and scheme". With 11 players there seem limited alignments -- I thought the 4-2-5 took it about as far as reason would allow -- as well as crashing or skating LBs. So what are you specifically calling for? (I read this a.m. that Willie Taggert, going to FSU, "created" his "Gulf Coast Offense." Really? When Chad Morris actually created it he was a HS coach, then Tulsa I think before Clemson and SMU. In short, hardly a unique or a niche offense anymore, just different route trees apparently.) I am Roof Agnostic since with the exception of some NFL players his first year Johnson has had three or four DCs including a former NFL coordinator, and every defense has been terrible. Roof was hardly responsible for the early schemes. (Groh's apparently was so unique nobody could understand it.) So what are you suggesting?

It's not the 4-2-5 he doesn't like, it's how we run the 4-2-5. When he says niche he's talking about how we go about our coverages, blitz packages ect. It's about getting more "exotic" in what we do. When you don't have Bama type players, you need to be different. Imo you need to confuse the OL on who they are blocking so you can get more free guys running at the QB, stuff like pre snap shifts, stunts, twist, switching up your alignment just a shade over ect. And the secondary need to be able to bait the QB into throws he shouldn't make with different types of coverages. Make the QB think you are in one coverage but actually be in a different. Correct me if I'm wrong on what you mean @33jacket although some of this was extra thoughts of myself lol.

 

[BigDaddyBuzz]

while Kelly would not be my first choice at DC, if the only way to get him back is to make him DC, I would definitely take him over Roof. For one, he is much more aggressive and will at least listen to CPJ. #2 while Roof is a good recruiter, Kelly is better.

 

[iceeater1969]

On clear pass plays or blitzing by the lb gets zero prsssure unless the offense makes a mistake. Until the blitzing lb stops running into the center of the lineman who is waiting for him in a pass blocking stance, the qb will have a clean pocket and have no excuse for making a bad throw. At least do like 45 , t d roof and approach with angle to one side. He sets th He blocker up and then shifts to get by - don't need to tackle the qb to disrupt the qb. Running into the numbers of 330# og who is 100% legal in holding u makes know sense. At least get by enough so qb knows we blitzed
Watching this in the duke game made me very discouraged.

If Kelly could fix ,this bring him back.

 

[33jacket]

while Kelly would not be my first choice at DC, if the only way to get him back is to make him DC, I would definitely take him over Roof. For one, he is much more aggressive and will at least listen to CPJ. #2 while Roof is a good recruiter, Kelly is better.

thats fair. IMO roof is not a great recruiter. Our talent on D is not one notch better than when Groh left. One could argue on a top end (ie nfl ready) its worse. So that is fakenews. However with that said. Our D talent the last 5 years is still better than the production roof has been trotting out. What was it. in 2014, with 4 nfl players on that D, or 5, we were like 110

If you notice, many many many of the D recruits are A Mac anyway.

But, yes i would rather have kelly over roof, if you only had to choose between those two

@Skeptic what @tech_wreck47 says is basically what I mean. We have generally smarter players, we don't utilize the brain here enough on D, and what I mean by that isn't a OVERLY complicated D, but rather a more solid system D that we can use as base. For instance, there are D systems out there, much like O systems, that have a standard philosophy you build on, and for sure, some weaknesses are there, but there are strengths it brings with it too. Guys like Patterson, Belichik (although I don't want to run a 3-4), monte kiffin, **** lebeau, mike zimmer, wade phillips, tenuta when he was here, bud foster all employ and VERY identifiable style that is well known and unique to the point where their system becomes synonomous with the coach. For instance. Monte Kiffin tampa 2. Or Wade/Bum Phillips 3-4. Mike Zimmers over D. etc.

My point, is what is roofs? LOL. In fact when you watch the tape sometimes its hard to tell what the concepts even are. Ask @Ibeeballin about this. He would agree.

What is Kellys?

My point is, there are a ton of DC, that just trott out what I call junk D. Its an alignment, with a simple backend concept, front assignments, but doesn't really take ONE thing away from an offense, doesn't stress the offense in one area, or do it well. What we need at tech is something that does this.

As an example.

Bud Foster. You know his D's are going to pressure. They are going to take chances. They put their CB on an island every down, with the philosophy I am attacking the LOS at 6 gaps every snap, and if you can block me then I might get beat if not, good luck.

Monte Kiffin. I am playing cover 2 no matter what, and I am going to stress the heck out of my MLB to do it, but I am taking away what you do on the edges and we need speed to do it. A certain type of player has to be in T2 and won't work in other schemes. (BTW, this D would never work at tech)

Tenuta, had a great zone blitz package to confuse the OL here. Played exclusively, or almost, cover 3 on the back. You knew what you were getting, it had its weaknesses, but it was an effective system

Gary Patterson does his combo covg in the secondary, and high pressure packages up front. A complex D....but its an awesome system

Here is my point. All these systems above have a fundamental philosophy. They can recruit a certain kid for it. Its well known. and its so nice/effective, that each of these guys have a coaching tree. The tree runs the philosophy. Much like CPJ does in O with monken. Bohannon. Coach Ken. Etc

My simple point is. What we need at tech is a D identity, that fits our Kid, our School and takes advantage of the brain and the system over the constant need for premium raw talent.

I personally think, we will never get a physical DL. So we need to pressure gaps. We need to take advantage of speed. S become LB. LB become DE. DE grow into DT. And a system that backs it up.

That is all my point is.

 

[iceeater1969]

Who thinks Kelly will get a dc job at lower power 5 school? I Do? When he went against the master(Coach) he was a 1 year dc , but IMO he has done well at fsu.

 

[Techster]

I personally think, we will never get a physical DL. So we need to pressure gaps. We need to take advantage of speed. S become LB. LB become DE. DE grow into DT. And a system that backs it up.

That is all my point is.

Dude...I've been preaching that FOREVER. Good to hear it from someone besides the voices in my head...

 

[Jacket in Dairyland]

thats fair. IMO roof is not a great recruiter. Our talent on D is not one notch better than when Groh left. One could argue on a top end (ie nfl ready) its worse. So that is fakenews. However with that said. Our D talent the last 5 years is still better than the production roof has been trotting out. What was it. in 2014, with 4 nfl players on that D, or 5, we were like 110

If you notice, many many many of the D recruits are A Mac anyway.

But, yes i would rather have kelly over roof, if you only had to choose between those two

@Skeptic what @tech_wreck47 says is basically what I mean. We have generally smarter players, we don't utilize the brain here enough on D, and what I mean by that isn't a OVERLY complicated D, but rather a more solid system D that we can use as base. For instance, there are D systems out there, much like O systems, that have a standard philosophy you build on, and for sure, some weaknesses are there, but there are strengths it brings with it too. Guys like Patterson, Belichik (although I don't want to run a 3-4), monte kiffin, **** lebeau, mike zimmer, wade phillips, tenuta when he was here, bud foster all employ and VERY identifiable style that is well known and unique to the point where their system becomes synonomous with the coach. For instance. Monte Kiffin tampa 2. Or Wade/Bum Phillips 3-4. Mike Zimmers over D. etc.

My point, is what is roofs? LOL. In fact when you watch the tape sometimes its hard to tell what the concepts even are. Ask @Ibeeballin about this. He would agree.

What is Kellys?

My point is, there are a ton of DC, that just trott out what I call junk D. Its an alignment, with a simple backend concept, front assignments, but doesn't really take ONE thing away from an offense, doesn't stress the offense in one area, or do it well. What we need at tech is something that does this.

As an example.

Bud Foster. You know his D's are going to pressure. They are going to take chances. They put their CB on an island every down, with the philosophy I am attacking the LOS at 6 gaps every snap, and if you can block me then I might get beat if not, good luck.

Monte Kiffin. I am playing cover 2 no matter what, and I am going to stress the heck out of my MLB to do it, but I am taking away what you do on the edges and we need speed to do it. A certain type of player has to be in T2 and won't work in other schemes. (BTW, this D would never work at tech)

Tenuta, had a great zone blitz package to confuse the OL here. Played exclusively, or almost, cover 3 on the back. You knew what you were getting, it had its weaknesses, but it was an effective system

Gary Patterson does his combo covg in the secondary, and high pressure packages up front. A complex D....but its an awesome system

Here is my point. All these systems above have a fundamental philosophy. They can recruit a certain kid for it. Its well known. and its so nice/effective, that each of these guys have a coaching tree. The tree runs the philosophy. Much like CPJ does in O with monken. Bohannon. Coach Ken. Etc

My simple point is. What we need at tech is a D identity, that fits our Kid, our School and takes advantage of the brain and the system over the constant need for premium raw talent.

I personally think, we will never get a physical DL. So we need to pressure gaps. We need to take advantage of speed. S become LB. LB become DE. DE grow into DT. And a system that backs it up.

That is all my point is.

thats fair. IMO roof is not a great recruiter. Our talent on D is not one notch better than when Groh left. One could argue on a top end (ie nfl ready) its worse. So that is fakenews. However with that said. Our D talent the last 5 years is still better than the production roof has been trotting out. What was it. in 2014, with 4 nfl players on that D, or 5, we were like 110

If you notice, many many many of the D recruits are A Mac anyway.

But, yes i would rather have kelly over roof, if you only had to choose between those two

@Skeptic what @tech_wreck47 says is basically what I mean. We have generally smarter players, we don't utilize the brain here enough on D, and what I mean by that isn't a OVERLY complicated D, but rather a more solid system D that we can use as base. For instance, there are D systems out there, much like O systems, that have a standard philosophy you build on, and for sure, some weaknesses are there, but there are strengths it brings with it too. Guys like Patterson, Belichik (although I don't want to run a 3-4), monte kiffin, **** lebeau, mike zimmer, wade phillips, tenuta when he was here, bud foster all employ and VERY identifiable style that is well known and unique to the point where their system becomes synonomous with the coach. For instance. Monte Kiffin tampa 2. Or Wade/Bum Phillips 3-4. Mike Zimmers over D. etc.

My point, is what is roofs? LOL. In fact when you watch the tape sometimes its hard to tell what the concepts even are. Ask @Ibeeballin about this. He would agree.

What is Kellys?

My point is, there are a ton of DC, that just trott out what I call junk D. Its an alignment, with a simple backend concept, front assignments, but doesn't really take ONE thing away from an offense, doesn't stress the offense in one area, or do it well. What we need at tech is something that does this.

As an example.

Bud Foster. You know his D's are going to pressure. They are going to take chances. They put their CB on an island every down, with the philosophy I am attacking the LOS at 6 gaps every snap, and if you can block me then I might get beat if not, good luck.

Monte Kiffin. I am playing cover 2 no matter what, and I am going to stress the heck out of my MLB to do it, but I am taking away what you do on the edges and we need speed to do it. A certain type of player has to be in T2 and won't work in other schemes. (BTW, this D would never work at tech)

Tenuta, had a great zone blitz package to confuse the OL here. Played exclusively, or almost, cover 3 on the back. You knew what you were getting, it had its weaknesses, but it was an effective system

Gary Patterson does his combo covg in the secondary, and high pressure packages up front. A complex D....but its an awesome system

Here is my point. All these systems above have a fundamental philosophy. They can recruit a certain kid for it. Its well known. and its so nice/effective, that each of these guys have a coaching tree. The tree runs the philosophy. Much like CPJ does in O with monken. Bohannon. Coach Ken. Etc

My simple point is. What we need at tech is a D identity, that fits our Kid, our School and takes advantage of the brain and the system over the constant need for premium raw talent.

I personally think, we will never get a physical DL. So we need to pressure gaps. We need to take advantage of speed. S become LB. LB become DE. DE grow into DT. And a system that backs it up.

That is all my point is.

Thanks 33 ! Totally agree and see the same up here in the Big 10 with established identities and traditions that the DCs recruit to. At UW, aggressive , attacking LBs ( occasionally get beat in isolation on RB, but who doesn't ?). Iowa has mobile , ball hawking DBs , looking to hide coverage, lure QB into bad throw and take it to the house. See OSU and UW games this year. These are gambling defenses that occasionally give up big plays, but MORE OFTEN they create havoc and turnovers that stop drives, turn momentum and put offenses behind the chains.

 

[tech_wreck47]

thats fair. IMO roof is not a great recruiter. Our talent on D is not one notch better than when Groh left. One could argue on a top end (ie nfl ready) its worse. So that is fakenews. However with that said. Our D talent the last 5 years is still better than the production roof has been trotting out. What was it. in 2014, with 4 nfl players on that D, or 5, we were like 110

If you notice, many many many of the D recruits are A Mac anyway.

But, yes i would rather have kelly over roof, if you only had to choose between those two

@Skeptic what @tech_wreck47 says is basically what I mean. We have generally smarter players, we don't utilize the brain here enough on D, and what I mean by that isn't a OVERLY complicated D, but rather a more solid system D that we can use as base. For instance, there are D systems out there, much like O systems, that have a standard philosophy you build on, and for sure, some weaknesses are there, but there are strengths it brings with it too. Guys like Patterson, Belichik (although I don't want to run a 3-4), monte kiffin, **** lebeau, mike zimmer, wade phillips, tenuta when he was here, bud foster all employ and VERY identifiable style that is well known and unique to the point where their system becomes synonomous with the coach. For instance. Monte Kiffin tampa 2. Or Wade/Bum Phillips 3-4. Mike Zimmers over D. etc.

My point, is what is roofs? LOL. In fact when you watch the tape sometimes its hard to tell what the concepts even are. Ask @Ibeeballin about this. He would agree.

What is Kellys?

My point is, there are a ton of DC, that just trott out what I call junk D. Its an alignment, with a simple backend concept, front assignments, but doesn't really take ONE thing away from an offense, doesn't stress the offense in one area, or do it well. What we need at tech is something that does this.

As an example.

Bud Foster. You know his D's are going to pressure. They are going to take chances. They put their CB on an island every down, with the philosophy I am attacking the LOS at 6 gaps every snap, and if you can block me then I might get beat if not, good luck.

Monte Kiffin. I am playing cover 2 no matter what, and I am going to stress the heck out of my MLB to do it, but I am taking away what you do on the edges and we need speed to do it. A certain type of player has to be in T2 and won't work in other schemes. (BTW, this D would never work at tech)

Tenuta, had a great zone blitz package to confuse the OL here. Played exclusively, or almost, cover 3 on the back. You knew what you were getting, it had its weaknesses, but it was an effective system

Gary Patterson does his combo covg in the secondary, and high pressure packages up front. A complex D....but its an awesome system

Here is my point. All these systems above have a fundamental philosophy. They can recruit a certain kid for it. Its well known. and its so nice/effective, that each of these guys have a coaching tree. The tree runs the philosophy. Much like CPJ does in O with monken. Bohannon. Coach Ken. Etc

My simple point is. What we need at tech is a D identity, that fits our Kid, our School and takes advantage of the brain and the system over the constant need for premium raw talent.

I personally think, we will never get a physical DL. So we need to pressure gaps. We need to take advantage of speed. S become LB. LB become DE. DE grow into DT. And a system that backs it up.

That is all my point is.

Gary Patterson is one of the reasons I would love to have Chad Glasgow. For the most part we already have the players to work for that system.

 

[BigDaddyBuzz]

Looks like Kelly is officially available. Taggert bringing Leavitt with him to be DC at FSU

 

[THWG]

thats fair. IMO roof is not a great recruiter. Our talent on D is not one notch better than when Groh left. One could argue on a top end (ie nfl ready) its worse. So that is fakenews. However with that said. Our D talent the last 5 years is still better than the production roof has been trotting out. What was it. in 2014, with 4 nfl players on that D, or 5, we were like 110

If you notice, many many many of the D recruits are A Mac anyway.

But, yes i would rather have kelly over roof, if you only had to choose between those two

@Skeptic what @tech_wreck47 says is basically what I mean. We have generally smarter players, we don't utilize the brain here enough on D, and what I mean by that isn't a OVERLY complicated D, but rather a more solid system D that we can use as base. For instance, there are D systems out there, much like O systems, that have a standard philosophy you build on, and for sure, some weaknesses are there, but there are strengths it brings with it too. Guys like Patterson, Belichik (although I don't want to run a 3-4), monte kiffin, **** lebeau, mike zimmer, wade phillips, tenuta when he was here, bud foster all employ and VERY identifiable style that is well known and unique to the point where their system becomes synonomous with the coach. For instance. Monte Kiffin tampa 2. Or Wade/Bum Phillips 3-4. Mike Zimmers over D. etc.

My point, is what is roofs? LOL. In fact when you watch the tape sometimes its hard to tell what the concepts even are. Ask @Ibeeballin about this. He would agree.

What is Kellys?

My point is, there are a ton of DC, that just trott out what I call junk D. Its an alignment, with a simple backend concept, front assignments, but doesn't really take ONE thing away from an offense, doesn't stress the offense in one area, or do it well. What we need at tech is something that does this.

As an example.

Bud Foster. You know his D's are going to pressure. They are going to take chances. They put their CB on an island every down, with the philosophy I am attacking the LOS at 6 gaps every snap, and if you can block me then I might get beat if not, good luck.

Monte Kiffin. I am playing cover 2 no matter what, and I am going to stress the heck out of my MLB to do it, but I am taking away what you do on the edges and we need speed to do it. A certain type of player has to be in T2 and won't work in other schemes. (BTW, this D would never work at tech)

Tenuta, had a great zone blitz package to confuse the OL here. Played exclusively, or almost, cover 3 on the back. You knew what you were getting, it had its weaknesses, but it was an effective system

Gary Patterson does his combo covg in the secondary, and high pressure packages up front. A complex D....but its an awesome system

Here is my point. All these systems above have a fundamental philosophy. They can recruit a certain kid for it. Its well known. and its so nice/effective, that each of these guys have a coaching tree. The tree runs the philosophy. Much like CPJ does in O with monken. Bohannon. Coach Ken. Etc

My simple point is. What we need at tech is a D identity, that fits our Kid, our School and takes advantage of the brain and the system over the constant need for premium raw talent.

I personally think, we will never get a physical DL. So we need to pressure gaps. We need to take advantage of speed. S become LB. LB become DE. DE grow into DT. And a system that backs it up.

That is all my point is.

This is why I would like to see CPJ go after Grinch from WSU if Roof is let go. They are even more undersized than we are on the DL, yet they caused havoc pretty much every play because he teaches his DL to attack and shoot gaps.

 

[Skeptic]

...
I personally think, we will never get a physical DL. So we need to pressure gaps. We need to take advantage of speed. S become LB. LB become DE. DE grow into DT. And a system that backs it up.

That is all my point is.

 

[Skeptic]

'm going to digest the rest of your post and the others in support, but meanwhile I am with you on the defensive line. Don't know why exactly but after 10 yeas there is a message there. Those guys are Georgia, Clemson, Alabama, etc.

 

[33jacket]

Looks like Kelly is officially available. Taggert bringing Leavitt with him to be DC at FSU

BTW Jim Leavitt on paper is a good hire and fit for DC at FSU. We will see if taggert is. Leavitt is kinda a stoops coaching tree etc for D.

and jimbo is not bringing him to A&M?

again for me it says something....if jimbo brings him it says another thing....

 

[BuzzStone]

I am now really hoping we keep CTR. No way we need to go to a worse DC

 

[Jacket in Dairyland]

While we are dreaming , check out Phil Parker at Iowa. Great resume. D is ALWAYS at or near the top of Big 10, especially in interceptions. Making about $600k from what Wikipedia says. Totally dominated us in a bowl game some years back. Maybe looking to change ? I have no idea ! Would LOVE to get him off UW schedule !

 

[Techster]

While we are dreaming , check out Phil Parker at Iowa. Great resume. D is ALWAYS at or near the top of Big 10, especially in interceptions. Making about $600k from what Wikipedia says. Totally dominated us in a bowl game some years back. Maybe looking to change ? I have no idea ! Would LOVE to get him off UW schedule !

I believe the DC for Iowa that totally shut us down in the OB has long since retired. Norm Parker was having some medical issues and stepped down.

 

[Skeptic]

I believe the DC for Iowa that totally shut us down in the OB has long since retired. Norm Parker was having some medical issues and stepped down.

I remember the guy though not by name. The defense and the size difference killed us.

 

[Jacket in Dairyland]

I believe the DC for Iowa that totally shut us down in the OB has long since retired. Norm Parker was having some medical issues and stepped down.

I think you are right, sir ! Norm was the DC, Phil was coaching DBs , IIRC.