Richt does what Johnson needs . . .

Xihix said:
The man shouldn't need to do defensive changes. And if you think there isn't a problem with our defense, then you are just dumb. Sorry. CPJ has said in his radio show in the past few weeks that he has never had to be involved with the defense as much as he has had to this year. That is very telling.
Click to expand...

+1
I think it is obvious that CPJ has gotten involved in "simplifying the defense" to fix the problems that Wommack has created. The triple option gets a lot of adjustments week to week and during a game, and I don't think CPJ can handle that and fix the defense at the same time. I'm inclined to think he's very disappointed in the defense, despite what he says in the press conference. If he thinks it's due to poor coaching, I'm pretty sure we'll see a change. I'm just not convinced that's what he's thinking.
 
How many players on a team end up on, or have potential to make, an NFL roster is 100% irrelevant to how good a college TEAM they are.

That being said, I think CDW is here next year, our D will be better, and our team will be better.

Getting someone to kick the ball into the endzone might help for starters.
 
Blaming Wommack is premature. I think the "fire the DC" talk comes from being influenced by the troubles of our neighbors to the east. It is way too early to be talking about changes to the coaching staff. Less than two years have past, and our team is doing pretty damn well. CPJ knows way more than we do about the inner-workings of the team. Lets let him do his job for at least a little bit longer before we start attempting to trump his decisions with mob rule.

If we're going to communicate something to CPJ, lets communicate our displeasure with the defense and let him make the decision on how to fix the problem.
 
Again, our team is only doing well because our offense is doing well. I never believed the whole defense wins you national championships thing, but I really think after this year, that it is true.
 
Xihix said:
I never believed the whole defense wins you national championships thing, but I really think after this year, that it is true.
Click to expand...
look at the sec teams at one and two.

FLA-offense has greatly underperformed
Bama-offense is just ball control
 
I've been as disappointed by the defense as anyone on this board, but I think it's too early to jump to conclusions about what needs to be done. Have faith in PJ. Yesterday on the show, he was talking about how we have had 7 starters lost to injury, the majority from the defense (not sure I know who the seven are, Hall, Anderson, Jackson, Cooper (not a starter?)). Also, as bad as we have been defensively, we have made several good in game adjustments to come out effectively in the 2nd half. I don't know why we can't come in with a game plan that is a little more effective in the first half, but it seems to me like we may have the personnel, both players and staff, that we need, its just a matter of figuring out the best way to use them.
 
I've been flip-flopping all day on Wommack.

Want to kill him. Want to keep him.

Can't quite make up my mind. But now I have.

Our coaches (on both sides of the ball) knew we didn't have the man power to stop GA from running the football on us. They KNEW it.

You can scheme all day and all night, but what I saw from our guys gave us the best chance at winning the game.

1. They were going for strips/turnovers like crazy. Watch the replay.

2. Call me ******. But we're probably the only team in D-I football starting 2 white dudes at DT other than maybe BYU. The talent we have coming in will surely help, but will it be enough to offset the loss of Derrick Morgan/ACC D POTY?

I say keep Wommack. We've at least made adjustments at the half. WE HAD ZERO ASS ON D-LINE ALL YEAR LONG. It was the biggest question mark on our team and yet we still are going to play for a championship on Saturday.

Could we have played better with anyone else running a smallish D-Line? Maybe. But not by much, imo.

Wommack has created a ton of turnovers for our defense. Tenuta created like 5 TO's in 2007.

Turnovers > Sacks 365 days a year. Let's keep the guy who seems to be able to scheme a bit. Paul Johnson will take care of the rest.
 
Also, I have a question. How many of our defensive starters were out during the Miami game?
 
Xihix said:
Also, I have a question. How many of our defensive starters were out during the Miami game?
Click to expand...

Our offense played as bad, if not worse than the defense, in the Miami game. Does that mean we should fire PJ?
 
wesleyd21 said:
2. Call me ******. But we're probably the only team in D-I football starting 2 white dudes at DT other than maybe BYU. The talent we have coming in will surely help, but will it be enough to offset the loss of Derrick Morgan/ACC D POTY?
Click to expand...

******
 
wesleyd21 said:
I've been flip-flopping all day on Wommack.

Want to kill him. Want to keep him.

Can't quite make up my mind. But now I have.

Our coaches (on both sides of the ball) knew we didn't have the man power to stop GA from running the football on us. They KNEW it.

You can scheme all day and all night, but what I saw from our guys gave us the best chance at winning the game.

1. They were going for strips/turnovers like crazy. Watch the replay.

2. Call me ******. But we're probably the only team in D-I football starting 2 white dudes at DT other than maybe BYU. The talent we have coming in will surely help, but will it be enough to offset the loss of Derrick Morgan/ACC D POTY?

I say keep Wommack. We've at least made adjustments at the half. WE HAD ZERO ASS ON D-LINE ALL YEAR LONG. It was the biggest question mark on our team and yet we still are going to play for a championship on Saturday.

Could we have played better with anyone else running a smallish D-Line? Maybe. But not by much, imo.

Wommack has created a ton of turnovers for our defense. Tenuta created like 5 TO's in 2007.

Turnovers > Sacks 365 days a year. Let's keep the guy who seems to be able to scheme a bit. Paul Johnson will take care of the rest.
Click to expand...


Ok...for all the Wommack supporters who claim that the reason he is underachieving is talent...then I have 2 questions for you.

1.) How do you explain us giving up a LOT of points at the end of last year with 4 NFL DLinemen and 1 NFL safety?

2.) If it is purely a talent only thing then how do you explain that ALL year in the second half after 'adjustments' we've been better on D? It happened in the FSU game, the Vandy game, the UGA game (yes look at first half vs second half outside of one missed assignment for the long TD they were solid in the second half). If it's purely talent then we should not have been able to adjust.

Wommack comes into games with piss-poor schemes and gameplans, at halftime CPJ gets with Wommack discusses what he's seen, the two of them work out an 'adjustment' and in the second half we're better on Defense. That is not just a talent issue.

Wommack needs better gameplans to start games and needs to be able to put some schemes together to stop opposing teams REGARDLESS of what talent he may or may not have.
 
gt02 said:
Our offense played as bad, if not worse than the defense, in the Miami game. Does that mean we should fire PJ?
Click to expand...

So PJ has one bad game...although I will argue that he HAD the correct play calling and our guys just missed blocks...what happened after that game? Didn't have another bad offensive performance since this year.

Wommack has had back to back to back bad games on defense, with missed assignments, poor schemes, and NOTHING has been done. For the first half of the season the common quote was 'simplifying the defense'. This means that Wommack can NOT get players to do what needs to be done.
 
Just comfort yourselves by gazing at God's masterpiece, hanging below the nose of Bumpas.

bumpas.jpg
 
Xihix said:
Also Ncjacket, I don't see why you try to defend Wommack. He's not worth a ****. And I know you're not directly defending him, but you also know what I mean.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean and I know what ncjacket means. Paul Johnson knows what to do with his staff better than you or any of the rest of us.
 
I have not taken a position on Wommack. I see the same thing everyone else is seeing and have decided to look at it from CPJ's perspective (as best I can).

If I were CPJ and I thought that my DC was costing me victories, I'd fire him.
 
unforgiven108 said:
Ok...for all the Wommack supporters who claim that the reason he is underachieving is talent...then I have 2 questions for you.

1.) How do you explain us giving up a LOT of points at the end of last year with 4 NFL DLinemen and 1 NFL safety?

2.) If it is purely a talent only thing then how do you explain that ALL year in the second half after 'adjustments' we've been better on D? It happened in the FSU game, the Vandy game, the UGA game (yes look at first half vs second half outside of one missed assignment for the long TD they were solid in the second half). If it's purely talent then we should not have been able to adjust.

Wommack comes into games with piss-poor schemes and gameplans, at halftime CPJ gets with Wommack discusses what he's seen, the two of them work out an 'adjustment' and in the second half we're better on Defense. That is not just a talent issue.

Wommack needs better gameplans to start games and needs to be able to put some schemes together to stop opposing teams REGARDLESS of what talent he may or may not have.
Click to expand...

I'm undecided on being a supporter because I'm not 100% convinced that everything is his fault.

When I see the talent on the field vs. the direction of recruiting - it looks to me like there is a clear change in philosophy. We are going after a different type of player at many positions, the most obvious being DT. Tenuta's D could get away with smaller, more athletic DTs because the LBs would fill up the holes (remember, not all blitzes are designed to get to the QB). Even our "NFL" DTs (see my previous post regarding Walker and Richard in the NFL) were small and didn't necessarily fit into Wommack's scheme. So, when people say talent is the issue they're not exactly saying we have a bunch of bums on the field - just guys that don't fit the system.
 
ContactBuzz said:
So, when people say talent is the issue they're not exactly saying we have a bunch of bums on the field - just guys that don't fit the system.
Click to expand...

I have never thought much of the excuse that a team underperforms because the players cannot execute the coach's game plan.

What kind of coach designs a game plan when he knows full well his players can't execute it?
 
00Burdell said:
I have never thought much of the excuse that a team underperforms because the players cannot execute the coach's game plan.

What kind of coach designs a game plan when he knows full well his players can't execute it?
Click to expand...

You saw the game Sat night. What gameplan will account for undersized guys getting whipped by bigger, motivated (by their own poor play this season) guys on the other side? These guys were recruited to play in Tenuta's feast or famine defense (which, if you'll recall, worked very poorly against bigger, talented offensive lines - like Sat night).
 
ContactBuzz said:
You saw the game Sat night.
Click to expand...
I did. And I have the PTSS to prove it :-)

What I saw Saturday night cannot be explained by comparing the relative sizes of our respective lines.

If UGa were running up the middle all night then yes - but they were running outside (there was the one big run up the gut) which, one would think, present an advantage to a smaller, faster DL.

And I could be wrong but I don't remember seeing even one stunt all night from our DL. UGa never even bothered pulling - we would just engage the OL right in front of him and get pancaked.
 
00Burdell said:
I have never thought much of the excuse that a team underperforms because the players cannot execute the coach's game plan.

What kind of coach designs a game plan when he knows full well his players can't execute it?
Click to expand...

I think the jury is still out due to how many injuries occurred on the defensive side of the ball. However, since most of you have more football savvy than I do, could somebody please explain our 4-2-5 scheme.

From what I understand, the 4-2-5 is a simple defense to run. It allows for more speed and versatility in defensive plays but yet hard to read. Works great against spreads. Sounded perfect for us to run. Yet, we had to change to a 4-3 early in the season to "simplify" the defense for the players. This is what concerns me about CDW.

If the 4-2-5 is a simple defense and we all agree that our players are more intelligent than most, what's the deal? Am I misinformed about the 4-2-5? If not, why were our players confused about their assignments? Were they confused because their assignments were not properly taught?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top