Roof Out as DC

[TromboneJacket]

I liked Ted Roof. He wasn’t the best DC ever, maybe not even the best we could get. However, he put his heart and soul into his work, and we saw definite improvement over Groh. Lately, the recruiting has improved as well. As for this season, the defense was better than it’s been. Everyone is acting like a small late lead means the offense did its job; it doesn’t. Watch a Seahawks game from early 2015; with a 1-point lead in the 4th quarter, the play calling went “run, run, pass, punt” repeatedly. Our offense was similar in not being able to sustain drives that could put the game away. I’m sure CPJ will fix it this offseason, but the lackluster offensive performance has to factor into any evaluation of our defense this year. Tl;dr I think Ted Roof had a net positive effect on GT football, and we should wish him well as we hope for a new DC who can improve the defense to complement the offense.

 

[iceeater1969]

I liked Ted Roof. He wasn’t the best DC ever, maybe not even the best we could get. However, he put his heart and soul into his work, and we saw definite improvement over Groh. Lately, the recruiting has improved as well. As for this season, the defense was better than it’s been. Everyone is acting like a small late lead means the offense did its job; it doesn’t. Watch a Seahawks game from early 2015; with a 1-point lead in the 4th quarter, the play calling went “run, run, pass, punt” repeatedly. Our offense was similar in not being able to sustain drives that could put the game away. I’m sure CPJ will fix it this offseason, but the lackluster offensive performance has to factor into any evaluation of our defense this year. Tl;dr I think Ted Roof had a net positive effect on GT football, and we should wish him well as we hope for a new DC who can improve the defense to complement the offense.

Well spoken and right on point.

Please post more often .

 

[SidewalkJacket]

Here's my brief take:

CTR improved defensive recruiting. Hard to argue that.

CTR was a GT man, and his players seemed to love and respect him.

CTR's on-field defenses were too conservative, too predictable, and sometimes seemed to have the wrong player on the field in certain situations.

Our offense has less to do with our defensive success than some here are trying to assert.

An aggressive, risk-taking defense would pair perfectly with our offensive style. If Nate Woody is the guy, it's well worth the shot.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Here's my brief take:

CTR improved defensive recruiting. Hard to argue that.

CTR was a GT man, and his players seemed to love and respect him.

CTR's on-field defenses were too conservative, too predictable, and sometimes seemed to have the wrong player on the field in certain situations.

Our offense has less to do with our defensive success than some here are trying to assert.

An aggressive, risk-taking defense would pair perfectly with our offensive style. If Nate Woody is the guy, it's well worth the shot.

For the most part, I agree with this assessment. I think an offense that can't stay on the field means a D that tires out quickly. Sustaining drives is what I felt we lacked on O this year.

As for the last point? People love CPJs risk taking when it works, and hammer him the minute it doesn't. Unless we succeed 100% of the time, a good portion of the fan base won't be happy. I hope we keep that in mind when we root for our new DC to take aggressive, risky moves. They won't always be successful, and we need to understand that.

 

[MWBATL]

It also depends on what style of play you want. Navy plays a conservative defense, perhaps even more conservative than Coach Ted Roof's scheme. The reasoning behind that is because Navy knows that if you get a high number of possessions in a game, the more talented team will generally win out in the end. With a bend-don't-break defense, Navy can artificially limit the number of possessions in a game and force opponents to beat them with efficiency, something that Navy has been incredibly good at. Two years ago, Navy held Notre Dame to only 6 possessions and won the game because of that. A lot of people forget that this type of defense - bend-don't-break - was lauded only a few years ago and claimed to be perfect when paired with our offense because it limits the amount of possessions in a game, and since we were one of the most efficient teams offensively we had a great chance at beating better teams, such as the Clemsons, Alabamas, and Ohio States of the world

Now, everyone is saying that an aggressive defense is the key and perfectly paired with our offense. I don't think that's exactly true. If you give up big plays and scores, then you put the offense in a hole that forces us to deviate from our base offense and requires us to air out the ball, which we've seen does not have good results. Frankly, I think a lot of the animosity behind Coach Roof's defense came from the fact that it wasn't fun to watch, in the same way many people hate Coach Johnson's offense. I think a lot of people want to see something more aggressive because it is more fun to watch. My philosophy is: the best defense is one that works. It doesn't matter whether it is conservative or aggressive, as long as it works

Great points, and I confess to being one who hated Gailey's offense for that reason, and similarly hated Roof's defense for the same reason. If I wanted to watch NFL style football, I'd watch the NFL. I enjoy college ball more precisely because it is different. Unfortunately, the choice you suggest (that the conservative style is best if it wins) simply hasn't work out well for GT in the past 15 years or so....imho.

 

[Lavoisier]

Bend but don't break only works if you don't break. Ted's MO was giving up points on 2 minute defense every freaking game. If you are going to let them score, at least make them earn it.

 

[Sideways]

A lot of our bad tackles are being slow to get into position or getting faked out of position. SOME of that is talent and God-given ability. Do you really think Ted Roof doesn't know how to coach tackling? Really? Wow. He coaches how to tackle, but sometimes the guy across the way is quicker than you.

Like I said, we disagree, but if you want, we can do this until the cows come home.

Best pure tackler that I can remember for the Johnson era was Jemea Thomas. He made tackles on defense, special teams, and they generally went backwards too. The problem is that in the Gailey era there were so many good tacklers that it is near nigh impossible to single one out as the best.

 

[Andewa]

Best pure tackler that I can remember for the Johnson era was Jemea Thomas. He made tackles on defense, special teams, and they generally went backwards too. The problem is that in the Gailey era there were so many good tacklers that it is near nigh impossible to single one out as the best.

Phillip. Wheeler.

 

[augustabuzz]

Phillip. Wheeler.

Darryl Smith.

 

[RedPete]

Bend but don't break only works if you don't break. Ted's MO was giving up points on 2 minute defense every freaking game. If you are going to let them score, at least make them earn it.

Bend but don’t break *IS* making them earn it... by forcing long drives rather than giving up big plays for cheap scores. But yeah it only works if you don’t break in the end.

 

[UgaBlows]

But yeah it only works if you don’t break in the end.

The dreaded bend and then break defense.

 

[slugboy]

For a defense designed to keep the offense in front of them and take advantage of mistakes, we were really low on interceptions and fumble recoveries. Way too low.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[RedPete]

In case you missed it, this year’s Defense managed the fewest takeaways in 20 years. Just another example of how bad luck (not scheme) killed us this year.

 

[MacJacket]

In case you missed it, this year’s Defense managed the fewest takeaways in 20 years. Just another example of how bad luck (not scheme) killed us this year.

Not sure I agree with the luck part.... Pressure on the QB leads to both fumbles and poor throws that get picked off. RB/WR fumbles might be luck, but our defensive scheme was just not good. All that is moot now that Roof is gone. We will see what happens next year.

 

[sidewalkGTfan]

In case you missed it, this year’s Defense managed the fewest takeaways in 20 years. Just another example of how bad luck (not scheme) killed us this year.

I’m a believer that causing turnovers isn’t just about luck. One of my biggest gripes about Roof’s D was that we always seemed to struggle to create negative plays and turnovers. It felt like we were always hoping the other teams O would screw up on their own. JMO

 

[RedPete]

It’s fun to pretend you can influence things you can’t control. But even so, this year’s D was practically the same as last year’s aside from 2 def starters (and schematically same as “opportunistic” 2014). Same coordinator, same players, different luck.

But anyway Roof and the entire secondary are gone now so it’s moot.

 

[Milwaukee]

In case you missed it, this year’s Defense managed the fewest takeaways in 20 years. Just another example of how bad luck (not scheme) killed us this year.

It's amazing how bad we were in sacks the last 3 seasons as well. It's almost like we were allergic to quarterbacks.

 

[Sideways]

Darryl Smith.

Yes, Phillip and Daryl were both good ones. Shame we can't seem to get players like this anymore.

 

[TampaBuzz]

In case you missed it, this year’s Defense managed the fewest takeaways in 20 years. Just another example of how bad luck (not scheme) killed us this year.

I don't agree either. It seems that every game, there were one or two passes that our defenders had a chance to intercept, but the ball was either dropped or bounced to the receiver. We just didn't make the plays when we had the opportunity.

 

[Techster]

Interesting....



I'd still take 'Bama's defense though.