Last year on the CPJ bandwagon

Cyp does some awesome numbers compiling.
TIA has the predictor
beej is a good person to just talk football with.

None of them are "insiders" the way the other five in my list are, but their contributions to the board are pretty important, IMO.

The rest of us are just jerking off.

I remember another guy ... 'stick' ... doesn't post much but who seems to know a thing or two. But yeah, not exactly a coaching convention in here, self included with emphasis.
 
The past two years their defense has been one of the best in the country.

I wonder if that's somehow related.

Last year they were in the low 30's in total defense and 18 in scoring defense. All of this while playing a crap schedule.
 
Last year they were in the low 30's in total defense and 18 in scoring defense. All of this while playing a crap schedule.

I know that as Tech fans we're supposed to continuously try to put down UGA, but the thought that they played a crap schedule is laughable.

Was every game they played hard, no. Was their schedule harder than the vast majority of FBS teams? Yes. Would they have gone undefeated in the ACC? Most certainly.
 
I know that as Tech fans we're supposed to continuously try to put down UGA, but the thought that they played a crap schedule is laughable.

Was every game they played hard, no. Was their schedule harder than the vast majority of FBS teams? Yes. Would they have gone undefeated in the ACC? Most certainly.

What would our record have been with that "Crap" schedule?
 
It needed to be done...


Notice how both of those were bullshit plays. 1. If that had been the mutts getting stripped they would have said forward progress was stopped (unless he scored ofcourse?).
2. Suplex is illegal. Bama player got a personal foul for it against missouri earlier int he year. This isnt the WWF, but ofcourse ACC refs sucking ass and just being happy they get to call a game for the mighty sec had a big no call.
 
Last year they were in the low 30's in total defense and 18 in scoring defense. All of this while playing a crap schedule.
Correct. Don't forget 80th in rushing D. When 79 teams have a better rushing D than you then you can't say you have a good defense - especially with the ridiculous NFL roster they had - that is pitiful. By comparison, our rushing D was 44th. And their schedule included Buffalo, FL Atlantic, GSU and two regular season games against teams in the top 20.
 
What would our record have been with that "Crap" schedule?

Of the ten regular season games they won that we could also have played, we would would have lost to Florida and probably Missouri - no other 'locks' on losses. Their regular season sched was hard but not that hard.
 
Correct. Don't forget 80th in rushing D. When 79 teams have a better rushing D than you then you can't say you have a good defense - especially with the ridiculous NFL roster they had - that is pitiful. By comparison, our rushing D was 44th. And their schedule included Buffalo, FL Atlantic, GSU and two regular season games against teams in the top 20.

:rolleyes:

This isn't baseball. There are a lot fewer games in football and the schedules are very loosely connected (not to mention the wide variety of offenses which will skew rushing/passing numbers). The numbers don't tell the whole story. They would have beaten ~75 of the 80 teams ranks ahead of them in rushing D.
 
I know that as Tech fans we're supposed to continuously try to put down UGA, but the thought that they played a crap schedule is laughable.

Was every game they played hard, no. Was their schedule harder than the vast majority of FBS teams? Yes. Would they have gone undefeated in the ACC? Most certainly.

I'm just talking about regular season where they had one win over a ranked team. One.

I wouldn't necessarily say they would go undefeated in the ACC depending on who they played. I certainly wouldn't give UGA auto-wins over FSU or Clemson.
 
This isn't baseball. There are a lot fewer games in football and the schedules are very loosely connected (not to mention the wide variety of offenses which will skew rushing/passing numbers). The numbers don't tell the whole story. They would have beaten ~75 of the 80 teams ranks ahead of them in rushing D.

I was addressing the question about the quality of their defense. It simply wasn't as good as advertised. The fact that they would have beaten most of the teams with better rushing defenses doesn't really change that. Before the season started, it was speculated that their D this year was probably better than their 1980 D. Not by a long shot. I'll give them credit - but their defense should have been a lot better than it was.
 
Back
Top