We still can't block anyone!

[GT98]

JT was 8 of 15? Is that right?

Yes. He had an overthrow to an A back in the flat that would have been a big play.

How the hell he avoided the sack on the last drive was crazy. He was $$$ again with the game on the line. Bodes well for the rest of the season.

 

[gtfan088]

Yes. He had an overthrow to an A back in the flat that would have been a big play.

How the hell he avoided the sack on the last drive was crazy. He was $$$ again with the game on the line. Bodes well for the rest of the season.

Yes, it was very similar to his late game heroics against VT, GA Southern, and UGA in 2014.

 

[GT1992]

The fancy stats I cited, FEI and S&P, adjust to opponent quality. For a VERY rough apples-to-apples comparison, Clemson's yards per play against Alabama was 6.5 and against BC was 6.8.

The adjustment is at best an approximation. For example, when FSU is without Davin Cook, I would expect fewer yards per carry. When you play an opponent makes a big difference and I haven't seen anything that accounts for that or weather conditions or a multitude of other factors. How do you adjust for Maine or other non-BCS schools? They really played that weak of a schedule last year.

Do you really think that BC's defense was almost Alabama caliber?

 

[GT1992]

That's why FloridaJacket posted the FEI rankings, which take into account opponent strength, etc. BC's Front 7 really is that good. Their secondary isn't very good, which of course, the biggest plays on offense came against.

I do agree that the blocking has to get better. The pass blocking was much, much improved--no jailbreaks on JT and he had time to find receivers. I was disappointed at the perimeter blocking as we had one decent run to the outside all day.

Give GT BC's front 7 and we'd average 10 wins a year.

The TO is designed to put more hats in an area. It isn't happening because we dive at ankles. Their defense is quick, but not extremely powerful and we were getting blown up on the line and it wasn't physicality. Alabama would run right up the middle all day against them.

 

[floridajacket]

The adjustment is at best an approximation. For example, when FSU is without Davin Cook, I would expect fewer yards per carry. When you play an opponent makes a big difference and I haven't seen anything that accounts for that or weather conditions or a multitude of other factors. How do you adjust for Maine or other non-BCS schools? They really played that weak of a schedule last year.

Computer rankings and statistics either just ignore games against FCS teams or they rate FCS teams in the same pool as FBS teams. There's nothing that's innately impossible about ranking FBS and FCS teams in the same pool. Sagarin has FBS and FCS teams in the same pool, and some FCS teams like North Dakota State can be surprisingly high.

Every team has variability in who they play and whether some players get injured. Clemson and Alabama also had easy FCS and G5 games.

 

[GT1992]

Computer rankings and statistics either just ignore games against FCS teams or they rate FCS teams in the same pool as FBS teams. There's nothing that's innately impossible about ranking FBS and FCS teams in the same pool. Sagarin has FBS and FCS teams in the same pool, and some FCS teams like North Dakota State can be surprisingly high.

Every team has variability in who they play and whether some players get injured. Clemson and Alabama also had easy FCS and G5 games.

We will meet many more physical front sevens than BC. I simply don't believe that there is a statistical model that can account for all the variables and think they are more looking back rather than forward. BC played a very weak schedule and had only a few games to get up for. How is money ball working in Oakland now? We should have been able to run the dive for a yard or two, but couldn't. What was wrong with your statistical analysis? Could it be we weren't blocking well?

 

[floridajacket]

We will meet many more physical front sevens than BC. I simply don't believe that there is a statistical model that can account for all the variables and think they are more looking back rather than forward. BC played a very weak schedule and had only a few games to get up for. How is money ball working in Oakland now? We should have been able to run the dive for a yard or two, but couldn't. What was wrong with your statistical analysis? Could it be we weren't blocking well?

I didn't say we played perfect. A lot of those plays which didn't go anywhere were bad reads. Blocking can look much worse than it actually is because a play may have been designed to let a guy loose and the runner chooses wrong.

But the talent of the other defense has to be taken into account. You're basically starting from a non-falsifiable position. "Their name is Boston College and therefore there is no way they have a good defense." Not only do you have all the statistical evidence, CPJ said right after the game STTE of "their defense is as good or better than any team we've faced, including Clemson."

 

[GT1992]

I didn't say we played perfect. A lot of those plays which didn't go anywhere were bad reads. Blocking can look much worse than it actually is because a play may have been designed to let a guy loose and the runner chooses wrong.

But the talent of the other defense has to be taken into account. You're basically starting from a non-falsifiable position. "Their name is Boston College and therefore there is no way they have a good defense." Not only do you have all the statistical evidence, CPJ said right after the game STTE of "their defense is as good or better than any team we've faced, including Clemson."

So now you are blaming our three year starter who won the Orange Bowl? The dive was blown up all day. Of course CPJ said good things about their defense when his offense sucked most of the game. What else would he do, admit that Sewak sucks?

 

[ptcJacket]

We had nothing up the middle all day, and the perimeter blocking wasn't any better. I was at the game and just comparing our O line to theirs, I felt like the surge they had coming off the line was significantly better than ours. They were 2-3 yards downfield and we were getting stuffed. Now, maybe they are a defensive juggernaut, but I still find it disconcerting.

 

[ee8384]

The "blocking problem" has gone on ever since the Notre Dame game last year. It's time to consider that there is something about the offensive blocking scheme that has been figured out and defenses are exploiting it.

 

[samsgt02]

I bet you didn't watch that 2014 game between the defending national champions and #1 FSU and Boston College, did you? Their defenses are legit. You just can't accept that because you hate Paul Johnson.

 

[andrew]

I bet you didn't watch that 2014 game between the defending national champions and #1 FSU and Boston College, did you? Their defenses are legit. You just can't accept that because you hate Paul Johnson.

I think it's tough to accept that a team which went winless in the ACC and is not a traditional (or even recent) power will be the toughest defense we face all year when we have the likes of Clemson and Georgia on our schedule.

If may still be true, but having a hard time accepting it doesn't have anything to do with Paul Johnson.

 

[The Champ]

BC actually played us differently than most teams have, they weren't bltizing or jumping gap right at the snap nearly as much as teams like VT and Miami do against us -- that's part of the reason the pass pro appeared so much better.

They were really good on D though, LBs were able to read and react and esssentially had enough speed to shut down anything on the edge.

 

[wesleyd21]

They were really good on D though, LBs were able to read and react and esssentially had enough speed to shut down anything on the edge.

I think our offensive players are definitely faster than BC's defenders. The problem was the wet field negating our speed advantage. CPJ said we never had an A-back hit full speed once during the game because of the wet field.

Beating a much bigger team in the slop wouldn't have happened without JT5's heroics. It was definitely a "throwback game" we were fortunate enough to win.

 

[beej67]

It's possible that BC might have a good defense.

One thing I did notice.. ..our blockers didn't look stoned or confused about who to block. They were usually just getting beat physically.

Getting outplayed but finding a way to win is actually a good result for the team. Should motivate us more in practice.

 

[LegendaryGT]

It's possible that BC might have a good defense.

One thing I did notice.. ..our blockers didn't look stoned or confused about who to block. They were usually just getting beat physically.

Getting outplayed but finding a way to win is actually a good result for the team. Should motivate us more in practice.

According to the postgame by CPJ, they actually were incredibly confused about who to block. I think the turf was a major issue for both BC's defense and our offense, and it skewed a lot of the things we'd typically evaluate.

 

[Longestdays]

The new setup of a 3 3 1 defense cause some confusion.

I know if 2 specific miss reads in the first half (3TO and a midline).

GT scored more on BC per drive than any team they played last year except Clemson. Clemson just wore out BC defense.

The wet field neutralized our speed to the edge.

There is a lot to clean up, but it is never as bad as it seems.

This game was a repeat of the 2014 VT game and or the 2012 VT game (except we win this time over 2012).

 

[GT1992]

I bet you didn't watch that 2014 game between the defending national champions and #1 FSU and Boston College, did you? Their defenses are legit. You just can't accept that because you hate Paul Johnson.

I hate Mike Sewak. And last year, our defense only gave up 2 more points against FSU than BC did. We were solid, not great. I think we'll face higher quality defenses when we play Clemson, Georgia, VT, and possibly UNC. The blocking flat out sucks, it wasn't one defender tackling the ball carrier, it was two or three stuffing them. I don't know if it is missed assignments, poor technique, or schematic issues (i.e. too complicated or defenses have found a weakness). We almost lost this one and watching Devine leap at a defender as he is sacking JT indicates to me confusion. He was not physically beat and a guard should not have the assignment of taking the outside pass rusher.

 

[Killick]

We've got three possession receivers. Stewart and Searcy both looked much more physically developed than last year. Those two and Jeune caught the ball well on a wet field. That and the improvement in pass blocking are very encouraging. Searcy might have a big year. If you're the DB, he many be fixing to decleat you or run by you. By mid year, the passing game may be as good as it was two years ago. Third down conversion % should improve greatly from last year.

 

[ramblinwise1]

I think the OL did fine. Pass blocking was very good, and if JT had stayed in the pocket they gave him he would've been able to look for receivers or, as he did on maybe one occasion, run forward for a significant gain.

I don't know what his deal is with thinking he can run backwards and create a big play. This isn't Pee Wee football.

Agree. JT has to step up into the pocket and quit trying to run away from the rush to the outside.