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
Defense
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="YJMD" data-source="post: 459922" data-attributes="member: 1929"><p>The problems with our D last game (and honestly in Alcorn who didn't have the horses to burn us) were not with the secondary scheme. You may not like a heavy reliance on zone and playing off the ball at the snap, but in terms of design fundamentals Woody knew where the sticks were and had guys in position to clean up screen passes, etc. That much is different from Roof, and Roof did a lot of quarters coverages. In any scheme, there's going to be openings for receivers. I would like to be more versatile, but overall I like what Woody is doing because it complements what the front 7 are <em>supposed</em> to be doing, and it gives us the opportunity to roll into different coverages to confuse the QB (cause of the INT we snagged), and a QB who is being taken out of rhythm is going to miss guys in front of their receivers in the zone to make picks or struggle to make accurate and on-time throws allowing the secondary to close and make a play on the ball or wrap-up.</p><p></p><p>Execution on the other hand...that was problematic. Mostly it was problematic in a few screens where people lost their leverage or took the wrong pursuit angles in clean-up. That part was much better in the Alcorn game, and this probably reflects heavily on the ejections and injury problems.</p><p></p><p>But the bigger problem was the front 7. The leverage problem (or wrong assignment) was amplified, leaving wide open lanes for QB to pick up yards on the ground, some big runs, and otherwise space to maneuver away from pressure. That part was a significant issue against Alcorn, and we were simply fortunate to athletically make up for it, and really they also did a poor job executing on their opportunities.</p><p></p><p>That problem of containment and pursuit angles is precisely why we got burned for 2 consecutive kickoffs (and really the first 1 was 1 missed tackle away from a TD too). Thankfully, it's not a talent problem, and having it exposed so egregiously may provide energy to fix it. But god help us if we don't. Knowing your assignment and sticking with it is the one requirement for Woody's defensive scheme to be decent. Adding athleticism to that makes it great. I know we've been hearing about aggression and I'm talking about control, but really the assignments themselves are aggressive, and the reads are minimal.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="YJMD, post: 459922, member: 1929"] The problems with our D last game (and honestly in Alcorn who didn't have the horses to burn us) were not with the secondary scheme. You may not like a heavy reliance on zone and playing off the ball at the snap, but in terms of design fundamentals Woody knew where the sticks were and had guys in position to clean up screen passes, etc. That much is different from Roof, and Roof did a lot of quarters coverages. In any scheme, there's going to be openings for receivers. I would like to be more versatile, but overall I like what Woody is doing because it complements what the front 7 are [I]supposed[/I] to be doing, and it gives us the opportunity to roll into different coverages to confuse the QB (cause of the INT we snagged), and a QB who is being taken out of rhythm is going to miss guys in front of their receivers in the zone to make picks or struggle to make accurate and on-time throws allowing the secondary to close and make a play on the ball or wrap-up. Execution on the other hand...that was problematic. Mostly it was problematic in a few screens where people lost their leverage or took the wrong pursuit angles in clean-up. That part was much better in the Alcorn game, and this probably reflects heavily on the ejections and injury problems. But the bigger problem was the front 7. The leverage problem (or wrong assignment) was amplified, leaving wide open lanes for QB to pick up yards on the ground, some big runs, and otherwise space to maneuver away from pressure. That part was a significant issue against Alcorn, and we were simply fortunate to athletically make up for it, and really they also did a poor job executing on their opportunities. That problem of containment and pursuit angles is precisely why we got burned for 2 consecutive kickoffs (and really the first 1 was 1 missed tackle away from a TD too). Thankfully, it's not a talent problem, and having it exposed so egregiously may provide energy to fix it. But god help us if we don't. Knowing your assignment and sticking with it is the one requirement for Woody's defensive scheme to be decent. Adding athleticism to that makes it great. I know we've been hearing about aggression and I'm talking about control, but really the assignments themselves are aggressive, and the reads are minimal. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
The 2014 ACC Football Championship was played in what city?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Defense
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