More than one week to prepare: myth or reality?

GoldZ said:
Yes, and the point is, they STILL couldn't stop it, ok?
Click to expand...

The question isn't whether someone can stop the option. The question is whether extra prep time gives the opposing team more of an advantage preparing for the option offense than it does preparing for the type of offense they usually face.

For OU, NU, and Texas, the offense they usually faced was the option offense, so the question is irrelevant.
 
andrew said:
The question isn't whether someone can stop the option. The question is whether extra prep time gives the opposing team more of an advantage preparing for the option offense than it does preparing for the type of offense they usually face.

For OU, NU, and Texas, the offense they usually faced was the option offense, so the question is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Not so, when they faced teams other than themselves. Even though the option was more prevalent then, it wasn't the O used by everyone at all. They tended to score a lot on others AND when playing each other....hmmm? The bowl teams they faced tended to be highly ranked great teams which had a month to prepare, yet they did quite well.

Look, it still comes down to execution and physical superiority----otherwise, why are there so many blow-outs between two I-formation/pro-set teams when all they do is practice week after week at stopping it? Notice how bowl games can be lopsided? Why? After all, they each had a month to prepare, right?

What did we do that surprised ugag in '08 when they had two weeks to prepare? Nada. Then with a different DC, we certainly didn't surprise em last year in Athens, yet we hung how many points/yards on em? How'd Clemson do with two cracks at it in '09? That's not only a lot of prep time, but more importantly a game of head to head film and direct on the field experience!

Extra prep time vs the option is waaay overrated. Doesn't the option team get extra prep time for the other team's D? It didn't help vs LSU because of physical domination and AF because of öööö execution. This year's bowl game, assuming we are healthy, should be interesting (especially if we beat ugag).
 
GoldZ said:
Extra prep time vs the option is waaay overrated.
Click to expand...

Extra prep time vs Georgia Tech's specific version of the option since Paul Johnson has arrived is not over rated at all. And the numbers prove it, beyond a shadow of a doubt. Proof last week. Proof last year. Proof each bowl.
The numbers are staggeringly positive that extra prep time matters.

I used to try to make all the same arguments you're making, and I quit, because Georgia Tech kept repeatedly proving me wrong, just like they're proving you wrong right now.

If GT wants to prove that extra prep time doesn't matter, GT needs to not play WORSE THAN IDAHO DID versus Virginia in a year when we're otherwise undefeated.

If GT wants to prove that extra prep time doesn't matter, now, today, then we have to win these games, this year:

VT
Bowl

And we have to win at least two ACC games where teams have extra prep time next year, and we have to win our bowl game next year.

Then your argument might be back to neutral. Right now you're arguing with a brick wall. Tech has proven on the field that prep time matters.
 
beej67 said:
Extra prep time vs Georgia Tech's specific version of the option since Paul Johnson has arrived is not over rated at all. And the numbers prove it, beyond a shadow of a doubt. Proof last week. Proof last year. Proof each bowl.
The numbers are staggeringly positive that extra prep time matters.

I used to try to make all the same arguments you're making, and I quit, because Georgia Tech kept repeatedly proving me wrong, just like they're proving you wrong right now.

If GT wants to prove that extra prep time doesn't matter, GT needs to not play WORSE THAN IDAHO DID versus Virginia in a year when we're otherwise undefeated.

If GT wants to prove that extra prep time doesn't matter, now, today, then we have to win these games, this year:

VT
Bowl

And we have to win at least two ACC games where teams have extra prep time next year, and we have to win our bowl game next year.

Then your argument might be back to neutral. Right now you're arguing with a brick wall. Tech has proven on the field that prep time matters.
Click to expand...
Or as PJ put it in his presser, "at some point you just have to believe what you're seein'" ... :biggthumpup:
 
There is a definite correlation for wwhen the first break occurs. We played 7 straight games. UVa played 5, then a break, then us. That favors UVa. You can see that stat for all teams. Does that mean we should have lost? No, we played flat. That's on us. Give us this week off, then play Clemson coming off 8 straight games and our chance of winning impproves.
 
GoldZ said:
Not so, when they faced teams other than themselves. Even though the option was more prevalent then, it wasn't the O used by everyone at all. They tended to score a lot on others AND when playing each other....hmmm? The bowl teams they faced tended to be highly ranked great teams which had a month to prepare, yet they did quite well.

Look, it still comes down to execution and physical superiority----otherwise, why are there so many blow-outs between two I-formation/pro-set teams when all they do is practice week after week at stopping it? Notice how bowl games can be lopsided? Why? After all, they each had a month to prepare, right?

What did we do that surprised ugag in '08 when they had two weeks to prepare? Nada. Then with a different DC, we certainly didn't surprise em last year in Athens, yet we hung how many points/yards on em? How'd Clemson do with two cracks at it in '09? That's not only a lot of prep time, but more importantly a game of head to head film and direct on the field experience!

Extra prep time vs the option is waaay overrated. Doesn't the option team get extra prep time for the other team's D? It didn't help vs LSU because of physical domination and AF because of öööö execution. This year's bowl game, assuming we are healthy, should be interesting (especially if we beat ugag).
Click to expand...


Your memory is failing you.

Look at the actual results from those games of long ago (I just did). There were some one-sided blowouts, but that means one side got stopped handily because it was overmatched. More common were scores in the teens and low twenties. Keeping the score that low means the option was stopped or slowed quite a bit, but no more or less than any other offense of the day.

Eventually we have to stop making excuses and believe the data. Basically we are trying to call every example where a team with more prep time did better against us an outlier. We were overmatched here; we stopped ourselves there. Etc. etc.

Remember most here expected us to run all over LSU because LSU had a poor year that year. And we actually did OK if not for the fumbles, but giving us more chances to fumble counts as a strategy. It was only AFTER the game that people started rationalizing about the talent on the LSU D overmatching our players.
 
beej67 said:
If GT wants to prove that extra prep time doesn't matter, GT needs to not play WORSE THAN IDAHO DID versus Virginia in a year when we're otherwise undefeated.

...proven on the field that prep time matters.
Click to expand...
I would argue that GT played better than Idaho.

Here's my evidence:

Idaho scored 14 points in regulation (one offensive TD)
GT scored 21 points in regulation (two offensive TD's)

Idaho had 296 (271 in regulation) total yards of offense, 2 TO's, 0-1 on 4th down and 9 punts
GT had 296 total yards of offense, missed a FG, 2 TO's, 3-3 on 4th down and 4 punts

UVA scored 24 points in regulation against GT
UVA scored 14 points in regulation against Idaho

UVA had 3 turnovers, and 7 penalties for 60 yards against Idaho
UVA had 1 turnover and 4 penalties for 25 yards against GT

UVA had 496 (471 in regulation) yards of offense missed a FG, went 1-1 on 4th down, and punted 7 times against Idaho
UVA had 407 yards of offense missed a FG, went 0-1 on 4th down, and punted twice against GT.

In terms of offensive efficiency, I think GT was more efficient than Idaho.

In terms of offensive efficiency, I think UVA was much more efficient against GT than against Idaho.

The simple fact is UVA played a bad game against Idaho (kinda like we did against Maryland perhaps they had exams/fatigue problems as well), and played one of its best against us.
 
---extra prep time obviously CAN"T hurt--SO--it obviously DOES help and previous games seem to prove it. If nothing else, then the simple psychology of the extra prep time factors in.
 
beej67 said:
Extra prep time vs Georgia Tech's specific version of the option since Paul Johnson has arrived is not over rated at all. And the numbers prove it, beyond a shadow of a doubt. Proof last week. Proof last year. Proof each bowl.
The numbers are staggeringly positive that extra prep time matters.

I used to try to make all the same arguments you're making, and I quit, because Georgia Tech kept repeatedly proving me wrong, just like they're proving you wrong right now.

If GT wants to prove that extra prep time doesn't matter, GT needs to not play WORSE THAN IDAHO DID versus Virginia in a year when we're otherwise undefeated.

If GT wants to prove that extra prep time doesn't matter, now, today, then we have to win these games, this year:

VT
Bowl

And we have to win at least two ACC games where teams have extra prep time next year, and we have to win our bowl game next year.

Then your argument might be back to neutral. Right now you're arguing with a brick wall. Tech has proven on the field that prep time matters.
Click to expand...

Nobody has proven squat bj. Apparently you missed my points about execution and physical dominance. Hasn't CPJ had his own quote about physical dominance? You also missed my point about having an average tandem of A & B backs combined with above average WRs, QB, and OL. This will impact both execution and physicality.

You and others seem to over credit our losses vs extra prep timers and minimize our successes against them---i.e. very little feedback about ugag and Clemson.

In the LSU game, we could have had THREE weeks to prepare and them ONE week to do so, and we would have still gotten rocked. As for UVA, what on earth did their extra prep time have to do with two block in the back TD erasers by our wrs? (the first of which could have meant a lot more than just 7 points).

If the option is so damned unique as to provide some huge advantage, then why have Army, AF, & Navy early on, lost so many damned games?

And to the poster who says my memory is failing---nope---I looked up several OU, NU, & Texas scores vs each other and their bowl games for a similar thread on here a few months ago and their scores had plenty of blow-outs and close games----like normal Os do.

I actually believe there is some advantage to extra prep time by our opponents, but far less than is being posted here. I believe whatever emphasis a DC chooses to employ, CPJ will quickly recognize it and take advantage of it---IF---the necessary physicality and execution are available. If not, then just replay the LSU and AF games and then post on here how their extra prep time doomed us.
 
cajunjacket said:
I disagree. Teams coming off a bye week are can come out flat and out of sync.
Click to expand...
---it's possible--wish Va. had been an example--extra time also allows for injury healing and simple REST from the grind--the mojo is for the coach to address--:biggthumpup:
 
Reality is that a team with good athletes, good coaching, and more time to prepare, will always kick our ass, as it has happened in post seasons (eg LSU, Iowa). We will never make it to a NCG with this offense because that is the type of team we will have to play either once or twice before we get to a NCG.
Anyways, we can be respectable in the ACC with the PJ triple option most years.
 
beej67 said:
Extra prep time vs Georgia Tech's specific version of the option since Paul Johnson has arrived is not over rated at all. And the numbers prove it, beyond a shadow of a doubt. Proof last week. Proof last year. Proof each bowl.
The numbers are staggeringly positive that extra prep time matters.

I used to try to make all the same arguments you're making, and I quit, because Georgia Tech kept repeatedly proving me wrong, just like they're proving you wrong right now.

If GT wants to prove that extra prep time doesn't matter, GT needs to not play WORSE THAN IDAHO DID versus Virginia in a year when we're otherwise undefeated.

If GT wants to prove that extra prep time doesn't matter, now, today, then we have to win these games, this year:

VT
Bowl

And we have to win at least two ACC games where teams have extra prep time next year, and we have to win our bowl game next year.

Then your argument might be back to neutral. Right now you're arguing with a brick wall. Tech has proven on the field that prep time matters.
Click to expand...
Bullshit.
 
ncjacket said:
Bullshit.
Click to expand...
We average less yards per play after adjusting for the opponent's overall defensive performance when the opponent has more than 7 days to prepare. 3 years of data.

That's proof on the field.
 
cyptomcat said:
We average less yards per play after adjusting for the opponent's overall defensive performance when the opponent has more than 7 days to prepare. 3 years of data.

That's proof on the field.
Click to expand...
No it's playing with statistics. What we average per play is immaterial. The only thing that matters is whether we win or lose, and overall we've won most of the games we would have been expected to and lost those where we didn't have a favorable matchup. To be clear, I've never said having extra time won't help, just that it should always help any team. But the angst among our fanbase about extra time is ridiculous.
 
In 2009 GT-Miami game, I remember a TV shot of Derrick Morgan on oxygen in early second quarter.
We were totally gassed for that game.

Was at the UVA-GT game. Reminded me of the 2009 GT-Miami game. We looked gassed.
All the reports and quotes by CPJ of players worn down BEFORE the UVA game tell most of the story, IMO.

Lighter practices this week with emphasis on recuperation and
recovery will show against Miami. I think we win.

I'm looking to see UVA make Mike Glennon look like Joe Montana on Saturday.
IMHO, NCST's 14 days off will lead to NCST beating UVA.

Anyne else remember the stats about how poorly opponents play
their next game after playing us? And, UVA practiced for 3 straight
weeks almost exclusively for us.

IMHO, NCST will beat UVA convincingly on Saturday.
 
ncjacket said:
No it's playing with statistics. What we average per play is immaterial. The only thing that matters is whether we win or lose, and overall we've won most of the games we would have been expected to and lost those where we didn't have a favorable matchup. To be clear, I've never said having extra time won't help, just that it should always help any team. But the angst among our fanbase about extra time is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
We lost many many games in which Vegas favored us when the opponent had extra time.

This includes our bowl games, yes Vegas favored us in them, so did a lot of posters.

Now you are convinced?

Games we were favored to win by Vegas where opponent had extra time:
2008 LSU L
2008 Clemson W
2009 iowa L
2010 NC State L
2011 UVA L
 
Last edited:
cyptomcat said:
We lost many many games in which Vegas favored us when the opponent had extra time.

This includes our bowl games, yes Vegas favored us in them, so did a lot of posters.

Now you are convinced?

Games we were favored to win by Vegas where opponent had extra time:
2008 LSU L
2008 Clemson W
2009 iowa L
2010 NC State L
2011 UVA L
Click to expand...
Nope. Whatever Vegas may has thought, do you honestly believe we had a better team then LSU in 2008? I don't remember a line on the State game, but we lost that one primarily because we couldn't stop their offense. UVA was an upset, but we've upset other teams as well...they do happen.
 
ncjacket said:
Nope. Whatever Vegas may has thought, do you honestly believe we had a better team then LSU in 2008? I don't remember a line on the State game, but we lost that one primarily because we couldn't stop their offense. UVA was an upset, but we've upset other teams as well...they do happen.
Click to expand...
I am pretty sure you favored us against LSU just like rest of us and like the rest of the country. All this is after the fact posting, show me a post where you said LSU should be favored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top