Interesting note about the D vs. FSU.

[Dwinstitles]

this D has shown zero improvement vs top teams . We are ranked so high because of the sorry teams played,

name the starters on D then you will figure it out.

 

[crossover22[]_[]]

To be honest the defense got to much hate for that game.

 

[Big Sky Cane]

Shouldn't AG have to earn our trust first?

I swear to god....this ******* guy.

 

[sebastian91]

As bad as it looked for our D, we did better against them than Clemson did, and they were at home. I don't know anything about Clemson's roster, but I wouldn't be surprised if they have a lot more talent and experience on D than we do. F$U is on a roll, and we got pounded on both sides of the ball. The defense couldn't get off the field, and the offense couldn't stay on the field. We're a top 25 team, but we need to get better to compete with the top teams. That's no secret, but I trust the process AG is implementing. I see a huge difference in attitude, fight, conditioning, strength. As the roster continues to turn over, I believe we'll see better execution as the talent and depth improves and we have some continuity for a freaking change. Time will tell, but I'm all in on AG. He gets it.

I agree and see those as well. my only problem (and it could be a back breaker) is the defense. i know it has been discussed ad nauseam on here but i believe that the defense sucks. call it scheme, philosophy whatever. **** is AWFUL to watch

I was fooled a bit in the early part of the year but we are seeing the same old **** happening over and over again. cant get off the field on 3rd and long. EVER. **** is like a joke

average to poor QBs look like hall of famers against us.

I think AG needs to turn over the Defense to a real coordinator and stay in a CEO/recruiter role, which he seems to excel at

The defense was abysmal last year, but we won some games and would've gone to the ACCCG. It's average-to-bad this year, and, again, we have a very legit shot at the ACCCG. That's improvement nonetheless, and the stats (and our record) bear that out. Changing the DC (which will never happen unless he gets a HC gig somewhere) will do nothing but be another setback. See my last sentence after the one you bolded. Continuity is a huge factor in VT's success on D. We need that continuity to continue to improve. You may not like what you see now, but Coach D (who I believe IS a real coordinator...what he did last year and is doing this year, with our roster, is remarkable) is going nowhere, and he's running the defense AG wants run. Either you believe in AG or you don't. Either get on board, or GTF out of the way.

I'm sorry but the passive BS defense is nauseating. I dont believe that it will be dominant. I understand the roster limitations on defense at this point, but I'm not sure that Coach D is doing a good job tbh.

I mean, we were flat out horrible last year. horrible. this year we are very meh. can stop a traditional running game but thats about it.

If a QB can throw or run well, we are ****ed

Trust the process.

 

[OBLIVION]

I'm sorry but the passive BS defense is nauseating. I dont believe that it will be dominant. I understand the roster limitations on defense at this point, but I'm not sure that Coach D is doing a good job tbh.

I mean, we were flat out horrible last year. horrible. this year we are very meh. can stop a traditional running game but thats about it.

If a QB can throw or run well, we are ****ed

Cheer up buddy.

Understand that outside of Duke. The other 3 teams offenses are ranked 92, 102, and 104.

 

[sebastian91]

15 of 22 active players on Stanford's defense are seniors.

Our seniors? Green. Highsmith. Renfrow. Gaines. Porter. Cornelius. Rodgers. Gilbert. Robinson.

Does anyone doubt that our defense gets better again next year? Trust the process.

 

[I'm Hurt Dawg]

15 of 22 active players on Stanford's defense are seniors.

Our seniors? Green. Highsmith. Renfrow. Gaines. Porter. Cornelius. Rodgers. Gilbert. Robinson.

Does anyone doubt that our defense gets better again next year? Trust the process.

Were they seniors last year as well? or the year before that?

 

[sebastian91]

15 of 22 active players on Stanford's defense are seniors.

Our seniors? Green. Highsmith. Renfrow. Gaines. Porter. Cornelius. Rodgers. Gilbert. Robinson.

Does anyone doubt that our defense gets better again next year? Trust the process.

Were they seniors last year as well? or the year before that?

What's your point? Every team turns over part of their roster every year. Teams sometimes get better in that process. Looking at our list of seniors, I think we're in that boat.

 

[I'm Hurt Dawg]

15 of 22 active players on Stanford's defense are seniors.

Our seniors? Green. Highsmith. Renfrow. Gaines. Porter. Cornelius. Rodgers. Gilbert. Robinson.

Does anyone doubt that our defense gets better again next year? Trust the process.

Were they seniors last year as well? or the year before that?

What's your point? Every team turns over part of their roster every year. Teams sometimes get better in that process. Looking at our list of seniors, I think we're in that boat.

They were good on Defense last year and the year before.

 

[sebastian91]

15 of 22 active players on Stanford's defense are seniors.

Our seniors? Green. Highsmith. Renfrow. Gaines. Porter. Cornelius. Rodgers. Gilbert. Robinson.

Does anyone doubt that our defense gets better again next year? Trust the process.

Were they seniors last year as well? or the year before that?

What's your point? Every team turns over part of their roster every year. Teams sometimes get better in that process. Looking at our list of seniors, I think we're in that boat.

They were good on Defense last year and the year before.

What's that got to do with us getting better by turning over the least talented part of our roster?

 

[I'm Hurt Dawg]

15 of 22 active players on Stanford's defense are seniors.

Our seniors? Green. Highsmith. Renfrow. Gaines. Porter. Cornelius. Rodgers. Gilbert. Robinson.

Does anyone doubt that our defense gets better again next year? Trust the process.

Were they seniors last year as well? or the year before that?

What's your point? Every team turns over part of their roster every year. Teams sometimes get better in that process. Looking at our list of seniors, I think we're in that boat.

They were good on Defense last year and the year before.

What's that got to do with us getting better by turning over the least talented part of our roster?

You were talking about seniors and how they had 15 seniors in their 2 deep made them great.

 

[sebastian91]

Were they seniors last year as well? or the year before that?

What's your point? Every team turns over part of their roster every year. Teams sometimes get better in that process. Looking at our list of seniors, I think we're in that boat.

They were good on Defense last year and the year before.

What's that got to do with us getting better by turning over the least talented part of our roster?

You were talking about seniors and how they had 15 seniors in their 2 deep made them great.

I was? Where did I say that?

 

[I'm Hurt Dawg]

What's your point? Every team turns over part of their roster every year. Teams sometimes get better in that process. Looking at our list of seniors, I think we're in that boat.

They were good on Defense last year and the year before.

What's that got to do with us getting better by turning over the least talented part of our roster?

You were talking about seniors and how they had 15 seniors in their 2 deep made them great.

I was? Where did I say that?

Originally Posted by sebastian91 View Post
15 of 22 active players on Stanford's defense are seniors.

Our seniors? Green. Highsmith. Renfrow. Gaines. Porter. Cornelius. Rodgers. Gilbert. Robinson.

Does anyone doubt that our defense gets better again next year? Trust the process.

 

[sebastian91]

They were good on Defense last year and the year before.

What's that got to do with us getting better by turning over the least talented part of our roster?

You were talking about seniors and how they had 15 seniors in their 2 deep made them great.

I was? Where did I say that?

Originally Posted by sebastian91 View Post
15 of 22 active players on Stanford's defense are seniors.

Our seniors? Green. Highsmith. Renfrow. Gaines. Porter. Cornelius. Rodgers. Gilbert. Robinson.

Does anyone doubt that our defense gets better again next year? Trust the process.

I know what I said. You are apparently having difficulty reading it though.

 

[I'm Hurt Dawg]

What's that got to do with us getting better by turning over the least talented part of our roster?

You were talking about seniors and how they had 15 seniors in their 2 deep made them great.

I was? Where did I say that?

Originally Posted by sebastian91 View Post
15 of 22 active players on Stanford's defense are seniors.

Our seniors? Green. Highsmith. Renfrow. Gaines. Porter. Cornelius. Rodgers. Gilbert. Robinson.

Does anyone doubt that our defense gets better again next year? Trust the process.

I know what I said. You are apparently having difficulty reading it though.

That next year we will be good on D because Golden players will be seniors, correct?

 

[sebastian91]

You were talking about seniors and how they had 15 seniors in their 2 deep made them great.

I was? Where did I say that?

Originally Posted by sebastian91 View Post
15 of 22 active players on Stanford's defense are seniors.

Our seniors? Green. Highsmith. Renfrow. Gaines. Porter. Cornelius. Rodgers. Gilbert. Robinson.

Does anyone doubt that our defense gets better again next year? Trust the process.

I know what I said. You are apparently having difficulty reading it though.

That next year we will be good on D because Golden players will be seniors, correct?

Try again, Sparky.

 

[I'm Hurt Dawg]

I was? Where did I say that?

Originally Posted by sebastian91 View Post
15 of 22 active players on Stanford's defense are seniors.

Our seniors? Green. Highsmith. Renfrow. Gaines. Porter. Cornelius. Rodgers. Gilbert. Robinson.

Does anyone doubt that our defense gets better again next year? Trust the process.

I know what I said. You are apparently having difficulty reading it though.

That next year we will be good on D because Golden players will be seniors, correct?

Try again, Sparky.

Then you brought up Stanfords 15 seniors up for nothing.

 

[sebastian91]

Originally Posted by sebastian91 View Post
15 of 22 active players on Stanford's defense are seniors.

Our seniors? Green. Highsmith. Renfrow. Gaines. Porter. Cornelius. Rodgers. Gilbert. Robinson.

Does anyone doubt that our defense gets better again next year? Trust the process.

I know what I said. You are apparently having difficulty reading it though.

That next year we will be good on D because Golden players will be seniors, correct?

Try again, Sparky.

Then you brought up Stanfords 15 seniors up for nothing.

Just thought it was an interesting tidbit of info. I didn't come out and say it, but when they mentioned it during the game, I was thinking "****, how are they going to replace all that?" In their case, unless they have a bunch of studs in the pipeline (I have no clue), they're going to have a hard time replacing that much of their two deep. In our case, the guys we have in the pipeline have more physical ability than the ones they'll be replacing. The seniors and RS Jrs next year will be AG's first class, which was thrown together last minute and comprised of 'bodies' because Randy didn't bother recruiting his last year. I think we'll be better on defense next year (addition by subtraction), but we still won't have enough talent to be elite (or satisfy the troll brigade).

 

[Canesfan1899]

Yards Per Attempt probably had to do with the fact that they didn't stretch us deep. They took everything they wanted underneath.

Agree, we picked our poison and wanted to make them nickle and dime us down the field. Had we tackled and covered the flats better the results may have been a little different.

 

[cubin10]

Yards Per Attempt probably had to do with the fact that they didn't stretch us deep. They took everything they wanted underneath.

Agree, we picked our poison and wanted to make them nickle and dime us down the field. Had we tackled and covered the flats better the results may have been a little different.

Since the UiF game the tackling has been less then stellar, needs to be fixed and get better, quickly.