Defenses that get teams off the field fastest

[dressedcheeseside]

I think overall talent level is a factor in not being top 20. I don't think it's enough to explain not being top 40.

Which defensive stat are you looking at? I wanna see how we compare with other schools in our range. For example, if you like Football Outsiders defensive efficiency or FEI, we rank a dismal #65. However, looking at some of the schools in our ballpark reveals Miami (7-4) at #66, Pitt (7-4) at #68, Stanford (11-2) at #60, UNC (9-2) at #56, ND (10-2) at #52. Is it coaching or talent with those teams?

Btw, in '14, we ranked #76 in this stat and that was with an insane number of forced to's.

'13: #51
'12: #64
'11: #61
'10: #80
'09: #51
'08: #30
'o7: #69

One outlier in the last 9 seasons. Hmm....

 

[33jacket]

It's not a hard concept to understand. Just because people disagree doesn't mean they don't understand.

@33jacket your post included reference to position coaching. Fwiw, I think our LBs looked much more disciplined in the Spring game.

I'm looking forward to big improvement.

IMO impossible to tell that vs our Offense in a spring game. We coach our LB's to flow too hard...Watch the S too; it was not good in spring, but again, I am not going to jump on it yet. Until we are going against 11, 12 and 21 sets we won't truly know.

 

[33jacket]

It seems to me it's important to have an identity - to have a philosophy that you believe in, can recruit to, and can teach. Now, maybe not all philosophies are created equal, in fact, it's obvious they're not, but having one is better than not having one. You can be successful as a super aggressive defense like Tenuta's or with a more base defense like Spaz at BC for a while. You can be successful as a triple-option offense like CPJ or an air-raid like Leach. But you've got to be good at something, you've got to believe in it, rep the ever-lovin'-crap out of of it, teach it to the guys, recruit to it, and fit guys in it to their strengths. Tenuta was great at that. CPJ is great at that. I played (practiced is a better word) for Tenuta 13 years ago, and I can still tell you what our philosophy and identity was. The message still rings in my head.

Is Roof great at that? I think my biggest question right now is: what is our identity/philsophy on defense? What is our message or core beliefs or non-negotiables? These are just different parsings of the same question. I want Roof to succeed very badly, and/but I also want to have a great defense at GT again.

Exactly what I am saying. And Roof has none of that IMO; so we will be in for torture on that side again this fall....he has had 4 years to get his system and guys in place and we will see.

 

[33jacket]

Which defensive stat are you looking at? I wanna see how we compare with other schools in our range. For example, if you like Football Outsiders defensive efficiency or FEI, we rank a dismal #65. However, looking at some of the schools in our ballpark reveals Miami (7-4) at #66, Pitt (7-4) at #68, Stanford (11-2) at #60, UNC (9-2) at #56, ND (10-2) at #52. Is it coaching or talent with those teams?

Btw, in '14, we ranked #76 in this stat and that was with an insane number of forced to's.

'13: #51
'12: #64
'11: #61
'10: #80
'09: #51
'08: #30
'o7: #69

One outlier in the last 9 seasons. Hmm....

the fact is. The data is clear. There is a step down in GT defensive performance under CPJ. It clear and undeniable

so...did the talent all of a sudden get worse
or the coaching?

For me its definitely the latter for the past 6 years. And maybe a little talent...but not enough to justify #70 ranked D's.....thats my point....

I think we all have to start looking, and admitting, potentially repping vs our O all spring and fall...isn't exactly the best thing ever. I watched on spring tape our S do things you would never do that quick vs a traditional O. Does that develop bad habits?

lets get one thing clear. We do not rep vs traditional offense sets and plays in spring or the first 2 weeks of fall. Lets make that clear. I have been to dozens and dozens of practices and have never once seen this; and I know this still to be the case. We don't go scout until week 1 prep. That is alot of time....alot of reps...vs our O.

We will see...I am guessing Griffin will get burned deep in high S cvg this year....too many times

 

[Boomergump]

I wonder if he'd be more aggressive if he had the talent for it? Maybe he thinks bend-don't-break, or bend-and-break-but-take-a-long-time is a better match for our offense and our defensive personnel?

It is hard for me to process the idea that a bend but don't break (or bend and sometimes break) defense is a good match for our offense. Maybe I am just missing something, but an agressive style that tends to get teams off the field, one way or another, meaning score or no score, seems to be the best match for our offense. IMHO the effectiveness of our offense goes up dramatically as the TOP does. We demoralize teams when we possess the ball and we are really hard to stop on downs. Opposing offenses will have a hard time getting in any kind of rhythm if their number of plays goes down and the time between series stays high. We have seen it time and time again, icing the normally high flying opponent offense with our possession offense. By the same token, we are way better on offense the more we are on the field.

I know occasionally watching opponent run outs for quick scores is frustrating, but the alternative is worse in my mind. Aggressive defense will make field position typically better as well. I think everybody on this board, to a person, would agree that we are an offensive team by identity and we go as our offense goes, generally speaking. The Chan years were the opposite. I am perfectly comfortable hanging the burden on our offense to score a lot in order to win.

An aggressive defense that gives up similar point totals, but on far less opponent TOP, is a preferable formula in my mind.
If points allowed can come down, then all the better.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

It is hard for me to process the idea that a bend but don't break (or bend and sometimes break) defense is a good match for our offense. Maybe I am just missing something, but an agressive style that tends to get teams off the field, one way or another, meaning score or no score, seems to be the best match for our offense. IMHO the effectiveness of our offense goes up dramatically as the TOP does. We demoralize teams when we possess the ball and we are really hard to stop on downs. Opposing offenses will have a hard time getting in any kind of rhythm if their number of plays goes down and the time between series stays high. We have seen it time and time again, icing the normally high flying opponent offense with our possession offense. By the same token, we are way better on offense the more we are on the field.

I know occasionally watching opponent run outs for quick scores is frustrating, but the alternative is worse in my mind. Aggressive defense will make field position typically better as well. I think everybody on this board, to a person, would agree that we are an offensive team by identity and we go as our offense goes, generally speaking. The Chan years were the opposite. I am perfectly comfortable hanging the burden on our offense to score a lot in order to win.

An aggressive defense that gives up similar point totals, but on far less opponent TOP, is a preferable formula in my mind.
If points allowed can come down, then all the better.

That only works if we are able to keep the ball on O. If we can't, that type of D leads to blowout losses. Last year we could not keep the ball. Our bdb D kept us in games with a chance in the 4th that would have been blowouts with a high risk D.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I think we all have to start looking, and admitting, potentially repping vs our O all spring and fall...isn't exactly the best thing ever. I watched on spring tape our S do things you would never do that quick vs a traditional O. Does that develop bad habits?

lets get one thing clear. We do not rep vs traditional offense sets and plays in spring or the first 2 weeks of fall. Lets make that clear. I have been to dozens and dozens of practices and have never once seen this; and I know this still to be the case. We don't go scout until week 1 prep. That is alot of time....alot of reps...vs our O.

I think you have a valid point, but it's a tad overstated. We may not rep against "traditional offenses," if there even is such a thing, but we do plenty of skill developmental drills that are common to all teams. Fundamentals are fundamentals, reads are reads, athletes are athletes. I'm inclined to pin our defensive woes on a combination of coaching and talent. Not exactly sure where the weighting lies, but we don't have the same horses you'll find in top D stables and talent deficiencies on defense are much harder to scheme around than on offense.

As far as Tenuta goes, he had a good scheme, but he had good players, too. They may not have all been highly recruited, but that staff was excellent at finding the hidden gems.

 

[Skeptic]

http://www.cbssports.com/college-fo...ors-that-get-teams-off-the-field-the-fastest/

Pretty much kills the argument that uptempo offenses hurt the defense.

BTW Roof is 77th smh.

There is a reason that Swinney parted company with Steele, and it was the latter's insistence that a quick offense hurt his defense. Venables is just the opposite: play as fast as you want, we will be there at the end. (But we ought to consider that GT has had its moments of getting offenses off the field. Again and again and again after scoring ourselves. Not preferable but ...)

 

[iceeater1969]

I wonder if he'd be more aggressive if he had the talent for it? Maybe he thinks bend-don't-break, or bend-and-break-but-take-a-long-time is a better match for our offense and our defensive talent.

1

It is hard for me to process the idea that a bend but don't break (or bend and sometimes break) defense is a good match for our offense. Maybe I am just missing something, but an agressive style that tends to get teams off the field, one way or another, meaning score or no score, seems to be the best match for our offense. IMHO the effectiveness of our offense goes up dramatically as the TOP does. We demoralize teams when we possess the ball and we are really hard to stop on downs. Opposing offenses will have a hard time getting in any kind of rhythm if their number of plays goes down and the time between series stays high. We have seen it time and time again, icing the normally high flying opponent offense with our possession offense. By the same token, we are way better on offense the more we are on the field.

I know occasionally watching opponent run outs for quick scores is frustrating, but the alternative is worse in my mind. Aggressive defense will make field position typically better as well. I think everybody on this board, to a person, would agree that we are an offensive team by identity and we go as our offense goes, generally speaking. The Chan years were the opposite. I am perfectly comfortable hanging the burden on our offense to score a lot in order to win.

An aggressive defense that gives up similar point totals, but on far less opponent TOP, is a preferable formula in my mind.
If points allowed can come down, then all the better.

If u combine an aggressive and a fairly effective defense with our usual offense, we are a force. I love to see our offense wear out the opponents defense. Strong defense and offense and top ten because of our system .

Also
If defense gets some recognition, recruiting will improve and we will get even better!!!.
Hope this is year the defense shows strong. Coach roof has been recruiting athletes so lets hope he turns them loose.

THE DT and DE need to be allowed to slash on many more plays instead of chuck to neutralize, peak and go. The delay allows the opponents ol men to get a death grip hold on our dl. Do we ever get a holding call ??

 

[Skeptic]

It is hard for me to process the idea that a bend but don't break (or bend and sometimes break) defense is a good match for our offense. Maybe I am just missing something, but an agressive style that tends to get teams off the field, one way or another, meaning score or no score, seems to be the best match for our offense. IMHO the effectiveness of our offense goes up dramatically as the TOP does. We demoralize teams when we possess the ball and we are really hard to stop on downs. Opposing offenses will have a hard time getting in any kind of rhythm if their number of plays goes down and the time between series stays high. We have seen it time and time again, icing the normally high flying opponent offense with our possession offense. By the same token, we are way better on offense the more we are on the field.

I know occasionally watching opponent run outs for quick scores is frustrating, but the alternative is worse in my mind. Aggressive defense will make field position typically better as well. I think everybody on this board, to a person, would agree that we are an offensive team by identity and we go as our offense goes, generally speaking. The Chan years were the opposite. I am perfectly comfortable hanging the burden on our offense to score a lot in order to win.

An aggressive defense that gives up similar point totals, but on far less opponent TOP, is a preferable formula in my mind.
If points allowed can come down, then all the better.

I see you are from the Air Coryall line of thought that says if you are gonna score do it in a hurry so we can get the ball back.

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

It seems to me it's important to have an identity - to have a philosophy that you believe in, can recruit to, and can teach. Now, maybe not all philosophies are created equal, in fact, it's obvious they're not, but having one is better than not having one. You can be successful as a super aggressive defense like Tenuta's or with a more base defense like Spaz at BC for a while. You can be successful as a triple-option offense like CPJ or an air-raid like Leach. But you've got to be good at something, you've got to believe in it, rep the ever-lovin'-crap out of of it, teach it to the guys, recruit to it, and fit guys in it to their strengths. Tenuta was great at that. CPJ is great at that. I played (practiced is a better word) for Tenuta 13 years ago, and I can still tell you what our philosophy and identity was. The message still rings in my head.

Is Roof great at that? I think my biggest question right now is: what is our identity/philsophy on defense? What is our message or core beliefs or non-negotiables? These are just different parsings of the same question. I want Roof to succeed very badly, and/but I also want to have a great defense at GT again.

Does not that "identity/philosophy on defense" actually start with the HC? Not saying that from him being hands on teaching during practice, but establishing the goals for D from day one of his hire?

The 2 coaches, I am aware of, that have totally seemed to have ignored that idea are Pepper & CPJ. From day 1 of their tenures D seemed to have been a back burner issue from goals/philosophy/recruiting. Seems as if both were more concerned with how we ranked in rushing stats than anything else.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Does not that "identity/philosophy on defense" actually start with the HC? Not saying that from him being hands on teaching during practice, but establishing the goals for D from day one of his hire?

The 2 coaches, I am aware of, that have totally seemed to have ignored that idea are Pepper & CPJ. From day 1 of their tenures D seemed to have been a back burner issue from goals/philosophy/recruiting. Seems as if both were more concerned with how we ranked in rushing stats than anything else.

CPJ has said repeatedly the #1 goal on defense is to stop the run. All else radiates from there. I'd say that is not ingoring defense. Also, the fact that he's on his 3rd DC says he cares and he demands performance or you're gone.

 

[alagold]

I wonder if he'd be more aggressive if he had the talent for it? Maybe he thinks bend-don't-break, or bend-and-break-but-take-a-long-time is a better match for our offense and our defensive personnel?

Cheese,

he had SIX SENIORS last yr (and 2 JRs), he will never have the experience again to run ANY schemes he might think up--maybe the talent wasn't great but on paper it sure looks better than what is on the field this yr--unproven is THE BEST adjective to describe them,I hope at the end of yr we don't have one worst

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Cheese,

he had SIX SENIORS last yr (and 2 JRs), he will never have the experience again to run ANY schemes he might think up--maybe the talent wasn't great but on paper it sure looks better than what is on the field this yr--unproven is THE BEST adjective to describe them,I hope at the end of yr we don't have one worst

We'll be better defensively this year.

 

[Frenchise]

We will struggle until we get a better line. We only have run stopping walls at this point. Guys can hold the point of attack 1 on 1, but there is no proven penetration ability now that Gotsis is gone. Hopefully KF can step it up, he was not there physically last year. Hopefully the young guys can get going as well. As it stands, there were a lot of mid majors that had better lines than us last year which is indefensible.

Every secondary will break down if you can't get pressure. End of story.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

I'm not sure what to do with that, are you? I know what fear it gives me, but I don't want to say it.

Say it.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

THE DT and DE need to be allowed to slash on many more plays instead of chuck to neutralize, peak and go. The delay allows the opponents ol men to get a death grip hold on our dl. Do we ever get a holding call ??

Would love for more people to comment on this. The ND game last year was the height of frustration to watch. I kept thinking, "How come they get to hold and we do not?" Something about the way our lines play on both sides of the ball seems to give up one of the techniques that other teams use to torture us.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Other interesting things I noticed in the article.....

Oregon was not on the list, which was disappointing. Would have loved to have seen how their defense ranked given the extreme up tempo style their offense plays. CPJ has said repeatedly that up tempo is great if you are scoring quickly and often but it wears down your offense more quickly if you are not scoring. It is a trade off for him.

Vanderbilt! I was actually surprised at how highly ranked their defense was. Made me wonder about which defensive stats are the most important.

The ACC looked like one of the more defensive minded conferences, which surprised me.

 

[Skeptic]

We will struggle until we get a better line. We only have run stopping walls at this point. Guys can hold the point of attack 1 on 1, but there is no proven penetration ability now that Gotsis is gone. Hopefully KF can step it up, he was not there physically last year. Hopefully the young guys can get going as well. As it stands, there were a lot of mid majors that had better lines than us last year which is indefensible.

Every secondary will break down if you can't get pressure. End of story.

Not a bad word play, though.