Optimistic about the defense? Why?

[iceeater1969]

Hedge much? The theory is on the line this year. But I’m sure there will be more reasons to explain bad D other than the players.

No the theory has been proven- u less you have a great aggressive defense like Army.

My buddy at ou said the army defense was highly aggressive and played in the ou backfield. The fans gave them standing o at end of game.

The bend but dont break is yours - embrace it and criticize the new scheme for 4 years. I will risk a bad stats for the chance to become great. Gt and your beloved bend but dont break have gone separate ways.

I hope u will consider attending games as the stats and TV leave out so much.

 

[WrongShadeOfGold]

Oh those wonderful Army comparisons again. I'm sure they wouldn't have been #8 in the country in defense if they went up against Clemson, UGA, etc. They played one team with a good offense all year and they lost.

 

[Ibeeballin]

Well that lack of speed on defense was confirmed with Elijah Holyfield running a 4.78

 

[bobongo]

Oh those wonderful Army comparisons again. I'm sure they wouldn't have been #8 in the country in defense if they went up against Clemson, UGA, etc. They played one team with a good offense all year and they lost.

Geez, that allowed 28 in overtime to Oklahoma. Wonder how many we'd have given up?

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

We were #111 in FEI Defense for 2018 the last I looked. We could have a massive improvement and still not be top 60. I think we can have a more than massive improvement, though.

"111 in FEI defense"? Sobering statistic that. Reminds me of what Casey Stengel said about his first Mets team after watching "Marvelous" Marv Thornberry commit three errors on one play: "Is there anyone here that can play this game?" Maybe not that bad but we have been so inept on defense that no lead seemed safe. The 2017 Miami bubble screen game being a prime example. Not that we have not had a good player here and there scattered through the defensive roster each year but not enough, not nearly enough to be a average defense much less a good one.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

Well that lack of speed on defense was confirmed with Elijah Holyfield running a 4.78

A 4.7 40? Really? That is hard to believe. Well how come he played so much and often started on a elite team as well? Not that I dispute our resident expert on all things defense: "MR. Ballin" but damn that is sobering. I would be willing to bet we have had inside linebackers and defensive ends faster than that. I am sure Attachou had a better time than that. Shoot, I would be willing to bet the big Aussie tackle had a time pretty close to that.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Lack of arm strength is often euphemistically referred to as a lack of "technique".

Imo if you are arm tackling you are losing from the get go. Have to put shoulders and bodies into people. Have to control their hips preferably or their shoulders. Foot speed matters most follows by mass. Arm strength helps too of course but not as much as getting a body into the ball carrier.

 

[slugboy]

Here's some FEI Defense stats from https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/feidef

Here's 31-43 (with Temple in there) for comparison.

Here's where we'd want to move to be decent (x axis is rank, where we're 111, and y axis is FEI rating; lower and "lefter" is better):

And it looks like it wasn't just level of competition--Army looked legitimately better than us on defense last year.

 

[bobongo]

Imo if you are arm tackling you are losing from the get go. Have to put shoulders and bodies into people. Have to control their hips preferably or their shoulders. Foot speed matters most follows by mass. Arm strength helps too of course but not as much as getting a body into the ball carrier.

Whether they hit 'em high or hit 'em low, I hope they hit the weight room, first.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

No the theory has been proven- u less you have a great aggressive defense like Army.

My buddy at ou said the army defense was highly aggressive and played in the ou backfield. The fans gave them standing o at end of game.

The bend but dont break is yours - embrace it and criticize the new scheme for 4 years. I will risk a bad stats for the chance to become great. Gt and your beloved bend but dont break have gone separate ways.

I hope u will consider attending games as the stats and TV leave out so much.

So....it’s been proven except for where it has been disproven? Okaaay.

And so was Tech’s problem the 3O or the bend break? Seems you think it was both but nothing else......... Okaay.

You are mischaracterizing Cheese’s point entirely by trying to tie him to any prior D scheme. Smh

 

[BurdellJacket]

I hope he's right, too, but Army runs a similar offense and they ranked #8 in total defense last year.

Don’t want to take anything away from Army, but GT defense would be ranked much higher had we played Army’s schedule. Still, not arguing there is very much room for improvement!

 

[BurdellJacket]

Also, it looks like to me Army defense was about #41 instead of # 8?

 

[bobongo]

Don’t want to take anything away from Army, but GT defense would be ranked much higher had we played Army’s schedule. Still, not arguing there is very much room for improvement!

Of course it would. But Army's defense was still a sight better. I think it's pretty improbable that we give up only 28 in overtime to Oklahoma, as Army did. Also, remember that while Army doesn't play our schedule, it also can't recruit to our level. Their G5 schedule is part of the context. Their G5 recruiting level is another part of the equation. But still, they ranked #41 in FEI while Tech ranked #111, as slugboy pointed out. I think this strongly refutes the idea of our formerly quirky offense being a reason for weak defense, since they run a very similar offense.

I think our defensive woes had little to do with the quirky offense, since it didn't practice against a quirky offense. Mostly it had to do with weak recruiting all around, mostly related to a lack of money and a poor recruiting budget. Also, I just don't think our coaching staff was made up of good recruiters, overall. I don't think it had as much to do with our quirky offense as has been postulated. Some, but not much. The offense had a gimmick to make up for weak recruiting, but the defense did not.

 

[BurdellJacket]

Of course it would. But Army's defense was still a sight better. I think it's pretty improbable that we give up only 28 in overtime to Oklahoma, as Army did. Also, remember that while Army doesn't play our schedule, it also can't recruit to our level. Their G5 schedule is part of the context. Their G5 recruiting level is another part of the equation. But still, they ranked #41 in FEI while Tech ranked #111, as slugboy pointed out. I think this strongly refutes the idea of our formerly quirky offense being a reason for weak defense, since they run a very similar offense.

I think our defensive woes had little to do with the quirky offense, since it didn't practice against a quirky offense. Mostly it had to do with weak recruiting all around, mostly related to a lack of money and a poor recruiting budget. Also, I just don't think our coaching staff was made up of good recruiters, overall. I don't think it had as much to do with our quirky offense as has been postulated. Some, but not much. The offense had a gimmick to make up for weak recruiting, but the defense did not.

Totally agree with your conclusions in both paragraphs. I was just saying our defense was not really 40 spots (whatever that would indicate?) worse than Army’s.

 

[Techster]

Of course it would. But Army's defense was still a sight better. I think it's pretty improbable that we give up only 28 in overtime to Oklahoma, as Army did. Also, remember that while Army doesn't play our schedule, it also can't recruit to our level. Their G5 schedule is part of the context. Their G5 recruiting level is another part of the equation. But still, they ranked #41 in FEI while Tech ranked #111, as slugboy pointed out. I think this strongly refutes the idea of our formerly quirky offense being a reason for weak defense, since they run a very similar offense.

I think our defensive woes had little to do with the quirky offense, since it didn't practice against a quirky offense. Mostly it had to do with weak recruiting all around, mostly related to a lack of money and a poor recruiting budget. Also, I just don't think our coaching staff was made up of good recruiters, overall. I don't think it had as much to do with our quirky offense as has been postulated. Some, but not much. The offense had a gimmick to make up for weak recruiting, but the defense did not.

FWIW, Army's 2018 DC Jay Batemen (now the DC at UNC), is considered one of the most innovative defensive minds in football. If there was "triple option" defense equivalent, Batemen's defense is probably the closest thing that's going on the defensive side. They refer to it as "positionless defense", and it's a defense that changes from game to game depending on the game plan. You can read about it here (as well as read about other innovative coaches):

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/11/14/defensive-schemes-rpos-mike-pettine-packers-naia-grand-view

More in depth write up:

https://www.tarheelblog.com/2019/1/...rdinator-film-review-mack-brown-hybrid-scheme

It will be interesting to see if Coach Monken can maintain the same production on defense without Batemen. Will Army continue to do well because Monken finds a successor to Batemen, or will Army's defense step backwards because "the brains" of the defense moved on? It's the equivalent of a masterful OC moving on and a team's offensive production falls off.

 

[Techster]

FWIW, Army's 2018 DC Jay Batemen (now the DC at UNC), is considered one of the most innovative defensive minds in football. If there was "triple option" defense equivalent, Batemen's defense is probably the closest thing that's going on the defensive side. They refer to it as "positionless defense", and it's a defense that changes from game to game depending on the game plan. You can read about it here (as well as read about other innovative coaches):

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/11/14/defensive-schemes-rpos-mike-pettine-packers-naia-grand-view

More in depth write up:

https://www.tarheelblog.com/2019/1/...rdinator-film-review-mack-brown-hybrid-scheme

It will be interesting to see if Coach Monken can maintain the same production on defense without Batemen. Will Army continue to do well because Monken finds a successor to Batemen, or will Army's defense step backwards because "the brains" of the defense moved on? It's the equivalent of a masterful OC moving on and a team's offensive production falls off.

Batemen at the Broyles Award ceremony. Seems like a REALLY good dude and down to earth...someone kids are gonna bleed for. Also has a some really good words for coach Monken:



Bateman led the Army defense for five seasons, from 2014-2018, and has been coaching since 1997. His first season was a rough one for the Black Knights, as they finished 90th overall in defense and Army only managed a 4-8 record. They were especially poor in stopping the run, giving up nearly 200 yards a game. From that point forward, however, Army managed to rise up the board. They finished 50th in total defense in 2015, and then an outstanding 3rd in 2016. That effort got him nominated for the Broyles Award as one of the top coordinators in the country. They slipped to 33rd in 2017, but jumped back up to 8th this season, and once again he was nominated for the Broyles award, this time being named a finalist.

 

[iceeater1969]

Batemen at the Broyles Award ceremony. Seems like a REALLY good dude and down to earth...someone kids are gonna bleed for. Also has a some really good words for coach Monken:



Bateman led the Army defense for five seasons, from 2014-2018, and has been coaching since 1997. His first season was a rough one for the Black Knights, as they finished 90th overall in defense and Army only managed a 4-8 record. They were especially poor in stopping the run, giving up nearly 200 yards a game. From that point forward, however, Army managed to rise up the board. They finished 50th in total defense in 2015, and then an outstanding 3rd in 2016. That effort got him nominated for the Broyles Award as one of the top coordinators in the country. They slipped to 33rd in 2017, but jumped back up to 8th this season, and once again he was nominated for the Broyles award, this time being named a finalist.

Good news.
Name a coach at gt that was nominated for the Broyles award. ? Some would choke before saying - cgc and did it 3 times. Let's guess - will he run a passive bbdb or will it be relentlessly aggressive ???

I wish the aggressive and GREAT army coach was at gt instead of a continuous parade of bend but break later guys. This guy has his players bringing the heat till the whistle blows.

Why we didn't have a quirky and aggressive defense to go with our quirky offense will always be a mystery. Defense - get them off the field. Offense run them till they drop. Sure it could have spectacular failures . But as we perfected the defense it would be a recruiting magnet - come to gt and be on espn highlight.

Its gt game day and the opponent has had a week to prepare for the offense and defense scheme they never seen. They go to gather like ham and eggs.


In 14 and 15 I posted this same many times. My first donation (@ 14 Clemson said - "for football recruiting " m bob and Coach = disaster.

In 67 I got officers basic training at fort bragg. We were "vigourly " trained by Vietnam seasoned green berets. They got up close and personal. That training was as full speed as it could get. These non coms knew the damage a half axx officer could cause. I went combat engineer but the lessons I learned helped me Get Better Fast Enough to avoid bad things. My non coms all respected me .
I can never be convinced that not practicing full speed has not hurt our defense.

Now that's all behind us .
We attack from here.


By the way I think defense could be good by end of year.

 

[Techster]

Good news.
Name a coach at gt that was nominated for the Broyles award. ? Some would choke before saying - cgc and did it 3 times. Let's guess - will he run a passive bbdb or will it be relentlessly aggressive ???

I wish the aggressive and GREAT army coach was at gt instead of a continuous parade of bend but break later guys. This guy has his players bringing the heat till the whistle blows.

Why we didn't have a quirky and aggressive defense to go with our quirky offense will always be a mystery. Defense - get them off the field. Offense run them till they drop. Sure it could have spectacular failures . But as we perfected the defense it would be a recruiting magnet - come to gt and be on espn highlight.

Its gt game day and the opponent has had a week to prepare for the offense and defense scheme they never seen. They go to gather like ham and eggs.


In 14 and 15 I posted this same many times. My first donation (@ 14 Clemson said - "for football recruiting " m bob and Coach = disaster.

In 67 I got officers basic training at fort bragg. We were "vigourly " trained by Vietnam seasoned green berets. They got up close and personal. That training was as full speed as it could get. These non coms knew the damage a half axx officer could cause. I went combat engineer but the lessons I learned helped me Get Better Fast Enough to avoid bad things. My non coms all respected me .
I can never be convinced that not practicing full speed has not hurt our defense.

Now that's all behind us .
We attack from here.


By the way I think defense could be good by end of year.

Yup. GT fans are forgetting that CGC was a Broyles award guy 3 times. That means something.

Nate Woody was an aggressive coach in the front 7, and certain packages had DBs blitzing, but I wish he would have played more press in the back end. We had more sacks and pressures than we did in a LONG time, and I think we could have gotten more. I think a lot of blitzing gets negated if you don't press on the backend because you're giving the WRs and QBs time to adjust on option routes. Most of the passing games these days have hot reads built in, and giving WRs cushions is just asking them to play pitch and catch.

I really wish CNW would have gotten another year or two, but unfortunately he didn't get that. Hope it works out for him...seemed like a good guy.

CGC has flat out said he's gonna press. It will be interesting to see how he attacks on the front seven. Defense has to be creative with pressure next year because we don't have an out and out stud rusher...yet. Will be fun to see progress because there's some talent on the defense.

 

[Animal02]

Yup. GT fans are forgetting that CGC was a Broyles award guy 3 times. That means something.

Nate Woody was an aggressive coach in the front 7, and certain packages had DBs blitzing, but I wish he would have played more press in the back end. We had more sacks and pressures than we did in a LONG time, and I think we could have gotten more. I think a lot of blitzing gets negated if you don't press on the backend because you're giving the WRs and QBs time to adjust on option routes. Most of the passing games these days have hot reads built in, and giving WRs cushions is just asking them to play pitch and catch.

I really wish CNW would have gotten another year or two, but unfortunately he didn't get that. Hope it works out for him...seemed like a good guy.

CGC has flat out said he's gonna press. It will be interesting to see how he attacks on the front seven. Defense has to be creative with pressure next year because we don't have an out and out stud rusher...yet. Will be fun to see progress because there's some talent on the defense.

I have no doubt the D will see improvement ( far more room to move up then down) I doubt Tech will ever have much success landing a top D line......I think finding the diamonds in the rough and coaching up will be more successful.

 

[Milwaukee]

Yup. GT fans are forgetting that CGC was a Broyles award guy 3 times. That means something.

Nate Woody was an aggressive coach in the front 7, and certain packages had DBs blitzing, but I wish he would have played more press in the back end. We had more sacks and pressures than we did in a LONG time, and I think we could have gotten more. I think a lot of blitzing gets negated if you don't press on the backend because you're giving the WRs and QBs time to adjust on option routes. Most of the passing games these days have hot reads built in, and giving WRs cushions is just asking them to play pitch and catch.

I really wish CNW would have gotten another year or two, but unfortunately he didn't get that. Hope it works out for him...seemed like a good guy.

CGC has flat out said he's gonna press. It will be interesting to see how he attacks on the front seven. Defense has to be creative with pressure next year because we don't have an out and out stud rusher...yet. Will be fun to see progress because there's some talent on the defense.

I was listening to a podcast a few weeks ago and Wes Durham was interviewing a coach, can't remember who, and they straight up said that every DC that Paul hired was told to run the bend but don't break and specifically not to play press coverage. There was a certain style that Paul wanted which is fine, but why rotate DC's and especially hire an aggressive DC when you won't let him be aggressive and run his system? Nate did what he could, but he wasn't allowed to run the defense that he wanted to run. Defense was Paul's downfall imo.