Stats Opposition Rushing Attacks (C'mon, Doug, be better)

[AE 87]

Doug at AJC put out a blog post on opposition rushing attacks
http://georgiatech.blog.ajc.com/2016/08/10/breaking-down-the-rushing-attacks-georgia-tech-will-face/

Unfortunately, he used yds/game which is an almost meaningless stat to compare with vs. GT because of reasons discussed ad nauseam

Here are last years yds/carry stats average and GT for Division opponents and georgie:
Team ..... Ave .... v. GT ..... v. Pwr5
Duke ...... 4.79 .... 4.58 ........ 4.89 (22)
Miami .... 3.68 .... 3.07 ........ 3.08 (102)
UNC ....... 5.96..... 7.45 ........ 6.11 (1)
Pitt ......... 4.77 ..... 4.65 ....... 4.36 (49)
UVA ....... 4.10 ..... 5.55 ....... 4.40 (48)
vpi .......... 3.80 .... 4.23 ....... 3.24 (93)
U[sic]Ga . 5.14 ..... 5.24 ........ 4.84 (25)

Besides Duke, we really didn't have great games in rush D last year.

 

[RonJohn]

Ken at AJC put out a blog post on opposition rushing attacks.

That was Doug Roberson instead of Ken. Both posts, Rushing O and Rushing D seemed to be terrible. For "Rushing yards last time playing GT:", he listed Mercer as last met in 1938 with no stats. For BC, Vanderbilt, and Ga Southern, he said "The teams didn’t play last season.". A computer program could have written both of those articles and done a better job.

 

[AE 87]

That was Doug Roberson instead of Ken. Both posts, Rushing O and Rushing D seemed to be terrible. For "Rushing yards last time playing GT:", he listed Mercer as last met in 1938 with no stats. For BC, Vanderbilt, and Ga Southern, he said "The teams didn’t play last season.". A computer program could have written both of those articles and done a better job.

thanks.

@CuseJacket could you change my title and OP to reflect Doug instead of Ken?

 

[swampsting]

Must have been a day off for Ken

 

[CuseJacket]

thanks.

@CuseJacket could you change my title and OP to reflect Doug instead of Ken?

Done

 

[augustabuzz]

That was Doug Roberson instead of Ken. Both posts, Rushing O and Rushing D seemed to be terrible. For "Rushing yards last time playing GT:", he listed Mercer as last met in 1938 with no stats. For BC, Vanderbilt, and Ga Southern, he said "The teams didn’t play last season.". A computer program could have written both of those articles and done a better job.

He also expects UVA to play at TECH. for the 3rd straight year this year.

 

[AE 87]

Done

Thanks, ... op too? ...

 

[33jacket]

when a offense lines up in 11 or 20 personnel, we really struggle in run defense. That is what most teams do to us. Roof matches formations more than tendancy, and tends to immediately put in 4-2-5 with the nickel back a little to off or a little to small to be a box defender. We don't drop the safety.

So we are spread out allowing for much easier power and inside zone and trap blocks. Duke does this to us almost religiously. They take advantage of his shell cover concept on defense (bend don't break) where we play relatively off; combined with smaller LB's that tend to get eaten up in the box by OL. We struggle shedding those blocks.

IMO we need to do a better job at guessing rush on occasion and flashing the third LB to the slot vs a nickel back; playing cover 2 behind him; still not dropping the safety but have that LB play the flats hard and work inside out if its playaction. We don't do this enough. We tend to sub on formation/personnel vs play down and distance tendancies....

If we are caught in a 4-2-5 vs a run, that supporting safety and cb needs to drop down; we can't be in a back pedal. One of those safeties has to have his formation key with his eyes at the line; at the same time roof can't align them 15 yards off the ball like we often are.

We also need to big stick our DE much more, to clog that hole and allow the LBs and S to fill and scrape the back. Another thing we dont' do enough IMO

The 4-2-5 concept needs to be more aggressive, we don't need to be as back when you have more speed on the field...

 

[ramblin' wagon]

when a offense lines up in 11 or 20 personnel, we really struggle in run defense. That is what most teams do to us. Roof matches formations more than tendancy, and tends to immediately put in 4-2-5 with the nickel back a little to off or a little to small to be a box defender. We don't drop the safety.

Do you think we should also play more 4-3 than 4-2? Most of the teams we play like to use 11, 12, 20, and 21 personnel. The only teams that us a lot of 0 and 10 are UNC and Clemson.

 

[PBR549]

when a offense lines up in 11 or 20 personnel, we really struggle in run defense. That is what most teams do to us. Roof matches formations more than tendancy, and tends to immediately put in 4-2-5 with the nickel back a little to off or a little to small to be a box defender. We don't drop the safety.

So we are spread out allowing for much easier power and inside zone and trap blocks. Duke does this to us almost religiously. They take advantage of his shell cover concept on defense (bend don't break) where we play relatively off; combined with smaller LB's that tend to get eaten up in the box by OL. We struggle shedding those blocks.

IMO we need to do a better job at guessing rush on occasion and flashing the third LB to the slot vs a nickel back; playing cover 2 behind him; still not dropping the safety but have that LB play the flats hard and work inside out if its playaction. We don't do this enough. We tend to sub on formation/personnel vs play down and distance tendancies....

If we are caught in a 4-2-5 vs a run, that supporting safety and cb needs to drop down; we can't be in a back pedal. One of those safeties has to have his formation key with his eyes at the line; at the same time roof can't align them 15 yards off the ball like we often are.

We also need to big stick our DE much more, to clog that hole and allow the LBs and S to fill and scrape the back. Another thing we dont' do enough IMO

The 4-2-5 concept needs to be more aggressive, we don't need to be as back when you have more speed on the field...

It's all about personel. We can bring the house but if you can't cover one on one they score.

 

[33jacket]

It's all about personel. We can bring the house but if you can't cover one on one they score.

but you said roof is a great recruiter and he has been here for 4 years now, so what gives? He is either a great recruiter and he has the personnel, or he is not a great recruiter and he still doesn't. Or the personnel is ok, not Alabama, but ok and the scheme isn't where it needs to be (I choose this). BTW, I never said blitz or bring the house...I said change what we do; we play too back...

 

[33jacket]

Do you think we should also play more 4-3 than 4-2? Most of the teams we play like to use 11, 12, 20, and 21 personnel. The only teams that us a lot of 0 and 10 are UNC and Clemson.

so in 12 and 21 you are in a 4-3. So for me thats a non-issue. Where roof gets stuck is 11 and 20. In 0 and 10 you are in dime...again..not a confusing set...its either nickel or dime.

the hybrid sets of 11 and 21 is where I think we need to play 4-2-5 more up and press a tad more, drop the S a bit more in the box, or move to a 4-3 shell and flare the olb to the flats on the 2 WR side and roll the coverage inside from the single high spot.

 

[ramblin' wagon]

so in 12 and 21 you are in a 4-3. So for me thats a non-issue. Where roof gets stuck is 11 and 20. In 0 and 10 you are in dime...again..not a confusing set...its either nickel or dime.

the hybrid sets of 11 and 21 is where I think we need to play 4-2-5 more up and press a tad more, drop the S a bit more in the box, or move to a 4-3 shell and flare the olb to the flats on the 2 WR side and roll the coverage inside from the single high spot.

I agree with playing more aggressive in the 4-2-5 and bring a safety up in the box on 11 and 20. What I am getting at is teams like UVA, Pitt, UGA, and Duke just to name a few, need to run the ball successfully to win. I doubt they could throw 40-50 times a game and win. So unless they go 10 or 0 lets play 4-3 and play to stop the run. They all run out of multiple formations. Maybe that's what you were getting at when you said roof plays formation more than tendency?

 

[PBR549]

but you said roof is a great recruiter and he has been here for 4 years now, so what gives? He is either a great recruiter and he has the personnel, or he is not a great recruiter and he still doesn't. Or the personnel is ok, not Alabama, but ok and the scheme isn't where it needs to be (I choose this). BTW, I never said blitz or bring the house...I said change what we do; we play too back...

It's getting better but like you said depth is still a big problem. What I said is Ted can get kids we have no business getting and that's 100% correct. You're right again about no support from the adminstration for football. Where you are wrong is you think you know more about football than Roof. It's easy to throw rocks at someone else. Everybody thinks they know the best way to do something but most people are just talk. They've never run a defense put themselves in a position where they are the one on the limb. It's easy to be the one with the saw!

 

[33jacket]

It's getting better but like you said depth is still a big problem. What I said is Ted can get kids we have no business getting and that's 100% correct. You're right again about no support from the adminstration for football. Where you are wrong is you think you know more about football than Roof. It's easy to throw rocks at someone else. Everybody thinks they know the best way to do something but most people are just talk. They've never run a defense put themselves in a position where they are the one on the limb. It's easy to be the one with the saw!

i have a big saw. Are you a tree? LOL

I never said I know more about defenses than roof...I have repeatedly said I hate his schemes and they don't fit who we can get at tech. That says nothing about knowing more football, you also don't have to be a chef to tell everyone if the food sucks. Bottom line, is I know enough about football, our concepts etc to see this IMO I don't like his schemes or what he is doing right now. If he truly knows a ton about football; and he is a great coach, then he needs to adapt. We will all agree HIS results on the field have NOT been good, and tenuta proved at GT they can be WAY better!!!

 

[PBR549]

i have a big saw. Are you a tree? LOL

I never said I know more about defenses than roof...I have repeatedly said I hate his schemes and they don't fit who we can get at tech. That says nothing about knowing more football, you also don't have to be a chef to tell everyone if the food sucks. Bottom line, is I know enough about football, our concepts etc to see this IMO I don't like his schemes or what he is doing right now. If he truly knows a ton about football; and he is a great coach, then he needs to adapt. We will all agree HIS results on the field have NOT been good, and tenuta proved at GT they can be WAY better!!!

Where is Tenuta now? Whether we have the best defensein the ACC or the worst next year Roof is still an excellent football coach. If he gets fired here here he'll have other opportunities at better places and continue to be successful.

 

[PBR549]

i have a big saw. Are you a tree? LOL

I never said I know more about defenses than roof...I have repeatedly said I hate his schemes and they don't fit who we can get at tech. That says nothing about knowing more football, you also don't have to be a chef to tell everyone if the food sucks. Bottom line, is I know enough about football, our concepts etc to see this IMO I don't like his schemes or what he is doing right now. If he truly knows a ton about football; and he is a great coach, then he needs to adapt. We will all agree HIS results on the field have NOT been good, and tenuta proved at GT they can be WAY better!!!

You need to understand why the food sucks instead of automatically blaming the chef. If you're not chef stop telling the chef how to cook.

 

[33jacket]

You need to understand why the food sucks instead of automatically blaming the chef. If you're not chef stop telling the chef how to cook.

If the food sucks the chef is always responsible. Whether he used the wrong recipe (gameplan) or ingredients (bad recruiting) its still on the chef. There is no one else to look at. If I repeatedly notice a chef uses recipe a and it sucks then to suggest he try b is a pretty good idea. Since i may not have coached ncaa level i have coached and i played. So i have a clue i would consider still myself a bit of a chef; albeit of course i am not urban meyer. Bottom line is his recipe and product has not been good here 1 year yet imo

As far as tenuta. I could care a less where he is now. At Gt he proved you can have a top 30 d year in and year out and that is all that matters. He did it here. Roof hasnt. This is an undeniable fact. And the restrictions are the same at the school level.

If we need to recruit better do it. If we need to change scheme a bit do it. But the results arent close to where anyone wants em.

 

[AE 87]

Fwiw, I started this thread to put out better data than AJC, just so that we know with what we're dealing.

With respect to the turn toward DC talk (pun unintended), I'll add two cents.

Personally, I think personnel was a real issue on DL last year, esp with flakiness of Hunt and injury to Gotsis. That being said, DL coach and players have said they focused more on get the QB than staying in rush lanes. I don't get that from a coaching perspective.

Uneducatedly, I think we should have played more 3DL sets to compensate for our lack of depth there.

@33jacket , I think APR came in near the end of Tenuta's time, so I'm not sure it affected him. If so, academic context is not the same.

I think we have enough talent/depth this year to see marked improvement if not yet great D.

 

[ramblin' wagon]

@AE 87 ,
I think our defensive rush YPP was terrible because we weren't committed to stopping the run last year. To tie into the Boston College thread, BC was determined to stop the run. Both us and BC gave up about the same yards to Clemson, 535 to 537. At that point the only thing that will save either team is getting some turnovers.

Something else I think is interesting is the games against Duke. IMO Duke has a very simplistic and predictable offense. They want to run 35 times a game at least. BC was committed to stopping the run against Duke and Duke still ran 35 times but only gained 33 yards. Duke ran 36 times against us.

So basically I think BC's approach worked when they played teams that wanted to run the ball. Teams that could throw the ball had much more success. I don't think BC is a top 5 defense, nor do I think we are #80.