But here's where I'm very, very cautiously optimistic:
1.) Kelly has let his DC's run the defense, for better or for worse. Diaco ran one style and BVG ran another style.
2.) Elko may just talk a good game, but I like his focus on basics. The thing that has driven me the most nuts since Kelly's arrival has been our over-reliance on strategery. Even in a relatively simple defense (Diaco's) we seemed to think we needed an answer for every unique situation as opposed to having rules and keys for our defensive players. I will never forget the "kudos to Navy!" for running the veer...which wasn't really the veer, but I digress. We should be able to line up in a base defense and physically beat the crap out of Navy. Our focus on tactics has really hurt us
3.) The stuff about Tranquill - the "Rover" talk made me roll my eyes, but the idea that we will be putting players in the best positions for them to succeed is a good one and seems like a refreshing change from "putting players n the field to put other players in position."
4.) Rankings of Elko's scoring defenses:
Wake Forest: 60, 43, 23
Bowling Green: 100, 77, 10, 5 (year after he left: 108)
I don't know the personnel he had on either team, but that seems like pretty steady improvement from both teams
Does that make me suddenly think we'll be great? Not at all. But I do think there are legitimate reasons for us to be cautiously optimistic.