2023 ACC News & Discussion

leatherneckjacket

leatherneckjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,155
Location
Atlanta, GA
GTJake said:
I'm not a stats guy, IMO they can be misleading at times. We have a new DC, most of the stats are from before the new hire. We played good defense against a strong Miami offense and got chewed up by a duel-threat QB, his sample size is too small yet to determine his defenses rankings. While there is no doubt we are weak against the run and need upgrades to our front 7, especially LB IMO, lets see how this plays out through the last 5 games before we determine just how bad we are .... if you get too hung up on statistics you can get blind-sided, just ask the Braves. :oops:
Click to expand...
I would modify your statement to say

If you get too hung up on the wrong statistics you can get blind-sided, just ask the Yankees.

Do not think the Braves are too focused on metrics like the Yankees are and they certainly are not the reason why they lost this postseason. Injuries to pitching and cold bats killed them.
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,902
I'm not sure I would take alot of good defense out of the Miami game.
We gave up a ton of yards, but not alot of points (which is good). That is due primarily to the TO's. (Which also allowed us to score most of the points we did).
But we only forced 3 punts on 12 possessions. Miami had 5 drives of 50 yds or more. Not a single 3 and out all game.
In terms of yards per carry it was our best performance against the run all year - that was the one thing I was really happy about (well other than getting a win we had no business getting).

BC was an awful game all around, especially on defense. Giving up over 550 yds and over 300 yds rushing is awful. Starting in the 2nd Quarter BC didn't have a drive of less than 30 yds the rest of the game and they had 5 drives of 60 yds or more and their last drive was 38 yds - but it ran out the last 5:42 of the clock and realistically they likely could have kept the ball as long as they wanted.
And this was in a game where they really did not have good field position. They only had 1 drive all game that started beyond their own 28 yard line (their next to last drive of the game coming off an INT). Their avg starting field position was their own 24.

FWIW, the most important factor for GT is TO margin, by a long shot.
GT is currently 6-8 against FBS opponents under Key.
In games where GT won the TO battle it is 5-2 (in 4 of those wins GT had at least a +3 TO margin in the game).
In games where the TO battle was even GT is 1-2
In games where GT has lost the TO battle it is 0-4
Overall GT is +14 in its 6 wins (19-5). It is -6 in its 8 losses (9-15).
The only game it has won where it didn't win the TO battle was UNC last year - both teams had 1 TO.
 
ThatGuy

ThatGuy

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,029
Location
Evergreen, CO
RamblinRed said:
I'm not sure I would take alot of good defense out of the Miami game.
We gave up a ton of yards, but not alot of points (which is good). That is due primarily to the TO's. (Which also allowed us to score most of the points we did).
But we only forced 3 punts on 12 possessions. Miami had 5 drives of 50 yds or more. Not a single 3 and out all game.
In terms of yards per carry it was our best performance against the run all year - that was the one thing I was really happy about (well other than getting a win we had no business getting).

BC was an awful game all around, especially on defense. Giving up over 550 yds and over 300 yds rushing is awful. Starting in the 2nd Quarter BC didn't have a drive of less than 30 yds the rest of the game and they had 5 drives of 60 yds or more and their last drive was 38 yds - but it ran out the last 5:42 of the clock and realistically they likely could have kept the ball as long as they wanted.
And this was in a game where they really did not have good field position. They only had 1 drive all game that started beyond their own 28 yard line (their next to last drive of the game coming off an INT). Their avg starting field position was their own 24.

FWIW, the most important factor for GT is TO margin, by a long shot.
GT is currently 6-8 against FBS opponents under Key.
In games where GT won the TO battle it is 5-2 (in 4 of those wins GT had at least a +3 TO margin in the game).
In games where the TO battle was even GT is 1-2
In games where GT has lost the TO battle it is 0-4
Overall GT is +14 in its 6 wins (19-5). It is -6 in its 8 losses (9-15).
The only game it has won where it didn't win the TO battle was UNC last year - both teams had 1 TO.
Click to expand...
This can't be overstated.

We're an average or below-average team, currently, hopefully on the upswing. But turnovers are making the difference.

(Not that that isn't often the case with teams of all skill levels - turnover margin is always important - but the numbers here are pretty striking.) Until our offense develops more consistency, our best chance for winning right now is an aggressive, ball-hawk defense that forces turnovers. Hopefully that's also something we're continuing to move towards.

I noticed in the Miami game a lot less visible "I'm trying to strip the bal from the defender every time I come into contact with him, and instead focusing on wrapping him up and taking him to the turf." And lo and behold, between that and good pressure on the QB, we forced a nice amount of turnovers. Hoping to see that trend continue.


Now back to the ACC news and discussion, we're now tied for 6th in the conference with BC. So that's something.
 
ibeattetris

ibeattetris

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,606
Root4GT said:
Our offense does have too many 3 or 4 play drives. We also have had several long scoring plays this year. The defense is really bad on all downs! Actually we really struggle to stop opponents running games which chews up time of possession.
Click to expand...
This is definitely an issue (especially in our losses). Looking at only non-garbage time drives this is our plays per drive:
UL: 5.4
MS: 8.5
WF: 4.8
BG: 4.8
UM: 4.4
BC: 5.2

In 2022 the average plays per drive across all NCAA was 5.5.

Our current "first down rate" (percentage of drives gaining 10 yards or scoring a touchdown) is 0.629 which is 95th in NCAA. Out touchdown rate is rank 51. We are very feast / famine.
 
ibeattetris

ibeattetris

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,606
RamblinRed said:
But we only forced 3 punts on 12 possessions
Click to expand...
This is the only thing I would push back on. It's a bit unfair to say we only forced a punt in 3 of 12 when 4 more of the drives had turnovers (one of which was in a drive with 0 yards). I think it is fair criticism to say we have given up too many yards (I have made similar claims in the stats thread), but I do think the defense deserves credit. Even removing the turnover drives completely, we held them to 2.85 Points Per Drive which would have been the lowest of the season for them.
 
ThatGuy

ThatGuy

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,029
Location
Evergreen, CO
ThatGuy said:
This can't be overstated.

We're an average or below-average team, currently, hopefully on the upswing. But turnovers are making the difference.

(Not that that isn't often the case with teams of all skill levels - turnover margin is always important - but the numbers here are pretty striking.) Until our offense develops more consistency, our best chance for winning right now is an aggressive, ball-hawk defense that forces turnovers. Hopefully that's also something we're continuing to move towards.

I noticed in the Miami game a lot less visible "I'm trying to strip the bal from the defender every time I come into contact with him, and instead focusing on wrapping him up and taking him to the turf." And lo and behold, between that and good pressure on the QB, we forced a nice amount of turnovers. Hoping to see that trend continue.


Now back to the ACC news and discussion, we're now tied for 6th in the conference with BC. So that's something.
Click to expand...
Actually, let me revisit that. I didn't give enough emphasis to a key point.

Per @slugboy 's post in 2 threads, Turnovers were gave us the Miami win and killed us vs. BC. (We did snag an interception against BC...which I had to look up, because I forgot about it amidst us throwing 3 interceptions.)

So I circle back to what we had been talking about before - the defense simply needs to continue to be ball-hawks, and continue to wrap up defenders. (And yes, contain run-happy QBs...god that was painful).

But IMO, as bad as the defense has looked some games, the main issue is the offense. We're either a really decent offense...or we turn it over 3+ times in a game. King appears to be reverting back to the hot-and-cold attributes that A&M fans know so well. If we can gain any semblance of consistency on offense, and not turn the ball over more than once a game there, I think we can take HUGE steps forward. But as we're seeing, that seems to be a big "if."
 
ThatGuy

ThatGuy

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,029
Location
Evergreen, CO
ibeattetris said:
This is the only thing I would push back on. It's a bit unfair to say we only forced a punt in 3 of 12 when 4 more of the drives had turnovers (one of which was in a drive with 0 yards). I think it is fair criticism to say we have given up too many yards (I have made similar claims in the stats thread), but I do think the defense deserves credit. Even removing the turnover drives completely, we held them to 2.85 Points Per Drive which would have been the lowest of the season for them.
Click to expand...
This. When I read that, I found myself thinking, "I'd actually rather have a forced turnover than a punt" on most drives.

Perhaps a better metric to evaluate our defense in its apparent bend-but-don't-break approach would be "stops with no points."
 
Northeast Stinger

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
11,184
RamblinRed said:
I'm not sure I would take alot of good defense out of the Miami game.
We gave up a ton of yards, but not alot of points (which is good). That is due primarily to the TO's. (Which also allowed us to score most of the points we did).
But we only forced 3 punts on 12 possessions. Miami had 5 drives of 50 yds or more. Not a single 3 and out all game.
In terms of yards per carry it was our best performance against the run all year - that was the one thing I was really happy about (well other than getting a win we had no business getting).

BC was an awful game all around, especially on defense. Giving up over 550 yds and over 300 yds rushing is awful. Starting in the 2nd Quarter BC didn't have a drive of less than 30 yds the rest of the game and they had 5 drives of 60 yds or more and their last drive was 38 yds - but it ran out the last 5:42 of the clock and realistically they likely could have kept the ball as long as they wanted.
And this was in a game where they really did not have good field position. They only had 1 drive all game that started beyond their own 28 yard line (their next to last drive of the game coming off an INT). Their avg starting field position was their own 24.

FWIW, the most important factor for GT is TO margin, by a long shot.
GT is currently 6-8 against FBS opponents under Key.
In games where GT won the TO battle it is 5-2 (in 4 of those wins GT had at least a +3 TO margin in the game).
In games where the TO battle was even GT is 1-2
In games where GT has lost the TO battle it is 0-4
Overall GT is +14 in its 6 wins (19-5). It is -6 in its 8 losses (9-15).
The only game it has won where it didn't win the TO battle was UNC last year - both teams had 1 TO.
Click to expand...
Hard to argue with those stats but, uh oh, here comes a slight twist.

Were the wins a function of turnovers or were turnovers a function of playing hard?

I know that may seem like stretching a point but I remember 2014 where Tech had a record number of turnovers and a huge turnover margin. But Tech also played hard on defense that year. Those were some of the hardest hits I had seen at Tech in a long time.

Point is, even though the 2014 team profited from a huge turnover rate, I think of that rate as a function of how Tech played rather than the wins being a function of how badly opposing teams handled the ball.

The eyeball test never proves anything but I felt good about the Miami game through the whole game because Tech was playing hard on every play and making things happen.

I will feel good about any game where Tech plays that hard. And the turnover ratio will probably take care of itself.
 
Techwood Relict

Techwood Relict

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,508
CuseJacket said:
Pitt WR responding to Pitt HC

Click to expand...


Happy That 70S Show GIF by Laff
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,397
yeti92 said:
Think any well connected donors decide they want him gone and start letting some skeletons out of the closet?
Click to expand...

Seems to be how it works these days with coaches who have HUGE contracts. Mel Tucker, Jim Harbaugh (rumor is a big donor that vehemently hates Harbaugh is the one that's leaking the spying info), and various other coaches in the past.

Dabo seems like a good guy though...even if he's hard headed. We'll see, but I think we're witnessing sun setting on the Dabo dynasty.
 
Top