Is Thacker gone after the season?

GTLiebs said:
At this point I kind of wonder if the coaches have just lost faith in blitzes working after past years and first couple games this season, cause we definitely used to be worse at it. Maybe over the offseason we came up with this to counter that, had some minor success against Clemson and UNC with it and are clinging to it and it just hasn't sunk in that our LBs can blitz now and our DE's are getting better.
Click to expand...

Against UNC I thought we were sending 4-5 or 6 and keeping the OL confused with various stunts up front. Against UVA it looked like we were just sending three with no stunts and just hoping they beat their blocks 80% of the time.
 
knoxjacket said:
There is really zero reason to have any seniors playing on defense right now. The defense cannot get any worse - why waste reps on guys that won't even be back next year?
Click to expand...

If you are giving up on the season I guess, otherwise play the best player available. We could play some younger guys in as many as 4 games without burning the redshirt I think though.
 
I haven't given up on Thacker. I am ok with Coleman and Knight. D line has shown signs of life. I question whatever Burton and Popovich are doing with the secondary. Since this is Collins' specialty, he has to fix it somehow.
 
smokey_wasp said:
I haven't given up on Thacker. I am ok with Coleman and Knight. D line has shown signs of life. I question whatever Burton and Popovich are doing with the secondary. Since this is Collins' specialty, he has to fix it somehow.
Click to expand...

I go back and forth on Thacker, sometimes I like what the D is doing; but against UVA I was not impressed at all. Sending 3 as many times as we did I thought was flat wrong, and not getting out of it when it wasn't working left me wondering what Thacker could possibly be thinking. Secondary also has me wondering what they are being taught in practice, they seem to be regressing.
 
knoxjacket said:
If we're playing defense to keep the other team from scoring and they are scoring anyway, it is time to reevaluate that strategy.
Click to expand...

I mean, it does sound pretty obvious, but if we’re giving up a TD on almost every drive, how much worse would it be to blitz more and play some man coverage? Just to see what happens - it’s not like we can give up TWO TDs per drive.

JRjr
 
vapspwi said:
I mean, it does sound pretty obvious, but if we’re giving up a TD on almost every drive, how much worse would it be to blitz more and play some man coverage? Just to see what happens - it’s not like we can give up TWO TDs per drive.

JRjr
Click to expand...

Worst case scenario they score faster and their defense is on the field even more which makes it easier for us to score.
 
Hmm... seems somebody on here a few weeks ago was trying to tell folks our biggest coaching problem was on the defensive side of the ball... now who was that guy....??

giphy.gif
 
vapspwi said:
I mean, it does sound pretty obvious, but if we’re giving up a TD on almost every drive, how much worse would it be to blitz more and play some man coverage? Just to see what happens - it’s not like we can give up TWO TDs per drive.

JRjr
Click to expand...

This is exactly correct. We seem to be following analytics which must say it's better to drop to the 3-8 and avoid a big play than to blitz a quarterback who has gotten quite comfortable. But if we are giving up touchdowns at an extremely high rate, wouldn't the occasional stop on downs be effective with a few blitzes. The Ravens blitz 60% of the time! I find the 3-8 only works when used very seldomly.
 
I really doubt we will fire Thacker this year, and if we do, I really doubt we will hire anyone better. CGC seems like he really wants to have a hand on the defense (for better or for worse at this point), and hiring a proven DC would require him to step back. From day 1, it's seemed to me like Thacker was meant to be CGC's protoge so that CGC can be the head coach, while also getting a heavy input on the defense. This isn't an indictment good or bad, just my read on the situation. I'd like to let Thacker have at least next year with some turnover in the secondary before I determine that he's truly the problem.
 
aeromech said:
If you are giving up on the season I guess, otherwise play the best player available. We could play some younger guys in as many as 4 games without burning the redshirt I think though.
Click to expand...
What constitutes a successful season now that we are 3-4? Five games remaining with two of those unwinnable and three questionable. The hype has always been we needed to rebuild the roster and it would take multiple seasons to do that. Is there any big difference in 3-9 and 4-8 with two beatdowns ? Not to me.
 
Yukonwreck said:
What constitutes a successful season now that we are 3-4? Five games remaining with two of those unwinnable and three questionable. The hype has always been we needed to rebuild the roster and it would take multiple seasons to do that. Is there any big difference in 3-9 and 4-8 with two beatdowns ? Not to me.
Click to expand...

We went 3-3 over the first 6. Not exactly as expected, but we got the 3 wins. 2-2 in the ACC, which is probably better than expected.

The next 6 should (uva now completed), should reasonably be 2-4. We are unlikely to win out of conference in the second half.

There are some things to consider. The acc coastal is not very good, but better than expected. Pitt and UVa benefited from the super seniors.

Clemson is not good this year. I think the team mentality would be different if we were facing a 3 or 4 loss Clemson instead of BC. But iiwii, we played them when everyone thought they were still good.

ND is beatable, but probably not by us. We are to erratic at this point. We certainly could do it if we played like we did against UNC (forcing turnovers without giving turnovers).

Par for this season was going to be 2-2 OOC, 4-4 IOC. Both are still available, but we predictably want to do it in the hardest way possible. I’m hoping we meet both goals.
 
Y’all are aware our head coach is all about defense, right? Whining about Thacker is like whining about PJ’s offensive coordinator.

Thacker ain’t the problem.
 
Yukonwreck said:
What constitutes a successful season now that we are 3-4? Five games remaining with two of those unwinnable and three questionable. The hype has always been we needed to rebuild the roster and it would take multiple seasons to do that. Is there any big difference in 3-9 and 4-8 with two beatdowns ? Not to me.
Click to expand...

We still have a shot at 6 wins, odds are against it; but it still there. We can beat VPI if we rush more than 3 for a change. Miami looks like they found their mojo again which is bad for us; hopefully Pitt puts the fire back out. BC looks good on paper; but isn't playing well at all. So, we could shock everyone and win 3 straight.
 
BuzzLaw said:
Y’all are aware our head coach is all about defense, right? Whining about Thacker is like whining about PJ’s offensive coordinator.

Thacker ain’t the problem.
Click to expand...

Whoever kept us rushing 3 all night against UVA gets my vote as the problem, or at least a big part of the problem.
 
WracerX said:
We went 3-3 over the first 6. Not exactly as expected, but we got the 3 wins. 2-2 in the ACC, which is probably better than expected.

The next 6 should (uva now completed), should reasonably be 2-4. We are unlikely to win out of conference in the second half.

There are some things to consider. The acc coastal is not very good, but better than expected. Pitt and UVa benefited from the super seniors.

Clemson is not good this year. I think the team mentality would be different if we were facing a 3 or 4 loss Clemson instead of BC. But iiwii, we played them when everyone thought they were still good.

ND is beatable, but probably not by us. We are to erratic at this point. We certainly could do it if we played like we did against UNC (forcing turnovers without giving turnovers).

Par for this season was going to be 2-2 OOC, 4-4 IOC. Both are still available, but we predictably want to do it in the hardest way possible. I’m hoping we meet both goals.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with what you said. What I was getting at in response to the post about playing just young players from here on out. The implication was that that would be giving up on this season (sic). I just think we need our young guys to get playing time NOW more that we need one more win in an already miserable year (again). Some might make the case that with this coaching staff, more playing time might be meaningless.
 
If the players are making mental mistakes, that is on the coaches. ESPECIALLY if those mistakes keep happening game after game. Some of y’all want to act like coaching is all about playcalling, but if you haven’t taught your players how to execute the plays and anticipate your opponent’s counter, it doesn’t matter what play you call or how many stars your players have.
 
aeromech said:
But back to the Defense in this Thacker thread...

Could rushing 3 and dropping 8 be the defense version of "ripping the band-aid off"?? Once we get our 3 NFL bound defensive linemen maybe the defensive scheme we are seeing will make sense. This defense might be beautiful once we have NFL stars at every position. Is this an NFL defense that recruits want to play in and we just need to be patient?
Click to expand...
That's not the problem with the defense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top