Let's speculate on starters if we get Woody

[AE 87]

Props to @Techster for his reading of cnw and personnel.

 

[Techster]

Love the article and the words Vic says. The scheme is more complex but the players themselves are being given straightforward assignments, 1 or 2 things to do on each play, and they have a narrower field of vision required to execute their assignment. I really think that works better for college athletes. And I really like how Woody tries to find out what players are good at and use them in that way. If you take someone lacking in some way (speed, athleticism, play recognition, etc.) and ask them to be versatile against a team with better all-around athletes, you're choosing to play at a disadvantage. But so long as the sum of the parts can defend the whole field, I think it's better to leverage a player's individual strengths, and doing so can neutralize a lot of talent advantages.

But there will be growing pains. Our success will rest on our ability to learn the defense and execute it without missing assignments.

IMO, football is football. Terminology may change, and certain philosophies about how to go from A to B changes, but at the end of the day it's still football. The best coaches are the ones that know how to communicate what they want and have it translate from their minds, to the playbooks, and to the players without confusion.

You look at Al Groh and Nick Saban. Are you telling me that GT can't recruit kids who understand a 3-4 scheme, but Nick Saban can? I'm in no way denigrating the SAs that go to 'Bama, but it takes a more academically inclined SA to get through GT. Our SAs are probably in the 90th-95th percentile of academically capable SAs that play on the Power 5 level. Yet somehow Saban has his guys running the 3-4 on a professional level? It's not even about having 4 and 5 star players...his guys rarely miss assignments, while Groh's defenses had entire units on different pages.

Groh is probably one of the smartest coaches in all of football. He has a PHD level of football knowledge that's widely acknowledged. The guy just isn't a good teacher. Watching the blank stares as he tried to communicate with our guys on the sidelines tells you that if the on the field product didn't. Having knowledge on a subject is great, but it's not useful if you don't know how to implement and utilize the knowledge.

Ralph Friedgen is another good example. He was literally a Super Bowl caliber OC for the San Diego Chargers, much like Al Groh was an NFL level OC and HC. Friedgen had a complex playbook, and all the things he did on offense made your head spin...but the guy knew how to coach his offense and the numbers he put up spoke to that. CPJ is a good example, and what he did with the 2008 squad that wasn't perfectly suited to his scheme (especially at OL) speaks to that.

I think the problem with a lot of coaches is once they get to a certain point in their careers and they coach to impress as opposed to coach to teach. They have all this knowledge and all these tricks and their playbooks get thicker and thicker...but they forget the point of having a playbook. It's not about wowing other coaches and the media (see Gruden's QB camps for a good example of this...."Spider 2 Y Banana!!!""), it's about getting your players from A to B the quickest and most effective way.

 

[tech_wreck47]

Hey look...sometimes a blind squirrel finds an acorn!

https://www.myajc.com/sports/colleg...tech-victor-alexander/I1Sd9aymrPouGtlyM0EMmN/

Some of the defensive positional changes are starting to become clearer. Watching film of how CNW's LB's play, I didn't think Vic would stay inside. ILB's are bigger body types, almost glorified DLs that take on blocks. OLBs are the fast/athletic types that "seek and destroy". It's more important for OLBs in this scheme to shed blocks, as opposed to take on blocks. No way Vic survives the inside in CNW's scheme given what ILBs are tasked with.

It looks like CNW is putting a premium on speed and quickness at OLB, especially the "jack" position, as opposed to pseudo DEs that Saban likes at OLB.

It may be that others will pass Vic at the position as the season goes on, but it does give you a glimpse at how CNW is thinking about LBs in his scheme.

Disagree, only 1 of his ILb’s are the BIG guy if I’m not mistaken.? And Vic is as big as any of the LB’s we have when it comes to weight, and I would say he’s probably the strongest. However, I do like him outside. Another reason I don’t think they have to be BIG guys inside in his system is because of guys like Jackson starting off at ILB, sure he can gain weight but that wouldnt be an immediate thing. Also BJS is no bigger that Vic besides height. Of course I could be wrong, I was just under the impression he had 1 ILB that was typically bigger.

 

[Techster]

Disagree, only 1 of his ILb’s are the BIG guy if I’m not mistaken.? And Vic is as big as any of the LB’s we have when it comes to weight, and I would say he’s probably the strongest. However, I do like him outside. Another reason I don’t think they have to be BIG guys inside in his system is because of guys like Jackson starting off at ILB, sure he can gain weight but that wouldnt be an immediate thing. Also BJS is no bigger that Vic besides height. Of course I could be wrong, I was just under the impression he had 1 ILB that was typically bigger.

I didn't see that on tape...it looked like the 2 biggest LBs were on the inside, and the OLBs were more of the athletic and quick guys what could cover ground and get around OTs to get to the ball. CNW in an interview literally said: Our inside backers generally are a little bigger than our outside backers. They take on blocks from linemen and backs just as our outside backers do, but usually in tighter space.

Will be interesting to see how personnel plays out this spring and into the fall.

 

[tech_wreck47]

I didn't see that on tape...it looked like the 2 biggest LBs were on the inside, and the OLBs were more of the athletic and quick guys what could cover ground and get around OTs to get to the ball. CNW in an interview literally said: Our inside backers generally are a little bigger than our outside backers. They take on blocks from linemen and backs just as our outside backers do, but usually in tighter space.

I agree they are a little bigger. I think if he had his choice he would have big and fast across all 4 spots. I was just under the impression at least 1 of his ILB was big to do what you are saying but was probably a little more athletic where he could also play outside as well and has a little different assignment than the more typical big guy . I just think vic could play inside because he’s not that small besides his height. I don’t mind him outside though.

 

[Techster]

I I just think vic could play inside because he’s not that small besides his height. I don’t mind him outside though.

CNW is happy he has your blessing. Lol.

 

[iceeater1969]

IMO, football is football. Terminology may change, and certain philosophies about how to go from A to B changes, but at the end of the day it's still football. The best coaches are the ones that know how to communicate what they want and have it translate from their minds, to the playbooks, and to the players without confusion.

You look at Al Groh and Nick Saban. Are you telling me that GT can't recruit kids who understand a 3-4 scheme, but Nick Saban can? I'm in no way denigrating the SAs that go to 'Bama, but it takes a more academically inclined SA to get through GT. Our SAs are probably in the 90th-95th percentile of academically capable SAs that play on the Power 5 level. Yet somehow Saban has his guys running the 3-4 on a professional level? It's not even about having 4 and 5 star players...his guys rarely miss assignments, while Groh's defenses had entire units on different pages.

Groh is probably one of the smartest coaches in all of football. He has a PHD level of football knowledge that's widely acknowledged. The guy just isn't a good teacher. Watching the blank stares as he tried to communicate with our guys on the sidelines tells you that if the on the field product didn't. Having knowledge on a subject is great, but it's not useful if you don't know how to implement and utilize the knowledge.

Ralph Friedgen is another good example. He was literally a Super Bowl caliber OC for the San Diego Chargers, much like Al Groh was an NFL level OC and HC. Friedgen had a complex playbook, and all the things he did on offense made your head spin...but the guy knew how to coach his offense and the numbers he put up spoke to that. CPJ is a good example, and what he did with the 2008 squad that wasn't perfectly suited to his scheme (especially at OL) speaks to that.

I think the problem with a lot of coaches is once they get to a certain point in their careers and they coach to impress as opposed to coach to teach. They have all this knowledge and all these tricks and their playbooks get thicker and thicker...but they forget the point of having a playbook. It's not about wowing other coaches and the media (see Gruden's QB camps for a good example of this...."Spider 2 Y Banana!!!""), it's about getting your players from A to B the quickest and most effective way.

I think we all agree that AG has a track record.
To me the detail he missed was in the speed of the clock he thought was in the players and ast coaches head. Think of the timing of a metronome w the weight about 3 /4 to top and then moved down to half way. OUR DL and lb are TOLD to run directly into the blocker and then, peak, go. By taking too long while next to blocker , we willingly facilitate them tob legally hold. HOLDING IS LEGAL UNLESS U ARE MAKING A MOVE TO THE BALL.
When we are way over matched size wise , they can actually throw our defensive end ( referesce last play Acc championship against FSU ,'s MONSTER OL to run out the clock.) because only flagrant holding will be called in key moments).

As Woody dials up the speed, i am ready to accept some bad plays on defense as well as good plays. A good aggressive defense with our offense can make for some impressive wins.

 

[tech_wreck47]

CNW is happy he has your blessing. Lol.

Lol, it was more of me saying I don’t disagree with him not being inside

 

[dressedcheeseside]

IMO, football is football. Terminology may change, and certain philosophies about how to go from A to B changes, but at the end of the day it's still football. The best coaches are the ones that know how to communicate what they want and have it translate from their minds, to the playbooks, and to the players without confusion.

You look at Al Groh and Nick Saban. Are you telling me that GT can't recruit kids who understand a 3-4 scheme, but Nick Saban can? I'm in no way denigrating the SAs that go to 'Bama, but it takes a more academically inclined SA to get through GT. Our SAs are probably in the 90th-95th percentile of academically capable SAs that play on the Power 5 level. Yet somehow Saban has his guys running the 3-4 on a professional level? It's not even about having 4 and 5 star players...his guys rarely miss assignments, while Groh's defenses had entire units on different pages.

Groh is probably one of the smartest coaches in all of football. He has a PHD level of football knowledge that's widely acknowledged. The guy just isn't a good teacher. Watching the blank stares as he tried to communicate with our guys on the sidelines tells you that if the on the field product didn't. Having knowledge on a subject is great, but it's not useful if you don't know how to implement and utilize the knowledge.

Ralph Friedgen is another good example. He was literally a Super Bowl caliber OC for the San Diego Chargers, much like Al Groh was an NFL level OC and HC. Friedgen had a complex playbook, and all the things he did on offense made your head spin...but the guy knew how to coach his offense and the numbers he put up spoke to that. CPJ is a good example, and what he did with the 2008 squad that wasn't perfectly suited to his scheme (especially at OL) speaks to that.

I think the problem with a lot of coaches is once they get to a certain point in their careers and they coach to impress as opposed to coach to teach. They have all this knowledge and all these tricks and their playbooks get thicker and thicker...but they forget the point of having a playbook. It's not about wowing other coaches and the media (see Gruden's QB camps for a good example of this...."Spider 2 Y Banana!!!""), it's about getting your players from A to B the quickest and most effective way.

There is a huge advantage for the SA's playing at Alabama or any factory "school", they can devote all their time and energy to football. Our guys have to split their time and energy to football and academics and many times academics gets the lion's share. I have always felt this reality gets very little attention from the fans yet has a very big impact.

 

[Techster]

There is a huge advantage for the SA's playing at Alabama or any factory "school", they can devote all their time and energy to football. Our guys have to split their time and energy to football and academics and many times academics gets the lion's share. I have always felt this reality gets very little attention from the fans yet has a very big impact.

I don't disagree with that. I think good coaches understand that aspect, and install accordingly. I think Al Groh (and other coaches for that matter) were fine with making players drink through a fire hose, as opposed to ramping up at the pace of the players. I think Jemea Thomas posted on social media about how his head was spinning and posted a photo of a HUGE defensive playbook. Jemea was arguably Groh's best defensive player during that time as well.

Friedgen ran a pro level offense, with a pro level playbook. Our guys were able to get it. It all comes down to ability to communicate and teach.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

I get the why but I wish TD had stayed at Tech. I think he would have been a good fit for CNW’s scheme and might have been able to slide between ILB and OLB. Oh well. Opportunity for others.

Gonna be very interesting to watch some of these position changes and final 2 deep.

 

[YJMD]

IMO, football is football. Terminology may change, and certain philosophies about how to go from A to B changes, but at the end of the day it's still football. The best coaches are the ones that know how to communicate what they want and have it translate from their minds, to the playbooks, and to the players without confusion.

You look at Al Groh and Nick Saban. Are you telling me that GT can't recruit kids who understand a 3-4 scheme, but Nick Saban can? I'm in no way denigrating the SAs that go to 'Bama, but it takes a more academically inclined SA to get through GT. Our SAs are probably in the 90th-95th percentile of academically capable SAs that play on the Power 5 level. Yet somehow Saban has his guys running the 3-4 on a professional level? It's not even about having 4 and 5 star players...his guys rarely miss assignments, while Groh's defenses had entire units on different pages.

Groh is probably one of the smartest coaches in all of football. He has a PHD level of football knowledge that's widely acknowledged. The guy just isn't a good teacher. Watching the blank stares as he tried to communicate with our guys on the sidelines tells you that if the on the field product didn't. Having knowledge on a subject is great, but it's not useful if you don't know how to implement and utilize the knowledge.

Ralph Friedgen is another good example. He was literally a Super Bowl caliber OC for the San Diego Chargers, much like Al Groh was an NFL level OC and HC. Friedgen had a complex playbook, and all the things he did on offense made your head spin...but the guy knew how to coach his offense and the numbers he put up spoke to that. CPJ is a good example, and what he did with the 2008 squad that wasn't perfectly suited to his scheme (especially at OL) speaks to that.

I think the problem with a lot of coaches is once they get to a certain point in their careers and they coach to impress as opposed to coach to teach. They have all this knowledge and all these tricks and their playbooks get thicker and thicker...but they forget the point of having a playbook. It's not about wowing other coaches and the media (see Gruden's QB camps for a good example of this...."Spider 2 Y Banana!!!""), it's about getting your players from A to B the quickest and most effective way.

Mostly we are in agreement, but I do want to highlight a couple of things as to why I think Bama can do significantly better than us with a 3-4 2-gap scheme.

1. Executing a football play isn't about cognitive intelligence. If you have to actively think about what you are doing each step of the way during a play you are going to be hosed no matter how big and fast you are. Certainly being taught how to be a football player involves cognitive learning, but there are stud players who know a scheme very well that are dumb as rocks or even illiterate and could never cognitively explain it to you in words. But they have excellent procedural memories and must be gifted at some way of learning that is non-verbal. Alabama may very well be getting players that are "smarter" than Tech players but whose intelligence on the football field and ability to learn football is not measured in all the ways we recognize intelligence.

2. The coaching is not the same. The scheme is only as good as your ability to teach it to college kids. Even if coaching is equal, Alabama has a lot more staff than we do. They might have the same number of coaches to work directly with the kids, but they've got a ton of people able to analyze things and inform the teaching.

3. Bodies. Alabama might go 4 deep at a position with 5 star talent. If 2 of the 4 can pick up the scheme and execute it to their standards, it doesn't matter if the 2 who don't see the field were higher rated or even more athletic. They can afford to have more people struggle to pick up a complicated assignment.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Mostly we are in agreement, but I do want to highlight a couple of things as to why I think Bama can do significantly better than us with a 3-4 2-gap scheme.

1. Executing a football play isn't about cognitive intelligence. If you have to actively think about what you are doing each step of the way during a play you are going to be hosed no matter how big and fast you are. Certainly being taught how to be a football player involves cognitive learning, but there are stud players who know a scheme very well that are dumb as rocks or even illiterate and could never cognitively explain it to you in words. But they have excellent procedural memories and must be gifted at some way of learning that is non-verbal. Alabama may very well be getting players that are "smarter" than Tech players but whose intelligence on the football field and ability to learn football is not measured in all the ways we recognize intelligence.

2. The coaching is not the same. The scheme is only as good as your ability to teach it to college kids. Even if coaching is equal, Alabama has a lot more staff than we do. They might have the same number of coaches to work directly with the kids, but they've got a ton of people able to analyze things and inform the teaching.

3. Bodies. Alabama might go 4 deep at a position with 5 star talent. If 2 of the 4 can pick up the scheme and execute it to their standards, it doesn't matter if the 2 who don't see the field were higher rated or even more athletic. They can afford to have more people struggle to pick up a complicated assignment.

Every point is a good one.

 

[RonJohn]

I don't disagree with that. I think good coaches understand that aspect, and install accordingly. I think Al Groh (and other coaches for that matter) were fine with making players drink through a fire hose, as opposed to ramping up at the pace of the players. I think Jemea Thomas posted on social media about how his head was spinning and posted a photo of a HUGE defensive playbook. Jemea was arguably Groh's best defensive player during that time as well.

Friedgen ran a pro level offense, with a pro level playbook. Our guys were able to get it. It all comes down to ability to communicate and teach.

I think it was in the Schultz podcast, CPJ made some comments that the issue with Groh's defense was the film study required to master it against each team each week.(at least my take on what he said) I believe he said that: Some of the players came to him because they couldn't complete class work when required to study film several hours each day for the defense. He told Groh that he needed to simplify the defense such that the players didn't have to spend many hours studying film. Groh told him to worry about the offense and leave him alone. CPJ decided to cut Groh.

It wasn't the complexity of the system. It was the need to watch many hours(thinking along the lines of 20 hours per week of the opposing offense) to be able to read the cues.

 

[Techster]

I think it was in the Schultz podcast, CPJ made some comments that the issue with Groh's defense was the film study required to master it against each team each week.(at least my take on what he said) I believe he said that: Some of the players came to him because they couldn't complete class work when required to study film several hours each day for the defense. He told Groh that he needed to simplify the defense such that the players didn't have to spend many hours studying film. Groh told him to worry about the offense and leave him alone. CPJ decided to cut Groh.

It wasn't the complexity of the system. It was the need to watch many hours(thinking along the lines of 20 hours per week of the opposing offense) to be able to read the cues.

If you require a large amount of time in order to apply the defensive schemes against an offense, then IMO, the system is too complex. You don't tell a coach to simplify if players have an easy time understanding and coaches are communicating at the appropriate level.

 

[RonJohn]

If you require a large amount of time in order to apply the defensive schemes against an offense, then IMO, the system is too complex. You don't tell a coach to simplify if players have an easy time understanding and coaches are communicating at the appropriate level.

You look at Al Groh and Nick Saban. Are you telling me that GT can't recruit kids who understand a 3-4 scheme, but Nick Saban can? I'm in no way denigrating the SAs that go to 'Bama, but it takes a more academically inclined SA to get through GT. Our SAs are probably in the 90th-95th percentile of academically capable SAs that play on the Power 5 level. Yet somehow Saban has his guys running the 3-4 on a professional level? It's not even about having 4 and 5 star players...his guys rarely miss assignments, while Groh's defenses had entire units on different pages.

I think we are at semantics now. I was trying to respond to comments like this. I agree that requiring large amounts of film study time to apply the defense against each individual offense makes it complicated. However, it isn't the scheme that is complicated, it is the application. What I understood from the comments was that the defensive players understood the scheme, but that at least some of them couldn't spend the time required to apply the defense and keep up with classwork.

If what I understood is correct, entire units could be on different pages because they read the offensive cues differently. I don't know if Alabama's defense has as much dependence on reading the offense. I guess the players at Virginia didn't have an issue with: 20 hours of "official" football activity, hours of weight training, hours of "unofficial" football activities, 20 hours of film study, and then classes and homework. You can do such schemes in the NFL because there is no limit on hours that the players spend on football.