Official Ted Roof Discussion Thread

[tech_wreck47]

I don't evaluate, drill or determine playing time for these student athletes. I have watched them drill. Have you? I have talked to Coach Pelton about what he teaches and sat in his clinic talk and watched video of the drill technique he teaches. Have you? In fact I've done that hundreds of times with coaches at every position at about every SEC and ACC school and others. Have you?

Yeah, our kids all have things to work on and if you could give me some credentials as to why you know better than Coach Pelton I'd be glad to arrange a meeting so you can tell him what you think he's doing wrong.

 

[tech_wreck47]

I don't evaluate, drill or determine playing time for these student athletes. I have watched them drill. Have you? I have talked to Coach Pelton about what he teaches and sat in his clinic talk and watched video of the drill technique he teaches. Have you? In fact I've done that hundreds of times with coaches at every position at about every SEC and ACC school and others. Have you?

Yeah, our kids all have things to work on and if you could give me some credentials as to why you know better than Coach Pelton I'd be glad to arrange a meeting so you can tell him what you think he's doing wrong.

I think you are missing the point from a lot of posters. I don't think anyone is saying they can't coach.they are simply saying our scheme does not work for what we have personnel wise and therefore that goes back to coaching. It not that hard of a concept to play to our players strengths. If they can't do something don't ask them to do it. If they can't win one on one on the D line (something you say our guys can't do) then stop asking them to do it so much, call plays that will confuse the OL and allow our guys to excel, get a step faster than the Ol because they don't know where you are coming from etc. would you disagree with this? I don't think Roof is a bad coach for his scheme, that's not the point being made. The point being made is if your guys can't do something, great coaches adjust.

 

[Techster]

I think you are missing the point from a lot of posters. I don't think anyone is saying they can't coach.they are simply saying our scheme does not work for what we have personnel wise and therefore that goes back to coaching. It not that hard of a concept to play to our players strengths. If they can't do something don't ask them to do it. If they can't win one on one on the D line (something you say our guys can't do) then stop asking them to do it so much, call plays that will confuse the OL and allow our guys to excel, get a step faster than the Ol because they don't know where you are coming from etc. would you disagree with this? I don't think Roof is a bad coach for his scheme, that's not the point being made. The point being made is if your guys can't do something, great coaches adjust.

That's what drives me crazy when a coach says "We need to simplify...". Holy crap, you see these kids every day in practice, it's halfway through the season, you're just realizing the schemes you're implementing aren't sinking in with the players or they don't have the ability to pull it off?! Are these schemes not run over and over in practice to make sure the players have it down? If it's not working in practice, there's a VERY good chance it ain't working in a game. Find something the players can do well and build from there. Don't force a square peg in a round hole.

 

[tech_wreck47]

basic and obvious to steal your phrase.

Some things a 35 year coach should be able to share would be beneficial for all on the board.

Tell us why you think Freemans hand activity is below par, because it is. What is wrong with his technique?

Tell us what you think Kyle Henderson's biggest challenge is to become more consistent based on his film? Where is his greatest area of inprovement that he could work on?

Outside of the obvious Simmons needs to work on his hip flexibility which was in the paper what have you noticed about his inside rip move that doesn't seem to work when he sets up Ot on the outside with his speed rush?

What have you noticed as a primary issue in mitchells game at lb with respect to pass cvg?

I would love to know your observations here since this should be very basic for you to detail by simply watching a few minutes of youtube videos on past games. And you can do so without putting a player down...and since players are the issue this would be a great read for us to learn. I know far less about dl technique than other spots. So for me it would be good to learn

I could be wrong so let me know if I am, this is just from memory and not watching any replay games (don't have good service where I am)

Freeman could get more violent with his hands, this will allow him to stay away from the OL instead of them getting in on him.

Kyle Cerge-Henderson needs to get more exspolsive off the ball, he seems to let guys get in on him.

Simmons on his rip move should be ripping up, but instead he is ripping up and into the body of the OL which is causing him to get to far into the body of the OL instead of using his length and extending his arms to keep away from the OL.

Brant does not play the guy in his zone, almost as if he isn't recognizing him? I would like to see him brake on the guys that come into his zone. Maybe his eyes are not in the right place?

Not sure if this is correct though?

 

[UgaBlows]

I like what Ted brings to the table vs. uga, attitude and play calling. I feel like we always have a good shot vs. them with him at dc.

 

[PBR549]

Ok I can agree with some of these comments. But let me ask this, if it's just personnel don't you think we should change up to fit the personnel we have?


I have nothing against Roof, nor do I think anyone on here does. My issue is, that if you don't have the personnel to run the scheme you run, then you need to evolve as a coach. That imo is what great coaches do. I've said it before but I'll say it again, play to the players strengths, Dan Quinn says this and took a team to the super bowl after just two years for a reason. Do you think we are doing this or do you disagree to do that? I just don't get us saying it's personnel but then saying it's not scheme, they go hand and hand. Why run a scheme you don't have the personnel for? Does that make any sense to you? I don't see the reason for us not to get more exotic with blitz and coverages to help the guys out. There are plenty of teams that do this. Our coach does this on offense to help offset thing. We are running a D that takes factory type talent and even then it's not always the best, take auburn as an example.

We are doing what our personnel dictates.

Its a numbers game. It all starts up front. You need to have someone to draw a double team whether run or pass. If you do it gives you a numerical advantage. I don't want to get into the business of evaluating individual players and I hate the idea of anyone thinking I'm putting down an individual so I'll stick with scheme basics. If we have a defender that draws two blockers it opens up what you can do. If you have two that draw two even better.

If none draw two you're behind. Now, there are things you can do if this is the case. You can bring 5. This can be a LBer, S or C. You can play zone behind it and give up a zone (many times the flat into the boundary) or play man free. You can zone blitz and drop an end to the flat but you're only rushing 4. Either coverage has more risk than bringing 4 and man free, two deep, quarters or two man or 3deep.

If you can't get there with 5! Bring 6! More risk cover 0. You better get there!

You're ability to draw a double team or cover receivers one on one determines your limitations. We've had to do what we've had to do. If some of these guys have improved enough to draw double teams we can out number their blockers by bringing fewer rushers.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

I already did. 2012 and 2013 from which all of our front 4 (incl JA in 12) made NFL money and all but Gotsis were upperclassmen. Hence, why I said "anointed after graduation" when you replied stte of not yet playing their best.

My point is that you can't just assume that lesser performance means lesser talent.

-2012 sacks
Sneezy 10
Watts LB 2
Barnes 1.5
Cross 1.5
Dieke 1.5
Cummings 3
Gotsis 1
Team total : 28

-2013 sacks
Sneezy 12.5
Jabari 2.5
Gotsis 5.5
Cummings 2.5
Team total : 34

2013 is the only year you can really say we had 2 guys playing at a high level together. I'll concede this year as I think Gotsis had about 14.5 TFL. In 2012 he had 1.5 (was he anointed or coached up?)

Stats from cfbstats.com

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

@PBR549 is 100 percent right when he said dc have to pick their poison when calling a game based on personnel. Totally correct.

And this is the basis of my criticism of roof. My opinion is this is what he is not doing well enough, ie his scheme is not matching who we have as good as it could. Now. The counter argument is maybe he is doing that perfectly. Ok. For me i think then the results would be better. Our talent is not perfect. But for me still not that bad. Thats why its my OPINION.

Yeah, if there is one thing I am an expert on, it's my opinion! . I once heard a coach say that elite, pass rushing defensive linemen were the most difficult players to find and recruit for any school. I think it is safe to say Russell Maryland, Bruce Smith, or Jadeveon Clowney aren't ever coming to Tech.

 

[PBR549]

Yeah, if there is one thing I am an expert on, it's my opinion! . I once heard a coach say that elite, pass rushing defensive linemen were the most difficult players to find and recruit for any school. I think it is safe to say Russell Maryland, Bruce Smith, or Jadeveon Clowney aren't ever coming to Tech.

We have too many limitations in recruiting. I've watched it. Most college coaches go to the field house when they get to a high school. Tech's go to the guidance office. It's tough and getting tougher. I've seen us unable to recruit those guys who now play on Sunday even if they had Tech ties.

 

[tech_wreck47]

We are doing what our personnel dictates.

Its a numbers game. It all starts up front. You need to have someone to draw a double team whether run or pass. If you do it gives you a numerical advantage. I don't want to get into the business of evaluating individual players and I hate the idea of anyone thinking I'm putting down an individual so I'll stick with scheme basics. If we have a defender that draws two blockers it opens up what you can do. If you have two that draw two even better.

If none draw two you're behind. Now, there are things you can do if this is the case. You can bring 5. This can be a LBer, S or C. You can play zone behind it and give up a zone (many times the flat into the boundary) or play man free. You can zone blitz and drop an end to the flat but you're only rushing 4. Either coverage has more risk than bringing 4 and man free, two deep, quarters or two man or 3deep.

If you can't get there with 5! Bring 6! More risk cover 0. You better get there!

You're ability to draw a double team or cover receivers one on one determines your limitations. We've had to do what we've had to do. If some of these guys have improved enough to draw double teams we can out number their blockers by bringing fewer rushers.

Our scheme requires the double team not every scheme HAS to have this though. So once again when you don't have the personnel to run your scheme then you have to change things up. Do you agree our offense maximizes Talent and levels the playing field? You can do the same on D but we don't. I'm talking about getting more exotic to confuse the OL when you can't win the one on ones like you mentioned. Why did you not comment on stuff like that? It's as simple as this, our scheme requires guys to win one on one battles without confusion, it's a pretty simple scheme which is fine If you have factory talent. There are schemes that do not require as much one on one or will atleast allow guys to have a step faster than the OL because of confusion though. Looking at our D personnel, which would you say fits best for us? You're comment was almost as if all schemes are the same. But you are still missing the point. Every scheme is not the same if you can't run one scheme because of personnel why not run something different? You keep skipping around stuff like this. You're just telling me why our scheme doesn't work for our guys instead of telling me why we should keep doing it instead of running something different.

 

[Lavoisier]

The sack leader last year was a Junior from BC. High 3-star recruit from NC which is kind of our wheelhouse as far as recruits go. The kid from Pitt was 7th in the nation. Duke Ejiofor at Wake Forest had double digit sacks (remember that name when we play them this year, kid is very good). NC State has a guy with 9 sacks. That's just our conference. We easily pull more talented guys than these schools but we're in the bottom 20 of sacks in the nation. Our coaches don't develop the guys we get like these other schools.

 

[PBR549]

Our scheme requires the double team not every scheme HAS to have this though. So once again when you don't have the personnel to run your scheme then you have to change things up. Do you agree our offense maximizes Talent and levels the playing field? You can do the same on D but we don't. I'm talking about getting more exotic to confuse the OL when you can't win the one on ones like you mentioned. Why did you not comment on stuff like that? It's as simple as this, our scheme requires guys to win one on one battles without confusion, it's a pretty simple scheme which is fine If you have factory talent. There are schemes that do not require as much one on one or will atleast allow guys to have a step faster than the OL because of confusion though. Looking at our D personnel, which would you say fits best for us? You're comment was almost as if all schemes are the same. But you are still missing the point. Every scheme is not the same if you can't run one scheme because of personnel why not run something different? You keep skipping around stuff like this. You're just telling me why our scheme doesn't work for our guys instead of telling me why we should keep doing it instead of running something different.

Listen please. If they can block all your guys one on one then you're in trouble. As Coach Johnson says there are no majic schemes. It comes down to blocking and tackling. It's all about numbers. You can work on every kind of blitz known to man but if you can't get there you're burnt. At some point per Coach Johnson someone has to step up if you want to be good. That's as simple as I can make it.

 

[AE 87]

-2012 sacks
Sneezy 10
Watts LB 2
Barnes 1.5
Cross 1.5
Dieke 1.5
Cummings 3
Gotsis 1
Team total : 28

-2013 sacks
Sneezy 12.5
Jabari 2.5
Gotsis 5.5
Cummings 2.5
Team total : 34

2013 is the only year you can really say we had 2 guys playing at a high level together. I'll concede this year as I think Gotsis had about 14.5 TFL. In 2012 he had 1.5 (was he anointed or coached up?)

Stats from cfbstats.com

OK, you seem to be missing my point. I'm saying that you can't look at performance at GT to guage talent since it's impossible to separate out scheme/what they're being asked to do.

I do think we did alright coaching them up to get them ready for NFL. You look at those sack numbers and conclude what about Barnes, Watts, Cross, Dieke, Cummings? Yet they all got NFL money.

Fwiw, we should expect lower absolute sack numbers because we should face fewer plays given how our O eats clock.

 

[PBR549]

The sack leader last year was a Junior from BC. High 3-star recruit from NC which is kind of our wheelhouse as far as recruits go. The kid from Pitt was 7th in the nation. Duke Ejiofor at Wake Forest had double digit sacks (remember that name when we play them this year, kid is very good). NC State has a guy with 9 sacks. That's just our conference. We easily pull more talented guys than these schools but we're in the bottom 20 of sacks in the nation. Our coaches don't develop the guys we get like these other schools.

I don't know, when was it we lost all those dlinemen in the off season? We've never had the depth we needed at DL. I don't know that that is a fair conclusion to draw. We usually don't have as many chances over the course of the season as others. I do agree we need to be better.

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

We have too many limitations in recruiting. I've watched it. Most college coaches go to the field house when they get to a high school. Tech's go to the guidance office. It's tough and getting tougher. I've seen us unable to recruit those guys who now play on Sunday even if they had Tech ties.

My guess is about 99.9% of us don't want to change that. And we still win 700 games.

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

The sack leader last year was a Junior from BC. High 3-star recruit from NC which is kind of our wheelhouse as far as recruits go. The kid from Pitt was 7th in the nation. Duke Ejiofor at Wake Forest had double digit sacks (remember that name when we play them this year, kid is very good). NC State has a guy with 9 sacks. That's just our conference. We easily pull more talented guys than these schools but we're in the bottom 20 of sacks in the nation. Our coaches don't develop the guys we get like these other schools.

I hear you loud and clear. We could do better with the players we have. But there isn't a correlation of sacks to wins for these teams. Boston College, Wake, NCST, even Pitt would like more wins and less sacks. It may be folly on our part to think more sacks means more wins. I know that is not your point, you illustrate that somehow these DC's can put their lesser talent into positions that result in sacks. But it might be enlightening to see how many plays of 25 plus yards those sack-happy defenses gave up. We did win nine games last year even with the albatross of Coach Roof around our neck! I am not saying be satisfied. But the ship ain't sinking either.

 

[PBR549]

My guess is about 99.9% of us don't want to change that. And we still win 700 games.

I agree but if we don't want to change that and we don't want to bring our salaries in line with the factories then we shouldn't hold our coaches responsible for producing like one!

 

[ilovetheoption]

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

OK, you seem to be missing my point. I'm saying that you can't look at performance at GT to guage talent since it's impossible to separate out scheme/what they're being asked to do.

I do think we did alright coaching them up to get them ready for NFL. You look at those sack numbers and conclude what about Barnes, Watts, Cross, Dieke, Cummings? Yet they all got NFL money.

Fwiw, we should expect lower absolute sack numbers because we should face fewer plays given how our O eats clock.

meh....if you can't get off the field on 3rd down you will face more plays and potentially get more sacks. Bama in 2012 n 2013 had crazy good Ds....and relatively low TFLs. They were 3 and out then spectating from the bench all game.....but I digress.

Roof haters might be right. I might be wrong. I just think it's presumptuous of fans, with much less info than coaches, to stipulate schemes etc don't work.

Does CPJ fire DCs he thinks aren't getting it done? Yes, has a history of it. I really don't believe he'd tolerate a scheme that was not capable of working with our players. I don't think he'd tolerate a position coach teaching wrong or bad technique. No one desires a top 20 D more than CPJ.

 

[tech_wreck47]

Listen please. If they can block all your guys one on one then you're in trouble. As Coach Johnson says there are no majic schemes. It comes down to blocking and tackling. It's all about numbers. You can work on every kind of blitz known to man but if you can't get there you're burnt. At some point per Coach Johnson someone has to step up if you want to be good. That's as simple as I can make it.

I agree 100% but I also believe there are things to help offset that by confusing opposing offenses. We do it on offense with our system. Go watch VT and tell me what you see, yes they beat guys one on one but a lot of that can be credited to the offense not having a clue what you are doing, where you are coming from, what blitz and stunts are being used ect. How often do you see one of our D linemen going free without being touched? Not very often, but it happens with other teams, so why is that? Confusion is the big reason imo. Your still missing the point, so I'll say it again. There are ways to offset not winning one on ones, we do not do that. You can play to a players strength (something you have ignored me saying) and I do not believe we do. now if you think our scheme maximizes our talent level then ok, there's nothing for us to argue about. I just believe there are a lot more things we could do so our guys could excel. please do not ignore this last question because I have asked many time through this thread (not directly at you) do you believe our talent level on D efficiency is 94th nationally?