GT Defense

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,120
And we lost Meiguez. Collins is getting us some very good defenders. I think starting next year our defense will be very reliable week to week which we haven’t seen in a looooong time. I’m honestly still stunned at the number of stops and stuffs we had last week. It was weird to see. Other than the long completion late our defense was just unbelievable.
 

goldfella

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
68
And we lost Meiguez. Collins is getting us some very good defenders. I think starting next year our defense will be very reliable week to week which we haven’t seen in a looooong time. I’m honestly still stunned at the number of stops and stuffs we had last week. It was weird to see. Other than the long completion late our defense was just unbelievable.
That's just for the season, right? I'm definitely down for a return to Black Watch-level defense.

And agreed! I haven't had this much fun watching a GT defense... well... ever...
 

wesgt123

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,833
That's fair, but I assume we have a big boi/where's the beef package we can put in for those situations either in our base 4-2-5 or a more traditional 3-4 look with Biggers at NT and a couple of our other DTs or big base Ends/SDEs on the line.

We do also have the advantage of having some abnormally large safeties, so I'm not overly concerned.
To me, that’s where we can really play into what the coaches speak about in the defenses “multiplicity” and see if they can get creative. Bring pressure from our DBs and let our lighter edge rushers drop back into coverage.

Idk if that’ll work. This is my NCAA video game logic coming into play here lol I could be wrong
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,727
To me, that’s where we can really play into what the coaches speak about in the defenses “multiplicity” and see if they can get creative. Bring pressure from our DBs and let our lighter edge rushers drop back into coverage.

Idk if that’ll work. This is my NCAA video game logic coming into play here lol I could be wrong
We haven’t had much, if any, pressure from our DBs. We’ve tried secondary blitzes, but so far it’s just our front six getting sacks
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,125
Location
Augusta, Georgia
We haven’t had much, if any, pressure from our DBs. We’ve tried secondary blitzes, but so far it’s just our front six getting sacks

We've had 3 of our DBs register TFLs, just not sacks. I think this generally goes to the scheme we are utilizing though. We are blitzing LBs to aid the 3 DL and relying on the DBs to mainly cover their assignments. It's working because a lot of our sacks against UNC were coverage sacks.
 

goldfella

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
68
To me, that’s where we can really play into what the coaches speak about in the defenses “multiplicity” and see if they can get creative. Bring pressure from our DBs and let our lighter edge rushers drop back into coverage.

Idk if that’ll work. This is my NCAA video game logic coming into play here lol I could be wrong
Even with a WDE/EDGE who isn't 265-300+ pounds, I get nervous about those types of players being in a position where they theoretically might be forced to cover a slot receiver or running back coming out of the backfield in the open field. As an OC I'd try to get that matchup as frequently as possible.

The multiplicity you mentioned is one of the main reasons why I prefer the 3-4 or 3-3-5 over the 4-2-5. You can have your linebackers, who will typically be substantially better in coverage than your lightest/most athletic linemen, all drop into coverage and pick any of your DBs as the fourth rusher.

If you want to get really weird, check out simulated pressures (look at Dean Pees- there's a great example of a simulated pressure against the Browns a couple of years ago that caused a forced fumble) and creepers, which can do a great job of messing with the OL and QB, especially when used creatively with exotic blitz packages.

In the example I mentioned previously, Pees used a 2-4-5 simulated pressure package where he had something like 2 linemen, 3 linebackers, and a safety all lined up at the line of scrimmage, and at the snap, 2 LBs and the safety sprinted back into zone coverage, while the 2 DL and a linebacker rushed. This also disguised the nickel corner blitz, which went almost untouched through the OLine (and I believe might've forced the fumble).

I'll have to see if I can find the video and post it.
 

goldfella

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
68
We've had 3 of our DBs register TFLs, just not sacks. I think this generally goes to the scheme we are utilizing though. We are blitzing LBs to aid the 3 DL and relying on the DBs to mainly cover their assignments. It's working because a lot of our sacks against UNC were coverage sacks.
I generally prefer to have it that way as well. Have your best coverage players play in coverage and your D linemen do D-line things
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,012
Even with a WDE/EDGE who isn't 265-300+ pounds, I get nervous about those types of players being in a position where they theoretically might be forced to cover a slot receiver or running back coming out of the backfield in the open field. As an OC I'd try to get that matchup as frequently as possible.

The multiplicity you mentioned is one of the main reasons why I prefer the 3-4 or 3-3-5 over the 4-2-5. You can have your linebackers, who will typically be substantially better in coverage than your lightest/most athletic linemen, all drop into coverage and pick any of your DBs as the fourth rusher.

If you want to get really weird, check out simulated pressures (look at Dean Pees- there's a great example of a simulated pressure against the Browns a couple of years ago that caused a forced fumble) and creepers, which can do a great job of messing with the OL and QB, especially when used creatively with exotic blitz packages.

In the example I mentioned previously, Pees used a 2-4-5 simulated pressure package where he had something like 2 linemen, 3 linebackers, and a safety all lined up at the line of scrimmage, and at the snap, 2 LBs and the safety sprinted back into zone coverage, while the 2 DL and a linebacker rushed. This also disguised the nickel corner blitz, which went almost untouched through the OLine (and I believe might've forced the fumble).

I'll have to see if I can find the video and post it.
Our starting safeties are LB size with speed so that really gives Thack some flexibility on who to drop and who to blitz, also nice that Charlie Thomas played safety last year, surely that improved his coverage skills
 

FlatsLander

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
926
Just watch a defensive highlight reel from the last game that popped up on youtube. One small thing that stood out to me was the sack where Griffin and Ivey got to Howell. Ivey beat the OL from the snap and had plenty of space to run to the backfield, but he chose to hold his spot for a beat and watch out for Howell getting around him. Griffin blew past his guy and they teamed up to get Howell. In the past, I've see DEs in Ivey's position rush upfield and overrun the QB, maybe getting a couple fingers on him. What Ivey did seems to show they've been taught to prioritize contain and positioning before rushing upfield, which is a very good thing.
 

alagold

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,801
Location
Huntsville,Al
Our starting safeties are LB size with speed so that really gives Thack some flexibility on who to drop and who to blitz, also nice that Charlie Thomas played safety last year, surely that improved his coverage skills
Not to be negative, but Carp and JT are both performance rated to date this season in bottom half of 440 safeties in US by a rating service . for ex-JThomas missed the sure tackle on Howell on the 1st TD.They are better than last yr but still average at this point.
 

684Bee

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,661
Not to be negative, but Carp and JT are both performance rated to date this season in bottom half of 440 safeties in US by a rating service . for ex-JThomas missed the sure tackle on Howell on the 1st TD.They are better than last yr but still average at this point.
They’ve both been underwhelming.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,012
Not to be negative, but Carp and JT are both performance rated to date this season in bottom half of 440 safeties in US by a rating service . for ex-JThomas missed the sure tackle on Howell on the 1st TD.They are better than last yr but still average at this point.
I agree, I never said they are great safeties, i think they are both more interested in trying to put a big hit on ballcarriers than making solid tackles
 

goldfella

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
68
I agree, I never said they are great safeties, i think they are both more interested in trying to put a big hit on ballcarriers than making solid tackles
Juanyeh was great 2 years ago. I'm just hoping he returns to form as the season progresses. Tariq is solid and I think he has a lot of potential, specifically the physical tools, he just needs to put it all together.
 

RamblinCharger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,541
Location
Alabama
I’m usually optimistic about GT football, but I need to see it against Pitt as well for me to believe. Hold them to 24 or less and I’m a believer in the D this year. I know UNC scored a bunch on Virginia, but UNC isn’t very good this year. If we can hold up Pitt then I’m all in.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,727
I’m usually optimistic about GT football, but I need to see it against Pitt as well for me to believe. Hold them to 24 or less and I’m a believer in the D this year. I know UNC scored a bunch on Virginia, but UNC isn’t very good this year. If we can hold up Pitt then I’m all in.
Since their lowest scoring game this year was 41 points (Tennessee, WMich), holding them to 24 would be impressive.
In their only loss, they gave up 44. So far, the formula is “put up lots of points”
 

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,120
I’m usually optimistic about GT football, but I need to see it against Pitt as well for me to believe. Hold them to 24 or less and I’m a believer in the D this year. I know UNC scored a bunch on Virginia, but UNC isn’t very good this year. If we can hold up Pitt then I’m all in.
Yeah, the next step for Collins and the program is to gain consistency. Whether we win or lose against Pitt I just want to see consistency from Clemson to UNC to Pitt. I understand we will lose games but it’s how we lose. NIU was an unacceptable performance. Playing a good consistent game against Pitt, even if we lose, would be a good sign. Letting Pickett pick us apart like last year while our offense sputters would be a major step backwards.
 
Top