Shoop's Defense

#76
#76
You hear Butch often speaking of complimentary football. Looking inside the stats the Jackets didn't beat their rushing average per play by much in the Tennessee game over their average for the 2016 season. 2016 season average yards per rushing play 5.5; versus Tennessee 6.22. The big difference is number of rushes - 2016 average rushing attempts per game 47; versus Tennessee 86. Had GT rushed their normal average of 47 times at the average yards gained vs. the Vols they would have rushed for 292 yards. GT's average per game last year was 258. So as an average GT was only nominally better than their 2016 results vs. the Vols - they just had almost double the attempts. So the question is why did they get so many more plays against Tennessee than against their 2016 average opponent? Not a rhetorical question. Is the pace we play offense killing the D? The large number of 3 and outs? In mean GT ran 99 plays. That ain't normal guys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#77
#77
1974Vol said:
You hear Butch often speaking of complimentary football. Looking inside the stats the Jackets didn't beat their rushing average per play by much in the Tennessee game over their average for the 2016 season. 2016 season average yards per rushing play 5.5; versus Tennessee 6.22. The big difference is number of rushes - 2016 average rushing attempts per game 47; versus Tennessee 86. Had GT rushed their normal average of 47 times at the average yards gained vs. the Vols they would have rushed for 292 yards. GT's average per game last year was 258. So as an average GT was only nominally better than their 2016 results vs. the Vols - they just had almost double the attempts. So the question is why did they get so many more plays against Tennessee than against their 2016 average opponent? Not a rhetorical question. Is the pace we play offense killing the D? The large number of 3 and outs? In mean GT ran 99 plays. That ain't normal guys.
Click to expand...

Increasing your average rushing YPC by 13% is actually a fairly significant increase.
 
Last edited:
#78
#78
JC61 said:
Yet, GT managed to win 4 of those...2 quite convincingly. Clemson beat them handily...but the 3 turnovers (1 for TD) v. UM was more the reason for that loss.

I agree that the yardage our VOLS are allowing is troubling.

Glad our team won!
Click to expand...

I'm glad we won too, we had some quality players step up and seize control of their roles, unfortunately none of them were on defense. That starts with Shoop. I may need to re-watch the 2nd half again but I don't recall any adjustments being made of any kind. He found a way in the end, but a lot of that had to do with just poor blocking and a bad read by the QB on one play.

I don't see this season, like i think most, being any improvement from last year and that would mean we are mediocre at best. This program has too much pride and history to accept mediocrity. Our coach has had some solid recruiting classes but for some reason we still lack depth and we struggle in almost every game. Our luck is soon to run out eventually and the bigger question is what do we do when that time comes, seems to be coming fairly soon.
 
#79
#79
1974Vol said:
So the question is why did they get so many more plays against Tennessee than against their 2016 average opponent? Not a rhetorical question. Is the pace we play offense killing the D? The large number of 3 and outs? In mean GT ran 99 plays. That ain't normal guys.
Click to expand...

The biggest thing is they were rolling with first downs, the longer runs really didn't happen until later in the game. Its not that they were getting huge chunks, they were mauling for 3-5 yards right up the middle by falling forward. 10+ yards in three plays gets you a first down, rinse and repeat.

There isn't much to figure out, the Vols really couldn't stop them... the turnovers cost Georgia Tech the game. They got 500 yards of rushing the hard way... mauling for 3-5 yards at a time. The longer run plays in the second half increased their per average attempt but even if you average 4 yards a carry and you can constantly fall forward for 3-5 yards... well that equals first downs and more plays. They ran so many plays because they were not getting large chunks, but they were constantly getting 10+ yards in 3 plays.
 
Last edited:
#80
#80
Rather than bash Shoop let's focus on what's wrong.

My take is DT play is not up to par. We got pushed a lot and gave up too much in the dive. Were our tackles catching linemen to free up backers? It looked so to me.

Our backers did not have the speed/quickness to match up with the speed of the QB and A backs. They had a lot of speed out there and it surprised me we couldn't match up. I was calling for a 425 to get quicker feet on the field.

When we got down on the scoreboard we seemed to stop attacking on D. Perhaps the staff felt we could not go down another score with the O playing poorly in the first half. Seemed we changed to a bend but don't break approach.
 
#81
#81
Monday I don't think was Shoops fault . Our DTs are garbage Khalil is looking like a big time bust and shy stays injured .
 
#83
#83
b9323070549z-1_20160722193303_000_gcgf314qo-1-0.jpg


My defense is a lot better when I play QB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#84
#84
What I don't understand is how is it this bad. He was good at Vandy and Penn St. And Franklin isn't the one spearheading their D
 
#85
#85
81Orange said:
Rather than bash Shoop let's focus on what's wrong.

My take is DT play is not up to par. We got pushed a lot and gave up too much in the dive. Were our tackles catching linemen to free up backers? It looked so to me.

Our backers did not have the speed/quickness to match up with the speed of the QB and A backs. They had a lot of speed out there and it surprised me we couldn't match up. I was calling for a 425 to get quicker feet on the field.

When we got down on the scoreboard we seemed to stop attacking on D. Perhaps the staff felt we could not go down another score with the O playing poorly in the first half. Seemed we changed to a bend but don't break approach.
Click to expand...

I didn't see any rotation in the DTs . need to rotate fresh bodies . I don't care how young or not ready the coaches feel about the player . wrong LBs were playing and the more athletic LBs road the bench . jumper and Bates need to be spelling instead of starting . the D looked completely unprepared .
 
#87
#87
Orange_Crush said:
Shoop has historically proven himself a quality DC. There were rumors of defensive staff being disagreeable and unsupportive last year. There were definitely injury issues last year. GaTech isn't the best indicator of what the D will be this year.

Everyone needs to relax, wait, and see what happens this year.
Click to expand...

Voice of reason. :hi:
 
#88
#88
BeardedVol said:
Increasing your average rushing YPC by 13% is actually a fairly significant increase.
Click to expand...

I would agree somewhat but had GT rushed for 292 yards instead of 500+ then there wouldn't be so many "fahr Shoop" threads. GT getting 655 yards of offense is more a result of running almost twice as many plays as the normally do. They don't run "hurry up" so one logical conclusion to draw is the Vols offense couldn't stay on the field and protect the D. So for all the talk about playing complimentary football the Vols are not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#89
#89
LSU-SIU said:
The biggest thing is they were rolling with first downs, the longer runs really didn't happen until later in the game. Its not that they were getting huge chunks, they were mauling for 3-5 yards right up the middle by falling forward. 10+ yards in three plays gets you a first down, rinse and repeat.

There isn't much to figure out, the Vols really couldn't stop them... the turnovers cost Georgia Tech the game. They got 500 yards of rushing the hard way... mauling for 3-5 yards at a time. The longer run plays in the second half increased their per average attempt but even if you average 4 yards a carry and you can constantly fall forward for 3-5 yards... well that equals first downs and more plays. They ran so many plays because they were not getting large chunks, but they were constantly getting 10+ yards in 3 plays.
Click to expand...

That's how GT always plays. Our offense just couldn't stay on the field and left the D exposed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#90
#90
These times are unofficial of course but watching the play by play on Offense we had 13 offensive possessions including overtime. Here ya go.

1st Quarter:

5 plays for 1:39
3 plays for 1:16
3 plays for 0:16

2nd Quarter:

3 plays for 0:20
9 plays for 2:30 (TD)
6 plays for 1:05 end of half. Wolf whiffed on 4th down catch that would have us a 1st down and a chance for a FG

3rd Quarter:

3 plays for 1:13--wr ran route short of line to make on 3rd down
7 plays for 2:31 (TD)

4th Quarter:

4 plays for 1:13 (TD)
3 plays for 0:42
8 plays for 3:21 (TD) 93 yard TD drive

OT 1:
3 plays (TD)

OT 2:
4 plays (TD)

I counted (5) drops I put on the WR. 3 of which would have gone for 1st down.
When we scored we scored fast.

GT had a 7:08 drive to score late in the 2nd Quarter then opened the 3rd with a 5:41 scoring drive that pushed the lead to 21-7.

We had 3 consecutive 3 and outs in the 1st half out of 6 total possessions with 1 scoring drive.
We had 2 3 and outs in the second half. 1 to start the 3rd and the second drive of the 4th. Scoring drives on 3 of 5 possessions in the second half.

The issue with our 3 n outs were the incompletions stopped the clock. Once we went to the ground game in the second half it opened up the receivers a bit more and just like last year had those big splash plays.

I guess we could put some of this on the offense but there was no excuse in us giving up that drive to start the 3rd other than the fact that the defense just couldn't stop them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#91
#91
Vol737 said:
Shoop's D got manhandled by Appy St and Ohio before a majority of our injuries occurred. Hell, VA Tech went up and down the field on us. Their five turnovers were the difference. If we watch FLA's anemic offense run all over us in two weeks, then the jury is in.
Click to expand...

WE heldthem both under 350 yards of total offense....
 
#93
#93
Remy said:
I went back and watched parts of the GT/UT game again. I have been curious why our defense looked very good early in that game and suddenly became very porous and susceptible to their rushing attack. Much has been made of our staying off the LOS more than usual. The 1st two offensive series we stopped was when we lined up as usual and not only that got we got LOS penetration. My observation is Johnson had his O crew move to counters and by pure speculation on my part our D team as a whole was told to play assignment football on D or sit down. Something changed and our defense from that point until the end of game saw a passive defense that almost got us beat. The GT QB literally was able to take a snap take one or two steps to either side, pause for a second, then do a 180 and run the play. Our defense would literally stand there while this was going on trying to figure where the play was going rather than just shooting a gap and smearing the guy. The last game winning defensive play found us returning to defensive penetration at the snap and once again we found success. Why we allowed them to keep the ball as long as they did behind the LOS without attacking those guys is byond me to understand, but it did not appear to be a mistake or that the GT OL was overwhelming us, it appeared to be part of our game plan executing what our coaches wanted. GT fumbled twice, kicked & missed 2 FGs one of which we blocked which lost them the game, their own mistakes beat them which MAY have been part of our game plan as well.
Click to expand...

somebody gets it. I remember a couple years ago when bowling green threw for 400 yards in offense and then the next week we practically shut down baker mayfield and there playoff team for 3 quarters. We attacked the first two series, they made adjustments and we got tired plain and simple. When the D is on the field for 48 minutes what do you expect is gonna happen without rotating players in?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#95
#95
rekinhavoc said:
I hope we shut out Floduh so we can put this to rest.
Click to expand...

Anybody want Chief back from Texas A&M? Good grief 34 pt lead with 16 minutes left and lose!
Our D-coordinator is doing okay and will continue to improve our team.

Indiana St. next then the Gators!

:loco:

Tennesseeduke
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#96
#96
Remy said:
I went back and watched parts of the GT/UT game again. I have been curious why our defense looked very good early in that game and suddenly became very porous and susceptible to their rushing attack. Much has been made of our staying off the LOS more than usual. The 1st two offensive series we stopped was when we lined up as usual and not only that got we got LOS penetration. My observation is Johnson had his O crew move to counters and by pure speculation on my part our D team as a whole was told to play assignment football on D or sit down. Something changed and our defense from that point until the end of game saw a passive defense that almost got us beat. The GT QB literally was able to take a snap take one or two steps to either side, pause for a second, then do a 180 and run the play. Our defense would literally stand there while this was going on trying to figure where the play was going rather than just shooting a gap and smearing the guy. The last game winning defensive play found us returning to defensive penetration at the snap and once again we found success. Why we allowed them to keep the ball as long as they did behind the LOS without attacking those guys is byond me to understand, but it did not appear to be a mistake or that the GT OL was overwhelming us, it appeared to be part of our game plan executing what our coaches wanted. GT fumbled twice, kicked & missed 2 FGs one of which we blocked which lost them the game, their own mistakes beat them which MAY have been part of our game plan as well.
Click to expand...
DL penetration, via stunting & shooting gaps is the key to disrupting an offense like GTs. Playing off the LOS plays right into the hands of their blocking scheme -- GT blockers fire off quick and low to either drive block or cut block. The DL has to attack and get penetration. It's the linebackers and DBs that have to play assignment. It appeared to me that UT's defensive staff perhaps did not know enough about how to disrupt that type of offense. If not, they should've consulted during the offseason with someone who does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#100
#100
mitzustu said:
What I don't understand is how is it this bad. He was good at Vandy and Penn St. And Franklin isn't the one spearheading their D
Click to expand...

I have wondered the same. I have no idea if this is correlated but here's a possibility: Shoop's scheme relies heavily in linebacker play. He likes to designate a hybrid guy who has is a mix of LB/Safety. Our thinnest position and worst recruited position (arguably) is Linebacker. Is it possible we simply have yet to find or develop the kind of key players on which his defenses rely?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top