Official Ted Roof Discussion Thread

[Whiskey_Clear]

Not just on Roof, but every starting DL in 2012 and 2013 got NFL money, and the only one never on a 53 man roster is still getting CFL money iirc.

Yet, we heard the same complaints about our DL then.

None of those guys played at peak level at the same time together. If those lines had all been in the same class and left for the pros the same year, I would concede. But they didn't. Gotsis didn't play at a "peak level" till his junior year and his senior year was cut short. Gamble didn't peak till his senior year and, as much as I want him to, most likely won't make a 53 man roster.

 

[33jacket]

Fair enough. We have a slight difference of opinion on how lacking or not our overall DL has been since 2009. 08 was our best during CPJ but I failed to include them in my earlier post.

As for Gamble, I love the guy. He was the heart and soul of our DL last year and I think he does have an outside shot at making a team I think. Praying for it to happen. But I really don't think he came into his own till his senior year last year. Next best last year was Freeman then probably Simmons and Branch as reserves who came on as the season progressed.

They gave their all and I appreciate the hell out of that. But we didn't dominate much and struggled in several games.

If we don't improve depth more than having one guy at a time play at a peak level, bellichick himself won't do much better. Good news is I think we are getting there. I do expect improved play this year barring major injuries. If that doesn't happen my opinion is subject to change.

Honestly though, I really think next year is the year we see our payoff on Dline.

ok. Finally a post I of course can agree with. You will never hear me say we are ok on the DL. Of course improving the DL helps us, and any team. Remember, Gamble battled bad injuries Soph and Jr year we all don't know about....I hope to heck he makes a squad. Without those injuries IMO he was a draft pick.

As far as DL. Yes, it may be next year with age. But...lets also be real too. Simmons and Freeman are Sr. A Sr DE with that much PT needs to ball out. They are gone next year, then the excuse of a young DE who can't set the edge enters again. At some point its put up or shut up. Its been a long time in this system. And, hopefully next year you won't post "they all didn't play together at peak time". Every team loses guys and mismatches peak time play. AE point is correct...all those dudes...were legit next level talents. Something is wrong here. Under groh it was 3-4 is not a fit here...conceded. Roof is a 4-3 over style, but he does ask his tackles to do alot of the same things a 3-4 would

For me, I am utterly convinced, while our DL is not world beaters, that we have bigger schematic issues on the backend that exposes our overall D.

As an example. So it turns out...in 2014 3 of the starting 4 secondary members ended up being legit NFL quality. That doesn't mean NFL starters, but they all made depth charts....ok, thats NOT easy to do. As much as we like to down play even practice squads, its not easy to do. Simply, look how loose and bad that secondary was. It wasn't talent. There is more too it. I know I am beating a dead horse, but I watch Roof trott out the same stuff every year...no changes, and its rinse and repeat with different talent. Our 3rd down rates, pressures and sacks are all near dead last in the NCAA. A better DL helps some....but its more than that.

Ted Roof blitzes around 25% of the snaps. Yet, we are near the bottom of the NCAA in sacks, pressures and TFL. Why is that? Its a few reasons. The blitz designs suck. Flat out are pedestrian.

The backend coverage doesn't match the blitz designs. When we blitz the coverage needs to take advantage of automatics or hot reads. It doesn't...so the ball gets out quick...doesn't make the QB think because we are not pressing enough or taking away the inside.

There is a whole lotta hurt in what we do. And the thing is...Ted is not dumb. But I just simply think his scheme is stuck in the mid 1990s, he has always done it this way and its a bit archaic.

33 Out.

 

[PBR549]

So. For your last point here. i agree. But my reason for why we dont win in the trenches is the roof scheme is not made for the type of kid we can get at tech. The 2004 or 05 starting dl was no more talented than some of ours the last two years; but they did fine. We had solid defenses. I think the same for 2006 starting unit.

For me what we asked our dl to do under groh and roof is not a fit. Although different base schemes both have the dl do similar tasks in concept especially at tackle.

Tenuta ran a unique scheme here. I think gailey influenced it. When i watch what he ran at uva some was similar but alot wasnt.

Also for me roof us really bad at manufacturing pressure.

This is simply just an opinion.

Where have you coached again?

 

[33jacket]

33 thanks for being specific.
It would help if in 17 could u watch replay while statistically noting for 3rd down some info relative to down distance , yard line offset of db, safety , fl at foot , back pedal, blitz lanes results.

I hope we are doing simple stuff like camo the coverage (8 on line then shift do and drop into coverage or blitz. That will be obvious to even untrained db eye (me).

If u get data u could detect change or not and make your presentation on gt swarm really meaning full. Engel love numbers.

By way my son who coaches hs in east texas says there is a online service that does the games breakdown and provides some level of down distance tendencies.

Thanks

I did this last year. I did a down and distance, situation, and the type of d we played with the results game by game. LOL. It took a while.

I then published success precentages on third down etc and the success of the offense.

What I found was we essentially play alot of 1/4 1/4 1/2 coverage. Which, some quarters DC feel is the right backend for todays spreads and zone reads. Its a version of quarters. In general, quarters is regarded as a more prevent call. The statistics showed we were actually the worst last year giving up chunk plays in this coverage than any other. It could be because we were in it more often (obvious), but what I noticed is we tend not to mix up pressure packages with this backend; and when the 1/4 and 1/2 S bailed in coverage (back pedal vs stand ground) we left open massive passing windows.

Blitzing in 1/4 1/4 1/2 was not often. It did happen, but not enough. So, as an opposing coach...its easy for me. On 3rd down, when I see this coverage, or 2nd down, Roof has all sorts of tells; first, my line and RB checks are to the MLB. If we blitz; its him. But, we rarely do. So my OL and RB really are not too concerned....Now my QB is relatively comfortable knowing the chances of blitz are low. We line up in our coverage presnap, its super easy to diagnose. So I probably already know where I am going with the ball at snap. If 1 is covered I go to 2.

We did, also not often, disguise a cover 3 with a 1/4/1/41/2 presnap roll a few times. Again, not often. But we would drop the 1/4 S down and roll the half S to the middle of the field at snap or tried to just before snap. The problem with doing this, is the weakness of the 1/4 1/4 1/2 scheme is the same weakness with the cover 3 LOL. Its the dumbest roll in all of football. Weakness of a cover 3 is a curl in, flats and digs....well what are the weaknesses of quarters. Flats, post/flags, and curls. So, basically, if a QB reads quarters, and we roll to cover 3 and he is presnap reading to go to an inside slant, or curl...he is right every time. If he presnap reads to attack the D with #2 on playaction, he is right again, every time.

Quarters by nature is a strong run defense look. but has a HUGE weakness in play action covering 2. If 1 runs a 9, and #2 S reads his key on run, and its playaction, and he is wrong....#2 is wide the hell open. Sound familiar? As a result, in flood concepts, scissor concepts etc, there are ALOT of checks between the S and CB to make up fo this big weakness in D. There are anywhere from 4-6 checks in quarters presnap to get your coverage and communication right. Especially in trips; where the CB has to take the presnap S man, and the S has to come up and take the CB man.

This is why Roof is simplifying. By nature what he runs requires many many checks to prevent the weaknesses in cover 4.

Now, my view is this. Cover 4 is tailored to stopping the run game. Done right, it SHOULD be harder to run on cover4 teams. Simply its easier to drop the S down quick for run support.

But, teams now, basically pass more. We see many RPOs which eats up quarters. We have 3 WR sets that are base now. IMO we haven't switched.

In coaches clinics they are really talking more and more about half field man concepts to the RB side for RPO. Man has to enter into the equation more now. But, you can get exposed in the run game, so they are doing partial field man concepts on 1st down. With half field zone shells. TCU really does this awesome. IMO we run enough man. We don't need to run more man. I do think we need to move from 50%+ in quarters, to more cover 3 and cover 2; and mix in half field zones. We need to change our S drops. And finally we need to make sure if we roll coverages, you show a coverage with a weakness, and roll to a coverage where its a strength...not to another coverage that shares many of the same weaknesses.

 

[33jacket]

Where have you coached again?

high school and in your head lol

what I want to know, is which family member of Ted are you. I am being serious...not trying to pick a fight.

if you just come out and say you are his mom, or sister, or dad...I will respect that and stop slamming him

 

[PBR549]

ok. Finally a post I of course can agree with. You will never hear me say we are ok on the DL. Of course improving the DL helps us, and any team. Remember, Gamble battled bad injuries Soph and Jr year we all don't know about....I hope to heck he makes a squad. Without those injuries IMO he was a draft pick.

As far as DL. Yes, it may be next year with age. But...lets also be real too. Simmons and Freeman are Sr. A Sr DE with that much PT needs to ball out. They are gone next year, then the excuse of a young DE who can't set the edge enters again. At some point its put up or shut up. Its been a long time in this system. And, hopefully next year you won't post "they all didn't play together at peak time". Every team loses guys and mismatches peak time play. AE point is correct...all those dudes...were legit next level talents. Something is wrong here. Under groh it was 3-4 is not a fit here...conceded. Roof is a 4-3 over style, but he does ask his tackles to do alot of the same things a 3-4 would

For me, I am utterly convinced, while our DL is not world beaters, that we have bigger schematic issues on the backend that exposes our overall D.

As an example. So it turns out...in 2014 3 of the starting 4 secondary members ended up being legit NFL quality. That doesn't mean NFL starters, but they all made depth charts....ok, thats NOT easy to do. As much as we like to down play even practice squads, its not easy to do. Simply, look how loose and bad that secondary was. It wasn't talent. There is more too it. I know I am beating a dead horse, but I watch Roof trott out the same stuff every year...no changes, and its rinse and repeat with different talent. Our 3rd down rates, pressures and sacks are all near dead last in the NCAA. A better DL helps some....but its more than that.

Ted Roof blitzes around 25% of the snaps. Yet, we are near the bottom of the NCAA in sacks, pressures and TFL. Why is that? Its a few reasons. The blitz designs suck. Flat out are pedestrian.

The backend coverage doesn't match the blitz designs. When we blitz the coverage needs to take advantage of automatics or hot reads. It doesn't...so the ball gets out quick...doesn't make the QB think because we are not pressing enough or taking away the inside.

There is a whole lotta hurt in what we do. And the thing is...Ted is not dumb. But I just simply think his scheme is stuck in the mid 1990s, he has always done it this way and its a bit archaic.

33 Out.

high school and in your head lol

what I want to know, is which family member of Ted are you. I am being serious...not trying to pick a fight.

if you just come out and say you are his mom, or sister, or dad...I will respect that and stop slamming him

Message me what HS.

 

[33jacket]

Message me what HS.

no need, outside of greenville, SC back in early 2000s; worked with WRs. I do not coach today; professionally I earn more than even our asst coaches at GT football. Its a no brainer. Coaching is a ****ty life man..... As many on this board know, I had about 1-2 years of a small radio program with one of our former SA's doing GT football, and I talked alot about it then; we were on FM once a week and I think live streaming 3 times a week. I have been consistently critical of our program in many facets when warranted but also offering improvement suggestions...not just complaining. I chaired the 1st and 10 board at georgia tech for a year plus(its a alumni association board we used to have years ago). I brought on Marvin Lewis who know works at GT, a baseball player that played in the minors at GT, 2 other former gt football players etc, some still post on this board today and can verify me.

I was really involved with our team. I am colleagues and old next door neighbors at tech in the dorms with Tim Brown, our former DL to OL who brought me in to help our football players with interviewing skills and professional networking.

I personally have given back to this program more than most people on this board post graduation. I don't mean money, time and effort. Of course I am older now, with kids, and I had to let alot of that go.

Back during the show, Gailey was ending his tenure and being released, and we focused alot on program issues Rad tried to correct...this has been my major issue with tech, trying to fundraise and get program improvements.

Today, I like to needle about roof...its fun...I actually have no bones to pick with him. Ted is a really good guy and person. Had great kids. In fact ironically may be his neighbor soon. I will needle him in person...hey ted "you still trotting out that loose quarters covg" LOL

anyway...look...messages boards are not a conduit for me to get personal with folks. Its a fun discussion. I respect you have lots of loyalty to him. I don't attack him. If you notice, I keep it really just on X's and Os. Well...other than hair gel but thats just a joke.

 

[Lavoisier]

While I do like TCUs results running their varied and down/distance specific coverages on defense, how do you avoid being exploited by the super fast up-tempo offenses these days? It would seem you would need guys across the board who are great in both zone and man coverages and would require a decent amount of brain power to keep switching checks and what the keys are.

 

[33jacket]

While I do like TCUs results running their varied and down/distance specific coverages on defense, how do you avoid being exploited by the super fast up-tempo offenses these days? It would seem you would need guys across the board who are great in both zone and man coverages and would require a decent amount of brain power to keep switching checks and what the keys are.

up tempos that get a first down, run to the line super quick and snap are all RPO's or auto plays. They only have 2-3. You have to scout that and match your defense to 80% rule.

Most teams that do that...the exact next play is a zone read run. If its not, its a slant or quick pass, because you are not concerned with line calls and complexity, you are just trying to get the D out of position and take advantage FAST. This is what chip kelly did at oregon. And film study shows the very next play most times...was as run.

As a D, your film study will show when those teams like to go hyper speed. You practice running to your spots fast from the ground (its a drill you can do with cones); and train your eyes to expect the hand off or quick pass. They could pump and go off that. So the S have to watch.

Teams that no huddle and up tempo and call complex plays from the sideline with signals, are not as fast, but still really fast. This is where you have to have a plan based on their personnel (11 usually, sometimes 20 or 10); and align quick, make simple variations quick once aligned you have to call your D fast. So....play done. Get up get aligned really fast in base, look to the sideline get your calls, adjust your alignment based on the call and read your key. The faster you can get up, and in position as a D, even before the offense is lined up, the better. For instance as S walk 10 deep to the hashes. Cb's split etc...then adjust on the call...At that point, the call can be the call....any call...you do have enough time, but the coaches need to be quick

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

I know some of you Roof haters are saying he isn't getting as much from available talent as he should. To that I say if you are not at practice spending time with our units...you are just guessing. Ditto for me in my evals.

As to DL many of you think our prior units are quite a bit better than I happen to. Opinions differ. I think you are overlooking the ceilings many of our guys had and that we typically have few guys across the line playing at a high level together. Different guys reach ceilings at different rates. Of our guys on the DL that have gone on to have even some limited NFL success, few were game changers early in their careers. Most, if not all, had to develop in time.

This situation led to DLs with no depth and few, usually only a single, difference maker on the unit in any given year.

Some cite the talent behind the DLs. There is some merit to that argument but I think you are vastly overlooking the importance of a strong front. Put an all conference secondary behind a high school DL and see how well they ball. They will look awful. Is this an extreme and unrealistic scenario? Yeah sure. D play is like all others. The best D line won't look great with a high school secondary behind them. But if I had to choose between these scenarios you can bet your butt I'd take the high school secondary.

It all starts up front. If you don't control the front, or at least win your share of battles, you will have a very long row to hoe and will live with frustration.

Our depth the last several years has been awful. On par with the bottom quarter of of p5 programs imo. Could more have been done regardless coaching wise? Maybe. I'm not in the habit of expecting wine to be made from water.

Roof should have more tools to use this year than any point in his current tenure. I expect it will show results. If not my opinion is subject to change. If so is your opinion likely to?

 

[33jacket]

I know some of you Roof haters are saying he isn't getting as much from available talent as he should. To that I say if you are not at practice spending time with our units...you are just guessing. Ditto for me in my evals.

As to DL many of you think our prior units are quite a bit better than I happen to. Opinions differ. I think you are overlooking the ceilings many of our guys had and that we typically have few guys across the line playing at a high level together. Different guys reach ceilings at different rates. Of our guys on the DL that have gone on to have even some limited NFL success, few were game changers early in their careers. Most, if not all, had to develop in time.

This situation led to DLs with no depth and few, usually only a single, difference maker on the unit in any given year.

Some cite the talent behind the DLs. There is some merit to that argument but I think you are vastly overlooking the importance of a strong front. Put an all conference secondary behind a high school DL and see how well they ball. They will look awful. Is this an extreme and unrealistic scenario? Yeah sure. D play is like all others. The best D line won't look great with a high school secondary behind them. But if I had to choose between these scenarios you can bet your butt I'd take the high school secondary.

It all starts up front. If you don't control the front, or at least win your share of battles, you will have a very long row to hoe and will live with frustration.

Our depth the last several years has been awful. On par with the bottom quarter of of p5 programs imo. Could more have been done regardless coaching wise? Maybe. I'm not in the habit of expecting wine to be made from water.

Roof should have more tools to use this year than any point in his current tenure. I expect it will show results. If not my opinion is subject to change. If so is your opinion likely to?

Whiskey. Here is the difference in your last point. You are going to change your opinion after about 5 years of poor performance. You are enabled to do that based on bad performance for many years, combined with what you feel is now a better unit so it should be a good defense, and if its not, the prior years plus this one you may change.

For me I have 15 years of data of bad performance with similar trends at different schools. I have another 5 of bad performance here at GT with the same issues that plagued him while at Auburn and the same ones that plagued him while here at GT part 1.

One good year...will not change that for me. You needed 5-6 years to change potentially. While you are asking us, if 1 is enough? No. If we have a good D this year (top 45 in D efficiency, top 45 in scoring, and big improvements in pressure and 3rd down rates ....lets define what good is...which btw is not great..its just ok, where we should be ESPECIALLY with this offense); but if we have a good D this year....then, I need to see it again in 2018, then, if it happens again in 2019. I will surely begin to flip end of 2018; but I also believe, that will only happen with an upgrade in some areas of talent and schematic adjustments. To get 3 straight years it will require both.

FYI IIRC tenuta had 5-6 straight years or so. It can be done here.

 

[Jerry the Jacket]

Ted Roof is a tremendous asset for Georgia Tech and in particular Georgia Tech football. It is the same 5 to 10 people on here that continually call for his head. I guess that is why these message boards exist to allow the vocal minority an outlet for their point of view. Ted will be here as long as he wants to be.

Go Jackets!

 

[Ibeeballin]

Man a lot to digest.

1) Been saying it's not talent for awhile. As stated, there have been numerous NFL guys from the Defense on this roster. No way we should be in the bottom statistically in defense.

2) We complain about being undersized on the DL, but we don't do much to help them out scheme wise. When run a few slow, lethargic twist and stunts but not many slants and angles.

3) I have an issue with Pelton also don't developing out pass rusher and also want to grow DTs(may be forced into tho). Idk what it is but it feels Freeman's growth has been stunted and guys like Simmon and ASA should be on the field together in obvious passing situations( this the favoritism that appears to be shown at times)

4) Zone drops has been horrible for awhile with our LBs. Whether it's spacing or closing on receivers. I hate the whole get into your zone drop with your eyes on the QB instead of looking up the defender who you are zone off, decipher the route, and close on the route that's in your zone.

 

[PBR549]

no need, outside of greenville, SC back in early 2000s; worked with WRs. I do not coach today; professionally I earn more than even our asst coaches at GT football. Its a no brainer. Coaching is a ****ty life man..... As many on this board know, I had about 1-2 years of a small radio program with one of our former SA's doing GT football, and I talked alot about it then; we were on FM once a week and I think live streaming 3 times a week. I have been consistently critical of our program in many facets when warranted but also offering improvement suggestions...not just complaining. I chaired the 1st and 10 board at georgia tech for a year plus(its a alumni association board we used to have years ago). I brought on Marvin Lewis who know works at GT, a baseball player that played in the minors at GT, 2 other former gt football players etc, some still post on this board today and can verify me.

I was really involved with our team. I am colleagues and old next door neighbors at tech in the dorms with Tim Brown, our former DL to OL who brought me in to help our football players with interviewing skills and professional networking.

I personally have given back to this program more than most people on this board post graduation. I don't mean money, time and effort. Of course I am older now, with kids, and I had to let alot of that go.

Back during the show, Gailey was ending his tenure and being released, and we focused alot on program issues Rad tried to correct...this has been my major issue with tech, trying to fundraise and get program improvements.

Today, I like to needle about roof...its fun...I actually have no bones to pick with him. Ted is a really good guy and person. Had great kids. In fact ironically may be his neighbor soon. I will needle him in person...hey ted "you still trotting out that loose quarters covg" LOL

anyway...look...messages boards are not a conduit for me to get personal with folks. Its a fun discussion. I respect you have lots of loyalty to him. I don't attack him. If you notice, I keep it really just on X's and Os. Well...other than hair gel but thats just a joke.

Obviously you're not a coach. You do sound like a booster guy with a personal issue with Ted. All the scheme stuff you put out here is BS that a lot of people on the board who also are not coaches will believe. You do sound like a booster club guy who wants people to think he's important to the program. I've seen you over and over in my 35 years as a college and HS coach. I don't like to put down players but obviously we can't recruit as well as the factories. You implied earlier that Mark Richt may have made the comment about Tech having low level talent in the ACC. Richt didn't make a comment like that but the article was correct. We have been at the bottom, not because we don't have GREAT recruiters like Roof and McCollum but because we can only recruit about one third of the kids that other schools can recruit.

One example you gave in this thread was about us having 3 out of 4 dbs in 2014 as having NFL talent. Every coach knows that if you sell out man every time, a good OC will get their best receiver one on one with that other guy and you've wasted that NFL talent.

Some love Tenuta. I like him too but go back and watch the 2014 UVA game and tell me who had the better defensive game plan? We've NEVER had a consistent defense over a period of years nor offense until Paul Johnson. If we keep this staff we have a chance to get better and more consistent. If we begin moving people again we'll regress. Johnson is smart, he knows this. Like I've said on several occasions if Paul is arrogant enough to fire the best recruiter he has and I've ever been around then it want take long for the wolves to be howling at his door.

As coaches we are constantly honing our craft. We never get to the point when we are not constantly learning from colleagues and opponents alike. Our coaches are the same and we have good ones. Not everyone can coach at Tech. It takes a special person to be successful here as a coach and a recruiter. Many wouldn't last a year.

I believe our recruiting is getting better and if we hang in there we'll see some more good seasons but don't be part of the problem. Let the coaches coach and hopefully they won't be trying to tell you how to be an engineer.

 

[tech_wreck47]

@33jacket knows his stuff, he's not just saying Roof can't coach or this or that. He's given reasons and explaining the reasons he feels the way he does. I see people saying it's personnel, yet when I asked a question earlier in the thread of do y'all really think our talent level is 94th (D efficiency) I got no answer, because if you say no we aren't then that means it's more than personnel. I understand some might be close to Roof on here or just like him because he's a Tech man but if some will say it's personnel and not scheme, that must mean you understand scheme to make that statement. If that is true can any of y'all let me know how our players fit into the scheme or even what we do scheme wise in general? If the answer is they don't for the scheme then wouldn't it be smart to change up things to fit the players you do have? A scheme that fits your personnel? I don't think anyone is saying Roof is a bad coach or that his scheme is a bad scheme, but for GT it's not good if you don't have the personnel for it.

 

[ATL1]

Obviously you're not a coach. You do sound like a booster guy with a personal issue with Ted. All the scheme stuff you put out here is BS that a lot of people on the board who also are not coaches will believe. You do sound like a booster club guy who wants people to think he's important to the program. I've seen you over and over in my 35 years as a college and HS coach. I don't like to put down players but obviously we can't recruit as well as the factories. You implied earlier that Mark Richt may have made the comment about Tech having low level talent in the ACC. Richt didn't make a comment like that but the article was correct. We have been at the bottom, not because we don't have GREAT recruiters like Roof and McCollum but because we can only recruit about one third of the kids that other schools can recruit.

One example you gave in this thread was about us having 3 out of 4 dbs in 2014 as having NFL talent. Every coach knows that if you sell out man every time, a good OC will get their best receiver one on one with that other guy and you've wasted that NFL talent.

Some love Tenuta. I like him too but go back and watch the 2014 UVA game and tell me who had the better defensive game plan? We've NEVER had a consistent defense over a period of years nor offense until Paul Johnson. If we keep this staff we have a chance to get better and more consistent. If we begin moving people again we'll regress. Johnson is smart, he knows this. Like I've said on several occasions if Paul is arrogant enough to fire the best recruiter he has and I've ever been around then it want take long for the wolves to be howling at his door.

As coaches we are constantly honing our craft. We never get to the point when we are not constantly learning from colleagues and opponents alike. Our coaches are the same and we have good ones. Not everyone can coach at Tech. It takes a special person to be successful here as a coach and a recruiter. Many wouldn't last a year.

I believe our recruiting is getting better and if we hang in there we'll see some more good seasons but don't be part of the problem. Let the coaches coach and hopefully they won't be trying to tell you how to be an engineer.

Well I think @Ibeeballin just made a post that pretty much counters much of this, so........

 

[tech_wreck47]

Obviously you're not a coach. You do sound like a booster guy with a personal issue with Ted. All the scheme stuff you put out here is BS that a lot of people on the board who also are not coaches will believe. You do sound like a booster club guy who wants people to think he's important to the program. I've seen you over and over in my 35 years as a college and HS coach. I don't like to put down players but obviously we can't recruit as well as the factories. You implied earlier that Mark Richt may have made the comment about Tech having low level talent in the ACC. Richt didn't make a comment like that but the article was correct. We have been at the bottom, not because we don't have GREAT recruiters like Roof and McCollum but because we can only recruit about one third of the kids that other schools can recruit.

One example you gave in this thread was about us having 3 out of 4 dbs in 2014 as having NFL talent. Every coach knows that if you sell out man every time, a good OC will get their best receiver one on one with that other guy and you've wasted that NFL talent.

Some love Tenuta. I like him too but go back and watch the 2014 UVA game and tell me who had the better defensive game plan? We've NEVER had a consistent defense over a period of years nor offense until Paul Johnson. If we keep this staff we have a chance to get better and more consistent. If we begin moving people again we'll regress. Johnson is smart, he knows this. Like I've said on several occasions if Paul is arrogant enough to fire the best recruiter he has and I've ever been around then it want take long for the wolves to be howling at his door.

As coaches we are constantly honing our craft. We never get to the point when we are not constantly learning from colleagues and opponents alike. Our coaches are the same and we have good ones. Not everyone can coach at Tech. It takes a special person to be successful here as a coach and a recruiter. Many wouldn't last a year.

I believe our recruiting is getting better and if we hang in there we'll see some more good seasons but don't be part of the problem. Let the coaches coach and hopefully they won't be trying to tell you how to be an engineer.

If he doesn't understand scheme that means you do. So please show where he has made statements that are not true? Also can you show what Roof does? And why it's ok to run at GT? And how if we continue to run it we will get better?If you don't believe him that it's scheme, maybe take the work of ibeballin an ex player who's saying it's scheme himself. Do you coach? Seem to make a statement that a guys not a coach you would need to be one to understand why he's not.

 

[PBR549]

Well I think @Ibeeballin just made a post that pretty much counters much of this, so........

Wrong on all counts. Personnel is the problem. Hopefully we see improvement across the board.

 

[AE 87]

I know some of you Roof haters are saying he isn't getting as much from available talent as he should. To that I say if you are not at practice spending time with our units...you are just guessing. Ditto for me in my evals.

As to DL many of you think our prior units are quite a bit better than I happen to. Opinions differ. I think you are overlooking the ceilings many of our guys had and that we typically have few guys across the line playing at a high level together. Different guys reach ceilings at different rates. Of our guys on the DL that have gone on to have even some limited NFL success, few were game changers early in their careers. Most, if not all, had to develop in time.

This situation led to DLs with no depth and few, usually only a single, difference maker on the unit in any given year.

Some cite the talent behind the DLs. There is some merit to that argument but I think you are vastly overlooking the importance of a strong front. Put an all conference secondary behind a high school DL and see how well they ball. They will look awful. Is this an extreme and unrealistic scenario? Yeah sure. D play is like all others. The best D line won't look great with a high school secondary behind them. But if I had to choose between these scenarios you can bet your butt I'd take the high school secondary.

It all starts up front. If you don't control the front, or at least win your share of battles, you will have a very long row to hoe and will live with frustration.

Our depth the last several years has been awful. On par with the bottom quarter of of p5 programs imo. Could more have been done regardless coaching wise? Maybe. I'm not in the habit of expecting wine to be made from water.

Roof should have more tools to use this year than any point in his current tenure. I expect it will show results. If not my opinion is subject to change. If so is your opinion likely to?

It's not guessing.
1) When guys make NFL rosters, they have talent. Suggesting that it was anointed on them after their Sr season is bizarre.
2) Coaches have talked about simplifying in order to let kids play faster. That's an admission that they weren't putting them in the best place to succeed to start with.
3) The complaint is not that we aren't a top 5 or top 10 or even top 20 D, but that we aren't top 50 or top 40. In fact, we've been bottom 30 and bottom 50 more often. I respect @PBR549 for consistently saying that we must have bottom 50 talent in his defense of Roof, but I don't buy it.

 

[33jacket]

Obviously you're not a coach. You do sound like a booster guy with a personal issue with Ted. All the scheme stuff you put out here is BS that a lot of people on the board who also are not coaches will believe. You do sound like a booster club guy who wants people to think he's important to the program. I've seen you over and over in my 35 years as a college and HS coach. I don't like to put down players but obviously we can't recruit as well as the factories. You implied earlier that Mark Richt may have made the comment about Tech having low level talent in the ACC. Richt didn't make a comment like that but the article was correct. We have been at the bottom, not because we don't have GREAT recruiters like Roof and McCollum but because we can only recruit about one third of the kids that other schools can recruit.

One example you gave in this thread was about us having 3 out of 4 dbs in 2014 as having NFL talent. Every coach knows that if you sell out man every time, a good OC will get their best receiver one on one with that other guy and you've wasted that NFL talent.

Some love Tenuta. I like him too but go back and watch the 2014 UVA game and tell me who had the better defensive game plan? We've NEVER had a consistent defense over a period of years nor offense until Paul Johnson. If we keep this staff we have a chance to get better and more consistent. If we begin moving people again we'll regress. Johnson is smart, he knows this. Like I've said on several occasions if Paul is arrogant enough to fire the best recruiter he has and I've ever been around then it want take long for the wolves to be howling at his door.

As coaches we are constantly honing our craft. We never get to the point when we are not constantly learning from colleagues and opponents alike. Our coaches are the same and we have good ones. Not everyone can coach at Tech. It takes a special person to be successful here as a coach and a recruiter. Many wouldn't last a year.

I believe our recruiting is getting better and if we hang in there we'll see some more good seasons but don't be part of the problem. Let the coaches coach and hopefully they won't be trying to tell you how to be an engineer.

you are entitled to your opinion. I am not a booster lol at all; and no personal issue with Ted. If you wish to see what you wish to see ok. I don't care one iota about your opinion so its fine