Official Ted Roof Discussion Thread

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,653
Location
Georgia
26-1.jpg


hair products about as out of date as my defensive scheme
 

SidewalkJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,665
My two opinions on CTR:

1) He is doing wonders for us in recruiting.
2) For whatever reason (design or talent) his defense generates no pass rush.

Which of these two things is more important to you seems to determine your opinions on CTR. Thus, we will forever be divided, it seems...
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,653
Location
Georgia
Gosh, it seems like I have been saying it now for 4-5 years. That no matter who is in his defense, his scheme is no good for us and we won't be good on D. We have had flashes, but never in a season can we truly rely on the D it seems for a big stop. Its always a bit of a prayer and more often than not, big 3rd downs from a mile away are converted it seems. Although, the closest maybe was 2015; but it was such an overall dumpster of a season it was so hard to gage.

So I could break from what I have been in general correct about for half a decade on roof, and say we will be better, this year....I could. I mean he is due for one good year. IS this it?

But I will say...as an example. RPO is now big in football. Categorically, across the board, DC's play man vs RPO because it makes the offense false read, it puts one extra man in the box for run, and gives the DB a one on one chance. Last year, statistically vs RPO teams, DC's chose man more than 50% of the time to push them to read poorly and force runs.

We are in quarters (or a version) with a back pedal technique most of our snaps. In fact, most DC who still play quarters moved to a flat foot technique because of RPO, where S park at 10 or 12 yard depth; get their read keys at snap while staying in place (don't move); if they read pass from the TE or OT if no TE they hinge step and go to 2, if they read run they square and focus on the key; the second they read pass and focus on 2...they move. At that point they try to gain inside leverage on 2.

One of my biggest complaints, is if we are a quarters base, which we are, a simple fix almost all quarter based D's now employ, or any 2 high S D (cover 2 for example); is to use flat foot technique (don't go til u know). However, we a ultra ultra prevent style. We line at 12, and backpedal PRESNAP sometimes....Its a total ball buster for me.

As a result, our 2 high safety look has a massive gap between their zone and #2 responsibility. We can't get on their hip quick enough. Its often why, vs Roof D, the TE are WIDE open in the middle....or the slot wr. The concept of the S is to gain inside leverage; but we can't do that backpedaling at snap or presnap before the read is perfectly made.

Now this is coached. This isn't choice of the S. The choice of the S is AFTER the read is diagnosed....how do you hinge, square and shuffle. He determines that based on the WR speed etc....I watched alot of tape on our D...when we play flat foot, its because the flat S is blitzing, has box support, but not because he is in zone. As a result, we already tell a smart QB pre snap...what we are doing by his body lean....

So...for me, even if you keep the roof scheme 100% the same...if you make this change on how our s line up, diagnose, read and react...its a big improvement.

Here is one simple example of moving the D into the more modern era....

We can then look at how we use our front 7 as well....but I really know the backend more and it drives me crazy. I am sure @Ibeeballin can give more insight on simple fixes to front 7 that would help in todays modern ball.

Just fyi, some coaches DO DO THINGs that way because "we always have". So...it could easily be this is the case with Roof
 

Chris Freeman

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
128
Location
Hampton, Georgia
Im still reserving judgment. We've brought in some solid defensive players of late, let's see what he does with them. Besides, it's not like his predecessors were any more successful. We've had a top 30 defense twice in the CPJ era. I believe it's a personnel issue and I don't see hiring a 4th DC changing that.
 

SidewalkJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,665
Gosh, it seems like I have been saying it now for 4-5 years. That no matter who is in his defense, his scheme is no good for us and we won't be good on D. We have had flashes, but never in a season can we truly rely on the D it seems for a big stop. Its always a bit of a prayer and more often than not, big 3rd downs from a mile away are converted it seems. Although, the closest maybe was 2015; but it was such an overall dumpster of a season it was so hard to gage.

So I could break from what I have been in general correct about for half a decade on roof, and say we will be better, this year....I could. I mean he is due for one good year. IS this it?

But I will say...as an example. RPO is now big in football. Categorically, across the board, DC's play man vs RPO because it makes the offense false read, it puts one extra man in the box for run, and gives the DB a one on one chance. Last year, statistically vs RPO teams, DC's chose man more than 50% of the time to push them to read poorly and force runs.

We are in quarters (or a version) with a back pedal technique most of our snaps. In fact, most DC who still play quarters moved to a flat foot technique because of RPO, where S park at 10 or 12 yard depth; get their read keys at snap while staying in place (don't move); if they read pass from the TE or OT if no TE they hinge step and go to 2, if they read run they square and focus on the key; the second they read pass and focus on 2...they move. At that point they try to gain inside leverage on 2.

One of my biggest complaints, is if we are a quarters base, which we are, a simple fix almost all quarter based D's now employ, or any 2 high S D (cover 2 for example); is to use flat foot technique (don't go til u know). However, we a ultra ultra prevent style. We line at 12, and backpedal PRESNAP sometimes....Its a total ball buster for me.

As a result, our 2 high safety look has a massive gap between their zone and #2 responsibility. We can't get on their hip quick enough. Its often why, vs Roof D, the TE are WIDE open in the middle....or the slot wr. The concept of the S is to gain inside leverage; but we can't do that backpedaling at snap or presnap before the read is perfectly made.

Now this is coached. This isn't choice of the S. The choice of the S is AFTER the read is diagnosed....how do you hinge, square and shuffle. He determines that based on the WR speed etc....I watched alot of tape on our D...when we play flat foot, its because the flat S is blitzing, has box support, but not because he is in zone. As a result, we already tell a smart QB pre snap...what we are doing by his body lean....

So...for me, even if you keep the roof scheme 100% the same...if you make this change on how our s line up, diagnose, read and react...its a big improvement.

Here is one simple example of moving the D into the more modern era....

We can then look at how we use our front 7 as well....but I really know the backend more and it drives me crazy. I am sure @Ibeeballin can give more insight on simple fixes to front 7 that would help in todays modern ball.

Just fyi, some coaches DO DO THINGs that way because "we always have". So...it could easily be this is the case with Roof

Now that's an insightful post. I haven't always liked the fact that you tend to hijack threads and turn them into CTR arguments, but I respect the work you put into that post and I tend to agree.

The question then remains: does his recruiting success (which is undeniable and echoed by HS coaches) make his antiquated coaching style worth it? Good scheme/lesser talent seems to work for us on offense, but will bad scheme/good talent work for us on D? Time will tell, b/c our D recruiting has skyrocketed as of late. Should be able to make judgements this year.
 

bke1984

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,447
First off, Roof > Groh. Both are pretty good recruiters, but Groh's sit back and let people throw all over you system was the worst thing I've ever witnessed. His scheme is 100% responsible for 2012 being a 7-7 season and not a 10-4 season.

I liked what I saw towards the end of the year last year, but it's still not as aggressive as I like to see on defense. The problem is that being aggressive against these spread option teams is not necessarily the best option anymore.

He's got some solid talent coming in, so we'll see how we look over the next couple years. Bottom line is that it doesn't have to be a top 15 defense. If we could just get a top 30 defense it might mean 2+ more wins a year with what we can do on offense.
 

tech_wreck47

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,670
Im still reserving judgment. We've brought in some solid defensive players of late, let's see what he does with them. Besides, it's not like his predecessors were any more successful. We've had a top 30 defense twice in the CPJ era. I believe it's a personnel issue and I don't see hiring a 4th DC changing that.
So you think our personal is so bad that they are bottom of the pack in college football? I find that hard to believe.
 

wreckrod

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
429
I guess my biggest frustration is I wish we could see where Roof was honing his craft as a DC. Obviously he is a tremendous recruiter.

We have been the most successful under Roof when CPJ has said "be more aggressive". Instead of waiting for the one game mid-season where we get torched, I wish we'd start the season with the desperation of that mid-season defensive meltdown.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,220
Roof/Tenuta comparison (Scoring Defense)

2013 Roof #29/ Tenuta #99 (UVA)
2014 Roof #53/ Tenuta #33 (UVA)
2015 Roof #51/ Tenuta #96 (UVA)
2016 Roof #39/ Tenuta not a DC
2017 Roof tbd/ Teunata... still not a DC

I know, I know. This single stat doesn't tell the whole story, not even close. But my point is to question how is Tenuta and his scheme performing against "modern offenses". Heck, nobody even wants him to be DC anymore.
 

ilovetheoption

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,816
Gosh, it seems like I have been saying it now for 4-5 years. That no matter who is in his defense, his scheme is no good for us and we won't be good on D. We have had flashes, but never in a season can we truly rely on the D it seems for a big stop. Its always a bit of a prayer and more often than not, big 3rd downs from a mile away are converted it seems. Although, the closest maybe was 2015; but it was such an overall dumpster of a season it was so hard to gage.

So I could break from what I have been in general correct about for half a decade on roof, and say we will be better, this year....I could. I mean he is due for one good year. IS this it?

But I will say...as an example. RPO is now big in football. Categorically, across the board, DC's play man vs RPO because it makes the offense false read, it puts one extra man in the box for run, and gives the DB a one on one chance. Last year, statistically vs RPO teams, DC's chose man more than 50% of the time to push them to read poorly and force runs.

We are in quarters (or a version) with a back pedal technique most of our snaps. In fact, most DC who still play quarters moved to a flat foot technique because of RPO, where S park at 10 or 12 yard depth; get their read keys at snap while staying in place (don't move); if they read pass from the TE or OT if no TE they hinge step and go to 2, if they read run they square and focus on the key; the second they read pass and focus on 2...they move. At that point they try to gain inside leverage on 2.

One of my biggest complaints, is if we are a quarters base, which we are, a simple fix almost all quarter based D's now employ, or any 2 high S D (cover 2 for example); is to use flat foot technique (don't go til u know). However, we a ultra ultra prevent style. We line at 12, and backpedal PRESNAP sometimes....Its a total ball buster for me.

As a result, our 2 high safety look has a massive gap between their zone and #2 responsibility. We can't get on their hip quick enough. Its often why, vs Roof D, the TE are WIDE open in the middle....or the slot wr. The concept of the S is to gain inside leverage; but we can't do that backpedaling at snap or presnap before the read is perfectly made.

Now this is coached. This isn't choice of the S. The choice of the S is AFTER the read is diagnosed....how do you hinge, square and shuffle. He determines that based on the WR speed etc....I watched alot of tape on our D...when we play flat foot, its because the flat S is blitzing, has box support, but not because he is in zone. As a result, we already tell a smart QB pre snap...what we are doing by his body lean....

So...for me, even if you keep the roof scheme 100% the same...if you make this change on how our s line up, diagnose, read and react...its a big improvement.

Here is one simple example of moving the D into the more modern era....

We can then look at how we use our front 7 as well....but I really know the backend more and it drives me crazy. I am sure @Ibeeballin can give more insight on simple fixes to front 7 that would help in todays modern ball.

Just fyi, some coaches DO DO THINGs that way because "we always have". So...it could easily be this is the case with Roof

At the risk of being an UNBELIEVABLE ballache, would you mind sourcing this? Not because I don't believe you, but because I'd like to take a peek at your materials to make myself a better, more educated fan (particularly where you get stats about coverages vs. specific style of teams, and how a "RPO team" is distinguished and such)

If you want to tell me"...no dude, that's a PITA" then fine, but I'd appreciate it :)
 

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,668
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
 
Messages
2,077
Im still reserving judgment. We've brought in some solid defensive players of late, let's see what he does with them. Besides, it's not like his predecessors were any more successful. We've had a top 30 defense twice in the CPJ era. I believe it's a personnel issue and I don't see hiring a 4th DC changing that.
I agree. Would Bud Foster or Buddy Ryan or John Chavis do any better with the players that we have always had?
 

JorgeJonas

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,147
Gosh, it seems like I have been saying it now for 4-5 years. That no matter who is in his defense, his scheme is no good for us and we won't be good on D. We have had flashes, but never in a season can we truly rely on the D it seems for a big stop. Its always a bit of a prayer and more often than not, big 3rd downs from a mile away are converted it seems. Although, the closest maybe was 2015; but it was such an overall dumpster of a season it was so hard to gage.

So I could break from what I have been in general correct about for half a decade on roof, and say we will be better, this year....I could. I mean he is due for one good year. IS this it?

But I will say...as an example. RPO is now big in football. Categorically, across the board, DC's play man vs RPO because it makes the offense false read, it puts one extra man in the box for run, and gives the DB a one on one chance. Last year, statistically vs RPO teams, DC's chose man more than 50% of the time to push them to read poorly and force runs.

We are in quarters (or a version) with a back pedal technique most of our snaps. In fact, most DC who still play quarters moved to a flat foot technique because of RPO, where S park at 10 or 12 yard depth; get their read keys at snap while staying in place (don't move); if they read pass from the TE or OT if no TE they hinge step and go to 2, if they read run they square and focus on the key; the second they read pass and focus on 2...they move. At that point they try to gain inside leverage on 2.

One of my biggest complaints, is if we are a quarters base, which we are, a simple fix almost all quarter based D's now employ, or any 2 high S D (cover 2 for example); is to use flat foot technique (don't go til u know). However, we a ultra ultra prevent style. We line at 12, and backpedal PRESNAP sometimes....Its a total ball buster for me.

As a result, our 2 high safety look has a massive gap between their zone and #2 responsibility. We can't get on their hip quick enough. Its often why, vs Roof D, the TE are WIDE open in the middle....or the slot wr. The concept of the S is to gain inside leverage; but we can't do that backpedaling at snap or presnap before the read is perfectly made.

Now this is coached. This isn't choice of the S. The choice of the S is AFTER the read is diagnosed....how do you hinge, square and shuffle. He determines that based on the WR speed etc....I watched alot of tape on our D...when we play flat foot, its because the flat S is blitzing, has box support, but not because he is in zone. As a result, we already tell a smart QB pre snap...what we are doing by his body lean....

So...for me, even if you keep the roof scheme 100% the same...if you make this change on how our s line up, diagnose, read and react...its a big improvement.

Here is one simple example of moving the D into the more modern era....

We can then look at how we use our front 7 as well....but I really know the backend more and it drives me crazy. I am sure @Ibeeballin can give more insight on simple fixes to front 7 that would help in todays modern ball.

Just fyi, some coaches DO DO THINGs that way because "we always have". So...it could easily be this is the case with Roof
This is very interesting and detailed. Thank you.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,237
He's got some solid talent coming in, so we'll see how we look over the next couple years. Bottom line is that it doesn't have to be a top 15 defense. If we could just get a top 30 defense it might mean 2+ more wins a year with what we can do on offense.

Man alive...that is so true. CPJ's offense with a top 30 defense will make GT a perennial top 25 team. It's scary what our offense can do with a few more possessions and more 3-5 and outs by the defense.

IMO, the best defense to pair up with CPJ's offense is an attacking defense. A defense than more times than not will create turn overs and puts a lot of pressure on the QB to force bad plays and get the opponent's offense off the field. Sure, it may lead to a big play, but if we win the majority of those battles, it puts a LOT of pressure on the other team's offense to keep up with ours. We've seen what happens when other teams offenses try to play catch up with us...they take more chances, and it leads to more big plays on defense.

In a way, CPJ had the perfect DC/defense the day he stepped on campus. Unfortunately, Tenuta's mouth and ego knee capped that relationship before it could go anywhere.
 
Messages
2,077
So you think our personal is so bad that they are bottom of the pack in college football? I find that hard to believe.
Not the bottom of the pack of all college football, but definitely much lower than the four or five ACC teams that stand between us and division title, and definitely lower than the best six or seven teams in each of the power five conferences. So yes, there is probably going to be at least forty teams out there that have better players on defense than we do. But fortunately, our defense doesn't play their defense, so we can mitigate the situation with an offense that trumps their defense. Our defense just has to be better against the opposing offenses. If it can result in two more wins per year, 7-5 can become 9-3. I think the dream would be a top drawer defense to go along with our offense.
 

Blumpkin Souffle

Bidly Biddington III
Messages
1,367
Recruiting has definitely seemed to have an uptick since he got here, but after 5 years I would like to see some improvement on the field. If we can make it into the top 50 defensive rankings I'll be thrilled.
 
Top