Performance Review - Roof

Do you terminate Roof's employment?

  • Total voters
    174
QuadF said:
The last 4 years:
2-12 in games where we scored less than 24 points on offense
9-6 in games where we scored 24-34 points on offense
15-4 in games where we scored more than 34 points on offense
Click to expand...

How does that compare to the rest of the ACC? We typically win when we score 24 points or more on offense, and typically lose when the offense gets stuffed. Sounds pretty normal to me. Given our program focus is on offense it is about what I would expect.
 
aeromech said:
How does that compare to the rest of the ACC? We typically win when we score 24 points or more on offense, and typically lose when the offense gets stuffed. Sounds pretty normal to me. Given our program focus is on offense it is about what I would expect.
Click to expand...

While offense is a strength of the team along with the ability of our OC to consistently overcome talent deficiencies, not all all offense focused teams are created equally. At the pace of our games, Roof has to defend far less possessions than his contemparies.

Those stats are a joke.

VT is a program that doesn’t have Clemson, UGA, or Bama loaded 4 and 5 stars. The stat I remember from that broadcast is VT is like 12-2 when scoring under 24 (27??? I can’t remember exactly) or something. So, ya, it’s possible to do more with less.
 
ElCidBUZZingFAN said:
While offense is a strength of the team along with the ability of our OC to consistently overcome talent deficiencies, not all all offense focused teams are created equally. At the pace of our games, Roof has to defend far less possessions than his contemparies.

Those stats are a joke.

VT is a program that doesn’t have Clemson, UGA, or Bama loaded 4 and 5 stars. The stat I remember from that broadcast is VT is like 12-2 when holding teams under 24 or something. So, ya, it’s possible to do more with less.
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight. You actually think we have the same talent on defense as VT. You really think that right?
 
aeromech said:
Then what is the point you're trying to make about VT not having Clemson/Bama talent on defense?
Click to expand...

Our output on D doesn’t match our talent level, and it’s not some impossible task to scheme or teach up that unit to be more serviceable to the program than it is. That’s been a story for far too long, too.

Do you think we have Boise State, Eastern Michigan, App State, and Texas Tech level talent? I guess I could buy into that following the old ‘you are what your record says you are’ line, but that’s the group of schools around us in the defensive efficiency rankings this year.

VT does more with less. They make a juggernaut on the backs of mostly 3 star dudes, much like we have to.

We do the same on offense. There’s nothing magical about defense that makes such a task harder.
 
If Roof can truly sell Tech, move him to a position coach and put him in charge of the new expanded recruiting staff.

But his d against the hurry has, and will continue to suck. We need a change at DC.

I am still backing CPJ, but the next losing season should be his last. No excuse to let so many close games get away this season.
 
ElCidBUZZingFAN said:
Our output on D doesn’t match our talent level, and it’s not some impossible task to scheme or teach up that unit to be more serviceable to the program than it is. That’s been a story for far too long, too.

Do you think we have Boise State, Eastern Michigan, App State, and Texas Tech level talent? I guess I could buy into that following the old ‘you are what your record says you are’ line, but that’s the group of schools around us in the defensive efficiency rankings this year.

VT does more with less. They make a juggernaut on the backs of mostly 3 star dudes, much like we have to.

We do the same on offense. There’s nothing magical about defense that makes such a task harder.
Click to expand...

VT 2015 recruiting class included a 5-star DT, a 4-star DT, and a 4-star DE
2014 recruiting class included a 4-star DT and a 4-star DE
2017 class included 4-star DE
(2016 class included a 4-star QB/DT J. Jackson)

by comparison
GT 2014 class had 0 4/5-star DL
2015 1 4-star DE
2016 1 4 star DE
2017 0 4/5 star DL

I see a huge disparity there talent wise, and that is what I think the problem is.

http://www.espn.com/college-sports/football/recruiting/school/_/id/59/class/2017
 
Iron City Wreck said:
Keep Him at least one more year.

However, I don't like the two minute performance right before halftime (or at the end of the game). To be fair, I also remember this problem under previous DCs where Tech scores with 2:30 or less and then the other team gets points.
It causes momentum to swing back the other way too many times right before half and at the end of the game flat out causes a loss.
Click to expand...
I agree. Now when are you coming to PC? I'm thinking Johnson's BBQ.
 
aeromech said:
How does that compare to the rest of the ACC? We typically win when we score 24 points or more on offense, and typically lose when the offense gets stuffed. Sounds pretty normal to me. Given our program focus is on offense it is about what I would expect.
Click to expand...

I don't think we can reliably win if we expect that the defense will give up at least 24 points per game. Not sure how it compares to others, but I do know that the acc schools we consider our peers have defenses that are reliable.
 
QuadF said:
The last 4 years:
2-12 in games where we scored less than 24 points on offense
9-6 in games where we scored 24-34 points on offense
15-4 in games where we scored more than 34 points on offense
Click to expand...
We are more likely to win if we score more points? Interesting. I'm not sure what to make of this.
 
aeromech said:
Talent explains getting embarrassed by Duke every year because if you have a talent advantage then that doesn't happen but on very rare occasions. Talent explains playing decent defense an entire half because you schemed for a specific offense and when it switches to two minute drill your lack of talent gets exposed. Talent explains getting bubble screened because Mark Richt figures out how your scheming to cover up your talent deficiencies and picks you clean. We were better at times this season because we schemed well, we were horrible when the opposing offensive coordinator figured out what we were doing and exploited our weakness. If the front 4 can't do it, you scheme around it, once the opposition figures out your scheme you are toast. There are only so many things you can do scheme wise to cover up a lack of talent. CPJ is not the only offensive coordinator on the planet that can find a weakness in a defense.
Click to expand...
Our defensive coaches failing to adjust to a series of short gain bubble screens is proof that we have a talent deficiency?

This post is an excellent example of the analytical emptiness of the concept of 'talent' among ST-ers. Talent proves everything (except when we win, of course — then its grit, determination, scheme, etc.).
 
18in32 said:
Our defensive coaches failing to adjust to a series of short gain bubble screens is proof that we have a talent deficiency?

This post is an excellent example of the analytical emptiness of the concept of 'talent' among ST-ers. Talent proves everything (except when we win, of course — then its grit, determination, scheme, etc.).
Click to expand...

When we finally did adjust to the bubble screen did it stop Miami, or did it expose other problems that Miami was able to exploit and score on?
 
aeromech said:
Talent explains getting embarrassed by Duke every year because if you have a talent advantage then that doesn't happen but on very rare occasions. Talent explains playing decent defense an entire half because you schemed for a specific offense and when it switches to two minute drill your lack of talent gets exposed. Talent explains getting bubble screened because Mark Richt figures out how your scheming to cover up your talent deficiencies and picks you clean. We were better at times this season because we schemed well, we were horrible when the opposing offensive coordinator figured out what we were doing and exploited our weakness. If the front 4 can't do it, you scheme around it, once the opposition figures out your scheme you are toast. There are only so many things you can do scheme wise to cover up a lack of talent. CPJ is not the only offensive coordinator on the planet that can find a weakness in a defense.
Click to expand...
I understand all of that, but when the opposing offense adjusts, you also have to adjust. The 2 minute D is not a one time thing - it's happened over and over all season and cost us at least one game.

I'm not saying Roof is a terrible coordinator. I'm saying he hasn't done anything at all to indicate that he's a good one, and we absolutely need a good one to reach the level that most of us seem to expect.
 
18in32 said:
Our defensive coaches failing to adjust to a series of short gain bubble screens is proof that we have a talent deficiency?

This post is an excellent example of the analytical emptiness of the concept of 'talent' among ST-ers. Talent proves everything (except when we win, of course — then its grit, determination, scheme, etc.).
Click to expand...
Just to make sure I understand your position since it's spilled over into yet another thread; since talent doesn't explain everything, it means nothing.
 
aeromech said:
When we finally did adjust to the bubble screen did it stop Miami, or did it expose other problems that Miami was able to exploit and score on?
Click to expand...
My recollection is that Miami scored on that drive. But to describe two DB's batting a 4th and 10 pass which happens to land on the WR as he falls to the ground as evidence of a 'talent deficiency' proves to me that in ST-World, literally everything that goes wrong is the fault of talent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top