Defensive Change is on the way

ATL1

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
That would be great moves to make them rushers. Should have been done sooner. Alabama is now multiple, not to compare but most teams have become multiple to put their players in the best position on the field and to also deal with the different and evolving offenses that they face each week.

But wasn't the D multiple anyway @Ibeeballin

GT will need more hybrid linebacker/safety types and at least one or 2 more NT's.
 
Ibeeballin

Ibeeballin

Im a 3*
Messages
6,081
ATL1 said:
That would be great moves to make them rushers. Should have been done sooner. Alabama is now multiple, not to compare but most teams have become multiple to put their players in the best position on the field and to also deal with the different and evolving offenses that they face each week.

But wasn't the D multiple anyway @Ibeeballin

GT will need more hybrid linebacker/safety types and at least one or 2 more NT's.
Click to expand...

We were roughly 75% Nickel 20% 4-3, & 5% 3-3-5
 
jchens_GT

jchens_GT

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
573
Location
Georgia
I'm curious if we will see some tweaks in the bowl game. Not enough time to install something completely new, but it will be interesting if we start the transition to multiple looks now.
 
ATL1

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
I assume this would be to maximize talent while not complicating scheme. When the "scheme" became less complex the D played better.
 

Oldgoldandwhite

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,761
Quit missing tackles - check!
Quit being out of position - check!
Rush the passer - check!
Cover the receivers before they get 15 yada downfield - check!
 
GTHomer

GTHomer

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
920
danny daniel said:
most other teams (even the good teams) had the same, or worse, problems with tackling, coverage, and pass rush and we were superior in not making bone headed penalties, displaying poor sportmanship, or looking like we aren't coached in basics. I still think we can play much better with our talent level but I must confess that our D is not as bad as most of us pontificate.
Click to expand...

I wanted to highlight these sentences from danny's post. Many teams DO have some of the same problems and their fans complain also. While they do provide some insight, stats don't tell everything about a team.
 

GTL

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
255
ChasonBaller said:
The question is what took him so long to do this? We have had the athletes this whole time..
Click to expand...

Jmonty71 said:
The answer? Because he isn't smart enough, as a DC, to see it.
Click to expand...

In the real world, the answer is making a major change in scheme during the season is a recipe for disaster. The basic scheme is put in place in the off-season at spring and fall practices, then tweaked during the week while prepping for the next game. Wholesale changes during the season rarely happens.
 

TechPhi97

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
778
Location
Davidson, NC
bke1984 said:
That's fine, but we still need to measure ourselves against the other teams currently playing D1 college football...and if you just look at that, we're not doing so well on the defensive side of the ball. Here are a few issues (https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/stat/):

#49 in opponent points per game
#64 in opponent yards per game
#78 in opponent yards per play
#53 in opponent points per play
#54 in opponent offensive TD per game

I'll admit, these numbers aren't as bad as I thought they'd be, but they're not exactly good either. It doesn't matter if you slice it by play or game, we haven't been that good on defense compared to our peers. I know we're going to give up yards and points the way football is played today...I'd just like to see these numbers in the 30's rather than the 50's - 70's.

Now, the good news is that we played a TON of young guys this year. I think we can get better just by experience alone. If we bump these up into the 30's I think we have a chance to be really good the way our offense can score at times.
Click to expand...

I like to use the FEI measures when we're comparing - our # of possessions is usually much lower than others, so that can skew the numbers. Our defensive FEI rank is 102nd this year; our offense is 20th.
 
Jmonty71

Jmonty71

Banned
Messages
2,156
bke1984 said:
That's fine, but we still need to measure ourselves against the other teams currently playing D1 college football...and if you just look at that, we're not doing so well on the defensive side of the ball. Here are a few issues (https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/stat/):

#49 in opponent points per game
#64 in opponent yards per game
#78 in opponent yards per play
#53 in opponent points per play
#54 in opponent offensive TD per game

I'll admit, these numbers aren't as bad as I thought they'd be, but they're not exactly good either. It doesn't matter if you slice it by play or game, we haven't been that good on defense compared to our peers. I know we're going to give up yards and points the way football is played today...I'd just like to see these numbers in the 30's rather than the 50's - 70's.

Now, the good news is that we played a TON of young guys this year. I think we can get better just by experience alone. If we bump these up into the 30's I think we have a chance to be really good the way our offense can score at times.
Click to expand...
Not listed. 3rd down conversion. YPP. Do you think the offense and them controlling the ball, has to do with a deal of the numbers, above? You cannot cherry pick numbers, dust them off, and say they are so so. The FEI is a really good way to tell how well a team, both offense and defense, played. The O ranked 20, the defense 102. Now those numbers above, don't look so pretty.

I can agree on the youth. However; this is Roof's 4th year, right? When does he stop getting a pass? Year 5, 6, 10, 20??? Just because he graduated from GT, doesn't mean he is the best man for the job. He plays an outdated scheme, which is why we struggle against new style offenses. Pitt, Clemson, UNC all come to mind as teams with new style offenses.
 

jandrews

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
275
Jmonty71 said:
Not listed. 3rd down conversion. YPP. Do you think the offense and them controlling the ball, has to do with a deal of the numbers, above? You cannot cherry pick numbers, dust them off, and say they are so so. The FEI is a really good way to tell how well a team, both offense and defense, played. The O ranked 20, the defense 102. Now those numbers above, don't look so pretty.

I can agree on the youth. However; this is Roof's 4th year, right? When does he stop getting a pass? Year 5, 6, 10, 20??? Just because he graduated from GT, doesn't mean he is the best man for the job. He plays an outdated scheme, which is why we struggle against new style offenses. Pitt, Clemson, UNC all come to mind as teams with new style offenses.
Click to expand...


Out of those three teams. UNC was definitely on the defense. I'd put Clemson on the offense and Pitt was a team lose. Look at how all the other defenses did against those teams. Tough to say a lot of teams don't struggle in the same department.

I'm not saying Roof should get a pass but with the constant turnover of DCs our recruiting has suffered. He finally has been adding much needed depth. I at least saw us rotating defenders in at the DL. I'm years past, our starters got worn out because our second team dropped off tremendously.
 
iceeater1969

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,652
jandrews said:
Out of those three teams. UNC was definitely on the defense. I'd put Clemson on the offense and Pitt was a team lose. Look at how all the other defenses did against those teams. Tough to say a lot of teams don't struggle in the same department.

I'm not saying Roof should get a pass but with the constant turnover of DCs our recruiting has suffered. He finally has been adding much needed depth. I at least saw us rotating defenders in at the DL. I'm years past, our starters got worn out because our second team dropped off tremendously.
Click to expand...
Letting young guys get playing time is a major change that has helped with recruiting (the true freshman Austin twins played in orange bowl so AJ Gray actually sees something to make him believe he will play day one).
I am hoping that recruiting can another leg up with swilling making a real impact (circa #26 mills).

At a certain point if we get enough raw talent surely we can let the dl gap rush much much more often. we can beat good teams without really good defense, but with very good defense we can beat great teams and destroy average teams (and get more playing time for young recruits).
 
Last edited:

jandrews

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
275
iceeater1969 said:
Letting young guys get playing time is a major change that has helped with recruiting (the true freshman Austin twins played in orange bowl so AJ Gray actually sees something to make him believe he will play day one.
I am hoping that recruiting can another leg up with swilling making a real impact (circa #26 mills).
Click to expand...

We aren't a football factory so getting the additional playing time is great for the players development. Also, it keeps the guys fresh and healthy. I can't remember if any of our DL sat our due to injuries this year. We will be young at DT next year but we have much needed depth. Competition between the guys will bring out the best in them.
 
Top