Coaching changes?

[jacketup]

Roof has never had a top 45 D as a DC in his life other than one year at penn state which was a top 20 d the year before too. This is a simple fact. Let me say. That is not good in nearly a decade of being a dc

Not sure how you are defining top 45. GT was number 40 in yards per game THIS YEAR (FBS games only).

If you are using points per game, you have to adjust for points given up by offense and special teams, which is not purely a defensive stat.

 

[RamblinRed]

I'm not a big Roof fan, I think he is a mediocre DC - that said i'm not in a rush to get rid of him. Our struggles on defense have less to do with the DC and more to do with the HC. That is the only legitimate conclusion you can make after 8 years of data points.

FWIW, statistically what the defense does is not that correlated with wins. Our 2 best seasons under CPJ have come with our 2 highest ypp allowed defenses - though remarkably they were the the 2nd and 3rd lowest ppg allowed. What those 2 defenses did well was not stop teams so much as turn them over. Our two best seasons were also the 2 with the fewest offensive TO's and the highest defensive takeaways leading to a strong positive TO margin.
The 2 winningest teams also were the best in offense ppg, 3rd down conversion % and among the best in TO and ypg.
When this program has an off season it is largely due to the offense not the defense. The defenses have been consistently poor under Johnson. His program is in many ways set up to mimic a Big 12 style program.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

When this program has an off season it is largely due to the offense not the defense.

I don't know what to make of this statement. So when the offense and defense both stink it's largely due to the offense?

 

[Jacket prime]

I don't know what to make of this statement. So when the offense and defense both stink it's largely due to the offense?

i think he's taking it as a given that the defense will stink under Johnson, so when the team stinks, it's because the offense stinks as well.

but i may be answering a rhetorical question...

 

[Jacket prime]

I'm not a big Roof fan, I think he is a mediocre DC - that said i'm not in a rush to get rid of him. Our struggles on defense have less to do with the DC and more to do with the HC. That is the only legitimate conclusion you can make after 8 years of data points.

My recollection is that we had similar issues under O'Leary: phenomenal offense, horrid defense. I've always wondered if its just an issue of us not being able to recruit enough talent to support both.

 

[AE 87]

@jacketup @RamblinRed

per game rankings are not the best rankings to consider for us. Because of our offense, we will typically have fewer drives (so also defend fewer drives) than most teams.

 

[alagold]

My recollection is that we had similar issues under O'Leary: phenomenal offense, horrid defense. I've always wondered if its just an issue of us not being able to recruit enough talent to support both.

JP,
That may be it so look at DT position.We have SIX Abacks coming back for 2 positions.DT has three.THEN we have 4 MORE scholly Abacks waiting to play and only 2 more DTs to my knowledge..for those counting--that's TEN TEN TEN Abacks, and only 5 DTs.We have been about 35th or so in OFF avg ypp for last 5 yrs and about 70th in DEF. Hmmmm. Think we could use more DTs?

 

[Squints]

Not sure how you are defining top 45. GT was number 40 in yards per game THIS YEAR (FBS games only).

If you are using points per game, you have to adjust for points given up by offense and special teams, which is not purely a defensive stat.

Yards per play is a much better stat then yards per game imo. And we were 92nd in YPP this year in FBS games only. That's atrocious.

 

[Jacket prime]

JP,
That may be it so look at DT position.We have SIX Abacks coming back for 2 positions.DT has three.THEN we have 4 MORE scholly Abacks waiting to play and only 2 more DTs to my knowledge..for those counting--that's TEN TEN TEN Abacks, and only 5 DTs.We have been about 35th or so in OFF avg ypp for last 5 yrs and about 70th in DEF. Hmmmm. Think we could use more DTs?

Oh, i definitely think we're short handed at DT, though i don't blame that entirely on the high number of A-backs we recruit. Losing the number of D linemen we did between the 2013 and 2014 seasons sure didn't help our numbers there. That said. i think we've got some O linemen that were also pretty good D linemen in high school, and they seem always seem end up on O here. But what do i know?

And who would have thought we'd ever be hurting for able bodies to play A back with the number of backs we recruit?

 

[dressedcheeseside]

JP,
That may be it so look at DT position.We have SIX Abacks coming back for 2 positions.DT has three.THEN we have 4 MORE scholly Abacks waiting to play and only 2 more DTs to my knowledge..for those counting--that's TEN TEN TEN Abacks, and only 5 DTs.We have been about 35th or so in OFF avg ypp for last 5 yrs and about 70th in DEF. Hmmmm. Think we could use more DTs?

Abacks, dbs and to some extent qb's are all interchangeable parts. That is why we have so many Abacks.

 

[Skeptic]

JP,
That may be it so look at DT position.We have SIX Abacks coming back for 2 positions.DT has three.THEN we have 4 MORE scholly Abacks waiting to play and only 2 more DTs to my knowledge..for those counting--that's TEN TEN TEN Abacks, and only 5 DTs.We have been about 35th or so in OFF avg ypp for last 5 yrs and about 70th in DEF. Hmmmm. Think we could use more DTs?

I really thought we could have used more Abacks this season. When everybody was getting hurt, including Snoddy -- who when he came back was not effective -- we had some raw kids trying to run a complex offense. Some rose to the challenge, others didn't. And now because of the injuries we still aren't sure how we will stand at that position come spring.

 

[LongforDodd]

Well, regarding the adding of majors, c'mon; consider the low reputation of a "college" that offers majors such as these: http://shass.mit.edu/undergraduate/majors Good heavens -- anthropology? Music? Theater arts?

And our current Provost ( I think he still is) and an MIT man told a gathering of concerned alums a few years ago that "MIT does just fine without a football team"....IIRC.

 

[LongforDodd]

Curious. So quiet right now with off season changes.

1 - are we doing nothing?
2 - waiting for navy season to end before poaching a coach?
3 - lining up someone else before firing ours and that takes a bit of time?
4 - wait til after bowl season
5 - wait til after nsd (i hope not)

So what say you. Which is Paul up to now? Up to now if he was going to make a change it usually is in the 2 or 3 timeframe or quicker which makes me wonder about option 1

With PJ I think you should limit him to three options. No more...no less.

 

[LongforDodd]

I think PJ would be a much better head coach if he wasn't calling all the plays and hired an offensive coordinator that runs the option. He would still be in control but would have a little more time to make adjustments instead of calling every play.

Would you want to be an OC under PJ? I don't think so.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

I really thought we could have used more Abacks this season. When everybody was getting hurt, including Snoddy -- who when he came back was not effective -- we had some raw kids trying to run a complex offense. Some rose to the challenge, others didn't. And now because of the injuries we still aren't sure how we will stand at that position come spring.

Our offense is too complex and highly dependent on practice reps to allow just any AB/BB/QB to play. Based on 2008 and this year, we apparently can only use experienced players. How to get them experience if they aren't played (especially QB) is a problem ......

Assume Byerly is the backup next year (and JT starts). Where does that leave us for the next year or two?

Concerning Roof, I still hope he is our next HC. He has passion and the D has played it's butt off this season compared to the injuries / talent. Just an opinion.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Would you want to be an OC under PJ? I don't think so.

A eunuch would look like a move up?

 

[GTNavyNuke]

And our current Provost ( I think he still is) and an MIT man told a gathering of concerned alums a few years ago that "MIT does just fine without a football team"....IIRC.

Our provost (Bras) told me that if Stanford could field a good team, we didn't need to change anything.

Again, I think that the administration will do whatever they can to support football until it may marginally affect GT's academic reputation.

 

[iceeater1969]

Pretty sure GT hasn't covered a TE or the flat since the 1980's

We dont in our base defense.
I totally agree.

When we play a pressing defense , we cover the tight end. However, we then dont cover the rb!

IMO
We will not get super quality defenders till we run aggressive defense.

 

[Techster]

In terms of numbers at DT, we're fine.

Returning: Pat Gamble, Francis Kallon, Kyle Cerge-Henderson
Redshirted: Scott Morgan, Brentavious Glanton

There was also some talk of Trent Sellers eventually moving to the DL. 5 legit DT bodies possibly 6 guys for 2 spots is good for us.
Numbers at DT will be fine...ability to play at the level we need is TBD.

 

[jacketup]

@jacketup @RamblinRed

per game rankings are not the best rankings to consider for us. Because of our offense, we will typically have fewer drives (so also defend fewer drives) than most teams.

Yards per play is a much better stat then yards per game imo. And we were 92nd in YPP this year in FBS games only. That's atrocious.

I agree. And 63 in ypp on O is mediocre at best. Atrocious + mediocre = 2-9