Curious why our D always looks the same?

Boomergump

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,281
What to do about our defense is a big question. Personally, I think we might need to think about what is best for the defense and then ask the offense to get their butts in gear if they need to make up the difference sometimes. Tenuta's scheme is not needed if you have horses in the front 4. Heck, we think highly of a lot of his guys now (in the front 4) primarily because his zone blitz scheme made them look better than they were. When you can't beat beat people straight up with speed, moves, and strength in the pass rush, you have to do it with aggression, numbers, and confusion while taking risks. That is what Tenuta was good at. Many like to look back at the Matt Ryan (GT white tops) BC game at home as the example of why NOT to run JT's scheme. Heck man, what did our offense score in that game 17 points? (I don't remember). Had we played that same game with an average CPJ offense, WE WIN!

At this point, I am for selling out on defense and playing to our strengths on that side of the ball, which is the secondary. Let's put them on an island, get after it, and live with the results either way. Maybe we don't have as much confidence in our offense this season to overcome a quick score. SO WHAT! Let's be honest and say that our team has been built around offense for a while now. I don't mind them having a little pressure on their shoulders, as they go, we go. At least getting after people, gives us a chance and keeps the ball in the offense's hands for more minutes every game, whether giving up a ton of quick points, or very few.

I would rather see us burned on a screen pass than endure a 14 play drive taking 8 minutes, resulting in a score. WE need to be the team owning the clock and having time and a half the number of snaps as our opponents, not the reverse. This offense CRUSHES defenses when they have been out there all day and it also ices the opposing offense. IMHO, we have often been the offensive team "iced" this year. The PITT game was a good example.
 

ramblin' wagon

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
41
Many like to look back at the Matt Ryan (GT white tops) BC game at home as the example of why NOT to run JT's scheme. Heck man, what did our offense score in that game 17 points? (I don't remember). Had we played that same game with an average CPJ offense, WE WIN!

I agree completely. That 2007 BC game and the whole 2007 defense in general has been brought up several times. Some peoples memories seem to be fuzzy. We gave up a over 500 yards that game but only 24 points. For the entire 2007 season the defense averaged 310 yds/g and 19.3ppg.
 

Mack

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,361
What to do about our defense is a big question. Personally, I think we might need to think about what is best for the defense and then ask the offense to get their butts in gear if they need to make up the difference sometimes. Tenuta's scheme is not needed if you have horses in the front 4. Heck, we think highly of a lot of his guys now (in the front 4) primarily because his zone blitz scheme made them look better than they were. When you can't beat beat people straight up with speed, moves, and strength in the pass rush, you have to do it with aggression, numbers, and confusion while taking risks. That is what Tenuta was good at. Many like to look back at the Matt Ryan (GT white tops) BC game at home as the example of why NOT to run JT's scheme. Heck man, what did our offense score in that game 17 points? (I don't remember). Had we played that same game with an average CPJ offense, WE WIN!

At this point, I am for selling out on defense and playing to our strengths on that side of the ball, which is the secondary. Let's put them on an island, get after it, and live with the results either way. Maybe we don't have as much confidence in our offense this season to overcome a quick score. SO WHAT! Let's be honest and say that our team has been built around offense for a while now. I don't mind them having a little pressure on their shoulders, as they go, we go. At least getting after people, gives us a chance and keeps the ball in the offense's hands for more minutes every game, whether giving up a ton of quick points, or very few.

I would rather see us burned on a screen pass than endure a 14 play drive taking 8 minutes, resulting in a score. WE need to be the team owning the clock and having time and a half the number of snaps as our opponents, not the reverse. This offense CRUSHES defenses when they have been out there all day and it also ices the opposing offense. IMHO, we have often been the offensive team "iced" this year. The PITT game was a good example.
Still remember the statue at Fr Benning....."lead follow or get the hell out of the way"..gosh lets do something and make watching a tech game exciting.
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,653
Location
Georgia
What to do about our defense is a big question. Personally, I think we might need to think about what is best for the defense and then ask the offense to get their butts in gear if they need to make up the difference sometimes. Tenuta's scheme is not needed if you have horses in the front 4. Heck, we think highly of a lot of his guys now (in the front 4) primarily because his zone blitz scheme made them look better than they were. When you can't beat beat people straight up with speed, moves, and strength in the pass rush, you have to do it with aggression, numbers, and confusion while taking risks. That is what Tenuta was good at. Many like to look back at the Matt Ryan (GT white tops) BC game at home as the example of why NOT to run JT's scheme. Heck man, what did our offense score in that game 17 points? (I don't remember). Had we played that same game with an average CPJ offense, WE WIN!

At this point, I am for selling out on defense and playing to our strengths on that side of the ball, which is the secondary. Let's put them on an island, get after it, and live with the results either way. Maybe we don't have as much confidence in our offense this season to overcome a quick score. SO WHAT! Let's be honest and say that our team has been built around offense for a while now. I don't mind them having a little pressure on their shoulders, as they go, we go. At least getting after people, gives us a chance and keeps the ball in the offense's hands for more minutes every game, whether giving up a ton of quick points, or very few.

I would rather see us burned on a screen pass than endure a 14 play drive taking 8 minutes, resulting in a score. WE need to be the team owning the clock and having time and a half the number of snaps as our opponents, not the reverse. This offense CRUSHES defenses when they have been out there all day and it also ices the opposing offense. IMHO, we have often been the offensive team "iced" this year. The PITT game was a good example.

Exactly. What we are doing on d doesnt work imo. Need to be aggressive. Need to mix it up. Etc
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,220
Selling out on D as a matter of it being your primary scheme that's been practiced and drilled for eternity and as a matter of trying to apply a bandaid to a dismemberment are two totally different things. You still have to know what you are doing and be proficient at it. Just selling out for the sake of doing something different but not having a clue is the surest way to a blowout I can think of, especially when your offense is anemic.
 

Skeptic

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,372
Isnt that dc at FSU?.
Thought it was kelly who fred up the d when he was temporary dc. When not prompted went to fsu.
Heck I cant be sure.
Well, according to Kelly his own self, and what FSU people said later, he was fed up so much at GT that he still admires Johnson, and as a man of honor had to leave when FSU came after him and he made a counter offer for big bucks -- three times his GT salary -- and a three-year contract, and FSU gave it to him. He was not going to be named DC until the end of the season anyway, if then but since none of us -- I think -- are mindreaders we don't know, do we? (We do know if we were paying attention that Johnson said something to the effect that "When I heard what they offered I knew we'd lost.") Lord, why is every departure for whatever reason written off as malcontent, angry, or even fed up? My guess is he went to FSU for the same reasons Johnson came to GT: more opportunity, more money, more security for his family, closer to his roots in Alabama (he still has family in one of those puddles in the road down there) ... the usual suspects.
 

GTonTop88

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,013
Location
Gibson, GA
What to do about our defense is a big question. Personally, I think we might need to think about what is best for the defense and then ask the offense to get their butts in gear if they need to make up the difference sometimes. Tenuta's scheme is not needed if you have horses in the front 4. Heck, we think highly of a lot of his guys now (in the front 4) primarily because his zone blitz scheme made them look better than they were. When you can't beat beat people straight up with speed, moves, and strength in the pass rush, you have to do it with aggression, numbers, and confusion while taking risks. That is what Tenuta was good at. Many like to look back at the Matt Ryan (GT white tops) BC game at home as the example of why NOT to run JT's scheme. Heck man, what did our offense score in that game 17 points? (I don't remember). Had we played that same game with an average CPJ offense, WE WIN!

At this point, I am for selling out on defense and playing to our strengths on that side of the ball, which is the secondary. Let's put them on an island, get after it, and live with the results either way. Maybe we don't have as much confidence in our offense this season to overcome a quick score. SO WHAT! Let's be honest and say that our team has been built around offense for a while now. I don't mind them having a little pressure on their shoulders, as they go, we go. At least getting after people, gives us a chance and keeps the ball in the offense's hands for more minutes every game, whether giving up a ton of quick points, or very few.

I would rather see us burned on a screen pass than endure a 14 play drive taking 8 minutes, resulting in a score. WE need to be the team owning the clock and having time and a half the number of snaps as our opponents, not the reverse. This offense CRUSHES defenses when they have been out there all day and it also ices the opposing offense. IMHO, we have often been the offensive team "iced" this year. The PITT game was a good example.
^^^This... These long drives we give up gets offenses and QBs in rythem and gives the opponents defenses long breaks to catch their breath and work on figuring out how to stop us.

Give up the quick TD or force some 3 and outs. I like our DBs 1 on 1 if the opposing QB only has a couple of seconds to get rid of the ball. I believe Darrell Revis would have a hard time covering with our pass rush right now.
 

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,668
Well, according to Kelly his own self, and what FSU people said later, he was fed up so much at GT that he still admires Johnson, and as a man of honor had to leave when FSU came after him and he made a counter offer for big bucks -- three times his GT salary -- and a three-year contract, and FSU gave it to him. He was not going to be named DC until the end of the season anyway, if then but since none of us -- I think -- are mindreaders we don't know, do we? (We do know if we were paying attention that Johnson said something to the effect that "When I heard what they offered I knew we'd lost.") Lord, why is every departure for whatever reason written off as malcontent, angry, or even fed up? My guess is he went to FSU for the same reasons Johnson came to GT: more opportunity, more money, more security for his family, closer to his roots in Alabama (he still has family in one of those puddles in the road down there) ... the usual suspects.
Thanks for the correction.
Per your understanding kelly was offered the dc by gt and and then somehow got an offer from fsu and left because of a better offer.
Living in texas I missed that. I thought fsu offered first and we had to scramble up an offer.
He sure worked in the shadows at gt 2006-2012 6 years as ST,CB,&DB coach under Johnson s oc wommack then oc groh some times talent is right there and you miss it.
 

Skeptic

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,372
Thanks for the correction.
Per your understanding kelly was offered the dc by gt and and then somehow got an offer from fsu and left because of a better offer.
Living in texas I missed that. I thought fsu offered first and we had to scramble up an offer.
He sure worked in the shadows at gt 2006-2012 6 years as ST,CB,&DB coach under Johnson s oc wommack then oc groh some times talent is right there and you miss it.
He did have two or three assignments on D for sure. I've never understood what was required to coach defensive backs then switch to linebackers or DEs even, as it seems to me to be entirely different requirements, but I suppose that is how the progression to DC or OC works. I have not followed FSU this season but a look at their stats so far so Kelly's defense has held opponents to reasonable scores for the offense to beat, and I think this is the third year of his three year deal. Based on the first two years it didn't look as though he would be back in Tallahassee because it was shoot 'em up every Saturday. But maybe so. Good for him if he is.
 

strong90

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
203
I don't know the group dynamics or interpersonal/professional relationships among our coaching staff, but seems CPJ has said "we can't stop 'em rushing 4" as many times as I have (if that's possible). Last year, after his vocal, public admonishment it seemed that we bagan to play more aggressively and forced some turnovers. Haven't seen that this year.
Yes, CPJ is the HC, but could there be something else at play here? I don't get it.
 

danny daniel

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,613
Pitt had the perfect O plan....keep 7 and 8 in the box to pass block (and discourage or negate any blitz attempts) and use their superior receivers to beat our "average cover" DBs while giving the QB lots of time to find his open play without pressuring him into making mistakes. Through in a mix of hard running and GT cannot get Pitt off the field.....smart strategy against our talent. CPJ admitted that we doubled/tripled covered Boyd and still could not cover him in crucial situations, given the protection afforded the QB. We are going to need another D plan as that O plan will work against us again.
 

Mack

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,361
Pitt had the perfect O plan....keep 7 and 8 in the box to pass block (and discourage or negate any blitz attempts) and use their superior receivers to beat our "average cover" DBs while giving the QB lots of time to find his open play without pressuring him into making mistakes. Through in a mix of hard running and GT cannot get Pitt off the field.....smart strategy against our talent. CPJ admitted that we doubled/tripled covered Boyd and still could not cover him in crucial situations, given the protection afforded the QB. We are going to need another D plan as that O plan will work against us again.
You are spot on........when I saw ND whip us with one on one coverage I told folks everybody from here on end will play us the way ND and Pitt and Dook etc did.....we aint fooling folks at all..........
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
Difference of opinions I guess. Finally watching Pitt game. Almost at the half. Pitt did a lot of crashing down 8 in the box with a 9th leaning often. Especially early. Marshals 1st TD burned em for it. Our big pass plays did also.

Now did we fool them? Did we execute better? I haven't been able to guess play calls and see little evidence the D did any more than any other D against any other offense does.

I don't know. When offenses make plays their coaches look smart. When they don't the coaches look stupid. But I think we are doing a much better job of making plays against blitzes. 2nd half to cone tho and I know that didn't go well so......

Wow...what a catch the Boyd kid made on 3rd Pitt TD. I begin to know how some teams felt watching Calvin now.
 

Mack

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,361
Difference of opinions I guess. Finally watching Pitt game. Almost at the half. Pitt did a lot of crashing down 8 in the box with a 9th leaning often. Especially early. Marshals 1st TD burned em for it. Our big pass plays did also.

Now did we fool them? Did we execute better? I haven't been able to guess play calls and see little evidence the D did any more than any other D against any other offense does.

I don't know. When offenses make plays their coaches look smart. When they don't the coaches look stupid. But I think we are doing a much better job of making plays against blitzes. 2nd half to cone tho and I know that didn't go well so......

Wow...what a catch the Boyd kid made on 3rd Pitt TD. I begin to know how some teams felt watching Calvin now.
Defense against the option is to make qb pitch early so help can get to the corner.When we have a good dive back that can keep folks honest we do well ...when we cant block the lineman we do poorly.Looks like folks are selling out on the dl.......sending at least one backer every play.......so far it has worked for them...eight in box every down has hurt us since we have had problems throwing the ball. We shall see how well we have improved tonight.
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,581
We have brought blitzes this year. And they've got about as much pressure as bringing 4 has. That's why we don't do it more, because if you're blitzes aren't getting pressure, then all you're doing by calling them is making it harder on your dbs.

And if we're being honest, with the exception of the Clemson, and probably FSU game today, our defense has given us multiple chances to win every game we've lost. What we need now is for our offense to start making the plays to win the game when they are given the chance to do so.
 

stylee

Ramblin' Wreck
Featured Member
Messages
668
We show different looks but it is so early in the play clock when our DBs roll down or CB bailout that the picture becomes crystal clear for the QB. It's cool to be vanilla but you have to be extremely disclipline in your assignment (we are not), have a DL that can speed up a QB(we don't), and guys that keep the ball I front of the sticks, rally up and make a the tackle(we don't do)


Great point, this is the overwhelming factor to me. Our discipline with the front seven has been horrendous.
 
Top