GT IS OVERCOMING A BAD DEAL OF CARDS

L

leathertoe

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Sep 22, 2002
Messages
8
GT beat BYU last week and a lot of people weren't satisfied. GT beat UNC today... and still you people weren't satisfied ... amazing ... hell, the Jackets are beat up and missing some of their best players and they're still kicking ass ... and y'all are not satisfied ... incredible!!... hopefully, we don't have some ugag bullfrogs hanging around ... just enjoy this team winning when it can ... which I hope continues to be often... this team has shown a great deal of heart, even in the one loss they had against clemson in the valley of the dead in a driving rainstorm. Without the rain in the second half, GT outplayed the tigers ... This is a very good team, even without several key players ....very good coaching staff ...Although, I wish we had gone for it on 4th and one when we were on UNC's 38 ... especially without our field goal kicker. Hang in there and support the Jackets ... I'm sick and tired of hearing how this is just an average team ... look at the sec and the big ten... they sure as hell look like average teams all across the board ... the sec is pathetic and that is the damn truth ... ESPN has not thought too highly of the sec or the big ten for the first weeks of this season ... This season will shake itself out and the GT football team will give its best ... whatever happens, happens ... you true Tech fans hang in there with the players ... support them ... they need it.
 
Agree with you leathertoe. I think the Clemson game was a big learning experience for O'Brien. You have to have those. Clearly we didn't have the right offensive calls in the first half, but we sure looked good in the second half. Without the rainstorm, things would have been different. Don't forget, Clemson came within a hair of winning at UGAg, and (although I HATE to say it) UGAg is a definite top 20 team. The last two weeks have spoken volumes about our boys!!! We've had every reason in the world to fold and pack it in, but we've gotten two big wins against competitive teams and I DON'T CARE HOW WE LOOKED GETTING THEM.
 
This was a good win at 'Caroliner'. Ace did a fantastic job....the o-line continued the improvement that began in the second half of the BYU game(after an awful game at klimpsum)..Suggs continued his improvement, a big part of which was the due to improved line play...this carried over to improved play by the receivers....O'Brien is a very good coach and looks like a genius when the line blocks.
The defense is solid but apparently has to gamble to get the job done...leaving us vulnerable..still giving up a lot of big plays...hopefully the defense will continue to improve so that we can get some pass rush without such extreme means that leaves us vulnerable to the big play. Example...if they don't fumble the big play inside the 5 the entire game could have been adversely affected.
One big mistake was the decision by Buck not to go for the first down on 4th and One from the NC 37 yard line. We only gained 10 yards by punting and it stopped our momentum and gave NC a very big chance to get back in the game. It showed lack of faith in an offense that had driven the ball down their throat and put pressure on our defense to win the game
Overall a very good effort...overcoming a lot of injuries and showing improvement in most phases of the game.
This team has a lot of depth and talent...even after the injuries...and that is unquestionably a tribute to the fine job of recruiting by Coach O'leary and his fine staff.
Hopefully we can continue to win as we overcome adversity, and the learning curve of the new staff.

blue.gif
blue.gif
blue.gif
blue.gif


'nician,
I disagree with you on Ugag...they are clearly overrated.
 
I think I need to call my Lasik surgeon and tell him I am now unable to read correctly. I know I did not just read a positve, encouraging post by Beeware.
 
I wouldn't characterize the decision to punt as a big mistake. I probably would have gone for it too, but if we had executed properly we would have pinned them inside the 20. The punt team screwed the strategy by 1) a poor punt, 2) violatee the 2 yd rule, 3) didn't contain and gave up a decent return.
 
Since we are posting our opinions on the call to punt instead of going for the first down, I would, definitely, have gone for the first down for the reason offered by BeeWare.

It shows a lack of confidence in your offense when you punt in that situation, and it builds great confidence in your offense when you exercise the option to go for it.

Also, there could have been a blocked punt, which would have been disastrious; we had little to gain if the punt went into the end zone; and the center could have snapped the ball over the punter's head.

The small chance for a downed punt inside the ten did not merit the risk of a blocked punt or bad snap over the punter's head.

wink.gif
 
I've already said I probably would have gone for it, but come on. The odds for downing a punt inside the 10 are substantially higher than either a blocked kick or a snap over the punter's head. The reason I would have gone for it is simply because I think we had a better than 50/50 chance to make it, not because I was worried about anything happening. If a player or coach is worrying about that kind of stuff at that point in the game, they have no business being on the field, IMO. That kind of thinking is trying not to lose instead of trying to win.
 
My reaction was to go for it. Immediately after I had this thought, the TV analysts made the remark that Tech definitely should go for it in this situation. Their remarks were the same as my thoughts on the situation.

Of course, that does not make me right, but it does add some credence to my personal decisions. At least, I was not alone regarding my way of thinking.

wink.gif
 
It was definitely lame for CG to punt on 4th and 1 at the UNC 38. It indeed showed a lack of confidence in the offense. The momentum of the game immediately shifted to UNC, and GT was lucky to survive it. (The loss to WF in 1999 was due in large part to an exact same situation.)

Earlier, it was also lame to kick the field goal on 4th and 2 inside the UNC 5 yard line. GT got lucky when UNC got called for running into the kicker. UNC would have had the momentum had they forced us to settle for a field goal after a 1st and goal to goal.

It's better to be lucky than good.


IMHO, it's always a big mistake to kick the ball on 4th and short on the opponent's side of the field. It just shows weakness and a lack of confidence. The other team always gains the momentum.
wink.gif
 
I agree with you--punting on 4th&1 from NC's 37 did change the momentum and we were lucky to survive it. I hope we don't make a habit of being that cautious.
 
It was a tough call either way. One one hand, they hadn't stopped our run all day, and it was likely we'd get it.

On the other hand, we weren't stopping them either, and if they had actually stopped us, how would the momentum have been then? It's a risk either way, and the punt was the lesser risk, in my opinion. That being said, I still would have gone for it. I'm just that kind of guy.
 
Let me get this right. Attempting to put the opponent inside their 10 yard line while we have the lead is a bad decision.

A.) We punt the ball inside the 10 yard line and they have a nightmare trying to come back with the way our D was playing.

B.) We go for the first down and don't get it. Now NC has the ball in good shape.

My analysis: The HC played the odds. We have the lead and our defense is playing well. Punt the ball and make them earn the points.
===============================================

Let me get this right. We are unable to get the TD on three attempts inside the 10. Our team is ahead by one point. We attempt the field goal to go up by four points is a bad decision.

A.) We kick the field goal and extend the lead to four points eliminating the possibility that a field goal will beat us.

B.) We go for the first down and don't succeed on 4th down and 2. (Aren't the odds on a 2 point conversion about 43%?) This was a similar distance therefore our odds of success are less than 50%.

My analysis: The HC played the odds. We made the field goal and then got an opportunity to trade it for a TD based upon the penalty. What would people have said if we went for it and it didn't work and NC drove the ball the other way for a score. (Similar to the turnover that we forced on them on the big reception.)

Our coach makes decisions based upon what is most likely to succeed based upon his experience. I would rather the coach play the odds that are in our favor than to wing it and cost us the game. It may not be the exciting or flashy decision. But, I will take a win any way we get it.

I don't think it is a matter of confidence in the team. He is using his head not his emotions.
 
GTY,
The point is that the value of getting the first down at the 37 is far greater than the benefit of possibly pinning the opponent inside the 20 (which we did NOT do). We gave up a high percentage chance to get a first down and virtually kill UNC's chances to win the game versus gaining 10 yards on the punt. I would go for that first down EVERY time from now until eternity in a game that our line and backs had dominated so well. Besides UNC's offense can be dangerous with Durant and they are capable of going 80 yards just as well as they are of going 63 yards.
I say play to win....what Buck did was play not to lose. A difference in philosophy, and either side can be argued.
 
great post GTYELLOWJACKET!

reading your post .. it seems that the coach did call those calls with his head rather than his emotions.

on the 4th and 2 on the UNC goal line .. we got very lucky and put up 7 instead of 3.

on the 4th and 2 in the 4th quarter .. the special teams didn't execute well. and because we failed to execute .. that decision did look very bad. they would have only gained 10 yards had we gone for the 4th done and failed.

but still .. there was a logical reason behind the decision to punt there ..

i'd rather have a conservative coach who wins the game rather than an attacking coach who loses it .. a la Mike Martz.
 
coach gailey doesn't play to not lose. coach gailey plays to win.

i would have also gone for the 4th down in the 4th quarter but i've never been the head coach of the dallas cowboys or the head coach of georgia tech ... coach gailey knew what he was doing and why he wanted to do it and he believed that punting the ball in that situation would have helped him to WIN the game and not to "not lose it".

please recall the 4th down and 2, which we converted when bilbo was in the game ... that was a lucky conversion.

coach gailey went for the 4th down then. because he felt that that was the thing to do to WIN the game and not to "not lose it".
 
They used to accuse Dodd of hosing down the field inside the 10's so that our punts would land like a dead duck. He would punt and dare the opponents to try to get out of their end zone. He would even punt on 3rd down. I seem to remember hearing that his philosophy was play not to lose until the end of the game. He had a "defensive" mind set. Many times he elected to kick off if we won the coin toss. His idea was to hold the opponent inside the 25 so that we would begin our offense with good field position.

Please excuse the reminiscing.
soapbox.gif
 
I'll never forget the '84 GT/UGAG game where this exact same situation came up. UGAG was driving the ball on us in a close game, but came up with a 4th and one at about our 40. Dooley kicked it. The momentum shifted completely to GT, and we went on to win easily, 35-18. Dooley let his emotion of fear cost him the game, when the logical thing would have been to go for it. Tech wasn't even slowing them down on that drive.

College football is all about momentum. You always give it to the other team when you kick it on 4th and short on their end of the field. I've seen it time and time again.

Playing with a chicken shiite, gun shy attitude won't win many games.

Going for it on 4th and short on your own side of the field is dumb and suicidal. We're not taking about this, here.
1drink.gif
 
Originally posted by FHstinger:
I

Playing with a chicken shiite, gun shy attitude won't win many games.

1drink.gif
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">You're right, Dooley didn't win many games at all.
And Coach Dodd never punted on third down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top