Notes from Athens:

[bugboy]

As I was unable to attend the Vandy game, SWMBO and I went to Athens to take in the renewal of the UGA/Clem rivalry. A few notes:

1) John Lovett will make a difference with Clemson's D. They really clamped down hard on Greene and made him look like a drunk out there.

2) Willie aint Woody.

3) Clemson's WR's seem to have a case of the dropsies. If not for that, they might have won.

4) Musa is UGA's only RB. He's good, but he can easily be shut down, IMO. His longest run from scrimmage was only 10 yards.

5) Georgia has a QB controversy on their hands. A 2-QB system will not work. Mark my words on that.

6) If we put a decent pass rush on Willie, he's toast.

7) I'm worried about facing Clemson's D. Those guys are much improved over previous versions.

8) I think we have the chance to get a few cheap TD's off of Clemson special teams. Those guys really stunk it up...as a matter of fact, that's the reason they lost.

9) UGA's front seven put alot of pressure on Willie.

10) I like our chances against both of these teams.

Can't wait for September 14th.

 

[pjjacket]

Thanks Bug for your opinions. Great to read something other than AUC pablum re UGAg.

I did not get to see the game on ESPN because of transportation problems from BDS@HGF so your notes are great for me.

 

[MsTechAnalysis]

Thanks for your analysis and breakdown. I have to agree with all that, especially on the QB controversy there. Greene was not a happy camper when he was pulled after throwing and interception. This could be very interesting down the road. I believe Richt is dreading on thin ice with this ... time will tell.

 

[bugboy]

One other thing:

There were a few instances when Willie was under pressure and he just threw it up for grabs downfield (hoping his WR would make a play over a short DB). In many of those instances, UGA had a great opportunity for an INT. As a matter of fact, he's lucky he didn't have about 4 passes intercepted (only 1 was picked off, in the situation I just described).

That might be the main diff between Willie and Woody. Woody would take off and run usually if under pressure...Willie is mobile, but he wants to hang around in the pocket more and make the throw.

I'm really worried about their defense though. They are much improved.

 

[beeware]

We got very little pressure on Vandy's QB, but we didn't really have to anyway. That will be different for klimpsum. I saw part of the replay of the ugag/klimpsum game and i saw a couple of the instances that you are talking about where he just threw it up for grabs and got lucky. Hopefully we can get some pressure on him...we will need much more pressure than we got on Vandy.

 

[GT98]

Originally posted by beeware:
We got very little pressure on Vandy's QB, but we didn't really have to anyway. That will be different for klimpsum. I saw part of the replay of the ugag/klimpsum game and i saw a couple of the instances that you are talking about where he just threw it up for grabs and got lucky. Hopefully we can get some pressure on him...we will need much more pressure than we got on Vandy.

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Sounds like you hit upon the key to the Clemson game--pressure Willie and force some mistakes. Just as the offensive gameplan for Vandy (and Uconn as well) will be as vanilla as possible, I think that the defensive plan will be as well.

I only remember a couple of blitzes in the Vandy game. We would often fake a cornerback or linebacker on the rush and then drop into a zone. Since Vandy could not make us pay for this type of coverage, then why do anything else? Just as the offense did not need to do anything but off tackle and toss sweeps to gain rushing yardage, why use a blitz package if you don't need to?

On monday night, Tubberville commented at halftime of the USC/Auburn game that USC used some offensive formations that Auburn had not seen on tape which created confusion for their defense. I expect that we will be able to do something similar both offensively and defensively against Clemson to create an advantage for us.