Interceptions

miles44

miles44

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
166
The first 9 games we had 4 INTs. The last 3 we had 7. Of those 7, I can't think of one that wasn't an overthrow or just a plain poor throw (Eason).
Not to take away from the Austins. I guess we were lucky in that aspect.
 
I'd say that Austin's first pick of Evans in VPI game wasn't an overthrow, rather, him making an effort to stay "on top" on the WR, coverage-wise. Also would say that DBs were generally positioned well - Austin's pick of Eason was a great example.

Important to point out too - if we were "lucky" in last 3 games, wouldn't it follow that we were "unlucky" in first 9? Seems like these things generally balance out (particularly fumbles), that's all.
 
Lawrence's pick against VT was an athletic play that required good positioning and legwork. Full credit for that one.

But yeah, you have to look at the pressure aspect too. If we were getting to the QB, that makes it a lot easier for the ball to wind up in a GT defender's hands. For example, I know Eason was running for his life on their last desperation hail mary (and was pushed as he threw), which is why it didn't even make it to the end zone. All the more impressive since I believe we only sent three that play.
 
Also, we've been playing our secondary back all year to not allow big plays. Which I assume fit into a philosophy of making teams drive the field against us which increases the probability of mistakes leading to turnovers. Basically what VT has tried to do to CPJ for the last 10 years. So when we're dropping people into coverage and forcing shorter throws you're putting a lot of pressure on the QBs to make accurate throws. Or maybe I'm making all that up to explain what we're seeing. Overall I see your point though, we haven't been jumping a lot of routes.

These past 3 games sure felt like 2014 again though. Offense wasn't as punishing, but still moved the ball effectively. And the defense gave up yards, but just killed teams with turnover production. The Austin's alone have what, 4 INTs, 1 forced fumble/recovery, and a TD in the last 3 games.
 
gtrower said:
Also, we've been playing our secondary back all year to not allow big plays. Which I assume fit into a philosophy of making teams drive the field against us which increases the probability of mistakes leading to turnovers. Basically what VT has tried to do to CPJ for the last 10 years. So when we're dropping people into coverage and forcing shorter throws you're putting a lot of pressure on the QBs to make accurate throws. Or maybe I'm making all that up to explain what we're seeing. Overall I see your point though, we haven't been jumping a lot of routes.

These past 3 games sure felt like 2014 again though. Offense wasn't as punishing, but still moved the ball effectively. And the defense gave up yards, but just killed teams with turnover production. The Austin's alone have what, 4 INTs, 1 forced fumble/recovery, and a TD in the last 3 games.
Click to expand...
Exactly how I saw it. If we can't force turnovers, we end up in shootouts because we don't stop many people. If we can force turnovers, it's lights out for our opponent because it's pretty rare that anyone stops us consistently, and extra possessions are deadly.
 
I'm not sure I understand the complaint. Most team's INTs are off of QB mistakes or tipped passes. A good secondary is in position to make a play when the opportunity arises (i.e. overthrow, or tipped pass). Even the Seahawks in the NFL who have a great secondary (who have 10 INTs in 11 games) get a large part of their picks from QB mistakes or tipped balls. Earl Thomas picked off Matt Ryan earlier this season on a ball tipped by Julio. I doubt anyone would second guess the talent of Julio, Matt or Earl Thomas.

I'd argue very few INTs are from great secondary play (like reading a QB and jumping a route) versus just being in the right place and getting lucky. We played good QBs, our guys were in good position on those particular instances and they made a good play.
 
gtrower said:
Also, we've been playing our secondary back all year to not allow big plays. Which I assume fit into a philosophy of making teams drive the field against us which increases the probability of mistakes leading to turnovers. Basically what VT has tried to do to CPJ for the last 10 years. So when we're dropping people into coverage and forcing shorter throws you're putting a lot of pressure on the QBs to make accurate throws. Or maybe I'm making all that up to explain what we're seeing. Overall I see your point though, we haven't been jumping a lot of routes.

These past 3 games sure felt like 2014 again though. Offense wasn't as punishing, but still moved the ball effectively. And the defense gave up yards, but just killed teams with turnover production. The Austin's alone have what, 4 INTs, 1 forced fumble/recovery, and a TD in the last 3 games.
Click to expand...

Bend don't break. It works when you're pressuring the QB more. The defensive line has definitely been playing better since the North Carolina game. When it doesn't work it becomes bend and break and it's frustrating af which is why we were calling for Roof's head a few weeks ago.
 
The whole defense has a role in making it more likely for the quarterback to make mistakes, and since interceptions are uncommon, you can't make a whole lot out of the variation over a season just from numbers. The eye test is more informative, and the eye test shows more pressure on the QB to back up the numbers. This is not to say we are suddenly good on defense, but despite the yards it doesn't look like a mistake that the results are getting better either.
 
miles44 said:
The first 9 games we had 4 INTs. The last 3 we had 7. Of those 7, I can't think of one that wasn't an overthrow or just a plain poor throw (Eason).
Not to take away from the Austins. I guess we were lucky in that aspect.
Click to expand...

At least you're not taking anything away from the Austins.
Easons INt to Austin was not a simple throw to him. He dove for a tipped pass.
But okay. Thanks for making a thread about a totally pointless topic.
Who do we call to void out all the easy interceptions?
 
Was Eason's pass tipped at the line? I've watched the replay a couple of times, and it look probable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top