First game participation report

The Doddfather

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
482
Nate Woody would’ve been a good one, I really liked him as well. That being said, I thought Thacker did a great job, especially given the situations our d was put in a couple times inside the 15. Again, I don’t think we should jump to conclusions on whether we can get to the qb based on this game (given the matchups and the opponent). Agreed that our secondary played great, but they were never going to score 100 on us. If anything, that game could’ve been closer to 21 if we don’t muff/(get interfered with) a punt and miss a golden opportunity from 1st and goal from the 4. Picking knits I know. Onto USF.
 

MidtownJacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
4,809
That was my interpretation of the most plausible explanation of that play. I could be wrong. It could be that Henderson was coached (or thought the call was) to to try to shoot inside and then he got washed down by the OT, in which case Curry should've flowed outside to clean up the RB spilling it out. The point is, it seems like it would be impossible to know who isn't doing their job if you don't know the call.

I cut out this part of your post because I would like to learn more about our defense to be able to understand these type of decision trees. Knowing which way we see coached to better understand what we are trying to do. It certainly helps me enjoy watching the game more as you can see guys progress in the scheme and their development.

Looking forward to some of the breakdown videos various posters here make to start that education for me in earnest!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,636
Location
Georgia
That's not what I saw. Now, I have not done a play by play breakdown and watched players individually to grade them, so I admit to the possibility of being wrong. I did watch the game twice. I did not see Curry as a/the weakspot. DL seemed like the glaring weakspot, which can make very good LB group look bad (and a very good DL can make a mediocre LB group look good). It's the same thing we had going on in '99. We had pretty good LB's in 99 with a young Wimbush leading the way, but the DL was weak at the point. When I paid attention (which was on replays of Clemson's biggest gash running plays), it looked like our DL was at best not penetrating or even fitting in their gaps and at worst getting pushed back into the LB level. A perfect example is on one of Etienne's early scores (maybe a 15'ish yard TD run, untouched). Curry fit in the B-gap, which is where an ILB should fit, and J.Henderson, playing DE should have had the C-gap (or been the force/leverage guy setting the edge), but Henderson got totally handled, like really badly handled and pushed back to the LB level creating a huge gap for the RB to go through untouched. And, so the LB looks bad because it looks like he should have flowed to the outside to make the tackle, but in reality, he's fitting where he's supposed to fit, and if everybody is just doing a decent (not great) job, then he's able to make the play. Instead, it's a gash for 6-pts, and the LB is shaking his head, and the DE is clapping his hands in disgust at himself.

That was my interpretation of the most plausible explanation of that play. I could be wrong. It could be that Henderson was coached (or thought the call was) to to try to shoot inside and then he got washed down by the OT, in which case Curry should've flowed outside to clean up the RB spilling it out. The point is, it seems like it would be impossible to know who isn't doing their job if you don't know the call.

Overall, I liked the look and feel of our defense and have a good feeling about its POTENTIAL to be better than we've had with the last three schemes (though I still don't think our last DC was given a chance and should not be judged on his one year, I truly though his scheme had potential as well). One thing I was most disappointed in was our inability to get to the QB, especially when sending a lot of people, but not being able to win any one-on-ones in pass rush. To be great, that HAS to change. Our secondary and nicely designed coverages kept them from scoring 100.

Truthfully. I have broken tape down yet. I posted that based on in game impressions and I could be really wrong.
 

vamosjackets

GT Athlete
Featured Member
Messages
2,147
Not to be snarky but only a few times in the last 4 decades have we ever had the ability to sack or even pressure any QB with any kind of regularity.
Throughout Tenuta's tenure, we were consistently able to pressure the QB as well as play well against the run ... We were almost always in the top 15 or 25 in total defense and TFL's. We had a few very good players during those years, but that did not seem to be the reason for our success in those categories. We had very good players like Smith and Fox, Eric Henderson, Gerris Wilkerson, and Phillip Wheeler - all guys who made an impact at the next level. but we made our living on role players like Adamm Oliver, Darrel Roberson, Chris Reis, KaMichael Hall, Gary Guyton, Joe Anoai, Mansfield Wrotto. Our success was not dependent on superior talent. Since that time, we've ONLY had success (and much less of it) dependent on superior talent. We could only pressure the QB when we had a big NFL-impact type of guy - like a Derrick Morgan/Michael Johnson/Vance Walker (and even then, we were pretty bad!) or a Jerry Attaochu. The difference in success has been remarkable. Perhaps CJT's zone-dog based scheme (send 5, but could be any 5, often dropping DE into coverage, playing zone behind it) would not be as successful today, maybe offenses have changed with the advent of the RPO stuff to negate that scheme. I don't know about that. But, it remains remarkable that we had a top 25 defense for 6 years and then didn't have a top 50 defense after that (and also didn't have a top 50 defense the majority of the time before that either).

I do believe this: if we're going to be a great program, we're going to have to do it with schemes that do not depend on superior talent ... on offense AND defense.
 

FlatsLander

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
839
I don't think Jamious is gonna redshirt. Dont think you would burn one of his 4 games here if he was.
CGC said in a press conference that they're not really focused on the 4 games for true freshmen. They're going to make the ATL chart based on practice and game performance, and play whoever is ATL. He did say that if we get later in the year and have some true freshmen that have 3-4 games, then they'll try and keep the redshirt if possible. They are just trying to win games at this point.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,054
Throughout Tenuta's tenure, we were consistently able to pressure the QB as well as play well against the run ... We were almost always in the top 15 or 25 in total defense and TFL's. We had a few very good players during those years, but that did not seem to be the reason for our success in those categories. We had very good players like Smith and Fox, Eric Henderson, Gerris Wilkerson, and Phillip Wheeler - all guys who made an impact at the next level. but we made our living on role players like Adamm Oliver, Darrel Roberson, Chris Reis, KaMichael Hall, Gary Guyton, Joe Anoai, Mansfield Wrotto. Our success was not dependent on superior talent. Since that time, we've ONLY had success (and much less of it) dependent on superior talent. We could only pressure the QB when we had a big NFL-impact type of guy - like a Derrick Morgan/Michael Johnson/Vance Walker (and even then, we were pretty bad!) or a Jerry Attaochu. The difference in success has been remarkable. Perhaps CJT's zone-dog based scheme (send 5, but could be any 5, often dropping DE into coverage, playing zone behind it) would not be as successful today, maybe offenses have changed with the advent of the RPO stuff to negate that scheme. I don't know about that. But, it remains remarkable that we had a top 25 defense for 6 years and then didn't have a top 50 defense after that (and also didn't have a top 50 defense the majority of the time before that either).

I do believe this: if we're going to be a great program, we're going to have to do it with schemes that do not depend on superior talent ... on offense AND defense.
When CPJ was hired, Tenuta had applied for the HC job. If I recall correctly, CPJ offered Tenuta the DC job but he turned it down. He was never hired as a head coach anywhere, I wonder if he regrets not staying at GT?
 

LibertyTurns

Banned
Messages
6,216
@vamosjackets I spent a lot of time out of country during the Chan years but I do remember the days of Morgan/ Johnson/ Walker under Tenuta and we blitzed a lot. The defenses were good as you said and you jogged my memory. I guess I do remember them getting the pressure pretty frequently. I don’t remember them getting a ton of sacks though. Is that just more bad memory on my part? Seems like an eternity ago but people would send me videotapes of the games and I’d watch them 4-6 weeks later. The good old days.
 

Vespid

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
295
When CPJ was hired, Tenuta had applied for the HC job. If I recall correctly, CPJ offered Tenuta the DC job but he turned it down. He was never hired as a head coach anywhere, I wonder if he regrets not staying at GT?

Don't have any insider knowledge if that occurred or not. But knowing those two guys personalities, I'm fairly confident that would have been a short lived marriage.
 

LibertyTurns

Banned
Messages
6,216
In 07 we were second in the nation in sacks per game.
In 06 we were 19th
In 05 we were 22nd
in 04 we were 18th
In 03 we were 25th.
I’m amazed. There was the Black Watch defense, but had no idea Tenuta’s D’s racked up that resume.

@vamosjackets Absolutely amazing our D literally fell off the cliff & an inept offense suddenly came to life. Imagine if we had been able to keep the D and have the offense we had. I would have been a run for the record books.
 

pbrown520

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
586
Loved our defensive identity under Tenuta. Only good thing about the CGC years (well Calvin and choice too) - I clearly remember the zone blitz eating QBs alive. People tend to only remember those games where Tenuta got lit up, but those were few and far between.
 

vamosjackets

GT Athlete
Featured Member
Messages
2,147
I’m amazed. There was the Black Watch defense, but had no idea Tenuta’s D’s racked up that resume.

@vamosjackets Absolutely amazing our D literally fell off the cliff & an inept offense suddenly came to life. Imagine if we had been able to keep the D and have the offense we had. I would have been a run for the record books.
One of the great "What if's/If only's" of my GT fandom for sure!
 
Top