Next DC

[TechPreacher]

This. I think this is what some of the posters were referring to earlier. There's always a lot of optimism with a new hire, but if next year doesn't go the way some fans expect, then the pitchforks will be back out again. I think any DC changing scheme needs at least three years unless the wheels just plain fall off.

I like the idea of hiring Woody as DC. It's a logical choice. My only hesitation is on the scheme change, and what that means with current talent on the roster. That's why I'd ask for at least three years.

Because we have difficulty getting DLs, I think we actually fit Woody's scheme pretty well. Therfeore keep recruiting to a 4-man front, so that we will have enough for a 3-man front.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Didn’t coach have great D’s at GS? He must not have run our O if the O is to blame for our bad D?

 

[slugboy]

I can deal with this response. I appreciate the reasoning and effort.

A new set of points built on the last ones:
1. I also have doubts about CPJ ever having a good defense here, and believe it could be due to exactly what you say (more practice time and scrimmages against our offense and against scout players who fit our specialized offense). BUT, I also have doubts about my doubts! ie I'm willing to acknowledge there's a chance our defense could actually be good with better coaching (and maybe (hopefully) a few key improvements in personnel). I recognize that our last 3 DC's certainly aren't among the top of the profession or had unquestioned success at other stops with equal talent. If that were the case, the case for my doubts would be much stronger. But, that being the case definitely leaves a hung jury. We cannot say with any level of confidence that if we had a DC who was proven, then we could eliminate that variable. But, that is still the biggest variable in our equation! If we had a good DC, could we have a good defense at GT under CPJ???? This is still the big question. I don't think ANYBODY (on earth) knows the answer to that, even CPJ himself. I think he thinks he can have a good defense, which is why he's done what he's done. I have a lot of hope for this Nate Woody possibility. If he works out, we have a better program instantly without having to change anything else (like new majors and crazy stuff like that). But, I had a lot of hope for Al Groh too, so my hope could very well be misplaced. We'll have to wait and see, won't we. The proof will be there one way or another in a couple of years ... which brings up the next point...

2. What is proof?? You bring up an excellent point in #1. Extremely important point! For any productive discussion there must be agreement on definitions, measures, and such (as much as possible). I think we can achieve that in this discussion and then move on together as GT fans hoping for success. Here is the bottom line on this for me: POINTS PER DRIVE (ppd) and/or YARDS PER PLAY (ypp). These are the best way to determine success. It takes out other variables as much as possible such as defensive scores, special teams, field position, etc. And, it's all about competition, so it's a ranking rather than a raw stat. Doesn't matter if we have 700 yards of offense if everybody else has 800. If we're in the top 30 in offense, that's a good offense, and the same goes for defense. Now, a lot of people are talking about FEI. I don't know exactly how that's calculated, but I think it's an efficiency stat (so, ppd and ypp) that is adjusted for strength of opponent opposite side of the ball. I don't care about the other stats. I don't care if we have 0 yards passing or 400 yards passing as long as we're more efficient that the competition (because that means we're winning on that side of the ball). I don't care about 3rd down conversions or turnovers as long as we compare favorably in defensive efficiency with our competition. I think the reason people pointed to 3rd down efficiency last year is that's where it seemed we were had the most glaring weakness which, if improved, would ultimately improve what matters - defensive efficiency. Turns out it didn't, because we improved 3rd down dramatically, but we still were in the 60's in efficiency. The best explanation for this would be if we gave up more on 1st and 2nd down (so no need for 3rd down conversions), but I'm not sure. And, people think our offense was decent because we were in the 30's in offensive efficiency. So, nothing else matters. According to the best data we have (and thus most objective evidence) our offense was significantly better than our defense, again. And, looking at the long run of CPJ's career here, this is the consistent result - we have an upper quartile offense and a bottom quartile defense. Again, make it simple. The simplest, and best way to determine success is with one of those FEI type stats. So, bottom line, my proposal is that we (me, you, and everyone else) judge the offense and the defense by these efficiency stats like FEI. Wherever we rank in those determines how good we are on that side of the ball (and the appropriate level of satisfaction we should have as fans). Again, the evidence will be there one way or another in a couple of years, and we'll all be able to look at it and decide.

3. Actually, there's something overarching even this second point. Wins/Losses. In 2014, we didn't have a great defense, but we had a phenomenal offense and thus had a great season. So, even if the DC doesn't work out, if we end up having good to great seasons on the record books, we will be happy and satisfied with CPJ even with a crappy defense. I think the W-L record should always be taken with a grain of salt - that grain being the objective stats of point #2.

4. I think the passing game is fine, philosophically. When we have a good QB and a good WR, our passing stats are really good (I'm talking about efficiency, which is all that matters). So, if that's the case, then the problem there is not the plan or coaching, but the personnel, plain and simple. I don't have much hope that Marshall can be the answer to this at QB, but we still may be able to be good enough offensively to win a lot of ball games with him. He can be special in other areas. I look forward to better days in the passing department when we get a better passer of the ball under center.

Because I can’t always tell when someone agrees with me or doesn’t get my point, I pretty much agree with you here.
Merry Christmas to everyone on a Western calendar!

1. I’ve seen other schools run this offense and have a better defense. Army and Navy have. This year, UCF was similar and they had a better defense. It could be a problem with recruiting or practice or something else that CPJ does, but I don’t think it’s mostly the offense. I’m not even sure if the offense makes any difference.
2. FEI/Fremeau is an opponent adjusted efficiency rating http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fei. I think of it like PPP or YPP curved up for playing Clemson and down for Vandy. I like it because it reminds me not to put too much emphasis on the last play I remember in a game.
The Fremeau Efficiency Index (FEI) is a college football rating system based on opponent-adjusted drive efficiency. Approximately 20,000 possessions are contested annually in FBS vs. FBS games. First-half clock-kills and end-of-game garbage drives and scores are filtered out. Game efficiency (GE) is a measure of net success on non-garbage possessions, and FEI opponent adjustments are calculated with special emphasis placed on quality performances against good teams, win or lose. Strength of schedule (SOS) ratings represent the average number of losses an elite team (two standard deviations better than average) would have against the team's schedule to date.
Offensive FEI (OFEI) is value generated per drive adjusted for starting field position and opponent defenses faced. Defensive FEI (DFEI) is value generated per opponent drive adjusted for starting field position and opponent offenses faced. Special Teams Efficiency (STE) is the average value generated per possession by a team's non-offensive and non-defensive units.

3. We barely lost a few games, and that makes this season look really bad on the win loss column.
Special teams was bottom 5 this year. Our defense was a little better and our offense was a little worse. But our offense was still top 25. We’ll either need a phenomenal unit on one side if we don’t get the others up to mediocre.
It doesn’t make as much difference as the other two units, but to me special teams is the low hanging fruit. When you’re bottom 5, just getting up to respectability should pay off.

4. I thought we pass blocked better than we run blocked this year, which made our passing stats disappointing to me. I don’t feel like we need to go air raid, but there were all the rain games this year where it seemed like the passing game had the advantage, and we couldn’t play that game. I’d like us to throw enough to be good at it.
I watched the Falcons not able to put the game away because they can’t run and control the clock, and I watched us drop third down and fourth down passes that would win games. Frustrating


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[lv20gt]

...

1. The problem with the we don't k ow that we don't know argument is that it's irrelevant. Are we replacing Roof with Brent Venables or someone who has proven it at this level? Most likely not. If rumors are true we are getting a guy with 0 experience at this level at all. We have no idea if he can recruit to this level or have defenses that can defend at this level consistently. On top of that even if he is good how will we know if it's a him problem or a Johnson problem of he fails? If our defense continues as it has every year under Johnson then won't we back in the same predicament in 4 years wondering what an elite dc could do? Now if we land an elite dc, maybe with the promise of head coach in wauting, then this point is moot. Unfortunately that isn't what the tea leaves are saying.

2. Proof of what? That our offense was a problem this year? Against tenn we had the ball up 28-21. We punt. Defense gets a 3 and out and the offense gets the ball back with about 7 and a half to play. A fg likely wins it, and there's even a good chance that we don't need points to win the game. But the offense couldn't put the game away. Twice. Against Miami offense scores just 17 points. People remember the defense giving up the last score. They don't remember the offense punting on the 4 previous possessions. Against Clemson offense scores just 10 points. Against uva the offense scores 29 points in 17 possessions and that includes a 14 yard td drive set up by the defense. The offense gave up a safety also. Against uga we scored 7 points. The only game we lost where the offense didn't have at least as much blame as the d was the duke game and even then the offense didn't play well. Just better than the d. Also as far as fei goes if you think the offense was anywhere near top 25 this year then there really is no point in having a discussion. Fei is a decent stat but like many stats it isn't as reliable when you get towards the extremes. It has always overvalued us and this year is just blatant. We had an average offensebrhis year. Not upper quartile.

3. Okay? If our offense was great then yeah we'd be happy. But it isn't. And it hasn't been except the second half of 2014 in a while. Our offense has been "good enough" in the sense that we'd be great if we had a great defense. But we dont. However in that regard for some reason Johnson is treated like an OC that is evaluated just on the offense and not the whole team.

4. Again, most efficiency stats are geared towards the norm, not the extremes. Even at our best our passing game has been mediocre under Johnson. But our routes have always been roudimentary and rour fundementals weak. And the problem with saying just wait till a better passer is under center is that good passers aren't just born. And the better passers from highschool aren't going to come run an option offense. Instead we get below average passers and then dont work in enough passing to build up good instincts or chemistry with the recievers. Then when the misread a defense or speed of a receiver we blame the qb instead of the staff. If the problem is personnel then ask yourself if our offense isn't conducive to getting or developing the right personnel.

 

[tech_wreck47]

From what I’ve seen Charles kelly was offered DC at Colorado state, or he atleast interviewed, but he has not been hired on anywhere. I wonder if he and CPJ have spoken and he could be our 10th coach? Not sure he would even want to do that but it would be a thought. My dream scenario as of now would be, hiring Nate Woody and have him over ILB’s and let him bring Mark Ivey as OLB coach (he was a former head coach for a high school in Florida, so he could have good connections for recruiting and his group he has done well at App state) here’s his bio.
https://appstatesports.com/coaches.aspx?rc=317&path=football
Then keep Pelton on the DL, CAM as safeties coach and some sort of promotion, go hire Charles Kelly as CB coach, and recruiting coordinator, let him also be over special teams (FSU won a national championship the year he was over ST) this would also give us a 10th coach.


Any takers?

 

[dressedcheeseside]

From what I’ve seen Charles kelly was offered DC at Colorado state, or he atleast interviewed, but he has not been hired on anywhere. I wonder if he and CPJ have spoken and he could be our 10th coach? Not sure he would even want to do that but it would be a thought. My dream scenario as of now would be, hiring Nate Woody and have him over ILB’s and let him bring Mark Ivey as OLB coach (he was a former head coach for a high school in Florida, so he could have good connections for recruiting and his group he has done well at App state) here’s his bio.
https://appstatesports.com/coaches.aspx?rc=317&path=football
Then keep Pelton on the DL, CAM as safeties coach and some sort of promotion, go hire Charles Kelly as CB coach, and recruiting coordinator, let him also be over special teams (FSU won a national championship the year he was over ST) this would also give us a 10th coach.


Any takers?

Why keep Pelton?

 

[slugboy]

1. The problem with the we don't k ow that we don't know argument is that it's irrelevant. Are we replacing Roof with Brent Venables or someone who has proven it at this level? Most likely not. If rumors are true we are getting a guy with 0 experience at this level at all. We have no idea if he can recruit to this level or have defenses that can defend at this level consistently. On top of that even if he is good how will we know if it's a him problem or a Johnson problem of he fails? If our defense continues as it has every year under Johnson then won't we back in the same predicament in 4 years wondering what an elite dc could do? Now if we land an elite dc, maybe with the promise of head coach in wauting, then this point is moot. Unfortunately that isn't what the tea leaves are saying.

2. Proof of what? That our offense was a problem this year? Against tenn we had the ball up 28-21. We punt. Defense gets a 3 and out and the offense gets the ball back with about 7 and a half to play. A fg likely wins it, and there's even a good chance that we don't need points to win the game. But the offense couldn't put the game away. Twice. Against Miami offense scores just 17 points. People remember the defense giving up the last score. They don't remember the offense punting on the 4 previous possessions. Against Clemson offense scores just 10 points. Against uva the offense scores 29 points in 17 possessions and that includes a 14 yard td drive set up by the defense. The offense gave up a safety also. Against uga we scored 7 points. The only game we lost where the offense didn't have at least as much blame as the d was the duke game and even then the offense didn't play well. Just better than the d. Also as far as fei goes if you think the offense was anywhere near top 25 this year then there really is no point in having a discussion. Fei is a decent stat but like many stats it isn't as reliable when you get towards the extremes. It has always overvalued us and this year is just blatant. We had an average offensebrhis year. Not upper quartile.

3. Okay? If our offense was great then yeah we'd be happy. But it isn't. And it hasn't been except the second half of 2014 in a while. Our offense has been "good enough" in the sense that we'd be great if we had a great defense. But we dont. However in that regard for some reason Johnson is treated like an OC that is evaluated just on the offense and not the whole team.

4. Again, most efficiency stats are geared towards the norm, not the extremes. Even at our best our passing game has been mediocre under Johnson. But our routes have always been roudimentary and rour fundementals weak. And the problem with saying just wait till a better passer is under center is that good passers aren't just born. And the better passers from highschool aren't going to come run an option offense. Instead we get below average passers and then dont work in enough passing to build up good instincts or chemistry with the recievers. Then when the misread a defense or speed of a receiver we blame the qb instead of the staff. If the problem is personnel then ask yourself if our offense isn't conducive to getting or developing the right personnel.

Are you responding to me or vamosjackets?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[tech_wreck47]

Why keep Pelton?

I would like to see what he can do in a different system. I also think he has done good with some guys. Attouchu on his move to the DL, Gotsis, Gamble is on an NFL roster. Not saying hes great, I would just like to see what he could do if his guys were more “attacking”

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Because I can’t always tell when someone agrees with me or doesn’t get my point, I pretty much agree with you here.
Merry Christmas to everyone on a Western calendar!

1. I’ve seen other schools run this offense and have a better defense. Army and Navy have. This year, UCF was similar and they had a better defense. It could be a problem with recruiting or practice or something else that CPJ does, but I don’t think it’s mostly the offense. I’m not even sure if the offense makes any difference.
2. FEI/Fremeau is an opponent adjusted efficiency rating http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fei. I think of it like PPP or YPP curved up for playing Clemson and down for Vandy. I like it because it reminds me not to put too much emphasis on the last play I remember in a game.
The Fremeau Efficiency Index (FEI) is a college football rating system based on opponent-adjusted drive efficiency. Approximately 20,000 possessions are contested annually in FBS vs. FBS games. First-half clock-kills and end-of-game garbage drives and scores are filtered out. Game efficiency (GE) is a measure of net success on non-garbage possessions, and FEI opponent adjustments are calculated with special emphasis placed on quality performances against good teams, win or lose. Strength of schedule (SOS) ratings represent the average number of losses an elite team (two standard deviations better than average) would have against the team's schedule to date.
Offensive FEI (OFEI) is value generated per drive adjusted for starting field position and opponent defenses faced. Defensive FEI (DFEI) is value generated per opponent drive adjusted for starting field position and opponent offenses faced. Special Teams Efficiency (STE) is the average value generated per possession by a team's non-offensive and non-defensive units.

3. We barely lost a few games, and that makes this season look really bad on the win loss column.
Special teams was bottom 5 this year. Our defense was a little better and our offense was a little worse. But our offense was still top 25. We’ll either need a phenomenal unit on one side if we don’t get the others up to mediocre.
It doesn’t make as much difference as the other two units, but to me special teams is the low hanging fruit. When you’re bottom 5, just getting up to respectability should pay off.

4. I thought we pass blocked better than we run blocked this year, which made our passing stats disappointing to me. I don’t feel like we need to go air raid, but there were all the rain games this year where it seemed like the passing game had the advantage, and we couldn’t play that game. I’d like us to throw enough to be good at it.
I watched the Falcons not able to put the game away because they can’t run and control the clock, and I watched us drop third down and fourth down passes that would win games. Frustrating


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I have to question your claim that UCF, Navy, and Army had better defenses. UCF gave up 42 points to USF and 55 points to Memphis. Army barely beat Eastern Michigan and Temple, giving up 20+ points in each game, and they gave up 35 points to SDSU, barely squeaking out a win which looked bigger because of the final intercepted lateral. Navy beat Air Force 48 - 45, SMU 43 - 40, and gave up 30, 31, and 34 points in their losses to Memphis, UCF, and Temple. That doesn't sound like a better defense to me.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Because we have difficulty getting DLs, I think we actually fit Woody's scheme pretty well. Therfeore keep recruiting to a 4-man front, so that we will have enough for a 3-man front.

From what I understand, it's not the numbers of DL, but the types. You recruit different techniques for the different schemes.

I am not a defensive line guru, so maybe someone can expound on this one.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Wow! Didn’t realize we were that awful. Given our location, 40 should be the worst ever. And that should be a bad season.

I'm not sure location means as much as it used to unless you're a blue blood. If location were that critical, then schools like GaSo, GSU, and the other regional G5 schools should be booming as well. Location is a major part, but not the whole. There are changes that need to be made institutionally if we want to compete at that level consistently, and they are unlikely to happen. So, since we realize we are on an uneven playing field, we just need to figure out how to game it for our best advantage.

 

[takethepoints]

I didn't think the AppSt - Toledo game was indicative of too much of anything. AppSt obviously had much more talent then Toledo on both sides of the ball. It was a true beatdown.

I worry more about recruiting then D stats. That's why I'm apprehensive about letting Roof go. We're always moaning about recruiting the Atlanta area –> he sews up Gwinnett County –> he moves on. I think another year would have made a big difference in D; we've been recruiting well there recently, especially on the DL. But this is water under the bridge; both sides decided to move on and take the risks.

I hope this works out, no matter who gets hired. The potential is there; it has to be activated.

 

[slugboy]

I have to question your claim that UCF, Navy, and Army had better defenses. UCF gave up 42 points to USF and 55 points to Memphis. Army barely beat Eastern Michigan and Temple, giving up 20+ points in each game, and they gave up 35 points to SDSU, barely squeaking out a win which looked bigger because of the final intercepted lateral. Navy beat Air Force 48 - 45, SMU 43 - 40, and gave up 30, 31, and 34 points in their losses to Memphis, UCF, and Temple. That doesn't sound like a better defense to me.

I was going off memory from FEI defense http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/feidef

UCF was much better (20). I was wrong on Army and Navy; they were worse.

App State is much better (30) and has a similar offense, though


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

I was going off memory from FEI defense http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/feidef

UCF was much better (20). I was wrong on Army and Navy; they were worse.

App State is much better (30) and has a similar offense, though


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Regardless of their 20 ranking, the two games I saw UCF play (USF and Memphis) showed me no defense at all. So maybe they got their high ranking the same way Georgia did, by not playing anybody worth a damn.

 

[iceeater1969]

Seats behind the defensive end of bench gave me a good view of pelton over last few years. Early on I was really disappointed by his teaching method on the sideline that totally excluded any reserves. Remember J hunt and Kelton sitting by themselves as pelton coached up gotsis and gamble. He had given up 2 guys until gostis was out for some reason and here came 2 guys back . This year he had them all in huddle and he kept motivating them ALL. After u t coach read the defense the riot act. At the start of jacksonville game the defense came off after a poor series. Pelton go the starters in their seats AND the backups standing behind. He then screamed xXxX, xXxX get your xxx in gear. The other players looked at the dl and the parents in the stands covered their childrens ears. (Reminded me of Jerry glanville hollering at spring game) D L really got after it an d he played a steady rotation of players. The subs weren't great at first, but now we have experienced players returning. During the season he was constantly and coaching up all his guys.

I would keep him as i think the dl is loyal to him but I would give him more emphasis on interior.

Besides he waves during the walk up he waves to wife and i when I holler " go gettum coach pelton". I think he really like being at gt.

Son is a coach. I well know that the new dc may have a key guy at dl and will accept what Coach says.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

I would like to see what he can do in a different system. I also think he has done good with some guys. Attouchu on his move to the DL, Gotsis, Gamble is on an NFL roster. Not saying hes great, I would just like to see what he could do if his guys were more “attacking”

I'm very leery of equating a player's performance to reflect on coaching ability. If I had been Lawrence Taylor's LB coach he'd have still broken sack records. If I had played LB for (insert any hall of fame coach) the only records I would have been likely to break is most games played without a sack.

Now if that great player says "Coach really helped me improve my game." Then I'm sold.

 

[Madison Grant]

Some of the comments worrying about the recruiting ability of a defensive coordinator are overvaluing that, IMO. Most coordinators are not big time recruiters. And there are going to be some problems recruiting to Tech that Brent Venables, if we could hire him, couldn't fix or overcome. We've got some good talent here now. Give us a DC that can coach them up.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Some of the comments worrying about the recruiting ability of a defensive coordinator are overvaluing that, IMO. Most coordinators are not big time recruiters. And there are going to be some problems recruiting to Tech that Brent Venables, if we could hire him, couldn't fix or overcome. We've got some good talent here now. Give us a DC that can coach them up.

Disagree. I think a lot of Bud Foster's success is due directly to his ability to recruit players to fit his scheme.

That said, success on the field is a recruiting tool in and of itself. If the next DC comes in and puts together a top 10D, the four stars (and maybe a five star or two) will follow. What's the chance of that happening though?

 

[tech_wreck47]

I'm very leery of equating a player's performance to reflect on coaching ability. If I had been Lawrence Taylor's LB coach he'd have still broken sack records. If I had played LB for (insert any hall of fame coach) the only records I would have been likely to break is most games played without a sack.

Now if that great player says "Coach really helped me improve my game." Then I'm sold.

I agree with that but I’m talking more from a developmental stand point.

 

[tech_wreck47]

Disagree. I think a lot of Bud Foster's success is due directly to his ability to recruit players to fit his scheme.

That said, success on the field is a recruiting tool in and of itself. If the next DC comes in and puts together a top 10D, the four stars (and maybe a five star or two) will follow. What's the chance of that happening though?

Agree, a lot of it goes to who you recruit to your system. And if we do have a really good year better recruits will come. I remember CPJ saying after the 2014 season that kids were wanting to come but we were already filled up.