What can we expect out of the 2013 defense?

[Clockwork Orange]

As we all know, the 2012 defense was little more than a clusterfizzle. As I see it, we had two major problems: (1) inadequate team speed, especially in the back 7; and (2) Sal / new system. Now that we're switching back to a 4-3-- the alignment most of the roster was recruited for-- I think we should pay very little attention to what the defense did last year, and try to make some judgments by comparing to the 2011 defense instead.

For starters, that defense had Justin Wilcox at the helm. To be conservative, I'm going to assume that Wilcox > Jancek. That may not be the case, but Wilcox did do a nice job with a defense that was young and lacking in speed and talent and it was the second year in his system. That should give his defense some edge over the 2013 defense.

The 2011 defense gave up 22.6 PPG (36th) and 340.5 YPG (28th). Can this defense improve enough over 2012 to get back into that range-- say, top 50 in points and yards allowed (recall in 2012 we were worse than 100th in both)?

Below is a quick comparison of the 2011 starters to a 2013 projection of the starters. Any position highlighted in green I consider to be superior to the other year; red is inferior and yellow is more or less neutral.



Note that two of these positions (LE, SLB) are marked as superior in 2013 simply because they have the same players with two more years of experience, and two more (RE, MLB) are marked superior because a starter or part-time starter from 2011 now occupies that role (RE, MLB). I think the only one of these four that can even be debated is A.J. Johnson over Austin Johnson at MLB since A.J. was at WLB in 2011, but I doubt anyone will challenge me on that judgement.

So that's 4 of 12 positions where the personnel is an improvement more or less by default. I've also penciled in the following:

* Dan McCullers as an improvement over Daniel Hood and Mo Couch at NT; size alone made that an easy call and McCullers is on a number of preseason watchlists.

* Byron Moore as an improvement over Brent Brewer and Brian Randolph at strong safety; choosing him over Brewer is easy for speed alone, and the experience difference between Moore and a freshman in 2011, Randolph, gives him the edge there too.

* Riyadh Jones and Justin Coleman as pushes with the 2011 platoon of Lanier, Coleman, Teague, and Randolph. We don't yet know what Jones is bringing but Teague really struggled, Randolph was a freshman, and Coleman is back with more experience. The only question is whether Lanier should be green over Coleman, IMO.

* Brian Randolph as a push with the combo of P-Wagg and Randolph; Waggner was a bright spot but I think Randolph is going to be a really solid safety and would have helped us tremendously last year if he hadn't been hurt.

* Dontavis Sapp as a push with A.J. Johnson at WLB; Sapp is better suited to that position and I think A.J. was a step too slow in addition to being a freshman.

* Mo Couch and Daniel Hood as a step down from Malik Jackson. Malik was a damn good playmaker despite being undersized in there.

* LaDarrell McNeil and Lemond Johnson (or really, whoever takes this nickel spot) as a step down from the duo of Byron Moore and Brian Randolph at nickel. We have a guy who was very inconsistent as a freshman last year and an unknown as a freshman this year vs. Moore and Randolph, who were talented enough to start some at safety and corner spots that year.

Final count: better at 6 positions, worse at 2, neutral at 4.

Overall I think this defense has more strength up front and possibly more speed in the back. Exactly how that plays with the new DC and recovering from last year's debacle, I do not know. But I think it boils down to this: if you are short on speed, the only way to be decent is to be in the right spot most of the time (we were in 2011). If you are short on speed and so confused that you don't even know where to be, you have the makings of a historically bad defense (2012). I believe we're still short on speed in 2013, but as long as we now have a staff that will have guys in the right spots, we should not see the kind of debacle we saw last year.

So I think we are a top 50 defense this year . . . which is not where we want to be, but would have been adequate to win 8 games a year ago. This year I think it's enough to win 6, as long as the offense isn't historically bad.

Thoughts?

[Creek Walker]

I think we have enough talent on D to be formidable. I fear, though, that formidable won't cut it if we're looking for more than 5-6 wins. The offense may be very lackluster this year. We have a very good offensive line, but I don't see a lot of bright spots elsewhere, unless one of these frosh QBs comes out and sets the world on fire a la Erik Ainge. I'm not impressed with Worley at all and only slightly more impressed with Peterman. We still don't have a dynamic playmaker at RB and the receiving corps is completely lacking in experience without a lot of obvious star power.

I don't see any way the defense isn't improved over last year's disastrous experiment. IF Jancek can cut it as a DC in the SEC, we have a chance to be solid. Maybe I'm looking at it with orange glasses, but I think there are very few linebacking corps in the SEC that are better than this linebacking corps.

It's going to be an interesting year. The fact that Jones has "coached up" every team he's had, coupled with the facts that this team appears to have bought into his system much more than Dooley's teams ever bought into his and the SEC is still down a bit this year, gives me hope that 6-6 is an obtainable goal, with 7 wins being within the realm of possibility. It's going to be a tough challenge, though.

[Volznut]

This is an experienced defense, but the problem is that they have experience...LOSING.

So, it's hard to say. I can say we should be better than last year (huge leap, eight?). We have some things that need to happen to be good

1 - McCullers has to dominate inside. I understand he will be much more of a fulltime guy and has really worked hard to lose weight. I think this is a big year for him
2 - Need Couch/Hood/Walls/Miller to hold their own inside
3 - Need a pass rush from someone. Looks like Vereen and Lewis could provide a spark there.
4 - Cornerbacks need to step up. I think we're fine at safety with Randolph back and a second year talented player in Mcneil. Justin Coleman is a junior and needs to be consistent. We saw some flashes he can play at a high level last year. Riyadh Jones will have to be the other guy. Moore will have to be a quality backup - he led us in ints last year.
5 - tackling has to be improved.

I think we will be a more fundamentally sound D that won't have to "think" as much and make more plays. I don't see it as dominating, but will be a middle of the pack D in the SEC.

[Clockwork Orange]

4 - Cornerbacks need to step up. I think we're fine at safety with Randolph back and a second year talented player in Mcneil. Justin Coleman is a junior and needs to be consistent. We saw some flashes he can play at a high level last year. Riyadh Jones will have to be the other guy. Moore will have to be a quality backup - he led us in ints last year.
will be a middle of the pack D in the SEC.

You think McNeil starts over Moore at safety? That will be an interesting one to watch but I'm thinking Moore right now.

will be a middle of the pack D in the SEC.

I would take that in a heartbeat.

[Volznut]

You think McNeil starts over Moore at safety? That will be an interesting one to watch but I'm thinking Moore right now.

I would take that in a heartbeat.

Yeah, I think Moore will play more of the nickel guy, but McNeil really came on last year and I think he is a much better tackler. Moore did have ints, but he also made a lot of busts and whiffs on tackling. I think McNeil starts. Both will play.

[LouisVOL]

There is no substitute for speed, and we will still be a slow team, at least the returning talent lacks speed.  That said, we were the worst pursuit angle team in history last year, not among the worst----the absolute worst.  Speed will still be our weakness, but I have got to believe that this staff will compensate with scheme and better fundamentals far better than last years abomination.  No doubt in my mind we will be better, but I would say top 50 is a hope rather than an expectation until we upgrade speed.

[Volznut]

There is no substitute for speed, and we will still be a slow team, at least the returning talent lacks speed.  That said, we were the worst pursuit angle team in history last year, not among the worst----the absolute worst.  Speed will still be our weakness, but I have got to believe that this staff will compensate with scheme and better fundamentals far better than last years abomination.  No doubt in my mind we will be better, but I would say top 50 is a hope rather than an expectation until we upgrade speed.

We looked slower than we were last year because the team was confused most of the time and reacted slowly. We looked a lot better the year before. I think we're a much better team speedwise with Maggitt in the lineup. His and randolph's return should help team speed. That all being said, we're not overly fast, but Butch is working on that.

[Inspector Vol]

Its no secret that our oline and dline need to dominate this year for us to get a bowl game. I see no reason we can't be a top 50 type defense, but if our offense is anemic they won't have top 50 stats as they will be on the field too much.

We are still too slow on defense. I really don't think that McNeil or Moore are very fast and while AJ is a beast of a tackler in the box he doesn't get to the corner very well. IMHO our lack of team speed is why we played bend and don't break when Wilcox was here.

I do notice that Butch is trying to upgrade our speed, but it will take 2 or 3 years to get fast enough. At least he sees the problem and is trying to fix it.

[BanditVol]

So I think we are a top 50 defense this year . . . which is not where we want to be, but would have been adequate to win 8 games a year ago. This year I think it's enough to win 6, as long as the offense isn't historically bad.

Thoughts?

We will certainly be better than last year....I don't think we could be worse.   

I don't know about top 50....Wilcox was in his second year and our offense was horrible in 2011, which means opposing teams quit trying to score in the third quarter for the most part.  Of course, this year's O might struggle also.

I honestly think we will be around 70th...an improvement from absolutely terrible to a bit below average.  Hope I am wrong, and like you say, we improve to average.

And one other thought....you have a lot of time on your hands.   

[Creek Walker]

I don't know about top 50....Wilcox was in his second year and our offense was horrible in 2011, which means opposing teams quit trying to score in the third quarter for the most part.  Of course, this year's O might struggle also.

I don't think that's it at all. How many games was UT out of by the third quarter in 2011? Not that many.

[BanditVol]

I don't think that's it at all. How many games was UT out of by the third quarter in 2011? Not that many.

LSU, bammer, Arkansas, and for all practical purposes....USCe after Dooley started our true frosh QB in his first ever SEC game   

We did hold uga to 20...all the rest of our opponents pretty much suxed.

Our offense was 106th in the country.  I didn't even think it was questioned that lack of offensive production can make the D look better.   

For the record, I liked our D for the most part in 2011 considering what we had to work with and I didn't complain about Wilcox much and really didn't want him to go.   But I do think the rank of 36th in the country was padded a bit by not really having much of an offensive threat.

[Creek Walker]

I didn't even think it was questioned that lack of offensive production can make the D look better.   

Please explain how anything that happens on the offensive side of the ball changes the stats the same team's defense accumulates while it is on the field? If anything, an anemic offense hurts the defense statistically because the other team's offense will be on the field more and have more time to amass yards and points.

[BanditVol]

Please explain how anything that happens on the offensive side of the ball changes the stats the same team's defense accumulates while it is on the field? If anything, an anemic offense hurts the defense statistically because the other team's offense will be on the field more and have more time to amass yards and points.

Simple...the other team doesn't need to score as many points and they call off the dogs late in the game.

It ain't rocket science!   

[Jedi Master]

I believe UT's defense will be improved in 2013, and in my opinion will end up ranked in the 45-65 range.  However, I do expect UT's offense will struggle in some games and the end result is that the current general concensus in regards of predicted record is correct.   UT will likely win ~6/7 games. 

There are quite a few factors that will impact your D's stat ranking.  As Bandit pointed out, if UT's games against ranked opponents turns out that such opponents have comfortable leads going into the 4Q, you will likely see those opponents call off the dogs and run the ball to shorten the game.  Also, injuries could have an impact, as UT's D isn't particulary deep.  Particularly your secondary.  And the talented depth that you do have is somewhat inexperienced. 

And of course, the great unknown is what approach your defensive coaches will choose, given UT's D talent.  I do know they will make stopping the big play a priority.  With your current set of talent on D, I expect hey will play UT's back 7 off the ball (against SEC teams), and keep everything in front of them.  This means a lot of zone, and likely a bend-not-break approach.  Otherwise giving up big plays puts too much pressure on UT's O to play catch up.  With your limited experience at QB/WR, I expect Coach Jones will take a methodical approach on both offense and defense, keep UT in the game, and pick opportunities to go for big plays (deep passes on O, blitzes on D).   As an UGA fan, my biggest question is how effective will UT be running the ball from the spread against SEC defenses?   UT must run the ball well and maintain manageable down and distance.  Based on its talent, the 2013 UT offense will not convert 3rd and long frequently, IMO.

[Creek Walker]

Simple...the other team doesn't need to score as many points and they call off the dogs late in the game.

It ain't rocket science!   

The only teams on the 2011 schedule that called off the dogs early were alabama and lsu. You're right: it ain't rocket science. I think you like to argue just for the sake of arguing.

[BanditVol]

The only teams on the 2011 schedule that called off the dogs early were alabama and lsu. You're right: it ain't rocket science. I think you like to argue just for the sake of arguing.

Uhhhh, I posted what I posted.  You were the one who decided to nitpick it.  I stand by what I said.

I am not the only person to express that opinion, either on here, or in articles by media figures that I have read.   

And I am not going to waste any more of my time on this topic....

[Creek Walker]

And I am not going to waste any more of my time on this topic....

  I've heard that before.