I've long had doubts about the S&C program. It is true that players are bigger and, perhaps, gym stronger. I don't think that is a clear upgrade, however. We seem to have worked hard on strength and weight and sacrificed speed and flexibility in the process. A good example here would be at our center position. Both players who played there regularly were better OLs, imho, when they were 10 pounds lighter.
This is not - repeat, not - a call for the lean, mean fighting machine OL we had under Paul. We've changed our O scheme and it needs bigger OLs across the board. But that doesn't mean piling on the weight despite the capability of the players to carry it effectively. This is something that calls for more individual attention and more drills in the weight room aimed at combining flexibility and strength. I don't see much evidence of that on the field, to be frank.
The DL is another story. There I think we are trying to make our players into something they aren't. One reason I thought getting rid of Woody was a real bad idea is that his D schemes fit the kind of DL players we could get to come to Tech and stick: smaller, stronger, and quicker. At present we are trying - again, imho - to get players who could work with another scheme to fit into slots they haven't the strength or talent for: i.e. run stuffers. We have a couple fo highly touted recruits coming in who do look like they can handle that role, so this may be a temporary concern. But trying to make up for natural strength and size with gym work is usually very difficult to pull off, especially for DLs. And, again, I see a decrement in speed and flexibility resulting.
Take this for what it is worth; i.e. probably not much. It's speculation based on anecdotal evidence. The end results, however, are undeniable: if our S&C program were better, I think we'd see better results on the field.
