Frame By Frame Defense

Discussion in 'Georgia Tech Football' started by Longestday, Aug 15, 2013.

  1. Longestday

    Longestday Helluva Engineer Featured Member

    I went over the scrimmage frame by frame looking at our one defense.

    For time sake I am going to use numbers over names.

    45, 96, and 99 did a great job. In fact they did just as good as any defense opposing our offense in comparing frame by frame of the 2012 season opposing defenses. 91 did the best by far on second team and should get play time in 2013. They had lots of penetration, speed getting to the QB, quickness in getting to the tackle. 45 made some tackles by chasing down from behind. 45 even ran around DBs to get to the tackle (bad for our DB). 96 has some speed as well and made some chasing tackles. 99 did great on the line and at times getting to the QB, but did not have the same hustle as 96 beyond these two aspects.

    32 and 40 did the best work. In general, I would not say the LB performed to the same level as our opponents against our offense. The LB were getting blocked a lot by our OL as they were pretty close to the LOS which makes them easy prey. When I think of good LB play against us I think of FSU and USC and their speed in finding and getting to the ball. They did get better in the second half.

    CB had decent coverage and the offense still made receptions. That is good for our offense. The WR did get a step on them for long passes at times. The press coverage allowed for some surprise CB blitz. I did not notice any exceptional plays from this group. Passes were either caught/dropped by the WR, or miss thrown by the QB, but not broken up by the CB.

    The safeties did not bring the wood like I have seen from opposing Ds. 6 did a good job of wrapping up. 4 shied away from tackles and at times tried to "cut block" versus wrap up. I can recall some serious blows being delivered by USC on our BB in the counter option BB trap.

    I am no defensive minded person and I have no experience coaching football. I do have eyes and an opinion though. I know I know nothing now because I think our DL is the strongest part of the D.
    pinglett and gtg609q like this.
  2. ATL1

    ATL1 Helluva Engineer

    gtg609q likes this.
  3. IronJacket7

    IronJacket7 Helluva Engineer

    I remember seeing another player quoted as saying Golden #4 was not a lay the wood type of Safety. I trust our coaches. But I have always wondered with the talent Golden possesses with the ball in his hands if he wouldn't be better suited for A-Back or WR...
  4. GTrob21

    GTrob21 Helluva Engineer

    Well that does encourage me about our DL... a little bit
  5. Pj4prez01

    Pj4prez01 Ramblin' Wreck

    Nowadays they aren't allowed to tackle people anyways.
  6. AE 87

    AE 87 Helluva Engineer

    Thanks OP. From the Process preview video, iiuc, our D was primarily playing from our base set with both 4-3 and 3-4 looks. They did not really scheme to stop our offense as much as practice our base-set assignments. I expect that's why we didn't have our linebackers and dbs flying to make the stops like the D you mentioned.

Share This Page