2024 non-GT games thread

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,823
I am talking about gt or Stanford verses a mid level team Scuse who is coached by a guy who has never been a head coach.

Stanford had way better plan and execution with way lower recruiting and no portal.

Man, we are talking about trying to beat SCuse.

We need coaches that can do more with less as we head into the meat of our schedule.

I think our team saw what lowly Stanford did and will immediately adjust.
What metric are you using to conclude that Stanford's recruiting is way lower? 247 doesn't think so.

I agree Stanford had a better defensive plan and execution. Their offense did enough to win.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,823
I don't know if the pick six was a bad throw or the WR cut the wrong way. Clearly he (McCord) read the defense incorrectly. That was the turning point in the game. I thought Cuse was getting their rhythm on offense about that time. That killed it.
Announcers thought one INT was on the receiver, one on McCord. Pick six was huge and was a key difference in the game's outcome.

Amazing that pressure can make a great QB look pedestrian at times. Also, credit to Stanford's defense for totally shutting down Syracuse run game, making them one-dimensional. This complemented their pass rush, since Syracuse was forced to gain yardage through the air.
 

g0lftime

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,915
Announcers thought one INT was on the receiver, one on McCord. Pick six was huge and was a key difference in the game's outcome.

Amazing that pressure can make a great QB look pedestrian at times. Also, credit to Stanford's defense for totally shutting down Syracuse run game, making them one-dimensional. This complemented their pass rush, since Syracuse was forced to gain yardage through the air.
They completely shut down Syracuse run game and still got pressure on McCord. Good game plan and good execution.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,522
Stanford's Defense > GT Defense (at least vs Syracuse)

I'm not sure we should be that surprised. We have improved on defense from dreadful to merely poor (maybe even average) but we don't really have any great additions in terms of players, so....we kidded ourselves that scheme alone could improve us. It has, but there's a limit...

We lost to Syracuse because our offense was lousy for 3 quarters of the game. Not sure why, but Stanford ran better than we could against Syracuse, and we stubbornly tried to "impose our will" running the ball and by the time we switched gears, it was too late.

On the other hand, had we not missed a FG....<sigh>...or had Stanford missed one....2 games outcomes would have been reversed.
 

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,649
What metric are you using to conclude that Stanford's recruiting is way lower? 247 doesn't think so.

I agree Stanford had a better defensive plan and execution. Their offense did enough to win.


IF you have them what have they been ranked over last few years ?
I could be wrong. I was following them when they were doing very good - ae87(?) had a site showing where teams recruited players and Stanford was going to major cities and at that time they were pretty good. I was advocating we use our near zero money budget for recruiting to do the same (after atl/ga) but only hit houston dallas tampa where gt has big alumni groups and get them to help. After Stanford started being also ran, i just assumed it was recruiting falloff.
 

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,649
Stanford's Defense > GT Defense (at least vs Syracuse)

I'm not sure we should be that surprised. We have improved on defense from dreadful to merely poor (maybe even average) but we don't really have any great additions in terms of players, so....we kidded ourselves that scheme alone could improve us. It has, but there's a limit...

We lost to Syracuse because our offense was lousy for 3 quarters of the game. Not sure why, but Stanford ran better than we could against Syracuse, and we stubbornly tried to "impose our will" running the ball and by the time we switched gears, it was too late.

On the other hand, had we not missed a FG....<sigh>...or had Stanford missed one....2 games outcomes would have been reversed.
Good point
I noticed that on missed field goal 43yds that kicker got on field late in clock.

At the unc benz game in 22 our defense was wildly successful and the lubricanted students and fans left singing rambling Wreck. All was good.

About 5 games later we had the 100-0 REDout.
Don'tt you think we have defensive players at least as talented as stanford.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,823
IF you have them what have they been ranked over last few years ?
I could be wrong. I was following them when they were doing very good - ae87(?) had a site showing where teams recruited players and Stanford was going to major cities and at that time they were pretty good. I was advocating we use our near zero money budget for recruiting to do the same (after atl/ga) but only hit houston dallas tampa where gt has big alumni groups and get them to help. After Stanford started being also ran, i just assumed it was recruiting falloff.
Stanford football has been inconsistent over the last 20 years but has had more success than we have overall. They have been pretty bad in the last three years.

I don't follow recruiting closely, so I rely on other sites.
247 has our last 4 classes ranked (most recent first) 33, 60, 54, 47. Our Team Composite sits at 46. We do have more transfers than Stanford.
Stanford is listed at 31, 44, 19, 43. Team composite at 42.

I think we have a better QB, but Stanford clearly has some playmakers on defense.
 

BCJacket

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
754
My take on all this is just that by eliminating the Divisions. They've simply unleashed Coastal Chaos on the entire Conference. Every ACC team can beat any other ACC team on a given Saturday.

The ACCCG is probably going to be random unexpected 10-2 programs every year. UL last year wasn't expected to be good. FSU this year was 'supposed to' walk over the conference. Clemson looks beatable. Cal is 3-0.
 

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,649
Stanford football has been inconsistent over the last 20 years but has had more success than we have overall. They have been pretty bad in the last three years.

I don't follow recruiting closely, so I rely on other sites.
247 has our last 4 classes ranked (most recent first) 33, 60, 54, 47. Our Team Composite sits at 46. We do have more transfers than Stanford.
Stanford is listed at 31, 44, 19, 43. Team composite at 42.

I think we have a better QB, but Stanford clearly has some playmakers on defense.
I checked rivals and you are right on recruiting. They have " not bad" and occasionally good classes. From the guy that was wrong. I thought they may have fewer but higher rated recruits.

Maybe we are going to continue be a poor defense.

Guess we are back to cpj plan burn clock by run or short pass on offense and bend but dont break on defense.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,823
My take on all this is just that by eliminating the Divisions. They've simply unleashed Coastal Chaos on the entire Conference. Every ACC team can beat any other ACC team on a given Saturday.

The ACCCG is probably going to be random unexpected 10-2 programs every year. UL last year wasn't expected to be good. FSU this year was 'supposed to' walk over the conference. Clemson looks beatable. Cal is 3-0.
I had a similar thought watching Stanford-Syracuse last night. Then I had a crazy thought - what if Cal and Stanford met in the championship game? Improbable, but not impossible. It would be the most ACC-like thing to happen.
 

InsideLB

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,896
IMO the only phase that was consistently good vs Cuse was special teams.

The D was struggling and the O needed to answer, both to keep up on the scoreboard and to give the D some time/cool off Cuse's O. We had several 4 and outs.

I do credit Cuse with an innovative scheme to stop our running game. Once we started taking advantage of what they were offering in the 4th it was too late.

So I really see it as a complimentary loss.
 

GT_B

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
664
I have to say I really enjoyed watching Cuse go down last night after their coach and fans were after our game.

Their locked on podcast guy was really thumping the chest the last 2 weeks and then had a meltdown session after the game, was a treat to watch.

The negative of this…I feel even worse about our defense. Hopefully playing VMI and getting some confidence will help the Defense today, but the lack of pash rush and closing speed of our LBs has always been the issue.
 

apatriot1776

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
588
I only caught a couple highlights but I will say regarding McCord, a couple bad decisions out of 40 passes can turn a decent day into a real bad one. He had the 2 awful INTs, he also had 340 yds and 2 TDs.

Very possible he got overconfident after the GT performance and pulled the trigger on some balls he shouldn’t have thrown. Again transitive property doesn’t always apply. Today will be very telling about where our defense stands.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,831
I had a similar thought watching Stanford-Syracuse last night. Then I had a crazy thought - what if Cal and Stanford met in the championship game? Improbable, but not impossible. It would be the most ACC-like thing to happen.
That was Stanford’s first ACC game iirc, they were laser focused on winning that one. Great defensive game-plan against the 2nd coming of Dan Marino (McCord). They had the advantage of our game film to see what Cuse was all about.
 

AugustaSwarm

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
819
I only caught a couple highlights but I will say regarding McCord, a couple bad decisions out of 40 passes can turn a decent day into a real bad one. He had the 2 awful INTs, he also had 340 yds and 2 TDs.

Very possible he got overconfident after the GT performance and pulled the trigger on some balls he shouldn’t have thrown. Again transitive property doesn’t always apply. Today will be very telling about where our defense stands.
That's what I thought too - McCord is a good QB, but he thought he was superman last night. The lack of run game likely contributed...

I wanted Cuse to be good, but I don't think they're a very complete team. They have some good pieces, but they're not a great team. It reinforces the idea that we're not there yet, either.
 

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,649
IMO the only phase that was consistently good vs Cuse was special teams.

The D was struggling and the O needed to answer, both to keep up on the scoreboard and to give the D some time/cool off Cuse's O. We had several 4 and outs.

I do credit Cuse with an innovative scheme to stop our running game. Once we started taking advantage of what they were offering in the 4th it was too late.

So I really see it as a complimentary loss.

That's what I thought too - McCord is a good QB, but he thought he was superman last night. The lack of run game likely contributed...

I wanted Cuse to be good, but I don't think they're a very complete team. They have some good pieces, but they're not a great team. It reinforces the idea that we're not there yet, either.
From high altitude
After Gt, McCord a lock to day one NFL draft.

After Stanford, McCord has 2 int in scrub game so maybe low or no round nfl .


Eyeball test
The Ol can adjust reads thier reads and run ball. If they can they pass block without triple team at gcg , king will pass and run them to death.

We have formely injured players who are ready ( boyd, blackburn, maddox) to add to offense. Also Singletary is showing out.

Defense played agressive in vmi game = 5 first downs. We will do the same at ul but not as effective.
 

GT33

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,177
What metric are you using to conclude that Stanford's recruiting is way lower? 247 doesn't think so.

I agree Stanford had a better defensive plan and execution. Their offense did enough to win.
Furd does not hurt for recruits. They hide behind their wall, but the reality is degree paths there are developed by the student and approved by the individual schools. It’s not a complete blank check, but it’s not like they’re all splitting atoms or splicing genes after practice. They have standards, do a fantastic job of recruiting “smart and athletic”. They will never be lower than top half ACC talent level.
 
Top