Interesting game of the past - 2004 UConn

[vamosjackets]

You know how youtube sucks all of the minutes of your life away sometimes. It lures you in when somehow it recommends exactly what will make you click and stay on that site for hours ... Yeah, it happened to me today. So, I started watching this 2004 UConn game, and found a few interesting tidbits.
One, it had 2 of the best catches you'll ever see. Here's one by Nate Curry that I've never even seen before. How did I miss this? I think it's in the conversation for best catch in GT history along with Calvin's reach behind spiderman catch vs NC St:

And then here's one by Megatron himself on the first play of the game that would probably also be in that same conversation.:


The starting duo of Calvin and Curry should definitely be in the conversation of GT's all time best starting duo of WR's. (I can guess what many will be thinking on a very related note to this. You don't have to say it.)

Another thing I enjoyed was just seeing how effective we were on defense back then. One of the things we were awesome at was disguising our intentions. We have LB's and DB's both moving up into blitz positions and backing off, one guy will come up on one side and then back off at the last second and the guy's coming from the other side. Safeties will buzz up as if they're in run support and then back off or vice versa. OL's and QB's are having to spend a lot of mental capital on trying to recognize what defense they're actually going to be going against when the ball's snapped. And then when it is snapped they don't know where people are coming from they just know it's going to be a lot coming on one side and they're going to have to all shift the protection, and the QB knows he's going to have to adjust his drop, and try to see where they're coming from so that he's not stepping into the blitz and find a throwing lane. At the same time, he's trying to recognize the coverage which has also been disguised well so as not to be diagnosed pre-snap. All of this obviously affects his performance on actually throwing the ball on time and accurately. That was one of Tenuta's preaching points - We're going to affect the QB. Affect the guy delivering the ball, and you've got a great chance to be a successful defense more often than not. Add on to that the our blitzes were always designed to also be sound against the run and take away their favorite running plays, and there's another ingredient to defensive success. Disguise, affect QB, stop run === sin quo non for good defense at GT. There are different ways you can do this, but Tenuta defintely had a way.
Watch the defense, and especially keep an eye on the back 7 and see if you can guess at the snap who's going to be coming, and from where, and what coverage they're going to be in. And, keep in mind, you're looking at it from a bird's-eye-view not as a QB or OL.:



And, finally, ... gosh we were bad on special teams.

 

[RyanS12]

I thought this was in the wrong forum until I looked. Was thinking of the national championship game. lol. Forgot about this.

 

[RyanS12]

Also, these need to be our uniforms! Period.

 

[vamosjackets]

Also, on defense, it isn't just about who or how many you bring from the back 7, it's also about how you match that with what the DL does. Look back and see if you can guess how the DL is going to attack - they're running "games" with the OL that match the blitz from the back. For instance, we'll bring 2 guys from the outside while "big sticking" the DE from that side (that means his aiming point is the facemask of the guard - so going hard inside at the snap) - this is why you also saw our DE's with so many sacks and TFL's during that era.

Contrast that with this example of our defense from last year's Pitt game. See if you can guess who's coming, what the DL are going to do, and what coverage we're going to be playing in the back:

 

[vamosjackets]

I thought this was in the wrong forum until I looked. Was thinking of the national championship game. lol. Forgot about this.

Are you one of the announcers in the broadcast of the game in my post?

 

[RyanS12]

Are you one of the announcers in the broadcast of the game in my post?

No. I have a face for radio. Lol.

 

[AE 87]

@vamosjackets nice thread.

I think the "disguise" aspect is big. However, it has seemed so obvious to me that I couldn't understand why it wasn't addressed. When Kelly was interim, he did more than either DC before and after, it seems to me.

That being said, I'm pretty sure CPJ mentioned it this past Spring, and I don't recall him mentioning it previously.

 

[Techster]

LOL...that looked like a Stanford/'Bama offense. Overloaded OL with a TE, FB, RB and 2 WRs. After 8 seasons of CPJ's offense, always weird to watch old GT film and see us in anything other than the Flexbone formation.

LOVED Tenuta's chaos defense. He gave up some big plays, but he created a lot of big plays behind the LOS as well. Too bad Tenuta couldn't get over not getting the job here when they fired Gailey, because his defense in combination with CPJ's offense would have been an awesome combo. Probably would have won an extra game or 2 every year, and the 2014 season probably would have been a playoff appearance year.

 

[SidewalkJacket]

Can you imagine those O personnel running CPJ's spread? RB at QB, PJ at BB, Rashaun Grant woulda been the perfect AB, maybe Ace as a heavy AB, CJ and Bilbo as massive WRs? Nate Curry obviously fits at WR, but maybe AB, too.

On another note, I am a believer in the high-risk, high-reward Tenuta style D to go with our clock-chewing, efficient O. I think it's a perfect marriage. The pressure the opposing O would be under to possess the ball for a long time and not turn it back over to our O would be enormous, and would play right into an aggressive, blitzing D's hands. Even when they would burn a blitz for a big play (as happened some games under Tenuta), our O would get it right back for maybe 7-8 minutes, and we might end up with one of those crazy, back and forth barn burners that we win like 2009 F$U.

 

[AE 87]

I think (guessing) that opposition offenses are more aggressive against us because our typical strength on O makes them thin they have to score every time.

Perhaps a more aggressive D would make it harder for them to get comfortable.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Tenuta's defenses were always predictable.....I could almost always predict, with 97% efficiency, that we would blitz Now where it was coming from or how many were coming?....never had a clue. But is was damn fun to watch. Those Ds always played with energy and a bit of a nasty streak too.

I always loved Tenuta's D and I have also always thought it would be a great match for our current scheme on O. I think both philosophies would put pressure on the opposing D and O. Several ways to skin a cat however. One could also argue a bend but don't break would be a great compliment to a ball control offense with a high scoring % per drive efficiency.

That said I like Roof today too. He hasn't managed to match Tenuta's success thus far but I think that has more to do with a lack of good depth than anything else. Here is to hoping this year is a break through on D.

 

[33jacket]

Roof's D is a joke when compared to Tenuta here at GT.

JT with this same personnel produces a better D IMO. Top 20 maybe not, but not bottom 1/3 in the NCAA and def top 40 or so; way more consistent. JT knew how to mess with the OL schemes and get a ton of TFL and spill runs outside. What Vamos is talking about big stickin the end to spill the runner is a small way of doing this and he would blitz on the opposite side freeing the playside end or overload the playside. The line slides always were too slow.

I digress. Our schemes are high school simple now. No disguise. No ingenuity. Nothing. Its pedestrian; and worst yet sometimes the backend action doesn't match what he is trying to do up front. Which gets me even more SMDH

anyway, I am rooting to Ted to improve. Really. I am. But I doubt he can...his track record as DC is just not stellar. Just an hoe hum avg NCAA DC. If the D this year is worse than last I think the guy is a goner....especially if we are a 5 win team

 

[Milwaukee]

I was at this game. Oh how I miss having a defense with a pulse.

 

[PBR549]

Roof's D is a joke when compared to Tenuta here at GT.

JT with this same personnel produces a better D IMO. Top 20 maybe not, but not bottom 1/3 in the NCAA and def top 40 or so; way more consistent. JT knew how to mess with the OL schemes and get a ton of TFL and spill runs outside. What Vamos is talking about big stickin the end to spill the runner is a small way of doing this and he would blitz on the opposite side freeing the playside end or overload the playside. The line slides always were too slow.

I digress. Our schemes are high school simple now. No disguise. No ingenuity. Nothing. Its pedestrian; and worst yet sometimes the backend action doesn't match what he is trying to do up front. Which gets me even more SMDH

anyway, I am rooting to Ted to improve. Really. I am. But I doubt he can...his track record as DC is just not stellar. Just an hoe hum avg NCAA DC. If the D this year is worse than last I think the guy is a goner....especially if we are a 5 win team

Roof understands everything Tenuta does. It's not rocket science. Defense is about speed and Jimmys and Joes. You can disguise all you want, you can blitz all you want and you can be on the edge of soundness with as an aggressive scheme all you want but other coaches are not dummies. People play a personnel game. If you have a weak link or links they will find them regardless of scheme. Can Roof be more aggressive? Obviously yes. Will it make us better on defense? Not in Roof's judgement, which I trust, with the personnel he's had the last couple of years but maybe in the future if our personnel gets better. Do fans want more aggressive schemes? Yep always do. " If you listen to the fans you'll soon be sitting with them" according to CPJ.

I love Jon Tenuta' s coaching ability but he's not here. Plus Roof has many advantages that Tenuta' doesn't have.

I love Ted Roof's coaching ability, recruiting, love for Tech, relationship he has with players and HS coaches and the fact he's our defensive coordinator. Ted has that ability to show kids he cares about them as individuals and they respond to that. We get kids we would not have a chance to get if any other coach besides Ted recruited them. He just has that ability and genuineness.

I feel like you have a personal grudge against Roof which is okay if you do. We all want to win football games but getting rid of Roof is not in our best interest in my opinion which I believe is a uniquely informed one.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

It ain't a personal grudge. (I don't think) Just a fan that thinks he knows more about personnel and schemes than current coaches.

 

[AE 87]

Roof understands everything Tenuta does. It's not rocket science. Defense is about speed and Jimmys and Joes. You can disguise all you want, you can blitz all you want and you can be on the edge of soundness with as an aggressive scheme all you want but other coaches are not dummies. People play a personnel game. If you have a weak link or links they will find them regardless of scheme. Can Roof be more aggressive? Obviously yes. Will it make us better on defense? Not in Roof's judgement, which I trust, with the personnel he's had the last couple of years but maybe in the future if our personnel gets better. Do fans want more aggressive schemes? Yep always do. " If you listen to the fans you'll soon be sitting with them" according to CPJ.

I love Jon Tenuta' s coaching ability but he's not here. Plus Roof has many advantages that Tenuta' doesn't have.

I love Ted Roof's coaching ability, recruiting, love for Tech, relationship he has with players and HS coaches and the fact he's our defensive coordinator. Ted has that ability to show kids he cares about them as individuals and they respond to that. We get kids we would not have a chance to get if any other coach besides Ted recruited them. He just has that ability and genuineness.

I feel like you have a personal grudge against Roof which is okay if you do. We all want to win football games but getting rid of Roof is not in our best interest in my opinion which I believe is a uniquely informed one.

I appreciate your defense of Ted.

However, I'm not sure it's fair to impugn 33's motives as arising from a personal grudge. The results have not been there on the field.

While I am not convinced that talent/injuries are sufficient to explain how bad we have been on D every year, I'll accept it as a possibility.

Let me ask you whether anything will convince you to change your opinion about Ted as a coach, not as a man.

For example, I will be inclined to chalk up past problems to talent/ depth if we are in the top 40 in my ppdD stat, or in Def FEI. Given Ted's influence on recruiting--almost all our D are Ted guys now, will you concede that there might be a problem with D scheme if D does not improve much this year?

 

[redmule]

One tidbit from that game. I took a younger friend with me and his date that had graduated from UConn. She was not that much of a football fan, but was a tremendous Boston Red Sox fan. At half time, they honored the 1994 baseball team that made the CWS championship game. Varitek and Garciaparra were on the field, both of whom had played for Boston. She almost had an orgasm and became a Tech fan when she found out they had both played for us.

 

[redmule]

I appreciate your defense of Ted.

However, I'm not sure it's fair to impugn 33's motives as arising from a personal grudge. The results have not been there on the field.

While I am not convinced that talent/injuries are sufficient to explain how bad we have been on D every year, I'll accept it as a possibility.

Let me ask you whether anything will convince you to change your opinion about Ted as a coach, not as a man.

For example, I will be inclined to chalk up past problems to talent/ depth if we are in the top 40 in my ppdD stat, or in Def FEI. Given Ted's influence on recruiting--almost all our D are Ted guys now, will you concede that there might be a problem with D scheme if D does not improve much this year?

I have to say that our history has been that we either have a good offense or a good defense, but very, very seldom do we have both. 1990 being about the only exception that comes to mind.

 

[PBR549]

I appreciate your defense of Ted.

However, I'm not sure it's fair to impugn 33's motives as arising from a personal grudge. The results have not been there on the field.

While I am not convinced that talent/injuries are sufficient to explain how bad we have been on D every year, I'll accept it as a possibility.

Let me ask you whether anything will convince you to change your opinion about Ted as a coach, not as a man.

For example, I will be inclined to chalk up past problems to talent/ depth if we are in the top 40 in my ppdD stat, or in Def FEI. Given Ted's influence on recruiting--almost all our D are Ted guys now, will you concede that there might be a problem with D scheme if D does not improve much this year?

I believe we have a sound scheme. Will we have enough personnel to be good at it? That remains to be seen but it's the same with any scheme. When you're consistently trying to out scheme someone with inferior personnel you'll never be consistent. I'll use our offense last year as an example.
We have a unique set of circumstances at Tech. We don't get the kids that Georgia, Clemson, Miami and Florida State etc. get. That's been well documented but we've been pretty consistent with our offensive scheme. The defensive coordinators here during the Johnson era have been a crapshoot. We have Roof now who brings the kind of advantages to our team that I listed above. I think fans are often misguided when trying to understand what a coach and teams problem's are. Go back and look at coaches who have been here and for the most part even the successful ones have been inconsistent.

The most important factors in being as successful as we can be in my opinion is recruiting the best players we can considering our circumstances and consistency of coaching staff.

Firing coaches, changing schemes etc. only makes us more inconsistent.

Hey, I'm a Tech fan and also have a unique perspective of having a professional relationship with not only Roof but many other coaches. I don't love all of them for sure. I want to win period and Ted is a top notch football coach who is a better recruiter than anyone I've seen recruit in over 30 years. When someone attacks Roof's scheme I feel like they are misinformed. He can scheme with anyone.

Fans and coaches themselves put too much stock in this coach is better than that coach. For the most part the good coaches know what every other coach knows. The coaches who are hired in areas of responsibilities like coordinators in college programs and even big high school programs head coaches and coordinators understand schemes and work tirelessly on how to attack them and how to adjust them. Nobody is surprised anymore. It's all been done.

 

[AE 87]

I believe we have a sound scheme. Will we have enough personnel to be good at it? That remains to be seen but it's the same with any scheme. When you're consistently trying to out scheme someone with inferior personnel you'll never be consistent. I'll use our offense last year as an example.
We have a unique set of circumstances at Tech. We don't get the kids that Georgia, Clemson, Miami and Florida State etc. get. That's been well documented but we've been pretty consistent with our offensive scheme. The defensive coordinators here during the Johnson era have been a crapshoot. We have Roof now who brings the kind of advantages to our team that I listed above. I think fans are often misguided when trying to understand what a coach and teams problem's are. Go back and look at coaches who have been here and for the most part even the successful ones have been inconsistent.

The most important factors in being as successful as we can be in my opinion is recruiting the best players we can considering our circumstances and consistency of coaching staff.

Firing coaches, changing schemes etc. only makes us more inconsistent.

Hey, I'm a Tech fan and also have a unique perspective of having a professional relationship with not only Roof but many other coaches. I don't love all of them for sure. I want to win period and Ted is a top notch football coach who is a better recruiter than anyone I've seen recruit in over 30 years. When someone attacks Roof's scheme I feel like they are misinformed. He can scheme with anyone.

Fans and coaches themselves put too much stock in this coach is better than that coach. For the most part the good coaches know what every other coach knows. The coaches who are hired in areas of responsibilities like coordinators in college programs and even big high school programs head coaches and coordinators understand schemes and work tirelessly on how to attack them and how to adjust them. Nobody is surprised anymore. It's all been done.

That's a long reply without responding directly.

Bottom Line: I don't think you understand my question.

Our offense is consistent. In pts per drive versus pwr 5, we have averaged #6 in the nation over CPJs time at Tech. Before last year, it was #4. When you consider that we're never in the top 10 in recruiting and in the top 30 once in the last 10 years, that's more than impressive. Having one off year now and again because of injuries/chemistry doesn't mean the scheme is inconsistent when it drastically outpaces talent rankings.

Second, BC recruits worse than us on average but had arguably the best D in FBS last year, and darn good for a few years. So, it's not true that D is different than O in the potential impact of good coordinators and scheme.

So, forgive me but it seems like you are stomping your foot and repeating yourself. I appreciate your fondness for Roof, but my question remains whether there is any performance on the field, or lack thereof, which could change your mind.