In this thread: I face facts about Ted Roof

[Whiskey_Clear]

Ok, my general point is that people usually learn from their experiences. More so when they don't do well. Roof is a lot older and more experienced than he was a Flukie coach.

So I take how he did in 2003 to 2007 as a concern but not a reason not to have him as head coach given the other aspects of his resume. Plus he's a GT guy through and through. That matters to me more than some others. I know our past HC hires of former coaches have fallen into good (Dodd and Alexander) and not so good.

If I remember correctly the amount of resources given to Duke football pre Cutcliff...made GT look like Bama by comparison.

 

[vamosjackets]

OK. Now I know. Cover 4 is it? Somewhere I heard 4 quarters or something to that effect. So it was Coach Narduzzi's brain child. Cool story but I still hate it.

I really like Cover-4 in spots. It's a very solid run defense, numbers-wise. It sounds like you're dropping 4 deep in the coverage, but the way I learned it from CJT and other coaching clinics back in the early 2000's, it's not how it sounds. It effectively gives you 9 in the box. You've got your front 7. Then whatever is the playside on a run-play, that safety plays the alley while the backside safety remains in coverage (maybe on a particular man, maybe going to the deep middle - like cover 3). Safeties play at about 9 yards deep so they can be there quick in run support. We used this to great effect in the CJT years. Auburn '05 comes to mind. It's got some similar principles to the old Tampa-2.

Here's Narduzzi's version if you REALLLLLY want to know more: http://www.championshipproductions....-with-4-3-Over-Cover-4-Defense_FD-03922A.html

I wish I could find an old coaching clinic book I had that explained the version I used to run. If I had to just pick one defense to stick with ALL the time, that would be it.

Something I'm totally ignorant on though now is the RPO offenses (so common now in NCAA) and the strategies to defending them. That wasn't really a thing back in my day (like 10-15 years ago).

 

[TheTaxJacket]

I'm not a Ted Roof fan. I didn't go to GT so I have no residual good will toward him as a player. I'm not fan of playing it safe on defense, especially when you'll never be able to recruit as well as other programs at GT. I'm not a fan of standard, boring schemes. I'm not a fan of giving cushions. I'm not even a fan of slicked back haircuts.

All that said, Roof has done exactly what we have asked for, at least this season, and he's done it pretty well.

He has fielded a perfectly competent defense that has been good enough to win games all season long. Even some of the games he's lost (UVa/Miami) he's called pretty good games, and the opposition has simply made plays with more talented guys.

GT's defense is absolutely no worse than an above-average defense this year, and were they not CONSTANTLY hamstrung by an abortion of a special teams situation, their numbers would likely look even better.

This is not the defense benefiting from playing few possessions. They are doing well using efficiency stats as well:

As of posting, ESPN's efficiency stats have them as the 25th best defense in teh country (asjusted for SOS)
http://www.espn.com/college-football/statistics/teamratings/_/sort/defEfficiency/tab/efficiency

FEI has them at 33, and that's not including the VT game where they ate up the VT offense, holding them to 2.9 yards per rush, and a QB rating of 34.7.

Now, he's got a bunch of seniors in the secondary, so I don't know if this is sustainable.

That said, it might be. I've said that I don't think Roof can coordinate his way out of a wet paper bag, but he can recruit, and maybe he can recruit his way to a decent defense. It's starting to look like maybe that's the case. Last year he recruited a good looking set of LB's and safeties. This year he's recruited a good looking set of DL. Kerr looks like a keeper.

The point is, if this is the new normal for a Ted Roof defense, it's good enough that we should take it and not look a gift horse in the mouth.

Bump.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Bump.

Glad you bumped this. With all the Duke hysteria it's nice to look back and evaluate the season as a whole.

 

[Longestday]

The question is did Roof improve because of Roof or is it CPJ demanding that Roof change. Roof goes back to what Roof does when CPJ takes his hands off. CPJ underestimated Duke and gave credit for the VT victory and backed off.

The defense improved because of players and CPJ forcing Roof to play more aggressive. When the heat turns on we get Roof style defense... 10 yard CB cushions and 2 X 15 yard deep back-peddling safeties. This felt just like 2016.

Duke scored on every drive but one. CPJ saw it coming and pressed too hard and called a bad second half. He knew he had to score every drive and started gambling on passes. I would of rather CPJ stayed with the run plan and lost fighting on defense versus the passing gamble on every 2nd half offensive drive.

Talent claim goes out the window when facing Duke.

 

[g0lftime]

It appears that Roof doesn't attack the gaps with DL. They go head up and try to get a push. With so much holding allowed now we can't get off blocks. We are a little undersized except with Adams in there. We don't use what should be a quickness advantage with this scheme. We got pinched inside against Dook and they read that the edge was open with the DE pinched. We looked totally unorganised on D against Dook. They imposed their will on us. I am still totally disgusted by what I saw there.

 

[sidewalkGTfan]

I blame @ilovetheoption for the Duke game.

In all seriousness, it's games like this weekend, why I'll never have both feet on the Roof bandwagon. We made a Duke offense that had been STRUGGLING to score points over the previous 6 games, look like the Patriots.

 

[GTJoeBrew]

I blame @ilovetheoption for the Duke game.

In all seriousness, it's games like this weekend, why I'll never have both feet on the Roof bandwagon. We made a Duke offense that had been STRUGGLING to score points over the previous 6 games, look like the Patriots.

Playing past the 1st down marker and hoping they wouldn't throw underneath time and time again was a great plan... I don't understand why the gameplan was so different than the VT game. Seemed to me they ran the same plays...

 

[33jacket]

@vamosjackets roof cover 4 doesnt do what you say. He plays S 12 off and doesnt have the lb with range to cover passing holes.

I agree with u. Its an ok run d and rpo d if u play S 8-9 off and employ the dont go til u know technique. We dont do that in his cover 4 versions.

Its why i liked what he has done this year alot. More dl slanting and stunts and alot more cv 3 and cv 2. Less quarters.

Then came duke. And it was his exact crap we saw the prior 4 years. Go look at the downs. We were in off quarters alot. Cutt is too smart for roof. Showed up again.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

If we hadn't crapped the bed against Tennessee, Miami, and Virginia and had actually won those games, or even 2 of the 3, we would have walked into the Duke game either 8-1 or 7-2. Then, losing while looking like crap against Duke would have been like Clemson losing while looking like crap against Syracuse. Sometimes teams just have a bad game. The problem with our awful game against Duke wasn't that it happened, it was that it happened after a slew of other games we gave away. How do we almost beat Miami, we really shut down Virginia Tech...but then we lose while looking like garbage against Virginia and Duke?

Every year we beat a team or two we shouldn't, but we also lose a game we shouldn't. When we couldn't close out Tennessee or Miami, one reason it hurt so bad is that it felt like those were our games we were supposed to steal...and that our bad losses would still be forthcoming. And here we are.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

The question is did Roof improve because of Roof or is it CPJ demanding that Roof change. Roof goes back to what Roof does when CPJ takes his hands off. CPJ underestimated Duke and gave credit for the VT victory and backed off.

The defense improved because of players and CPJ forcing Roof to play more aggressive. When the heat turns on we get Roof style defense... 10 yard CB cushions and 2 X 15 yard deep back-peddling safeties. This felt just like 2016.

Duke scored on every drive but one. CPJ saw it coming and pressed too hard and called a bad second half. He knew he had to score every drive and started gambling on passes. I would of rather CPJ stayed with the run plan and lost fighting on defense versus the passing gamble on every 2nd half offensive drive.

Talent claim goes out the window when facing Duke.

I watched the condensed game, with an eye for the D schematically, and while I am no expert, it appears that most of our issues were a combination of bad angles and missed tackles. On the first two long runs by the Duke RB in the first half, there was a defender at or near the LoS who plane whiffed on a tackle where contact was made. There were also more of those head scratchers that seem to kill us as of late. We force a fumble on third down before the 1D marker, but Duke recovers beyond the marker for a 1D. Things like that, we just haven't seemed to have those breaks go our way. Now, we can argue all day about whether missed tackles is a function of coaching or not, but I think this game came down to the fact that Dukes offense just whipped us on the LoS, and we weren't able to get enough pressure. Maybe one of our D gurus can explain it better, but it seemed as if they had a counter to everything we threw at them on D. I give a lot of credit to Cutcliffe on this one. He outcoached us, and forced CPJ to get out of his game plan in the 2nd half.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I watched the condensed game, with an eye for the D schematically, and while I am no expert, it appears that most of our issues were a combination of bad angles and missed tackles. On the first two long runs by the Duke RB in the first half, there was a defender at or near the LoS who plane whiffed on a tackle where contact was made. There were also more of those head scratchers that seem to kill us as of late. We force a fumble on third down before the 1D marker, but Duke recovers beyond the marker for a 1D. Things like that, we just haven't seemed to have those breaks go our way. Now, we can argue all day about whether missed tackles is a function of coaching or not, but I think this game came down to the fact that Dukes offense just whipped us on the LoS, and we weren't able to get enough pressure. Maybe one of our D gurus can explain it better, but it seemed as if they had a counter to everything we threw at them on D. I give a lot of credit to Cutcliffe on this one. He outcoached us, and forced CPJ to get out of his game plan in the 2nd half.

Wait a minute, you forgot to bash Roof. It’s all his fault, remember?

 

[stech81]

Wait a minute, you forgot to bash Roof. It’s all his fault, remember?

Wait I thought this week we are blaming the Hill .

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Wait a minute, you forgot to bash Roof. It’s all his fault, remember?

Oh, don't get me wrong, I think Roof was complicit in this loss, and I have probably been one of his staunchest supporters on this board. When you give up yardage in chunks, and let Duke score at will against you, then coaching is involved at some level. Now, I've seen enough progress on the D this year to consider this game a bit of an outlier, but I still feel Roof needs to shoulder some of the blame.

Those missed tackles were awful, though.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

There is no doubt, as the DC, Roof has to shoulder much of the responsibility for the players' errors and mistakes. He is paid well to get them ready, physically and mentally.

I think overall, Roof and the D this year have generally overperformed, but that is just my opinion. I will admit they laid a big fat goose egg on Saturday. No doubt.

 

[MWBATL]

Oh, don't get me wrong, I think Roof was complicit in this loss, and I have probably been one of his staunchest supporters on this board. When you give up yardage in chunks, and let Duke score at will against you, then coaching is involved at some level. Now, I've seen enough progress on the D this year to consider this game a bit of an outlier, but I still feel Roof needs to shoulder some of the blame.

Those missed tackles were awful, though.

I'm sorry....I just don't see how an offense that has averaged 12 points a game and scores 43 against you can be anything but a HUGE indictment of the defensive coaching philosophy.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I'm sorry....I just don't see how an offense that has averaged 12 points a game and scores 43 against you can be anything but a HUGE indictment of the defensive coaching philosophy.

Because last Saturday was 11% of the statistical sample for the year so far on D. By the same token, this same D has held every other team, with the exception of Tennessee, to well below its season average in points scored.

 

[Jmonty71]

I watched the condensed game, with an eye for the D schematically, and while I am no expert, it appears that most of our issues were a combination of bad angles and missed tackles. On the first two long runs by the Duke RB in the first half, there was a defender at or near the LoS who plane whiffed on a tackle where contact was made. There were also more of those head scratchers that seem to kill us as of late. We force a fumble on third down before the 1D marker, but Duke recovers beyond the marker for a 1D. Things like that, we just haven't seemed to have those breaks go our way. Now, we can argue all day about whether missed tackles is a function of coaching or not, but I think this game came down to the fact that Dukes offense just whipped us on the LoS, and we weren't able to get enough pressure. Maybe one of our D gurus can explain it better, but it seemed as if they had a counter to everything we threw at them on D. I give a lot of credit to Cutcliffe on this one. He outcoached us, and forced CPJ to get out of his game plan in the 2nd half.

Here is the issue in a nutshell. Our D does not attack. We sit back, and hope the other team makes a mistake. A lot of those bad angles come from lack of speed and talent. We do not have the speed to run Roof's read and react D. We have to be the hammer and stop being the nail, in my opinion. Cutliffe knows that Roof plays soft and takes advantage of it. Sad part, we have decent players. Roof has them playing so soft, that they look bad on the field, at times.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Here is the issue in a nutshell. Our D does not attack. We sit back, and hope the other team makes a mistake. A lot of those bad angles come from lack of speed and talent. We do not have the speed to run Roof's read and react D. We have to be the hammer and stop being the nail, in my opinion. Cutliffe knows that Roof plays soft and takes advantage of it. Sad part, we have decent players. Roof has them playing so soft, that they look bad on the field, at times.

Two things. Watch the game. We were meeting the runner where we need to in order to get a stop for a minimal gain, but whiffed on the tackles.

Second, talent differential isn't an issue when playing Duke. Bedford said on the radio broadcast that it wasn't scheme, but execution that was killing us. After watching the game, I tend to agree with him.

 

[kg01]

Here is the issue in a nutshell. Our D does not attack. We sit back, and hope the other team makes a mistake. A lot of those bad angles come from lack of speed and talent. We do not have the speed to run Roof's read and react D. We have to be the hammer and stop being the nail, in my opinion. Cutliffe knows that Roof plays soft and takes advantage of it. Sad part, we have decent players. Roof has them playing so soft, that they look bad on the field, at times.

We're taking guys who lack top-end speed (I love our guys but let's be honest here) and asking them to go from standing still to intercepting guys who're running full stride. That's a recipe for constantly defeated angles.

Of course we're poor tacklers. Look what they're being asked to do!

And don't get me started on the 15yd cushions on 3rd and 3. Don't get me started, Jmonty! It's too early for that shiz!