Official Ted Roof Discussion Thread

[tech_wreck47]

When we play "finesse" teams with more depth/talent, I do believe the D coaching can make an impact on our performance. When we play power running teams with more size/speed, I do believe the D coaching can make an impact on our performance, although less.

But, Defense cannot be so "tricky" or different that magic can be worked. When you don't have big nasties OR NFL quality linebackers in numbers, NO D coordinator, in my opinion, can make the difference that many of you believe.

I don't think anyone is asking anything unreasonable for our D, around 50? That should not be an issue imo.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

I don't think anyone is asking anything unreasonable for our D, around 50? That should not be an issue imo.

Again, I realize this is just our opinions, and I am not arguing. I am pointing out that if we could recruit the level of talent at DT and LB in numbers that we do at S and CB, then yes, I even think 30's would be possible. But, honestly, 50's may be the highest we can expect with such a dearth of DT/LB talent. I agree it is better now than the last few years, but still not where Roof can just be blamed totally for everything. I actually think the way he plays it, although VERY difficult to watch at times, where he makes the other team be "perfect" going down the field and keeping everything in front of our D is probably the right way to use our D talent, but I would agree that I would like to see a little more risk taken with blitzes at times. BUT, I am realistic enough to know that with this RISK comes the possibility of over the top TD's by more talented teams.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Summary of my thoughts, then I'll hang up and listen:
1) I don't know anything about Def philosophy, and I certainly don't think I know more than Roof
2) I recognize that our talent/depth is not at the level of Climpson or Bama etc
3) I don't think BC's talent/depth was at that level either in 2015 when their D was top 5 or last year when their D was top 25.
4) So, I think that coaching can maximize results from talent on the Defensive side of the ball, even if not to the same degree as on the Offensive
5) I believe that our talent/depth is not just equal to but better than our results
6) So, I think that there is something that our DC could do differently to get better results.

Riiing......riiiing.......riiiiiing....
1) ditto for myself
2)whole world agrees
3)disagree here...they are what they were...too 25 or better D
4)maybe so....great coaching on D can certainly make a difference. I do recognize this.
5)you base this primarily on NFL post college success. Does that mean Gaily really is great coach? He spent a lot of time there. (A bit tic as I think he probly was a pretty good coach. Just didn't have consistent success everywhere; was AP less great for not making it big in the NFL?)
6)probably so. Is he good enough to make top 90 talent top 50 performers? Top 70 talent top 30 performers? Top 30 talent top 10 performers? How many coaches can? I'd pay good money for it as I think those are very lofty expectations.

 

[tech_wreck47]

Again, I realize this is just our opinions, and I am not arguing. I am pointing out that if we could recruit the level of talent at DT and LB in numbers that we do at S and CB, then yes, I even think 30's would be possible. But, honestly, 50's may be the highest we can expect with such a dearth of DT/LB talent. I agree it is better now than the last few years, but still not where Roof can just be blamed totally for everything. I actually think the way he plays it, although VERY difficult to watch at times, where he makes the other team be "perfect" going down the field and keeping everything in front of our D is probably the right way to use our D talent, but I would agree that I would like to see a little more risk taken with blitzes at times. BUT, I am realistic enough to know that with this RISK comes the possibility of over the top TD's by more talented teams.

Why should 50 be the highest? There are plenty of teams thatwe have just as much talent as if not more and they are able to do it. But like you said it's all just opinions.

 

[AE 87]

Riiing......riiiing.......riiiiiing....
1) ditto for myself
2)whole world agrees
3)disagree here...they are what they were...too 25 or better D
4)maybe so....great coaching on D can certainly make a difference. I do recognize this.
5)you base this primarily on NFL post college success. Does that mean Gaily really is great coach? He spent a lot of time there. (A bit tic as I think he probly was a pretty good coach. Just didn't have consistent success everywhere; was AP less great for not making it big in the NFL?)
6)probably so. Is he good enough to make top 90 talent top 50 performers? Top 70 talent top 30 performers? Top 30 talent top 10 performers? How many coaches can? I'd pay good money for it as I think those are very lofty expectations.

I think your reply to (4) contradicts your reply to (3). If coaching can affect results as you concede in (4), then results are not simply a function of talent as you assume in (3). That was my point. If you look at GT's O, we regularly do better on Offense then our recruiting rankings.

While I didn't take time to parse the recruiting rankings between Offense and Defense, here's a comparison of average Rivals Stars for BC and GT over the last several years:

TIFWIW

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

I think your reply to (4) contradicts your reply to (3). If coaching can affect results as you concede in (4), then results are not simply a function of talent as you assume in (3). That was my point. If you look at GT's O, we regularly do better on Offense then our recruiting rankings.

While I didn't take time to parse the recruiting rankings between Offense and Defense, here's a comparison of average Rivals Stars for BC and GT over the last several years:
View attachment 2678

TIFWIW

I take recruiting rankings with a mountain of salt.

 

[zhavenor]

Or we could play that 15 man defense...

Well now you've ruined our defensive plan for this year. There goes our National Championship. Thanks a lot

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I think your reply to (4) contradicts your reply to (3). If coaching can affect results as you concede in (4), then results are not simply a function of talent as you assume in (3). That was my point. If you look at GT's O, we regularly do better on Offense then our recruiting rankings.

While I didn't take time to parse the recruiting rankings between Offense and Defense, here's a comparison of average Rivals Stars for BC and GT over the last several years:
View attachment 2678

TIFWIW

So you didn't factor out the irrelevant parts that hugely affect the outcome? Nice analysis.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

13 pages in two days and no Brad Stewart sightings. Woo hoo! What a hot thread I started!

 

[SlawDog]

13 pages in two days and no Brad Stewart sightings. Woo hoo! What a hot thread I started!

Or backup QBs!

 

[Stray Dog THA GAWD]

Well now you've ruined our defensive plan for this year. There goes our National Championship. Thanks a lot

We're doomed!

 

[strong90]

All this talk about poster credentials and player talent is malarkey: most on this board know enough about football and the players on our team to assess the effectiveness of our scheme.

Does coaching experience make one more informed than others? Perhaps, but it doesn't take a multi-year coach to see that our defensive scheme is ineffective and lacks innovation or aggressiveness---just watch the game tape. Plus, experience can be detrimental when one becomes reluctant to change as circumstances are changing all around them. Recently, my social justice warrior daughter humbled me by opining that just because my perspective on contemporary social issues has been shaped by a lifetime of experience, it doesn't mean that I'm right. Sometimes an outsider's perspective can offer enlightenment.

The talent excuse frustrates me most. With some factory exceptions, the talent difference across P5 teams is marginal---most are 3-star recruits---and we are usually about average. Just like Nick Saban, we would like to have better players, but we already have talented-enough players to be better than we are, and we've even put a few in the NFL. Despite some modest improvements in recruiting, we linger around the middle-of-the-pack in talent but fall to near the bottom in results. Lacking any other metric, our defense should be equal to or better than our recruiting rankings.

Finally, if you have a perceived talent gap, the notion of playing a basic, vanilla scheme as a winning strategy confounds me. Scheme to mitigate personnel mismatches by doing whatever it takes to create havoc and force errors. Waiting on them to make a mistake only slows the inevitable and allows them to control the game. Our defensive success shouldn't be defined by their failure to execute.

So... after having written all that, I realize that I could have just said: 1) most on this board know a little about football and coaching experience doesn't mean you're right; 2) the talent gap is marginal and we are about average with sub-par results; and 3) if you think we don't match-up, then disrupt.

 

[tech_wreck47]

Serious question. Does anyone think saint amour will start over freeman if he plays just a smug better? Or do you think we would put saint amour on the opposite side of freeman?

 

[GTNavyNuke]

OK, I waded through all 13 pages in the last two days of this stuff. First, I'll take @33jacket up on predictions: I think our D will be rated 75th by FEI*, 59th by S&P** and our D Line*** 93rd. That's the average over the last three years. Till we are better, I won't expect anything better.

The FEI is the number I threw out a few days ago where we were 94th (of 128) last year. That's down from 84th and 82nd the previous two years. So worse.

Another way Football Outsiders measures team performance is the S&P+. By that measure we were 57th last year after being 66th in 2014 and 55th in 2015. So about the same.

But the reason we are so weak on D overall is our DL was 114th out of 128 last year. Dismal and a lot worse than 82nd in 2014 and 84th in 2015. But we already knew that from the loss of Gotsis. Hopefully, Adams & Cerge-Henderson & Freeman & Glanton have break out years.

BTW, I like Roof and had hoped he would be our next head coach. But last year put that hope on hold.

* http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/feidef FEI is a college football rating system based on opponent-adjusted drive efficiency. Approximately 20,000 possessions are contested annually in FBS vs. FBS games. First-half clock-kills and end-of-game garbage drives and scores are filtered out. Defensive Efficiency (DE) is the value generated by a team's defense per non-garbage possession relative to national average scoring rates by starting field position. DFEI is value generated per possession adjusted for the strength of opponent offenses faced.
** http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaadef The S&P+ Ratings are a college football ratings system derived from the play-by-play data of all 800+ of a season's FBS college football games (and 140,000+ plays). As of January 2015, S&P+ ratings are based around the core concepts of the Five Factors: efficiency, explosiveness, field position, finishing drives, and turnovers.
*** http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaadl Pulling the ideas mostly from Football Outsiders’ pro stats, below are the following defensive line stats for each of FBS' 128 schools. Based on run-blocking and pass-blocking.

 

[danny daniel]

OK, I waded through all 13 pages in the last two days of this stuff. First, I'll take @33jacket up on predictions: I think our D will be rated 75th by FEI*, 59th by S&P** and our D Line*** 93rd. That's the average over the last three years. Till we are better, I won't expect anything better.

The FEI is the number I threw out a few days ago where we were 94th (of 128) last year. That's down from 84th and 82nd the previous two years. So worse.

Another way Football Outsiders measures team performance is the S&P+. By that measure we were 57th last year after being 66th in 2014 and 55th in 2015. So about the same.

But the reason we are so weak on D overall is our DL was 114th out of 128 last year. Dismal and a lot worse than 82nd in 2014 and 84th in 2015. But we already knew that from the loss of Gotsis. Hopefully, Adams & Cerge-Henderson & Freeman & Glanton have break out years.

BTW, I like Roof and had hoped he would be our next head coach. But last year put that hope on hold.

* http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/feidef FEI is a college football rating system based on opponent-adjusted drive efficiency. Approximately 20,000 possessions are contested annually in FBS vs. FBS games. First-half clock-kills and end-of-game garbage drives and scores are filtered out. Defensive Efficiency (DE) is the value generated by a team's defense per non-garbage possession relative to national average scoring rates by starting field position. DFEI is value generated per possession adjusted for the strength of opponent offenses faced.
** http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaadef The S&P+ Ratings are a college football ratings system derived from the play-by-play data of all 800+ of a season's FBS college football games (and 140,000+ plays). As of January 2015, S&P+ ratings are based around the core concepts of the Five Factors: efficiency, explosiveness, field position, finishing drives, and turnovers.
*** http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaadl Pulling the ideas mostly from Football Outsiders’ pro stats, below are the following defensive line stats for each of FBS' 128 schools. Based on run-blocking and pass-blocking.

To me the DL looks bigger this year . I hope that means something on the field. IMO Branch, St Amour, and Simmons are playing the best on the DL but not likely to have the 3 of them on the field at the same time so we need others to step up.

 

[tech_wreck47]

To me the DL looks bigger this year . I hope that means something on the field. IMO Branch, St Amour, and Simmons are playing the best on the DL but not likely to have the 3 of them on the field at the same time so we need others to step up.

If they are playing the best I sure hope they are all on the field at the same time.

 

[THWG]

To me the DL looks bigger this year . I hope that means something on the field. IMO Branch, St Amour, and Simmons are playing the best on the DL but not likely to have the 3 of them on the field at the same time so we need others to step up.

On obvious passing situations, I would like to see a crazy D-Line. By this I mean, Simmons and St. Amour at DE with Branch and Freeman at DT or stand all 4 of them up and have them move around before the snap. I really think that this would throw opposing teams off and lead to more sacks.

 

[tech_wreck47]

On obvious passing situations, I would like to see a crazy D-Line. By this I mean, Simmons and St. Amour at DE with Branch and Freeman at DT or stand all 4 of them up and have them move around before the snap. I really think that this would throw opposing teams off and lead to more sacks.

Nothing against freeman, but with his size I wouldn't move him inside to DT on passing downs. I would probably put Glanton in there. Or maybe one of the true freshman we have heard about.

 

[THWG]

Nothing against freeman, but with his size I wouldn't move him inside to DT on passing downs. I would probably put Glanton in there. Or maybe one of the true freshman we have heard about.

I'm talking about like 3rd and 10 or longer. I think he has the size to hold his own if he has to, but his speed would cause guards some trouble.

 

[tech_wreck47]

I'm talking about like 3rd and 10 or longer. I think he has the size to hold his own if he has to, but his speed would cause guards some trouble.

That's what I thought you were saying, I just think he would get swallowed up by some Guards and if two guys got on him it would be hard for him to make any pressure.