Official Ted Roof Discussion Thread

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Um, has anyone caught the somewhat concerning thread with every DC that's coached at GT under CPJ? The theme of "we need to simplify" the defense for our players...

Seems like we hear it every year. Hopefully, with guys that have been in the system for 3-4 years under Roof, we start hearing more "We're expanding what we do to take advantage of X and Y."

Since "simplifying" always seems to make the D better, then why not keep it simple all the time. Why "expand" if there's no real reason to? We "simplified" after the UNC game last year, and we all saw what happened. Why wait? Start off the season that way then add some wrinkles if needed. But overall, KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID !!!

 

[Lavoisier]

Football can often be boiled down to needing three basic ingredients to be a good team (great teams require a few other things like luck etc.):

1) Talent
2) Scheme
3) Fundamentals

With some synergistic effects between the three: fundamentals based on talent etc.

I think all Tech fans agree that Coach Roof is good at #1. I think many feel he has failed at #3 with how poor our tackling is and how our DLine gets stood up and can't generate a rush against even some pretty poor OLines. I think there are mixed feelings on point 2 which is where all the arguments come from. Some fans feel our lack of talent leads to a schematic failure while others, such as myself, feel the schematic failure (and failure of teaching fundamentals) has wasted some pretty decent talent. Someone posted in another thread all the guys we sent to the NFL from the defense the past few years so we have had talent at Tech especially compared to some other teams in the ACC. I also feel like some posters assume that if Roof and his coaches (they all share blame and should be scrutinized imo) are fired we can never find people who can recruit as well or close enough to his level. I disagree with this but it's all speculation until we try with a different coach who has the same support as the current staff has.

Do we extend Roof in December or let him walk? I think we extend him at something like $800-850k/year for 3 years, but I don't think it's money well spent. I think taking a hit in recruiting for a tighter scheme and better fundamentals would be a better choice and using the difference to get good assistants that can really hammer home fundamental stuff.

We hired Roof at $600k if I remember correctly which is about right for what he brings to the table. We kind of had to extend him after the OB even though it was an over pay, but I just feel like we're getting fleeced if we extend him. He has to have a legitimately good defense for me to be ok with it, I don't think merely improvement and promises that we'll be good soon is good enough for me as a fan.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

I'm tired of every thread turning into a Ted Roof bash/defend cluster####. Can we consolidate this mess and leave the other threads alone?

Mmmmmm, about as likely as Trump becoming politically correct

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

hair products about as out of date as my defensive scheme

Luckily we don't run your scheme 33...thanks for clarifying your deficiencies though

 

[Lavoisier]

Since "simplifying" always seems to make the D better, then why not keep it simple all the time. Why "expand" if there's no real reason to? We "simplified" after the UNC game last year, and we all saw what happened. Why wait? Start off the season that way then add some wrinkles if needed. But overall, KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID !!!

Simplifying is a very good strategy especially since we have a very efficient offense. My personal opinion: you don't need to get super exotic with your coverages and blitzes or have a bunch of substitution packages with an offense that can score like ours. I personally love the Michigan State/Pitt quarters/cover 4 defense. They play with the same personelle regardless of situation (except maybe short yard and goal line stuff) and they just practice the same thing over and over until they are simply elite at the one thing they do. The LBs don't have to switch reads or cues depending on if they are in a 4-3 or 4-2 alignment. Others have different opinions and there is no perfect scheme, but it's one I think has a lot of merit for GT.

I think you can go complex and outsmart your opponent if the kids come in with D1 fundamentals and you can spend all of camp installing neat disguises and stunts, but we aren't that school and are never going to be.

 

[33jacket]

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

Not sure what u mean. The source is me. I watch film. If you want a S footwork combined with where their head is pointing and their alignment you can immediately tell what they are trying to do or if unsure and what d was called.

 

[Coloradojacket]

Interesting Stats. I look at Defense as a matter of points scored per game.

2016 24.46 per game 9-4
2014 25.57 per game 11-3
2008 20.38 per game 9-4
2006 18.35 per game 9-5

 

[ilovetheoption]

Not sure what u mean. The source is me. I watch film. If you want a S footwork combined with where their head is pointing and their alignment you can immediately tell what they are trying to do or if unsure and what d was called.

Ah, I thought you were grabbing the numbers from a site somewhere to determine percentages of coverages and stuff. NM

 

[33jacket]

Ah, I thought you were grabbing the numbers from a site somewhere to determine percentages of coverages and stuff. NM

Yes. I just realized what you meant. No. The formation numbers and what dc call against rpo came from a coaches clinic this past offseason. I was just about to type this response.

What was interesting for those that didnt call man vs rpo or check to man, they all made changes to backend covg even if still in cover 4 or 2 etc. they had too....rpo exploits the heck out of deep zones.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Instead of reporters asking how MJ looks, who has stood out, what frosh has impressed etc....I'd like to see someone ask CPJ and Roof what factors have led to our inability to get the D off the field more. Then what are we doing to improve this? (Other than just simplify...)

Heck I'd also like someone to ask what drills etc are run to improve ball security. Is it mostly just reps? If it's mostly reps how do you balance reps at QB with 4 viable candidates and what problem does that create when game 1 arrives?

As for the D....imo it boils down to winning the one on one battles in the trenches. Our lack in doing so is what leads to the majority of the rest of our problems and the criticisms of same.

 

[iceeater1969]

NOW FOR A DEFENSE OF OUR DEFENSE.
Please tell me what scheme and who the 1# defense unit is practicing against.

I saw the spring game and the defense was pretty quick. I hear they are flying around.
Imo our defense is probably close to the best defense our offense sees. Our plan and practices favor making the O so good it dominates.


If we lack depth in offense talent (as we have in the past) , the 1 defense is not getting well prepared by the scout team.



The bet is - our advantages for the offense improves them much faster than the defense declines.
Roof bets we play soft for most of game and only tight when red zone or end of game. This gives very bad stats in spite of strong offensive stats.


Despite this low ranking on defense and a thankless assignment for the players we are improving defensive talent see 2018 recruit last 4 or 5 commits). . I believe this is amazing.

I feel that we should play very aggressive in early season games. First -early in season teams are not in playing shape. In addition its hot so if we can get our offense back on the field, the opponent defense will be totally gassed by 3rd q so . If they are gassed and with depth on offense we can run base plays and save more sophisticated plays for later in year. We should keep this up aggressive he whole game.
Finally and the most important reason. THE DEFENSE GETS REAL GAME EXPERIENCE WITH AGGRESSIVE DEFENSE BEFORE WE NEED IT AT END OF YEAR . When u need AGGRESSIVE d it's to late to be learning . If u want acc champ or major bowl in the playoffs you must be already super quick at AGGRESSIVE d . Its too late at end of year.


Based on late 16 and our overall depth improvement i believe Roof is working towards being more aggressive.

This year if we ramp up the same as 16 , the defense when combined with offense could result a great end of season (circa14 but better fsu and may scored at will).

My final point
I like how Roof treats the players. They never quit on him.

At this time he is here add some x o tech help - could be a consultant. . Also add a couple of very young recent players to staff( Coach roof is coaching the lb with chalk board during the time o is on field) so they can help communicate with players in game and practice. Let Roof be the DC.

I rest my defense.

 

[tech_wreck47]

Interesting Stats. I look at Defense as a matter of points scored per game.

2016 24.46 per game 9-4
2014 25.57 per game 11-3
2008 20.38 per game 9-4
2006 18.35 per game 9-5

Yea because they only get a limited amount of drives like we do, so it evens out. Not really an advantage.

 

[MidtownJacket]

This is a really interesting conversation that is going on amid the chatter. Thanks @33jacket for putting together what you're seeing and explaining the specific concerns you have with CTR's tendencies and apparent coaching philosophy.

I don't think anyone contends CTR hasn't helped our recruiting effort significantly, which is where a lot of my frustration comes from when reading posts where people are bashing him. I frankly don't have the knowledge you bring to the discussion on scheme / set up / pre-snap reactions so find your posts insightful. I just spent the last hour re-watching some film and noticed exactly what you're calling out. Thanks for helping my understanding of our Defense improve a little bit.

I am really hoping we will see improvement on the D side of the ball consistent with the uptick in recruiting, and agree that time will tell. If we keep coaching players into bad positions than hopefully we can get some help from someone inside the organization to improve those areas. I don't know CPJ or CTR personally but they both seem to be competitive enough to improve despite their own proclivities (CPJ putting in pistol for Vad; CTR simplifying things at the end of the season last year are two examples of this).

TL;DR | I learned something about how we set up presnap from @33jacket today so thanks

#GATA

 

[33jacket]

Instead of reporters asking how MJ looks, who has stood out, what frosh has impressed etc....I'd like to see someone ask CPJ and Roof what factors have led to our inability to get the D off the field more. Then what are we doing to improve this? (Other than just simplify...)

Heck I'd also like someone to ask what drills etc are run to improve ball security. Is it mostly just reps? If it's mostly reps how do you balance reps at QB with 4 viable candidates and what problem does that create when game 1 arrives?

As for the D....imo it boils down to winning the one on one battles in the trenches. Our lack in doing so is what leads to the majority of the rest of our problems and the criticisms of same.

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.

 

[tech_wreck47]

For those who don't say its scheme/coaching do you honestly think our talent level on D is in the bottom of the country? 94th in D efficiency.
If so then I have no argument, but if you don't believe our D talent is that bad, what in your opinion is the issue?

 

[33jacket]

We are always simplifying our d. We said that in 2014. Last year. This year. Its getting old. at some point we need to produce.

Our issues are more than players. Players changed at ton from 2014 to 2016 and 17.

Coaching needs to help. Players need to help. We all want the same thing. A better d. I am convinced we can be better with the same personnel. I just think we are stuck in mud.

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

I'm not talking about our conference, I'm talking about in all of college football. We were 94th in D efficiency. I don't think for one second that our talent level is that bad. I agree 100% our system does not allow our guys to play at a highler "star ranking" and that's the reason I can't stand what we do on D. I guess what I'm trying to say is, our talent level is not 94th but our scheme makes it to be that. If we were Bama we would be fine because we could win the one on ones without confusing the offense. But we're not, imo we need more stunts, twist exotic blitz/coverages to confuse the offense and allow our guys to capitalize on that. You can do that and still play simple and fast it's not rocket science for the guys to learn that kind of stuff. Hopefully Roof simplifying things early like he is and allow the guys to run fast will help, only time will tell.

94th and that includes UAB, Wake, Iowa State, Army, FAU, UL-Monroe,Tulane, etc.

 

[lv20gt]

For those who don't say its scheme/coaching do you honestly think our talent level on D is in the bottom of the country? 94th in D efficiency.
If so then I have no argument, but if you don't believe our D talent is that bad, what in your opinion is the issue?

What has remained constant throughout the years of bad defenses?

 

[33jacket]

What i do like about ted:

1 - i do agree and it does seem d recruiting has ticked up in the last 2-3 years. Is that ted or not who really knows. But i will agree at least partly for sure.

2 - he has shown a solid ability to adjust his calls many times after halftime to help. I think he needs to try to expedite that adjustment in between quarters but, his adjustments seem to most times be good.

3 - i have not seen a d that quit. Maybe unc once and clemson once. But that can happen.

4 - he is a good person. Good representative for gt.

5 - not sure anyone has noticed this. I have been tracking it for 3 years now. Late in games if we are behind and NEED stops to catch up he calls a totally different game. He gets way more aggressive. And it has worked a ton. I dont have the statistics a hand it would be a huge effort to do this. But if we are down a score or even two but in striking distance in the 4th his calls are way different and I believe 3rd down rate improves. I wish he called a whole game this way. I have observed this many times and far appreciate this than what he rolls out there earlier. Btw. His aggressive version is not crazy. But its just better imo

6 - dude does work his arse off

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Just to note, the scheme change mostly affects our front 7, not our secondary. It's the complete lack of pass rush that is most worrisome to me. We lose a few battles in the secondary, but generally, it's been the strength of our D. It would be nice to get them some help this season.

The last DE we've had that could get to the qb was Sneezy. Pressures and sacks w/o blitzing is all Jimmies and Joes not schemes. We haven't had that kind of player in a while.

It involves coaching technique, too, but I put that on Pelton more than Roof.