Thoughts going into UVA week

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

Noted, that you're deeply skeptical about a man who kept us in the top 40 on D for 4 straight years (3 in the top 30) with 2 and 3 star talent, and who oversaw losses to UGA in which they scored 19, 14, and 15 points from 2004-2006. We also held #2 Notre Dame to 14 points in 2006 and lost, Wake Forest to 9 and lost, and that's just 2006. If your expectations are to NEVER give up more than 30 points, you are unrealistic. He was the best defensive coordinator we have ever had, and without him we would not have 18 straight bowls, and would in fact probably have gone 3 or less wins in some of those seasons.

So yeah, let's be skeptical about that cuz, you know, we would totally have been a top 5 defense without him those years because that's what GT normally is.

Also, your statement about "one play to the next" is entirely subjective and revisionist. We averaged LESS than 20 points a game on offense in most of those seasons and still won a lot. His AVERAGE (meaning, counting one play to the next and averaging them) defensive output was enough to win with 2 TDs and a FG a game. Think about that and then read what you wrote.

Go back and look at the defensive personnel during the Tenuta years. We had some studs. Give Ted Roof those players and our defense would be enormously improved. We have a dearth of talent on the defense. We were thin BEFORE the offseason attrition.

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

My take on Tenuta is the same as my take on Jerry Glanville: you live by the blitz, you die by the blitz.

I think that's why there were so many big plays against his Ds while he was here. Against an O that didn't have either the scheme and/or the personnel to exploit the risks he took, his Ds were quite successful. Against those who did, well …

This year I think they'll be a bit more successful in terms of prep. Problem = we're a lot better on O this year and we are rolling.

We beat Virginia Tech this year BECAUSE Bud Foster blitzed, and put Fuller man on man with Smelter. Sometimes it works, sometimes it don't. When (or if) we start blitzing, we don't have Fuller type DB's.

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

Tenuta: I think Tenuta is one of the actual bonafide defensive coordinators out there. Would've loved to have kept him here at GT. I always wonder what could've been had we kept him .... wow, what a thought. Think about a great defense going with our offense all these years.

UNC scored 28 on UVA. It has appeared to me that UNC has an offense to be reckoned with. We have a bad defense, but their offense made our defense look like air. Against other teams, I thought our defense had a chance, but against UNC, it wasn't a matter of having a chance, it was a matter of how many plays will it take. So, UNC scoring 28 against them, I believe, confirms both that UNC has a good offense and that UVA has a good defense.

Where Tenuta's defense excels is at stopping traditional offenses. He will shut down a power run game and give heavy, effective pressure against their play-action game. His MO is to stop what the offense is good at and if they're going to beat you, make them do it left handed (he preached this to us), and that is a good philosophy. As far as I can see, if he's got an achilles heal, it's the non-traditional offenses. His defenses are so geared to stop what most offenses do, that they will struggle to play a different kind of game. We've had good success against them the last 2 years. He had trouble with WVU in the gator bowl, and with Oregon. Now, most DC's have trouble with these (and our) offense, so that's not just a Tenuta problem. I think he will come up with some kind of good game plan against us. But, what our offense does is it turns Tenuta's philosophy against he defense. It dictates what the defense can do. The defense can't do what it's good at (which is blitz pressure, pressure, pressure, aggressive), it will have to beat us left handed, it will have to focus on assignments. But, I do believe his defense will be a bigger challenge than we've seen the last 2 weeks against UNC and Pitt. I think he will do everything he can to try to make JT have to beat us with his arm. He will take some chances as well to try to make things happen. I wouldn't be surprised to see their defense be as effective as a VT or Duke against us, though I think we're much better offensively now than we were against VT. Hopefully Synjyn continues to be a workhorse and not fumble.


Chance at a defensive revival: I remember feeling this way about our defense during Groh's last weeks. I remember when Kelly took over thinking that there was little chance we could get any better. I thought that there were too many personnel issues back then, just like I'm thinking now. I do think the big difference between then and now is the crazy attrition we've had on the DL, but I'm still wondering if there is any way we could see some semblance of a defensive revival over the last part of this year the way we saw it that year under Kelly. 33Jacket and others are adamant that the defense SHOULD be better. I have argued against that point, saying that there's no way you can expect better when you have those kinds of losses on the DL in the offseason. BUT, I was wrong back in '11 and I hope I'm wrong now. I still disagree with them that the source of our defensive ineptitude is Roof's head being up his rear, but I'm going to go ahead and change my mind and side with them that our defense CAN be better. I'm sure Roof is looking for answers, and I'm hoping he finds something this week; or at least before we get to Ugag. If he finds something, anything that can shore up our DL and/or create pressure, something that could just at least make the offense do something they don't want to have to do to beat us, we still have a chance at being a great team rather than just a great offense.

When Kelly took over, he changed us from a 3-4 to a 4-3 because it fit our personality better. I wouldn't mind seeing the inverse happen in this case and go to a 3-4 to minimize the impact of the DL, put your best 3 DL out there and get more athleticism on the field in the form of LB's and/or DB's in the back 8 (rather than back 7) and just send people from everywhere.

In reality, don't we line up 4-5-2 a lot?

 

[Wrecking Ball]

My take on Tenuta is the same as my take on Jerry Glanville: you live by the blitz, you die by the blitz.

I think that's why there were so many big plays against his Ds while he was here. Against an O that didn't have either the scheme and/or the personnel to exploit the risks he took, his Ds were quite successful. Against those who did, well …

This year I think they'll be a bit more successful in terms of prep. Problem = we're a lot better on O this year and we are rolling.

Oh, so: In 2002, #10 NCST (with Philip Rivers) and #17 FSU didn't have the personnel to beat him. In 2003, #17 Auburn, #10 FSU? In 2004, #20 Clemson and #8 UGA didn't? In 2005, #3 Miami, #16 Auburn, and #13 UGA didn't? In 2006, #2 Notre Dame and #16 Wake Forest didn't? In 2007, #13 Clemson didn't? Thanks for teaching me that all of those teams had no talent and we were really the most talented team in the whole world and it was our crappy D not shutting them out that was why we lost.

 

[slugboy]

I'd love for our defensive failures to be giving up 24 or 28 total points.

 

[Wrecking Ball]

On 15+ drives as well. Now we give up 49 on 10 drives. In the "awful" BC game, Matt Ryan had 12 serious drives and put up just 24 points.

 

[AE 87]

On 15+ drives as well. Now we give up 49 on 11 drives.

fify

 

[DTGT]

In reality, don't we line up 4-5-2 a lot?

Transposition? 4-2-5?

 

[Frenchise]

We beat Virginia Tech this year BECAUSE Bud Foster blitzed, and put Fuller man on man with Smelter. Sometimes it works, sometimes it don't. When (or if) we start blitzing, we don't have Fuller type DB's.

And in every game where the other team had an OL with a pulse they scored without blitzing anyway. The VT game is not a good example of the defense because their OL is all frosh and their QB makes poor decisions. Every other team we face has a much better OL, and we will get no pressure bringing 4.

 

[vamosjackets]

We beat Virginia Tech this year BECAUSE Bud Foster blitzed, and put Fuller man on man with Smelter. Sometimes it works, sometimes it don't. When (or if) we start blitzing, we don't have Fuller type DB's.

It's not just about blitzing... it's about HOW you blitz. Just blitzing is about like saying ... Our offense just needs to pass the ball to be successful ... or conversely, our offense needs to quit passing the ball to be successful. It's not as simple as "to pass or not to pass"... neither is it as simple as "to blitz or not to blitz". Blitzes don't create incompletions. Pressure creates incompletions. And, pressure is a product of coming from the right spot and being in the right spot on the back end to take away a quick safety valve.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

It's not just about blitzing... it's about HOW you blitz. Just blitzing is about like saying ... Our offense just needs to pass the ball to be successful ... or conversely, our offense needs to quit passing the ball to be successful. It's not as simple as "to pass or not to pass"... neither is it as simple as "to blitz or not to blitz". Blitzes don't create incompletions. Pressure creates incompletions. And, pressure is a product of coming from the right spot and being in the right spot on the back end to take away a quick safety valve.

Aren't there "hot routes" designed to go right were the blitzer came from? Most of the time there's gonna be open guys, the blitzer has to get there before the qb can find them.

 

[Wrecking Ball]

Aren't there "hot routes" designed to go right were the blitzer came from? Most of the time there's gonna be open guys, the blitzer has to get there before the qb can find them.

Not in a zone blitz. A zone blitz will, for example, have a LB blitz and either a safety step up into coverage or a DE drop back. Our DEs made a lot of picks that way, Robo in particular.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Not in a zone blitz. A zone blitz will, for example, have a LB blitz and either a safety step up into coverage or a DE drop back. Our DEs made a lot of picks that way, Robo in particular.

If you drop a DL you're still bringing the same number of guys, just from different angles. To me, blitzing is bringing more guys than you normally do. Even bringing a safety up can cause problems on a slant if he can't get there in time.

 

[Wrecking Ball]

If you drop a DL you're still bringing the same number of guys, just from different angles. To me, blitzing is bringing more guys than you normally do. Even bringing a safety up can cause problems on a slant if he can't get there in time.

@vamosjackets said it best: blitzing is about applying pressure, not numbers. JT was a master of that. Ted Roof throws numbers at it. Blitzing is like tanks in WW2 - numbers didn't mean as much as where they were applied. Ted Roof's blitzes are like WW1 mass charges into machine guns.

 

[vamosjackets]

If you drop a DL you're still bringing the same number of guys, just from different angles. To me, blitzing is bringing more guys than you normally do. Even bringing a safety up can cause problems on a slant if he can't get there in time.

One of Tenuta's favorites brought 2 LB's and dropped 1 DE. So, you did have 5 coming (so a blitz by your definition), but also gained the advantage of dropping the DE to the exact spot where a typical "hot route" would've been. Another aspect is that the DE would make a quick move upfield first so that the OT would have to respect him, so that the OL had to account for 6 guys coming even though it was only 5 (so we would often have a LB coming free while an OT was left standing there), and we could still have 6 in zone coverage. So, then the OT gets smart and stops respecting the possibility of the DE coming, then with a simple call, the DE DOES come, and the OT completely whiffs and BOOM, Mr. Shockley meet Mr. Henderson. Add another variation onto that of the DE taking a track looping inside while the DT instead of going straight up on the OT, while the DT loops outside, with 2 LB's coming, all while the OL has been used to only accounting for 5 guys. And, that's just one of the plethora of zone-dog combinations.

WHO (or what offensive scheme) DOES THAT REMIND YOU OF??? I'll give you a hint ... it rhymes with Call Swanson and Fliple Concoction.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

One of Tenuta's favorites brought 2 LB's and dropped 1 DE. So, you did have 5 coming (so a blitz by your definition), but also gained the advantage of dropping the DE to the exact spot where a typical "hot route" would've been. Another aspect is that the DE would make a quick move upfield first so that the OT would have to respect him, so that the OL had to account for 6 guys coming even though it was only 5 (so we would often have a LB coming free while an OT was left standing there), and we could still have 6 in zone coverage. So, then the OT gets smart and stops respecting the possibility of the DE coming, then with a simple call, the DE DOES come, and the OT completely whiffs and BOOM, Mr. Shockley meet Mr. Henderson. Add another variation onto that of the DE taking a track looping inside while the DT instead of going straight up on the OT, while the DT loops outside, with 2 LB's coming, all while the OL has been used to only accounting for 5 guys. And, that's just one of the plethora of zone-dog combinations.

WHO (or what offensive scheme) DOES THAT REMIND YOU OF??? I'll give you a hint ... it rhymes with Call Swanson and Fliple Concoction.

I see your point. But we don't have any Mr. Hendersons no matter what scheme we're running. Or, for that matter, any Phillip Wheelers, K. Michael Halls, Chris Reises, Dawon Landrys, Kenny Scotts, Joe Anoais, Gary Guytons, Darrell Robertsons, Dennis Davises or Vance Walkers.

 

[Wrecking Ball]

I see your point. But we don't have any Mr. Hendersons no matter what scheme we're running. Or, for that matter, any Phillip Wheelers, K. Michael Halls, Chris Reises, Dawon Landrys, Kenny Scotts, Joe Anoais, Gary Guytons, Darrell Robertsons, Dennis Davises or Vance Walkers.

Do you think a fairy enrolled them for us? Wheeler was a bucket of potential when he came and nothing more, KaMichael Hall was undersized, Reis wasn't all-anything, Guyton was smaller... we developed them! That's a nice thought. And it didn't take 5 years. Many of these guys were starting as sophomores with development.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Do you think a fairy enrolled them for us? Wheeler was a bucket of potential when he came and nothing more, KaMichael Hall was undersized, Reis wasn't all-anything, Guyton was smaller... we developed them! That's a nice thought. And it didn't take 5 years. Many of these guys were starting as sophomores with development.

I'm not buying that. Those were good/great college players and many of them pros. They would have been good/great players anywhere. You can't make chicken salad out of you know what.

 

[Wrecking Ball]

Chris Reis was 6'1 204, a 3 star.
Pat Clark was 5'10 175, 2 star who spent a lot of time at QB and WR before quickly shuttling to DB his last two years and starring (I thought it took decades to teach a position? IIRC Tenuta coached DBs himself.)
Anoai was 6'3 240, a 3 star.
Joe Gaston (solid backup and sometimes starter) was 6'0, 205, a 2 star.
KaMichael Hall was 6'1, 205, a 3 star.
Adamm Oliver was 6'4 235, a 3 star.
Avery Roverson was 6'2, 190 (played at 210 or so), a 3 star.
Kenny Scott was a stud, a 4 star at 6'1, 178.
Wheeler was 6'2, 215, a 3 star.
Travis Chambers was 6'1 215, a 2 star.
Guyton was 6'4, 220 - a 2 star.
Djay Jones was 6'2, 186, a 2 star (played at 220).
Jamal Lewis was 6'0 175, a 2 star (played amazing at safety.)
Even Darryl Richard was a 3 star.
Robo was 6'5, 215, a 3 star (developed into a beast).
Vance Walker was 6'2 255, a 2 star.
Jahi Word Daniels was 5'11, 160, a 3 star.
Michael Johnson was 6'7, 215, a 3 star.

@dressedcheeseside

 

[Wrecking Ball]

Buy THAT. None of them came in heralded, most of them were projects, most of them lanky or small or what have you but they were turned into headhunters, killers, and beasts.