In partnership with CBSSports.com
Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game
Buy, sell and swap tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Last year, only one Big 10 team was in the top 20 in total offense, Wisconsin. Only 4 were in the top HALF of the country.
Do stats tell the entire story? No, but you're the one using Penn State's rankings as evidence of Bradley's greatness. And there is clearly a correlation between bad offenses improving opposing defenses' statistics.
“We need to keep this (expletive) together,” Mauti and Zordich to Hill
How many ways do you need this spelled out for you? They had so little NFL talent at Auburn on the defensive side of the ball. Go look for yourself.
I was being literal when I said that we will have more defensive plays drafted this year alone than he did in three years at Auburn.
This post was edited by leftcoastlion 23 months ago
“We’re doing things we couldn’t imagine,” says safety Stephen Obeng-Agyapong. “But we’re doing them together.”
6 SEC schools including two of the best defenses in years (Bama and LSU) that were great regardless of the competition. The argument that Bradley was great against Big 10 schools but shouldn't be expected to perform against other styles of offense is stupid.
I never said he shouldn't be good against other styles of offense, but that he shouldn't design his defense for a team he won't see. We see pro style, run heavy offenses 10 games a year, and face possibly one spread team a year that we aren't as talented as. I'd be extremely worried if we came out in a 4-2-5 or a 3-3-5. That's not what we needed. Bradley gave us what we needed, which was a dominant defense that won a hell of a lot of games for us.
My point about the SEC was that they're the best conference in the nation, and they don't have many great statistical offenses. Arkansas is really good offensively, but they're the only people I can think of who light up scoreboards. Does that mean their defenses are overrated? Not IMO.
This post was edited by Andrew Dzurita 23 months ago
Why should we have to go to class if we came here to play FOOTBALL, we ain't come to play SCHOOL, classes are POINTLESS
I got the point, but I still don't think he's a good DC.
Too bad for him. He had some decent talent at GaTech in his time there, and only one top 15 defense in his career in the ACC. Not impressed. Also not impressed with the 50th best defense in the country, regardless of which school accomplishes that. Especially not compared to multiple dominant defenses from another coordinator.
EDIT: and he had much more talent than most cupcake OOC teams they played, short of Clemson. Still didn't do well defensively.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Andrew Dzurita 23 months ago
No, I'm saying that people under appreciate Bradley's competence as a DC.
The only other evidence I could think of is objective, so I didn't think it should be brought up. I've seen some pretty darn good defenses that came under Bradley, and not just great individual players.
Who's fault was that ... that Auburn didn't have any defensive talent absent Fairley? Just a question and I'm interested in your answer.
Auburn's defense was atrocious during that season in which they bought the national title.
By the way, the SEC did not have over powering offenses last year. Good, but not mind-blowing.
Certainly not a defensive coordinators. Chizik took over a barren program and frankly he doesn't exactly have LJ and Vandy coaching up the defensive units. I'd love to hear an explanation of how Roof could conceivably be responsible for a lack of talent on the defense.
And the '10 defense was hardly atrocious. How many points did they hold Oregon too? They were statistically average that year, despite a lack of overall talent and an offense that had them on the field constantly with teams throwing the ball on them to catch up.
Fact is, Roof's career is a mixed bag. He turned out a couple of very good defensive units at GT back when the ACC was a legitimately difficult league. He was at two terrible programs in Duke and Minny, and dramatically improved both units. At Auburn his defenses were terrible, but the talent on his defense was arguably amongst the worst of any unit, offensive or defensive, in the entire SEC.
The only time he has ever had the kind of talent he'll have this year, was at GT, when he had top 25 defenses.
Bradley's track record is still much more impressive.
And it's a coaches job to develop players. If Roof couldn't develop talent that's his fault. And one DL doesn't count. There were 10 other guys on the field who needed skill development.
Auburn's defense will go down as the worst defense of a national title team ever for collegiate football. Isn't it the DC's job to help develop players, or is that a poor assumption on my part.
26 points to Ark State; 27 to a bad offense in South Carolina in the regular season; 34 to a horrid Kentucky team; 43 to Arkansas; 31 to a bad Ole Miss team; 24 to Chattanooga and 31 to a good Georgia offense.
Yes, it held Oregon to 19 ... that was a fluke.
Auburn's defense fed off its offense. All you had to do is watch that year's Alabama game. Once the offense started to play, the defense responded. Without Cam, that defense wasn't good enough for Auburn to win three games that year. It was bad.
No. It is not a defensive coordinators job to develop talent. That is moronic. It is a position coaches job to recruit and develop talent. It is a coordinators job to.. coordinate. Put those players in the best position to succeed. This seems very straight forward.
Bradley had a fine track record. He also had serious deficiencies. But regardless, you are comparing apples and oranges. Roof never had the talent Bradley did, and when he was at Auburn he was consistently facing more difficult opponents. They are not comparable. The most direct comparison we will ever get is this year to last year, when they had many of the same players and played as close to a similar schedule as possible.
Everyone recognized that Roof's "attacking philosophy" failed miserably in the SEC. You say he didn't have talent. You say its not his job to help develop players and defend him by saying its not his fault that the talent was lacking. So, why is he not at Auburn?
Roof did well at Minnesota. I will take the Roof that did wonders with the Gopher defense and pass on the guy that led the defense at Auburn.
It's great to be arguing about football again!
It is well understood that Chizik was heavily involved in the defense. And to say that an attacking philosophy wouldn't work is to pretend that Bama and LSU haven't existed over the last few years. There is a very obvious reason his defense didn't work, and I've spelled it out over and over... His defensive unit was one of, if not the least talented units, offensive or defensive, in the entire SEC. Of course they sucked.
Now, unless you believe that we will not have talent, I'm not sure what the concern would be. Is there any doubt that LJ and Vandy will continue to produce top talent for Roof's defense?
Now, I do still have concerns about our defensive backfield now and moving forward, but that will hardly be on Roof.
Gee whiz. Bradley was a fine DC, but it's not like he was some genius of play calling. The defense made adjustments here and there - usually good ones. But he ran a Cover 3 pretty much every play - not exactly a real difficult job, especially when you've been doing it for how many years?
I don't know what to expect from Roof. He's been up and down at various stops. I'm also not a fan of consistent blitzing. Just read an article about how New Orleans was getting sick of Gregg Williams always blitzing - teams expected it and exploited it.
I'm going to reserve judgment on Roof until I see our defense in action.
Our talent on defense is thin. We have talent, but not what PSU typically has. We have very little depth.
As for the attacking philosophy for this defense, IMO its the way to go. We are thin in the secondary. You don't want the secondary having to cover for a long time. Then again, its not like we are going to face many offenses that throw the ball.
Chizik is also a former DC who was very well respected in his own right before taking the job at ISU.
It's every coaches job to develop talent, thats why they call them coaches. They teach the sport. Just because they're a coordinator doesn't mean they stop coaching players.
Ohio has a great QB and a formidable D. Will be a very close game that can go either way IMHO
Their D is not "formidable" by any stretch of the imagination.
I look forward to your re-appearance here after the game.
F the NCAA
F the BOT
LOL!! You do realize that Chizek was a very good DC, don't you? I think it was 2004 when he had the number 1 scoring defense in the country. So who do you think designed the defense against Oregon in the NC game when they had, as you said, "a lack of overall talent" -- the guy who had given them an average defense over the season, or the one who routinely cranked out top 10 defenses when he was a DC?
It should be obvious that if Chizek wanted to win that NC game, he was gonna take over the defense, and the result was lightyears better over what Roof had given them. Roof is a bum, and since he is such a pal of BBOs we're gonna see dud defenses for the foreseeable future.
And I think that was a good thing. Did you see what happened to our defense in the games after Paterno was given the boot last year? One word: Torched.
It was a much more aggressive defense, something many fans were begging for before Joe was fired.
He dialed up the blitzes like people asked, and we got to see the result of what happens when you leave less than mediocre DBs in one on one situations with WRs.
Pros and Cons. We had some big plays against OSU, we were lucky Braxton couldn't hit the broadside of a barn last year.
EDIT: We also didn't have the personell to run what Bradley was rumored to have wanted to run.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports