Next DC

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
I agree with that but I’m talking more from a developmental stand point.

That's just a very difficult thing to evaluate from the stands.

Your point about 2014, I don't remember the quote but don't doubt you, shows why it's important to perform at a high level consistently. Which is something we have struggled to do for ages.
 

tech_wreck47

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,670
That's just a very difficult thing to evaluate from the stands.

Your point about 2014, I don't remember the quote but don't doubt you, shows why it's important to perform at a high level consistently. Which is something we have struggled to do for ages.
To an extent it is, but if a guy is getting better and better each year I would contribute that to coaching (hard work from the player as well). That’s the point of a coach after all. If they weren’t helping develop what’s the point of position coaches? IMO that’s why the falcons have gotten so good at getting to the QB, a lot of the same guys from Quinn’s first year but way better production.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
To an extent it is, but if a guy is getting better and better each year I would contribute that to coaching (hard work from the player as well). That’s the point of a coach after all. If they weren’t helping develop what’s the point of position coaches? IMO that’s why the falcons have gotten so good at getting to the QB, a lot of the same guys from Quinn’s first year but way better production.

True. I just think coaches ride star players cost tails a little too much sometimes. Chances are Payton Manning, Lawrence Taylor, etc would have been great regardless of who coached them.
 

Jmonty71

Banned
Messages
2,156
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.
So, because Roof can recruit well out of ONE county, he should get a pass on being a crappy DC? How many other counties does GA have? How well do we penetrate those? I don't understand. If we get a DC that can motivate student athletes and generate some excitement, recruits will ring our door bell.

Recruits want to play for a winning program and a DC that can get them to the next level. I never saw Roof as that type of person.
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,121
Location
Augusta, Georgia
So, because Roof can recruit well out of ONE county, he should get a pass on being a crappy DC? How many other counties does GA have? How well do we penetrate those? I don't understand. If we get a DC that can motivate student athletes and generate some excitement, recruits will ring our door bell.

Recruits want to play for a winning program and a DC that can get them to the next level. I never saw Roof as that type of person.

Roof is an excellent recruiter. Period. We can argue all day the merits of his defensive scheme, but Yomanser pretty much put paid to the notion that Roof couldn't recruit. And he wasn't good for just "one county" either. Chimedza, out of IMG in FL, is here because of Roof.

As for this statement: "If we get a DC that can motivate student athletes and generate some excitement, recruits will ring our door bell," all I can say is that would be nice, but I wouldn't count on it. Unless we make major changes within the structure of the GTAA, the new DC will be hampered by the same limitations the previous 3 had.
 

tech_wreck47

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,670
Roof is an excellent recruiter. Period. We can argue all day the merits of his defensive scheme, but Yomanser pretty much put paid to the notion that Roof couldn't recruit. And he wasn't good for just "one county" either. Chimedza, out of IMG in FL, is here because of Roof.

As for this statement: "If we get a DC that can motivate student athletes and generate some excitement, recruits will ring our door bell," all I can say is that would be nice, but I wouldn't count on it. Unless we make major changes within the structure of the GTAA, the new DC will be hampered by the same limitations the previous 3 had.
I’ll agree that Roof can recruit more than what I thought, but at no time has it been made a fact that TK is here because of Roof. That’s just speculation on your end. I think the main issue people have with believing Roof is a great recruiter is the proof of guys he has been the main recruiter on. People haven’t seen him go out and get this crazy amount of talent. People can talk about it but at times talk is just talk, there has to be something to back that up. As the saying goes though, it’s never as bad or as good as it seems.
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,121
Location
Augusta, Georgia
I’ll agree that Roof can recruit more than what I thought, but at no time has it been made a fact that TK is here because of Roof. That’s just speculation on your end. I think the main issue people have with believing Roof is a great recruiter is the proof of guys he has been the main recruiter on. People haven’t seen him go out and get this crazy amount of talent. People can talk about it but at times talk is just talk, there has to be something to back that up. As the saying goes though, it’s never as bad or as good as it seems.

I'll refer you to Yomanser's post in the closed thread Roof.

Here is the direct quote from Yomanser: "FYI, TK Chimedza (currently committed 4-star defensive tackle) is entirely a Roof product. We wouldn't have him committed without Roof in the picture. This also applies to the Swillings, one of which was an Army All-American and consensus 4-star. They also committed because of Roof. Along with them, Jaquan Henderson was a 4-star who whose main recruiter was Roof. Beyond those, TD Roof, Xavier Gantt, and currently committed Malachi Carter are all high-ceiling highly-regarded Roof recruits that I can name off the top of my head. He's also had us in the discussion with several high-profile recruits that Tech didn't end up landing, but wouln't have had a shot at without him. We're only now starting to see the benefits Roof is providing us in recruiting."

https://gtswarm.com/threads/roof.13786/page-28#post-373124
 

tech_wreck47

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,670
I'll refer you to Yomanser's post in the closed thread Roof.

Here is the direct quote from Yomanser: "FYI, TK Chimedza (currently committed 4-star defensive tackle) is entirely a Roof product. We wouldn't have him committed without Roof in the picture. This also applies to the Swillings, one of which was an Army All-American and consensus 4-star. They also committed because of Roof. Along with them, Jaquan Henderson was a 4-star who whose main recruiter was Roof. Beyond those, TD Roof, Xavier Gantt, and currently committed Malachi Carter are all high-ceiling highly-regarded Roof recruits that I can name off the top of my head. He's also had us in the discussion with several high-profile recruits that Tech didn't end up landing, but wouln't have had a shot at without him. We're only now starting to see the benefits Roof is providing us in recruiting."

https://gtswarm.com/threads/roof.13786/page-28#post-373124
Never saw this, I was just going by what TK himself said about academics where the main reason (if I’m not mistaken) but like I said I’ll admit he’s better than I thought, but I still think it’s never as good or as bad as it seems. I’ve seen people say he’s not even good (I’ve never said that, I’ve only questioned why he’s great) and I’ve seen people say he’s great, I think I’m in the middle. JMO. Glad I can actually have a decent conversation with you even though we don’t see eye to eye.
 

vamosjackets

GT Athlete
Featured Member
Messages
2,156
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.
1. I don't think it's irrelevant, far from it. I think it's the most relevant argument (maybe the only relevant point in the event we're discussing). If we're not trying to find the next great DC, then why are we even playing or donating money or even watching? The whole point of competition is to try to win. It seems to me that using your logic, there's also no sense in changing the head coach either since we're not going to find someone proven at this level who will come and coach at GT for what we can pay. Using your standard (Brent Venables, the best DC in the nation right now), we would have to hire Nick Saban in order to justify changing head coaches. Although, I do think your idea of hiring an elite DC with the promise of head coach in waiting is an intriguing one.

2. I don't understand your explanation of your suspicion of FEI. You may THINK we had an average offense this year, but you don't have any proof. You only have what your biased eyes tell you. There needs to be numerical analysis in order to compensate for the inherent biases we ALL have when watching GT football. If the FEI stat says we have an offense ranked in the 30's (which is what I remember someone on this board showing), then it doesn't matter that you THINK we were average, we obviously weren't. We weren't as good as you wanted, but we were better than about 80% of D1 (or whatever you call it now) college teams. Same goes for me, it doesn't matter what I THINK I'm seeing if the numbers don't agree with me. If we can't agree on an objective way to evaluate performance, then productive conversation will be all but impossible. And, you (nor I) will have anything but our own biased opinions to keep us company and to preach to everyone else.

3. Why would you want to get rid of a HC at GT who gives us a chance to have a GREAT offense even at our current level of recruiting? The consistent floor of our offense has been "good enough" to takes us where we want to go IF we can find a way to have an above average defense. And, the ceiling for our offense is the sky itself, the best in the freakin' nation.

4. Again, I don't understand your critique of FEI. Can you explain what you mean by "most efficiency stats are geared toward the norm, not the extremes"? Somehow, you have used that line to justify the conclusion that our passing game was mediocre even in a year when the adjusted efficiency numbers actually said we were at or near the top. Efficiency in passing, btw, would mean yards per attempt (FEI would be adjusting for schedule and other game factors). If we lead the nation in that, then nothing else matters for our passing game. And, not our passing game route tree is not rudimentary, nor our fundamentals weak. We run a run-n-shoot based on 4-verticals (or the threat thereof). This is the same philosophy as some of the greatest passing offenses in history. It is the same philsophy as our run game, designed to make the defender make a decision and then whatever he decides we can make a play off of that. It doesn't always work (neither does any other offensive play), but it often does. It is obvious to me that our passing philosophy is extremely effective to work as well as it does with the personnel we have had. We've had some of the worst arm talent in college football playing under center for us during CPJ's tenure, and we've still been able to do damage in the passing game, we still have wide open receivers and one-on-ones with our best guy making a play. You don't get that with any other offense nearly as often as we get it. JT was decent in the arm-talent department, and Smelter was an upper-quartile college football talent, and we just dominated the competition with those two (nobody else, just two good players was all it took). Same with Nesbitt and D.Thomas. It seems to me we already have one guy committed in this class (J.Graham) and another possibility (M.Barrett) who take us up to that level of talent under center, so we're sitting on something special again.

But, again, the biggest roadblock to any of these points having any benefit in discussion though, is a failure for us to agree on the best way to evaluate performance. If we can't do that, no other points will ultimately matter. Can you propose a better way than FEI for evaluation?
 

Madison Grant

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,276
1. I don't think it's irrelevant, far from it. I think it's the most relevant argument (maybe the only relevant point in the event we're discussing). If we're not trying to find the next great DC, then why are we even playing or donating money or even watching? The whole point of competition is to try to win. It seems to me that using your logic, there's also no sense in changing the head coach either since we're not going to find someone proven at this level who will come and coach at GT for what we can pay. Using your standard (Brent Venables, the best DC in the nation right now), we would have to hire Nick Saban in order to justify changing head coaches. Although, I do think your idea of hiring an elite DC with the promise of head coach in waiting is an intriguing one.

2. I don't understand your explanation of your suspicion of FEI. You may THINK we had an average offense this year, but you don't have any proof. You only have what your biased eyes tell you. There needs to be numerical analysis in order to compensate for the inherent biases we ALL have when watching GT football. If the FEI stat says we have an offense ranked in the 30's (which is what I remember someone on this board showing), then it doesn't matter that you THINK we were average, we obviously weren't. We weren't as good as you wanted, but we were better than about 80% of D1 (or whatever you call it now) college teams. Same goes for me, it doesn't matter what I THINK I'm seeing if the numbers don't agree with me. If we can't agree on an objective way to evaluate performance, then productive conversation will be all but impossible. And, you (nor I) will have anything but our own biased opinions to keep us company and to preach to everyone else.

3. Why would you want to get rid of a HC at GT who gives us a chance to have a GREAT offense even at our current level of recruiting? The consistent floor of our offense has been "good enough" to takes us where we want to go IF we can find a way to have an above average defense. And, the ceiling for our offense is the sky itself, the best in the freakin' nation.

4. Again, I don't understand your critique of FEI. Can you explain what you mean by "most efficiency stats are geared toward the norm, not the extremes"? Somehow, you have used that line to justify the conclusion that our passing game was mediocre even in a year when the adjusted efficiency numbers actually said we were at or near the top. Efficiency in passing, btw, would mean yards per attempt (FEI would be adjusting for schedule and other game factors). If we lead the nation in that, then nothing else matters for our passing game. And, not our passing game route tree is not rudimentary, nor our fundamentals weak. We run a run-n-shoot based on 4-verticals (or the threat thereof). This is the same philosophy as some of the greatest passing offenses in history. It is the same philsophy as our run game, designed to make the defender make a decision and then whatever he decides we can make a play off of that. It doesn't always work (neither does any other offensive play), but it often does. It is obvious to me that our passing philosophy is extremely effective to work as well as it does with the personnel we have had. We've had some of the worst arm talent in college football playing under center for us during CPJ's tenure, and we've still been able to do damage in the passing game, we still have wide open receivers and one-on-ones with our best guy making a play. You don't get that with any other offense nearly as often as we get it. JT was decent in the arm-talent department, and Smelter was an upper-quartile college football talent, and we just dominated the competition with those two (nobody else, just two good players was all it took). Same with Nesbitt and D.Thomas. It seems to me we already have one guy committed in this class (J.Graham) and another possibility (M.Barrett) who take us up to that level of talent under center, so we're sitting on something special again.

But, again, the biggest roadblock to any of these points having any benefit in discussion though, is a failure for us to agree on the best way to evaluate performance. If we can't do that, no other points will ultimately matter. Can you propose a better way than FEI for evaluation?
23rd in the magical geek stat of FEI. Yay!!!!! 70th in scoring. You don't have to be a stat geek to understand the bottom line. Your company can have tremendous magical efficiency stats, but if you look in the bank account and you're losing money, you aint doing well. Forget the defense. Roof is gone. We'll see if we can do better there.
 

ilovetheoption

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,816
23rd in the magical geek stat of FEI. Yay!!!!! 70th in scoring. You don't have to be a stat geek to understand the bottom line. Your company can have tremendous magical efficiency stats, but if you look in the bank account and you're losing money, you aint doing well. Forget the defense. Roof is gone. We'll see if we can do better there.
I am assuming that Madison Grant is not a musician. If he were, his understanding of tempo would be disastrous.
 

Madison Grant

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,276
I am assuming that Madison Grant is not a musician. If he were, his understanding of tempo would be disastrous.
LOL. In fact, I am a musician. Please, please, please, please, please don't give me the "It's because the option eats up the clock" crap. Yes, that's why really effective option teams like the old Nebraska and Oklahoma used to beat people 10-7. WRONG! The option, when it's humming, can just as easily be a quick strike offense. It's just not a "two minute" drill offense. Virginia Tech game? One missed assignment by the defense, and it's to the house. If you stat geeks can explain to me how FEI takes into the account how we ran up a monster yardage number against UT, but fumbled it after a 30 yard gain late with a chance to put it away, and didn't execute an offensive play the last play of the game, or dropped a catchable pass that would have put the Miami game away, I'll shut up. The offense was mistake prone this year. We didn't have the 3rd down passing we had with JT. Stats can deceive as well as eyes.
 
Top