41 plays vs. 88

cyptomcat

cyptomcat

Hibernating
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
69,953
Georgia Tech’s offensive game was a strange brew of ineffective play mixed in with three long-distance scores and low possessions. As a result, the Yellow Jackets ran just 41 plays compared to 88 for Virginia.

It was tied for the second fewest in school history. As you might expect, it’s not often that teams win with that few snaps. In fact, in the past 10 seasons, prior to Saturday, in matchups of power-conference teams, it had happened just once, according to sports-reference.com. (Ohio State beat Wisconsin in 2009 with 40 offensive snaps.)
Click to expand...
http://georgiatech.blog.ajc.com/2016/11/20/5-things-to-know-about-georgia-techs-win-over-virginia/
 
Opponents are committing their resources to stopping the run at the line of scrimmage and daring us to get into their secondary. As a result, we are scoring on the occasional big play instead of grinding out time-consuming drives. It's not what this offense is supposed to do, but it's working. As long as we can punish defenses with it and win games, I'll take it. The only problem is, it keeps our defense on the field a lot, and we're living on turnovers.
 
Jacket67,

The whole ööööing point of running option out of the flex is to throw over the top. If we weren't going to throw four seams, we should run wishbone.

I'm happy that CPJ feels confident running the trick when opponents load the line.
 
If Brad Stewart doesn't drop that pass, it's even less. If we don't throw when they play strict man and load up front, we're stupid. The entire point of option offense is to take the better choice the defense gives you.
 
If it wasn't so windy, I bet we would have passed downfield even more. We were WIDE ASS OPEN and when we can pass block (which we've done well lately) it's just too easy to score TD's in those situations. That's exactly what our offense is supposed to do - instill so much fear about our running game that we can rip off big chunks through the passing game.

That said, the play count disparity was also partially because of our inability to pick up 1st downs in short yardage situations. We were not very good at all in that situation yesterday, regardless of who was at QB or what play was called. PJ was pretty disappointed about that in the postgame interview.
 
beej67 said:
Jacket67,

The whole ööööing point of running option out of the flex is to throw over the top. If we weren't going to throw four seams, we should run wishbone.

I'm happy that CPJ feels confident running the trick when opponents load the line.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong. I like that we can adjust and score on big plays, and that is what we have to do to respond. But our defense is not very good and doesn't have the depth to stay on the field all day against most teams. Turnovers have been a big factor over the last two games that have gotten our defense off the field. Counting on turnovers is not as reliable a defensive strategy as controlling time of possession and limiting possessions. I'm not complaining about big plays on offense, but I'd like to to see us make blocks and pick up the 4-5 yards we need to run the ball and control the clock.
 
jacket67 said:
Don't get me wrong. I like that we can adjust and score on big plays, and that is what we have to do to respond. But our defense is not very good and doesn't have the depth to stay on the field all day against most teams. Turnovers have been a big factor over the last two games that have gotten our defense off the field. Counting on turnovers is not as reliable a defensive strategy as controlling time of possession and limiting possessions. I'm not complaining about big plays on offense, but I'd like to to see us make blocks and pick up the 4-5 yards we need to run the ball and control the clock.
Click to expand...

If the defense has 7 in the box with 2 deep safeties and a deep LB to keep him clean, like Miami and Georgia have done the past few years, then we could and should do that.

The thing *I* want, is a defense that allows the same PPD as ours, but does it in a riskier fashion. Either get off the field or go ahead and give up the points. That way our offense can wear their defense down. The more snaps we have on O the tireder they get. Longer games benefit us. It's time for us to start playing like it.

Get off quick on defense, take less clock on offense unless we're trying to kill a half, get more total plays to work with, wear them down, and 4th quarter offensive efficiency goes up, while our defense is less tired.
 
beej67 said:
If the defense has 7 in the box with 2 deep safeties and a deep LB to keep him clean, like Miami and Georgia have done the past few years, then we could and should do that.

The thing *I* want, is a defense that allows the same PPD as ours, but does it in a riskier fashion. Either get off the field or go ahead and give up the points. That way our offense can wear their defense down. The more snaps we have on O the tireder they get. Longer games benefit us. It's time for us to start playing like it.

Get off quick on defense, take less clock on offense unless we're trying to kill a half, get more total plays to work with, wear them down, and 4th quarter offensive efficiency goes up, while our defense is less tired.
Click to expand...
Agreed, especially when we're not particularly good on D anyway. When we force turnovers, we win games. Period. I know that's nothing earth-shattering and holds true for most teams, but I think it is especially true for ours. I want our offense on the field as much as possible.
 
MEwreck02 said:
WTF? You sound like every talking head on ESPN. The whole idea is to make you over commit to the run and burn you with the pass. It is what every offense is designed to do, score points.
Click to expand...

I think you are misinterpreting my line, "It's not what this offense is supposed to do." I should have said, "It's not historically how CPJ's offense has succeeded." The long-term experience with CPJ's teams has been to win by gaining 300+ yds on the ground, keeping the clock running, forcing the other team's offense to stand on the sideline, and limiting the number of possessions. That formula requires getting a consistent 3-5 yards on each carry and having 3rd and short conversions. That's not what we did against UVa, but we were able to adjust and win the game by taking advantage of their defensive strategy and forcing turnovers.
 
We used to get to see the other team's defense start bickering when there was nothing they could do to stop us. We have not death marched in forever.
 
beej67 said:
The thing *I* want, is a defense that allows the same PPD as ours, but does it in a riskier fashion. Either get off the field or go ahead and give up the points. That way our offense can wear their defense down. The more snaps we have on O the tireder they get. Longer games benefit us. It's time for us to start playing like it.
Click to expand...
This works until we start rocket tossing to the third row in the stands or pitching to no one in particular.
 
A wise man once said:

Just wait until we don't win good enough.
 
UVa played the same D Cutcliff has run at Duke. Everyone within 7 yards of the los. Flow with motion while the DT pinch in to try and blowup the handoff.

They basically dared us to throw. We did and gouged them. Qe should have continued it instead of trying to kill clock because you can't kill clock going 3 and out.
 
WracerX said:
UVa played the same D Cutcliff has run at Duke. Everyone within 7 yards of the los. Flow with motion while the DT pinch in to try and blowup the handoff.

They basically dared us to throw. We did and gouged them. Qe should have continued it instead of trying to kill clock because you can't kill clock going 3 and out.
Click to expand...
OTOH, block good enough to get through the first wave and a run goes to the house.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top