ESPN likes Georgia Tech???

[UgaBlows]

Whats weird is that last season it seems like our team played the worst against option and read option teams and played pretty decent against pro style teams

 

[B Lifsey]

Whats weird is that last season it seems like our team played the worst against option and read option teams and played pretty decent against pro style teams

Guess our O wasn't very good and D didn't gain much from practicing against them

I think the bigger question is do any real recruits and their HS coaches fall for this type of drivel? Or, is it just good off season forum content for fans? I'd would hope recruits and coaches understand how college practices operate, especially those from teams large enough to use similar "scout team" concepts.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

As I mention, we can debate if it hampers the d or not. I will say this...and you draw any conclusions you want from it, but Roof specifically told paul he wants to go up against more traditional O sets more in spring for his D to learn; and had that added into his coaching agreement upon hire (not in the contract but just as an agreement).

90% of the reps are vs our O plays and option. Does it hamper our D? I have no clue. At one point I believed it did actually. Especially in teams that run alot of FB sets and TE sets. Then I started thinking, alot of teams we play with read option spread option plays like clemson....our D is actually ok repping our O to defend these since its very similar in run fits.

Personally, in my experience alot of tendencies, and habits are created in spring and fall camp and the offseason. If those are created vs our unique O it may not be good. At the same point, any DL will tell you its easier playing up than dodging a cut or scoop....and backend responsibility is really similar. LB's....thats a bit different...but I know people have opinions that think it does hurt us and others think it doesn't matter.

I have gone back and forth between the two. If I was a LB, and ran vs the option play after play, where I am either avoiding a cutting AB, or smashing the A gaps...after a while it would get old, and to me it seems you would lose sharpness on hitting the flats in cover 2 or reading a FB or TE....but maybe not. @Ibeeballin doesnt' think it would affect him...so I have to trust that...but I have heard DC's from teams in the past saying it doesn't help their D.

so who knows if arbuckle is right or not. What I do know, is we never have really had a good D under paul to the likes we saw under Gailey. Call it coaching. Talent or whatever, but its just fact....3 DC later...so, is there something to this???? Maybe...or maybe not

I think this year will say a bunch...we seem to have experience, good above avg talent and decent line depth....If we are blowing assignments like we did under Groh and Roofs first 1.5 years...then I am worried for sure.

And I wonder if there is really any objective way to test this? I have not seen any.
Two years ago the defense spent a lot of time practicing against the shotgun formation and the diamond formation, much more so than against the Flex Bone. Did it make them better against "conventional" offenses that year? Who knows. We had different personnel and our defensive line was not as thin as it was last year. Or you could compare CPJ's first year at Tech to later years. That first year he supposedly still had a Gailey era defense. The problem there is that the offense that first year tended to put the ball on the ground a lot, if I remember correctly, putting the defense in some tough positions. Of course that would have been better by bowl season but it did not help the defense much.

My issue with this argument is that there are other teams that run unique offenses and no one says those hurt those defenses. Likewise there are teams that run very conventional offenses which have lousy defenses. It always feels like pundits are cherry picking the data to reinforce a bias against CPJ's offense.

 

[gtg936g]

I agree with @33jacket, this year will show us a lot in terms of defensive performance. We should have the players and the depth. We will see if we can add scheme to the equation to get the results we hope for. Folks say we were not very good against the run and the pass last year. That is true to an extent. If you use a nickel base, and do not have some studs on the DL, you are probably not going to be good against the run. I would say we played to the strengths we had last year. We brought numbers to stop the run and get after the QB. We used our key play makers to get turnovers. That was the best we could hope for, and we maximized those turnovers. Our front 4 this year should be much more of a force, and we should be able to get after the QB with 4 or 5 this year.

 

[tech_wreck47]

God to know. Thanks.

Yes, GOD is all knowing.

 

[danny daniel]

Maybe the answer is more like this:
Offense - Above average 3 star talent + great coaching + unique scheme well suited to the talent = top tier offense
Defense - Above average to average 3 star talent + solid coaching with no unique scheme advantage matched to the talent = average defense at best
Other issues are just so much noise

 

[tech_wreck47]

Bite your tongue - The U-seless was never "great" they cheated the whole time. That's like saying SMU was great.

Yes they did cheat but those teams were still great. If I were playing for a championship game and lost, but later my team received the victory because the other team had an ineligible player I would not say we won, because we really lost when it mattered. So although they cheated when this white were on the feild they were great.

 

[33jacket]

And I wonder if there is really any objective way to test this? I have not seen any.
Two years ago the defense spent a lot of time practicing against the shotgun formation and the diamond formation, much more so than against the Flex Bone. Did it make them better against "conventional" offenses that year? Who knows. We had different personnel and our defensive line was not as thin as it was last year. Or you could compare CPJ's first year at Tech to later years. That first year he supposedly still had a Gailey era defense. The problem there is that the offense that first year tended to put the ball on the ground a lot, if I remember correctly, putting the defense in some tough positions. Of course that would have been better by bowl season but it did not help the defense much.

My issue with this argument is that there are other teams that run unique offenses and no one says those hurt those defenses. Likewise there are teams that run very conventional offenses which have lousy defenses. It always feels like pundits are cherry picking the data to reinforce a bias against CPJ's offense.

Cpj first year was not gailey era D. There was no tenuta. We had a ton of talent wasted by wommacks scheme. But....since u did bring it up....i think that 2008 d was pauls best since he has been here. If its not its top 2 even with crap scheme.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

And I wonder if there is really any objective way to test this? I have not seen any.
Two years ago the defense spent a lot of time practicing against the shotgun formation and the diamond formation, much more so than against the Flex Bone. Did it make them better against "conventional" offenses that year? Who knows. We had different personnel and our defensive line was not as thin as it was last year. Or you could compare CPJ's first year at Tech to later years. That first year he supposedly still had a Gailey era defense. The problem there is that the offense that first year tended to put the ball on the ground a lot, if I remember correctly, putting the defense in some tough positions. Of course that would have been better by bowl season but it did not help the defense much.

My issue with this argument is that there are other teams that run unique offenses and no one says those hurt those defenses. Likewise there are teams that run very conventional offenses which have lousy defenses. It always feels like pundits are cherry picking the data to reinforce a bias against CPJ's offense.

You never hear the pundits say UNC's putrid defense is hurt by practicing against their O. Why not?

 

[ATL1]

The only way to end that perception is to:
a. Keep winning
b. Have a good/solid defense of better

Hell Im waiting on that as well. Proof is settled on the field.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Cpj first year was not gailey era D. There was no tenuta. We had a ton of talent wasted by wommacks scheme. But....since u did bring it up....i think that 2008 d was pauls best since he has been here. If its not its top 2 even with crap scheme.

Sure. But all I was talking about was defensive personnel being familiar with a conventional offense. CPJ's first 2 years he had players who should have been well seasoned in seeing conventional offenses at the college level.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

If putting a good D together was easy everyone would have one. I think we have the ingredients for a good one this year. Sure hope it plays out that way.