Ted Roof earns redemption!

[okiemon]

"Ted Roof earns redemption."

Probably not. Until there is week-in-and-week-out defensive success, I'm sticking to the blind-hog-and-acorn principle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jerry the Jacket]

That's 7 acorns this season so far.

Go Jackets!

 

[iceeater1969]

That's 7 acorns this season so far.

Go Jackets!

Imagine how many acorns if we were Clearly Pretty good on defense verses the opponents make unforced errors.

And we could be pretty good in near future.

 

[LargeFO]

"That's 7 acorns this season so far."

Yeah, cause his defense played so well against Duke...

 

[tech_wreck47]

I don't doubt that we have more in common than not, I just grow wearisome of the 'bash CTR regardless' posts. When the D plays well, the people who have an axe to grind with CTR refuse to give him any credit, but instead point out the offenses mistakes. (Ironically, we don't tend to trash an opponents D when we exposes them on offense) I have said all along I am not sure CTR was the best hire, but I want to give him time to prove me wrong or not, and fixing CAGs 3-4 debacle was always going to be a project that took some time.

I like CTR, my only issue is scheme, and even with giving him time I don't believe it will work with the type of players GT has historically gotten. Our scheme makes it to where you have to win a lot of one on ones which is fine if you are Bama, but we are not. When our D line is not big, strong, or athletic enough to over power the OL why are they going into the OL with their hands and trying to shed off the block instead of shooting gaps? ( which you still use your hands), but it allows a hole to be clogged better instead of having to shed the block to fill the hole. We also are not very "exotic" in coverages or blitz which I think would help our D cover up some weaknesses. This is honestly my only complaint about our D and why I don't believe it will get much better until we either recruit better( D line mainly) or change scheme that plays to the players strengths better. I honestly believe we have better talent than what shows.

 

[sidewalkGTfan]

That's 7 acorns this season so far.

Go Jackets!

I'm glad PJ doesn't agree with you that a win always equates to good D since he fired his first DC after winning the ACC.

I want Roof to succeed because firing coaches is tough on a team and program but for all that's holy, scrap the soft D and let the guys pin their ears back.

 

[AE 87]

Here's what I find most frustrating about how we judge our D: The scale keeps moving. I've heard all year that if we could just get more TOs on D or do better on third down, then we'd be all right. We did both today. We held UVA to 7-17 on third down. We had two TOs. (Not counting the garbage time heave that ended the game) And yet here we are still griping about how bad our D is. So again, I ask, what is the benchmark we are looking for? We held UVA in check for most of the game. I am not sure that some of you guys even know how to be happy...

7 of 17 is still over 41%. If we averaged that for the season, we'd be #83 rather than #126. It's not like that's great.

Fwiw, I think that you're misrepresenting the "scale" being used in the past. That being said, we did keep them off the board. We were better in points/drive defense.

 

[PBR549]

The defense played pretty well today. Yes it was bend but don't break but offensively we could not put drives together. We scored on big plays. We couldn't stay on the field on offense. Having said that we found a way to score so I'll take it. Roof did what he had to do to win. I'll take it.

 

[danny daniel]

I like CTR, my only issue is scheme, and even with giving him time I don't believe it will work with the type of players GT has historically gotten. Our scheme makes it to where you have to win a lot of one on ones which is fine if you are Bama, but we are not. When our D line is not big, strong, or athletic enough to over power the OL why are they going into the OL with their hands and trying to shed off the block instead of shooting gaps? ( which you still use your hands), but it allows a hole to be clogged better instead of having to shed the block to fill the hole. We also are not very "exotic" in coverages or blitz which I think would help our D cover up some weaknesses. This is honestly my only complaint about our D and why I don't believe it will get much better until we either recruit better( D line mainly) or change scheme that plays to the players strengths better. I honestly believe we have better talent than what shows.

I tend to agree. I especially dislike the technique we seem to be using in the DL (to put both hands on the blocker, square up and push). This seems to lead to a long struggle to get off the block when required and an even longer struggle to push that blocker into the passer. It also results in getting us in a more standup vertical position. I am for getting over, under, around, or through the blocker ASAP and getting after the ball. The blocker is a mere nusiance, not a marriage partner. IMO our technique turns us into velcro men and kills our pass rush and pursuit. Comments or corrections?

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

7 of 17 is still over 41%. If we averaged that for the season, we'd be #83 rather than #126. It's not like that's great.

Fwiw, I think that you're misrepresenting the "scale" being used in the past. That being said, we did keep them off the board. We were better in points/drive defense.

Take out the last garbage time drive and we were 6/16 on third for .375, which would be good for 44th. Again, not great, but pretty good. I don't think I am misrepresenting the scale either. It has shifted from week to week based on the performance from the week before, mostly in regards to turnovers.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

...This is honestly my only complaint about our D and why I don't believe it will get much better until we either recruit better( D line mainly) or change scheme that plays to the players strengths better. I honestly believe we have better talent than what shows.

This is probably where you and I disagree. I think that the DL CTR has been bringing in are pretty solid, but just need time to develop. We're already seeing a couple of them beginning to shine.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

When the game was on the line, the D came through. That's good enough for me to give the D kudos. There was plenty of times I was cussin' them, though, but hey, they did enough to get the win when the O was less than stellar.

 

[tech_wreck47]

This is probably where you and I disagree. I think that the DL CTR has been bringing in are pretty solid, but just need time to develop. We're already seeing a couple of them beginning to shine.

I can respect that, I honestly just don't see us winning the battle inside more than not and imo it takes more physically gifted guy than what we have. That's nothing against our guys because I believe they are good ball players. It's just my opinion that you need the best of the best to run our scheme consistently. But regardless we both want the same thing, a strong D.

 

[BuzzStone]

I think we can all agree we are happy to have 2 struggling offenses in a row for our D to get some valuable playing time. Our Defense will be better next year because it is hard to get worse. We may be young but I believe our guys will get better in spite of CTR. We have another team coming up that can't score offensive TDs. I hope we can look good again on D even though its painful to watch.

 

[orientalnc]

For years we have struggled with defense, but we have never been this bad:

http://www.espn.com/college-football/matchup?gameId=400869064

 

[mj claz]

For years we have struggled with defense, but we have never been this bad:

http://www.espn.com/college-football/matchup?gameId=400869064

It must be Bob Shoop's fault. He is such a terrible DC. (Sarcasm)

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Here's what I find most frustrating about how we judge our D: The scale keeps moving. I've heard all year that if we could just get more TOs on D or do better on third down, then we'd be all right. We did both today. We held UVA to 7-17 on third down. We had two TOs. (Not counting the garbage time heave that ended the game) And yet here we are still griping about how bad our D is. So again, I ask, what is the benchmark we are looking for? We held UVA in check for most of the game. I am not sure that some of you guys even know how to be happy...

I don't need to look at the statistics to know that we are playing a lot harder and faster than we used to. We dished out some massive hits today. PJ won't get to play in the NFL but he hit like an NFL linebacker yesterday. The DL was fairly solid too and playing physical. The apathetic body english of three or four games ago is gone.

Our biggest problem on D (I'm not a D expert at all) is that our secondary gives way too big of a cushion. Good QBs or QBs not fighting the wind have taken advantage of that.

At the end of the season, our D may be ~100th. We were 111th after VT. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/feidef

That is not redemption for the coaching staff to me.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I don't need to look at the statistics to know that we are playing a lot harder and faster than we used to. We dished out some massive hits today. PJ won't get to play in the NFL but he hit like an NFL linebacker yesterday. The DL was fairly solid too and playing physical. The apathetic body english of three or four games ago is gone.

Our biggest problem on D (I'm not a D expert at all) is that our secondary gives way too big of a cushion. Good QBs or QBs not fighting the wind have taken advantage of that.

At the end of the season, our D may be ~100th. We were 111th after VT. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/feidef

That is not redemption for the coaching staff to me.

Again, I am not saying that thee two wins "redeem" the coaching staff. I am saying that I don't think we should have hung them out to dry to begin with. Our D has been atrocious this year. Easily the worst of the CTR era so far. I just think that with the talent I see being recruited, that it's about to change for the positive. I see these two games as an indicator that the guys are starting to get it.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Our biggest problem on D (I'm not a D expert at all) is that our secondary gives way too big of a cushion. Good QBs or QBs not fighting the wind have taken advantage of that.

Here's a good article that explains why so many GOOD defenses run soft coverage.

http://www.footballstudyhall.com/20...ge-football-defense-soft-coverage-mike-stoops

 

[GTNavyNuke]

...... I see these two games as an indicator that the guys are starting to get it.

Fair enough. And I agree based the intensity of our players. Whether that will be enough will be answered after the season.

I really wanted Roof to succeed and become our HC. I don't see that as very likely now. But I'm wrong a lot, so hopefully this is another case.