Roof Out as DC

RedPete

RedPete

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
944
Location
Atlanta, GA
TampaBuzz said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yes - the scenario you just described is exactly bad luck (not coming up with the ball) as opposed to scheme (not putting guys into position to make plays).
 
AlabamaBuzz

AlabamaBuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,020
Location
Hartselle, AL (originally Rome, GA)
Roof always got great effort out of our guys. They "brought it" for him every game. Talent was the limiting factor, always, and that was mainly due to our lack of size/speed up front.

With that said, I have hope for the next DC that he will also be able to get this "effort" and also get a few more big nasties so that we can compete better.
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
Sideways said:
Yes, Phillip and Daryl were both good ones. Shame we can't seem to get players like this anymore.
Click to expand...

They were a rare catch for us back then as well. How often in our history have we started 2 frosh together at LB who were also productive. Both were 4star talents.
 
slugboy

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,491
Whiskey_Clear said:
You can be physical and still give up points and first downs.

Clemson game wasn't our worst performance of the year. But I'm also a little surprised he mentioned us. Players usually remember and respect the teams that gave them the most trouble.
Click to expand...
The defense fought and clawed that game. If you told me before the game--well, before the season--that we held Clemson to 24 points, I'd ask "did we win?". We just had no offense that game. We only got 230 yards of offense that game (http://www.espn.com/college-football/matchup?gameId=400937505). We gave up 428 yards, which was below average for Clemson.
I'm surprised they didn't say "Syracuse" though.
 
tech_wreck47

tech_wreck47

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,670
AlabamaBuzz said:
Roof always got great effort out of our guys. They "brought it" for him every game. Talent was the limiting factor, always, and that was mainly due to our lack of size/speed up front.

With that said, I have hope for the next DC that he will also be able to get this "effort" and also get a few more big nasties so that we can compete better.
Click to expand...
More like scheme instead of players. There are other schools that produce better with the same issue of size and speed. Woodys scheme should fit our guys better with or without more big nasties. What we did of “read and react” is exactly what you don’t want when you have a smaller group on D, it allows the bigger offenses to attack you. What Woody does is attack them.
 

Sideways

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,589
slugboy said:
The defense fought and clawed that game. If you told me before the game--well, before the season--that we held Clemson to 24 points, I'd ask "did we win?". We just had no offense that game. We only got 230 yards of offense that game (http://www.espn.com/college-football/matchup?gameId=400937505). We gave up 428 yards, which was below average for Clemson.
I'm surprised they didn't say "Syracuse" though.
Click to expand...

When we play Clemson, it is just about always a hard fought game on both sides. Maybe not that terribly close but we just about always give our best effort against the Tigers. Old habits die hard. Pitt, Virginia, Wake, etc. just don't get the juices flowing although Miami and Virginia Tech are pretty close.
 
UgaBlows

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,831
I know i'm being somewhat delusional but i like to Think of Woody's defense as if it's tailor made to kill the shotgun-spread offense. I feel like Womack, Groh, and maybe Roof's defensive mind-sets/philosophy's are too old school for the modern game.
 

Sideways

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,589
UgaBlows said:
I know i'm being somewhat delusional but i like to Think of Woody's defense as if it's tailor made to kill the shotgun-spread offense. I feel like Womack, Groh, and maybe Roof's defensive mind-sets/philosophy's are too old school for the modern game.
Click to expand...

Yep. It would appear that the game has "passed them by" but then defensive coordinators have been confounded by this spread option and its various offshoots for going on a decade now. You would think someone would have figured out a way to at least slow it down by now. Of course, if you have Alabama/Clemson defensive linemen and UGA linebackers that will slow down anything this side of a freight train.
 

Lavoisier

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
847
The way the game is reffed these days with no holding calls, no pick calls, and no illegal man down field calls (or very few) it benefits spread teams that utilize RPOs a lot. You can't slow them down when the refs call the game the way they do unless you are simply more talented than the other team. I like the use of high pressure defenses because the opponent might move the ball on us but we'll put their qb in the dirt.
 
vamosjackets

vamosjackets

GT Athlete
Featured Member
Messages
2,150
Whiskey_Clear said:
They were a rare catch for us back then as well. How often in our history have we started 2 frosh together at LB who were also productive. Both were 4star talents.
Click to expand...
Not sure if I'm misunderstanding you, but Wheeler and Smith didn't play together.

But, think of the great defensive players we had during the CCG/CJT years:
Wimbush/Smith/Fox/Meyers/C.Collins/Gathers/Hargrove
Smith/Fox/A.Brown/E.Henderson
Bowers-Wilkinson/C.Reese/K.Hall/J.Anoai/E.Henderson/A.Oliver/J.Butler/D.Landry
P.Wheeler/G.Guyton/K.Hall/J.Anoai/A.Oliver/D.Richard/D.Robertson/V.Walker/K.Scott/J.Lewis

And, the vast majority of those guys were ranked 2 or 3 stars. The recruiting rankings back then weren't better (and mostly worse) than they are now. So, what does that say? Player development? A better eye for underrated talent? Scheme?

IMO, it's a little of all of it, but especially scheme that allows those guys to play fully to the maximum of their ability, playing to their strengths - aggressive, attacking, putting the pressure on the offense and making them look bad, dictating what they're going to have to do to be successful (not what they want to do). That makes our guys look a lot better.
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
vamosjackets said:
Not sure if I'm misunderstanding you, but Wheeler and Smith didn't play together.

But, think of the great defensive players we had during the CCG/CJT years:
Wimbush/Smith/Fox/Meyers/C.Collins/Gathers/Hargrove
Smith/Fox/A.Brown/E.Henderson
Bowers-Wilkinson/C.Reese/K.Hall/J.Anoai/E.Henderson/A.Oliver/J.Butler/D.Landry
P.Wheeler/G.Guyton/K.Hall/J.Anoai/A.Oliver/D.Richard/D.Robertson/V.Walker/K.Scott/J.Lewis

And, the vast majority of those guys were ranked 2 or 3 stars. The recruiting rankings back then weren't better (and mostly worse) than they are now. So, what does that say? Player development? A better eye for underrated talent? Scheme?

IMO, it's a little of all of it, but especially scheme that allows those guys to play fully to the maximum of their ability, playing to their strengths - aggressive, attacking, putting the pressure on the offense and making them look bad, dictating what they're going to have to do to be successful (not what they want to do). That makes our guys look a lot better.
Click to expand...

You are right. I was thinking of Smith and Key Fox. But you are right. We had some serious ballers back then. Gathers would be another easy four star. Five star if he had gone to a SEC school. All of them were under rated by services and our competition.

Tenuta was a darn good D.C., and had some darn good talent to coach up. Those names bring back a lot of warm and fuzzies. Was a really fun D to watch and they balled.

I thought back at the time of the CPJ hire that losing Tenuta was the biggest negative of the deal. I try not to think about how good things might have been if Tenuta had stayed on as D.C.
 
vamosjackets

vamosjackets

GT Athlete
Featured Member
Messages
2,150
Whiskey_Clear said:
You are right. I was thinking of Smith and Key Fox. But you are right. We had some serious ballers back then. Gathers would be another easy four star. Five star if he had gone to a SEC school. All of them were under rated by services and our competition.

Tenuta was a darn good D.C., and had some darn good talent to coach up. Those names bring back a lot of warm and fuzzies. Was a really fun D to watch and they balled.

I thought back at the time of the CPJ hire that losing Tenuta was the biggest negative of the deal. I try not to think about how good things might have been if Tenuta had stayed on as D.C.
Click to expand...
Same here.
 
AlabamaBuzz

AlabamaBuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,020
Location
Hartselle, AL (originally Rome, GA)
tech_wreck47 said:
More like scheme instead of players. There are other schools that produce better with the same issue of size and speed. Woodys scheme should fit our guys better with or without more big nasties. What we did of “read and react” is exactly what you don’t want when you have a smaller group on D, it allows the bigger offenses to attack you. What Woody does is attack them.
Click to expand...


OK, but if you attack and they block the attack, just be happy with the results. I guess you can have fast death or slow death, whichever you like better.

If you are thinking of Tenuta's D, he had more talent overall in his time there than we have had recently, specifically at LB and DL.
 
vamosjackets

vamosjackets

GT Athlete
Featured Member
Messages
2,150
AlabamaBuzz said:
OK, but if you attack and they block the attack, just be happy with the results. I guess you can have fast death or slow death, whichever you like better.

If you are thinking of Tenuta's D, he had more talent overall in his time there than we have had recently, specifically at LB and DL.
Click to expand...
Why did he have more talent? The recruiting rankings were significantly worse.
 
Top