Was our defense hamstrung in the past?

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,043
Who really knows? I think there is another possibility, one I've seen professionally in several different ways. CPJ was hands-off with the defense unless they screwed up -- at which point his feedback was likely harsh. Thus, although his public comments and individual philosophy is aggressive, getting out of the way of the DC, etc., the biggest impact of his coaching style was to cause DCs to be fearful of him. That could work differently in many ways. It might discourage them from being proactive about advocating for changes to how practice is done to accommodate better teaching, installing schemes more applicable to other offenses, etc. To avoid his criticism, they might have chosen less aggressive schemes. Even though results may have been poor, and he might make negative comments about performance and approach, if it is not specific, they'll avoid the most fear-inducing confrontations and further entrench an attitude that he's not actually there to help.

This might contrast sharply with CPJs beliefs about things, and to some degree responsibility rests on grown adults to tolerate someone getting on their arses and to advocate for what they think is best regardless, but realistically most people will avoid overt conflict if they are able to, seek to do the best they can, and take personal responsibility for failings of their unit completely missing attention to opportunity to improve working conditions.

Ultimately, program culture is big time HC responsibility. I think CPJ was somewhat of a mixed bag. I'm deeply proud of his integrity and straightforwardness and successes as our coach and throughout his career. I'm deeply proud of the individual bonds he made with his players and how he helped shaped them into finer people as well as players. I respect his keen football mind and ability to outfox other coaches on gameday. I also think we are seeing how a more involved and constructively minded HC can change things for our culture. We don't know how CGC stacks up against CPJ in all those other areas.

That may well be true, and it almost certainly had an effect, if true. And I agree with all the good and bad aspects you point out about CPJ. But keep in mind that CPJ himself had much better success - great success, in fact- at the lower levels, where I think the effects on recruiting didn't bear as much on the level of talent vis-a-vis the level of competition as it does at the P5 level.
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
7,875
Location
Augusta, Georgia
It was the side effect it had on recruiting that was ultimately its undoing.

I would only edit this to clarify that it was it's effect on defensive recruiting that was the issue. Everyone knew coming in that we would be recruiting generally lesser ranked offensive recruits as "system fits." It was our lack of being able to consistently recruit top tier defensive talent that ultimately cost us several seasons. In both 2011 and 2012, GT fielded teams ranked 16th and 11th in OFEI with the oft-maligned TW as QB and David Sims as starting BB. Our offense was churning right along without any real star power to speak of. It was the defense that was our prevalent issue. Now, whether the D woes were due to talent, scheme, poor coaching, or head coaches intentionally sabotaging their D is open to debate. I tend to believe it's a mixture of all but the last one.
 

TheSilasSonRising

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,729
A common misperception. During the season they practice against a simulation of the opponent's. Just like our opponents practice against the simulation against what we run. Just like our Kunis practice to get to stimulation against what we run.

But when we held spring or preseason scrimmages with our 1s vs 2s and 2s vs 1s, or 1s vs 1s, what O did our D get their time against?
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,043
I would only edit this to clarify that it was it's effect on defensive recruiting that was the issue. Everyone knew coming in that we would be recruiting generally lesser ranked offensive recruits as "system fits." It was our lack of being able to consistently recruit top tier defensive talent that ultimately cost us several seasons. In both 2011 and 2012, GT fielded teams ranked 16th and 11th in OFEI with the oft-maligned TW as QB and David Sims as starting BB. Our offense was churning right along without any real star power to speak of. It was the defense that was our prevalent issue. Now, whether the D woes were due to talent, scheme, poor coaching, or head coaches intentionally sabotaging their D is open to debate. I tend to believe it's a mixture of all but the last one.

I wonder if the offensive scheme had an effect on defensive recruiting as well, because of the issue of what you had to practice against - scout team or the oddball offense of the first- and second-team. Recruiting did seem roughly equal on both sides of the ball. The offensive scheme mitigated the effects of the offensive recruiting. Defense had no such allaying facility. Bottom line is that the offensive scheme helped the offense and hurt the defense. Practicing against the wrong scheme hurt per se, but it was recruiting that was affected most by that, IMO.
 

BurdellJacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
477
Location
Atlanta
I would only edit this to clarify that it was it's effect on defensive recruiting that was the issue. Everyone knew coming in that we would be recruiting generally lesser ranked offensive recruits as "system fits." It was our lack of being able to consistently recruit top tier defensive talent that ultimately cost us several seasons. In both 2011 and 2012, GT fielded teams ranked 16th and 11th in OFEI with the oft-maligned TW as QB and David Sims as starting BB. Our offense was churning right along without any real star power to speak of. It was the defense that was our prevalent issue. Now, whether the D woes were due to talent, scheme, poor coaching, or head coaches intentionally sabotaging their D is open to debate. I tend to believe it's a mixture of all but the last one.


It's your use of the phrase "oft-maligned TW as QB" that really bothers me. Tevin met or exceeded virtually every offensive stat of Joshua Nesbitt. Josh had more yards rushing but he had many more carries. On yards per carry Josh had only 0.08 more ypc. Passing, Tevin had much better yards per attempt, completion percentage and passing efficiency. And the team offense was just as efficient as under JN. Most on here thought more highly of JN because we had much better defenses and therefore won more.
 

BurdellJacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
477
Location
Atlanta
This...is why most on here thought more highly of JN. All of your other statistics are valid and true but make no mistake about it. This is why.




So I understand. In a discussion of the efficacy of one SA over another in this august body (of which only statistical proofs based on stats are sacrosanct), one wonderful play of daring and luck would rule.
 

smathis30

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
732
So I understand. In a discussion of the efficacy of one SA over another in this august body (of which only statistical proofs based on stats are sacrosanct), one wonderful play of daring and luck would rule.
moreso the attitude that came with it, plato.

dude played tough and to win at all costs.
 

Heisman's Ghost

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,397
Location
Albany Georgia
It's your use of the phrase "oft-maligned TW as QB" that really bothers me. Tevin met or exceeded virtually every offensive stat of Joshua Nesbitt. Josh had more yards rushing but he had many more carries. On yards per carry Josh had only 0.08 more ypc. Passing, Tevin had much better yards per attempt, completion percentage and passing efficiency. And the team offense was just as efficient as under JN. Most on here thought more highly of JN because we had much better defenses and therefore won more.

He is not maligned by me that is for sure. Tevin was handicapped by some pretty poor defenses during his time as starter. There were games that I felt like we had to score damn near every drive to win. A three and out was almost fatal. I don't know who the defensive experts on this board would say is the worst defensive coordinator we had but Coach Groh was the only one that I can think of that was dismissed during the season. I am not sure about that though, is that right? Was it talent? Was it coaching? Was it both? All I know is that changing coordinators did not seem to help much, if at all. I thought Woody was the best but maybe a case can be made for the first guy. What was his name again? But then, he had demonstrably better players to work with too.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,351
It's your use of the phrase "oft-maligned TW as QB" that really bothers me. Tevin met or exceeded virtually every offensive stat of Joshua Nesbitt. Josh had more yards rushing but he had many more carries. On yards per carry Josh had only 0.08 more ypc. Passing, Tevin had much better yards per attempt, completion percentage and passing efficiency. And the team offense was just as efficient as under JN. Most on here thought more highly of JN because we had much better defenses and therefore won more.

You can’t deny that he was very maligned by our fanbase during his tenure as QB, definitely not deserved but it is what it is.
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
7,875
Location
Augusta, Georgia
It's your use of the phrase "oft-maligned TW as QB" that really bothers me. Tevin met or exceeded virtually every offensive stat of Joshua Nesbitt. Josh had more yards rushing but he had many more carries. On yards per carry Josh had only 0.08 more ypc. Passing, Tevin had much better yards per attempt, completion percentage and passing efficiency. And the team offense was just as efficient as under JN. Most on here thought more highly of JN because we had much better defenses and therefore won more.

I'm as big a TW fan as there is on these boards, but he gets almost no credit for how stinking good he was in this offense and spent his senior year with everyone clamoring for Vad Lee to start.That's why I used the term. It has nothing to do with my appreciation for his play.
 

LongforDodd

LatinxBreakfastTacos
Messages
3,005
So I understand. In a discussion of the efficacy of one SA over another in this august body (of which only statistical proofs based on stats are sacrosanct), one wonderful play of daring and luck would rule.
I don't want this to be turned into another thread derailment so we can discuss this more elsewhere if you wish. I apologize to everyone if my comment was misplaced.
 

biggtfan

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
182
Location
Atlanta
Yes, the defense was hamstrung in the past. Reasons:
1. As stated by an active member of the defense in an AJC article (wtte) 'we see the looks in practice that we'll see in games." Further, defensive players sit in on offensive meetings to understand routes and strategies. They could never have done that under CPJ.
2. Not seeing common passing schemes was a disincentive to recruiting defensive talent.
3. Assuming the above are credible, it would help explain why multiple DC's couldn't fix the problem.
 
Top