A Thread to Rehash GT HC Comparisons

[ibeattetris]

Soooo.... did you not read any of my post? Because comments like these are exactly what I was trying to address. Did you completely ignore the fact that Tech had the ball for almost an entire quarter longer than Clemson did in 2018? Yet they still allowed 49 points, and lost by 4 touchdowns?

In 2018 Clemson scored 49 points in 11 drives for a PPD average of 4.45. In 2020 Clemson scored 73 points in 17 drives for a PPD average of 4.29. Clemson had ZERO scoring drives of less than 50 yards in 2018, they had 4 in 2020. They had 3 drives where they scored 17 points while gaining only 15 combined yards.

In 2018 Clemson scored 49 points with a TOP of 23:55. That’s about 2.05 points per minute they had the ball. In 2020 Clemson scored 73 points with a TOP of 35:53. That’s about 2.03 points per minute with the ball.

Like I said, the defense played just as well, probably better, against Clemson in 2020 as they did in 2018. To say that 49 in 2018 is the same as 73 is definitely not ludicrous, it’s actually accurate. In fact, it’s so accurate that statistically the games were basically the same defensively. Now, if you want to provide some data other than anecdotal anger to disprove that point, I’d be happy to learn. Otherwise, you’ll have to accept the fact that 2018’s performance under CPJ was just as bad, and really worse, as 2020’s performance under CGC.

You're on the right track. The 2018 Clemson game is a bit disingenuous though, as Clemson defense scored one of their touchdowns. The offense thus gave up 42 points in 11 drives for a still terrible 3.8 ppd. I agree with your thesis, but I think we should at least get the facts straight. I would also say the defense certainly played better in 2018, but it's really splitting hairs when it's that bad.

You are correct to downplay the the significance of the Clemson game, though. While truly a terrible experience, we have had four worse in recent memory (though we did win a couple of the ones that were worse due to the offense).

I posted more in a previous post:

Observation and Overreaction

Now Like many people I'm sure that we all felt hopeless after the clemson game some less than others, but the more I took to look at the season at a whole. We're 2-3 Right now with one loss that we expected (Not as Bad) the other against a quick fire offense and one that All be it questionable...

gtswarm.com

 

[Coloradojacket]

Trevor Lawrence didn’t start in 2018. He only threw 18 passes in 2018. He threw 32 passes in 2020. Trevor Lawrence was taken out of the game again in 2018 after Clemson scored to make the game 35-7 on their first drive of the 2nd half. Both Kelly Bryant and Chase Brice were playing in the 2nd half of the 2018 game. Lawrence threw 4 passes in the 2nd half of that game. He threw 5 passes in the 2nd half of the 2020 game. Plus, that 2018 game was Lawrence’s “break out” game. It was the first game he got significant playing time. In the 2020 game he was a national champion and a Heisman favorite.

So yes, you do actually need to say more. You literally haven’t provided any information that disproves the fact that Clemson’s 49 point performance is statically any different than their 73 point performance in 2020. Again, statistically, the 2020 defense performed better than the 2018 defense. The offense was worse, and the lack of ball control hurt the defense just as much as the poor defense itself. Once again, Georgia Tech had THIRTEEN more minutes of ball control than Clemson in 2018, and still allowed 49 points.

Ok...live in this fantasy that 73 point humiliation is ok. In my 51 years it is the worst defeat I have seen. Even to our 69-14 loss to ND in 1977. We have been smashed this year and our staff is to blame. Wins and losses are all that matters. In 2018 we won 7 and went to a bowl. We may win 3 this year and that is fact. To try to justify because our current coaches have decided to live in 3 and out world is silly.

 

[JacketOff]

You're on the right track. The 2018 Clemson game is a bit disingenuous though, as Clemson defense scored one of their touchdowns. The offense thus gave up 42 points in 11 drives for a still terrible 3.8 ppd. I agree with your thesis, but I think we should at least get the facts straight. I would also say the defense certainly played better in 2018, but it's really splitting hairs when it's that bad.

Disingenuous is a bit of a strong word, no? I mean, I get what you’re saying but to act like there’s a significant difference in the figures is a bit much. So the data wasn’t 100% accurate, but is there really that much of a difference between a defensive touchdown and touchdown drives of 5 and 7 yards respectively? Combined with a 3 yard drive that ended with a field goal? If you’re going to place the blame of the fumble returned for a touchdown on the offense you really need to do the same thing when a team can gain 15 yards and score 17 points. When you account for those “drives” I think it’s extremely fair to say that the 2020 defensive performance is at least on par with the 2018 version. I still think it was better considering the 2018 version only forced 9 third downs. If the 2020 defense could’ve gotten off the field even somewhat regularly the final score wouldn’t have been nearly as bad.

 

[JacketOff]

Ok...live in this fantasy that 73 point humiliation is ok. In my 51 years it is the worst defeat I have seen. Even to our 69-14 loss to ND in 1977. We have been smashed this year and our staff is to blame. Wins and losses are all that matters. In 2018 we won 7 and went to a bowl. We may win 3 this year and that is fact. To try to justify because our current coaches have decided to live in 3 and out world is silly.

Did I ever say a 73-7 point game was “ok”? No, I didn’t. You still haven’t gotten the point of my original post yet, which is that CPJ’s losses were just as embarrassing and totally inept as CGC’s have been on the field. The only differences are on the scoreboard, simply because CPJ held the ball longer so teams couldn’t score as much. The point is that CPJ’s teams had just as much of a chance to beat Clemson, Georgia, and Minnesota in 2018 as CGC’s did to beat Clemson, Georgia, and Virginia Tech: none. CPJ’s teams were just able to “hide” their incompetence behind an offensive scheme while CGC’s don’t have that luxury.

 

[Lee]

Did I ever say a 73-7 point game was “ok”? No, I didn’t. You still haven’t gotten the point of my original post yet, which is that CPJ’s losses were just as embarrassing and totally inept as CGC’s have been on the field. The only differences are on the scoreboard, simply because CPJ held the ball longer so teams couldn’t score as much. The point is that CPJ’s teams had just as much of a chance to beat Clemson, Georgia, and Minnesota in 2018 as CGC’s did to beat Clemson, Georgia, and Virginia Tech: none. CPJ’s teams were just able to “hide” their incompetence behind an offensive scheme while CGC’s don’t have that luxury.

Just ignore him. I’ve stopped trying wkth that one.

In a perfect world for him we would rack up some gaudy rushing yard totals against the Elon’s of the world running the TO, keep competing with the Woffords of the world for recruits, look like a HS team compared to the Clemson’s and Dwags of the league, and continue to be a joke in the college football world. But hey at least we would control the TOP and be in the top 10 in rushing yards every year right next to Army and Navy!

What people like him can’t understand is that we were sprinting in the opposite direction of Clemson and Ugag, jogging that way with dah U and Pitt, and walking that way with Duke and UNC (before the coaching change). Paul saw the writing on the wall and dipped. His small but vocal legion of followers couldn’t and won’t see it.

 

[CuseJacket]

I think this is a great hypothetical, but in terms of CPJ vs. CGC I think defense is the critical point, especially with CGC being touted as a defensive minded coach. As others have pointed out, the 3O limited opponent’s possessions, therefore giving them fewer opportunities to score points. The new offense doesn’t do that, so teams are routinely putting up more points than they did against CPJ led teams, making defensive performances look much worse, even if the points per drive outputs were the same. The 45 points Georgia scored, the 49 Clemson scored, and the 34 Minnesota scored in 2018 really aren’t all that different materially than the 73 Clemson scored this year. It all boils down to number of possessions and time of possession.

The 2018 Clemson game is the greatest example. Tech held the ball for 13 minutes(!!) longer than Clemson. But still allowed 49 points and got beat by 4 touchdowns. Clemson only had 9 3rd downs the entire game. In 2020, Clemson had the ball almost 12 minutes longer than Tech, and had 17 3rd downs. So really, the defense played just as good, if not better, against Clemson in 2020 than they did in 2018.

A lot of the blowout losses that Tech has suffered since CGC took over are just the materialization of transitioning the offense from a “death march” mentality into a modern up-tempo one. The offensive production has went down, and defensive performance has stayed relatively the same, but because of the increase in opponents’ possessions the defensive performance looks much worse compared to the CPJ era. If the defensive team that played against Clemson in 2018 would’ve played them in 2020, Clemson might’ve actually put up 100.

Oops, I meant CPJ vs CCG. I even proofread the acronym and still screwed it up. Johnson and Gailey. One was good at the offense, the other good at defense. Same record.

 

[TheJuiceIsLoose]

Ok...live in this fantasy that 73 point humiliation is ok. In my 51 years it is the worst defeat I have seen. Even to our 69-14 loss to ND in 1977. We have been smashed this year and our staff is to blame. Wins and losses are all that matters. In 2018 we won 7 and went to a bowl. We may win 3 this year and that is fact. To try to justify because our current coaches have decided to live in 3 and out world is silly.

If you paid attention to the way losses unfolded under the previous HC, you would know that 38-7 losses and 42 -17 losses had the same feel as the 73- 7 because we had ZERO CHANCE to come back & win, the game just had fewer possessions, and the previous HC milked clock to pull a "slight of hand scam" on Fans like you

Under the Previous HC, a 24-3 Gm in the 1st half felt like 56-3 because of our play calling, no hurry-up Off, no serious passing Gm other than low percentage "jump ball passes"

The clock stops on incomplete passes, combine that with "Tempo Offenses" in 2020 and scores can get sideways when the Lines of Scrimmage have such a huge disparity in Talent

Go and re-watch the Clemson vs ND Gm, notice the size-speed ratio of the players, the overall Athleticism, then notice how many of those guys in the 2 deep played their HS FB in GA that we NEVER had a chance to sign based on 1 reason, our previous HC

Our previous HC was like an outdated Chemical Plant that get razed, before you can Redevelop that Land , you have to make all sorts of arrangements to clean up the leftover toxins in the environment

The previous HC left a toxic environment Talent-Wise and a toxic environment with the local HS FB Coaches

The Job that CGC has is much more extensive than a 2-3 yr "cleanup", that's why he was given a 7 yr deal, and that is also why I HAVE CGC's BACK FOR THE FULL 7 YEARS

I understand how extensive the Toxic Cleanup is, unlike many other GT Fans

 

[ibeattetris]

Disingenuous is a bit of a strong word, no? I mean, I get what you’re saying but to act like there’s a significant difference in the figures is a bit much. So the data wasn’t 100% accurate, but is there really that much of a difference between a defensive touchdown and touchdown drives of 5 and 7 yards respectively? Combined with a 3 yard drive that ended with a field goal? If you’re going to place the blame of the fumble returned for a touchdown on the offense you really need to do the same thing when a team can gain 15 yards and score 17 points. When you account for those “drives” I think it’s extremely fair to say that the 2020 defensive performance is at least on par with the 2018 version. I still think it was better considering the 2018 version only forced 9 third downs. If the 2020 defense could’ve gotten off the field even somewhat regularly the final score wouldn’t have been nearly as bad.

I think disingenuous is fine. If you take offense to the word, then I am sorry.
I would say the difference between 0.6 ppd is very significant. If you take the 50th best offense ppd from last year and added 0.6 to it, that would put them in the top 20. If you don’t think that is significant, then I’m not sure what else to say. While you might not have done it on purpose, it did drastically affect the point you were making. I argued that the loss to Clemson wasn’t as bad as people were making it out to be, but arguing that the loss in 2018 was just as bad or worse defensively just doesn’t add up.

For the rest of your post, if you are going to just begin removing drives or changing things based on how you feel, then have it. PPD is not meant to take into account things like field position or turnovers and is why advanced stats like FEI (which do take these into account) end up being even better. For what it’s worth, we also gave up more points per play and gave up more of the available yards in 2020 as opposed to 2018. Both games were atrocious, but I am not seeing a scenario where the 2018 game was worst than 2020.

 

[jacket_fan]

Just ignore him. I’ve stopped trying wkth that one.

In a perfect world for him we would rack up some gaudy rushing yard totals against the Elon’s of the world running the TO, keep competing with the Woffords of the world for recruits, look like a HS team compared to the Clemson’s and Dwags of the league, and continue to be a joke in the college football world. But hey at least we would control the TOP and be in the top 10 in rushing yards every year right next to Army and Navy!

What people like him can’t understand is that we were sprinting in the opposite direction of Clemson and Ugag, jogging that way with dah U and Pitt, and walking that way with Duke and UNC (before the coaching change). Paul saw the writing on the wall and dipped. His small but vocal legion of followers couldn’t and won’t see it.

I appreciate the point you made. Both were miserable defensive efforts.

The season is not over, but in the ACC the 2018 defense finished 9th, the 2020 defense is last in total defense. Hopefully, the defensive stats will improve by the end of the year. The stat of points per possession is a great way to compare. But total defense to me is a better barometer. Although, I understand you were making the point of the specific Clemson games.

Perhaps because it is more recent or that I was at the game, but the Clemson game this year is the worst whipping I have experienced as a fan.

 

[gt02]

You literally haven’t provided any information that disproves the fact that Clemson’s 49 point performance is statically any different than their 73 point performance in 2020.

How about starting with the fact that 49 is, literally, different than 73?

In any event, I understand the point you are making, but I think what you miss is that limiting the other team's offensive possessions was by design. Both by our offensive game plan, and by the bend/don't break defense. And it was effective in keeping us in games that we may not otherwise have been. Of course, the Clemson game is probably not a good example, because we were not in it. But you could find games where the only reason we kept it close was because we limited possessions, and it was close enough to make a run at the end.

 

[takethepoints]

Just ignore him. I’ve stopped trying wkth that one.

In a perfect world for him we would rack up some gaudy rushing yard totals against the Elon’s of the world running the TO, keep competing with the Woffords of the world for recruits, look like a HS team compared to the Clemson’s and Dwags of the league, and continue to be a joke in the college football world. But hey at least we would control the TOP and be in the top 10 in rushing yards every year right next to Army and Navy!

What people like him can’t understand is that we were sprinting in the opposite direction of Clemson and Ugag, jogging that way with dah U and Pitt, and walking that way with Duke and UNC (before the coaching change). Paul saw the writing on the wall and dipped. His small but vocal legion of followers couldn’t and won’t see it.

2018 results:

Georgia Tech 49 Virginia Tech 28

Georgia Tech 38 UNC 28

Georgia Tech 27 Miami 21

Georgia Tech 30 UVA 27

Somehow, I fail to see a lack of progress here, despite bad losses to Clemson and Ugag. And all this was after losing our starting BB for the season for the second straight year.

But, hey, we were beat by Clemson by 28 points and Ugag by 24! Obviously we are doing better now after getting beat by Clemson this year by - wait a minute while I check the math - a mere 66 points. Obviously the millennia has arrived.

I expect to watch you commit sepuku on Youtube if Duke beats us again.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

Folks, there will be no "extensive" clean up, unless you believe us lucking into 7-8 wins one season in the future an "extensive clean up". That is the current HC's potential from what I have seen. I don't think he has the type of discipline or ingenuity to do better. I'm saying it now - no ACC championships and no wins against UGAG under this HC. That is my strong belief.

Again, I really do want to be wrong, and I want to be able to say out loud, many of you were right, and I was wrong. I have only seen things this year to further my strong opinion about our marketeer.

NOTE: Like many others have stated, if he could hire genius top notch coordinators, this opinion might change, but that ain't happening.

 

[WreckinGT]

Did I ever say a 73-7 point game was “ok”? No, I didn’t. You still haven’t gotten the point of my original post yet, which is that CPJ’s losses were just as embarrassing and totally inept as CGC’s have been on the field. The only differences are on the scoreboard, simply because CPJ held the ball longer so teams couldn’t score as much. The point is that CPJ’s teams had just as much of a chance to beat Clemson, Georgia, and Minnesota in 2018 as CGC’s did to beat Clemson, Georgia, and Virginia Tech: none. CPJ’s teams were just able to “hide” their incompetence behind an offensive scheme while CGC’s don’t have that luxury.

Yeah, I don't know. To me, being down by 21 with 6 minutes left in 2018 and seeing Clemson trot Lawrence, Etienne, and Higgins out there to finish us off is very different than hoping the Clemson punter doesn't lead the 5th stringers down the field to cross the 80 point threshold.

 

[JacketOff]

I think disingenuous is fine. If you take offense to the word, then I am sorry.
I would say the difference between 0.6 ppd is very significant. If you take the 50th best offense ppd from last year and added 0.6 to it, that would put them in the top 20. If you don’t think that is significant, then I’m not sure what else to say. While you might not have done it on purpose, it did drastically affect the point you were making. I argued that the loss to Clemson wasn’t as bad as people were making it out to be, but arguing that the loss in 2018 was just as bad or worse defensively just doesn’t add up.

For the rest of your post, if you are going to just begin removing drives or changing things based on how you feel, then have it. PPD is not meant to take into account things like field position or turnovers and is why advanced stats like FEI (which do take these into account) end up being even better. For what it’s worth, we also gave up more points per play and gave up more of the available yards in 2020 as opposed to 2018. Both games were atrocious, but I am not seeing a scenario where the 2018 game was worst than 2020.

Disingenuous didn’t offend me, I just don’t believe it’s accurate. 0.6 PPD is significant when applied over an entire season. But we’re talking about a single game, which makes it virtually irrelevant. If you applied that 0.6 PPD difference over the additional 6 drives that Clemson had in 2020 than 2018 its a difference of less than 6 points compared to the 2020 game. Is giving up 68 points drastically different than giving up 73 points? No it’s not. Besides, PPD wasn’t the only factor in my observation. Time of possession and 3rd downs forced are relevant. Clemson had the ball for 12 minutes longer in 2020 than they did in 2018. They also faced 17 third downs in 2020 compared to only 9 in 2018. That means they had fewer third downs than total drives in 2018. The 2020 defense forced 17 third downs in 17 drives, and 2 of those drives started in a goal to go situation. Which means that the 2020 defense forced more third downs when Clemson started their drives outside of goal to go than the 2018 defense did.

Lest not we forget the 2020 Clemson offense is a completely different animal than the 2018 Clemson offense. In 2020 Trevor Lawrence was a junior and a Heisman favorite. Etienne is now the all time leader in ACC rushing. In 2018 Lawrence didn’t even start the game, and Etienne was only a sophomore. Plus, it’s been established that Clemson deliberately ran up the score in 2020, which they didn’t do in 2018. In 2018 they only attempted 11 second half passes. In 2020 they doubled that number and threw 22 passes.

The 2018 defensive performance was in no way drastically better than 2020’s. I still stand by my original statement that the 2020 team probably played better given the circumstances they were under. Sure, 2018 allowed a lower PPD figure, but they were also on the field for almost a full quarter’s worth of time less than in 2020. If 2018’s defense played in 2020 the result is almost assuredly worse.

 

[JacketOff]

2018 results:

Georgia Tech 49 Virginia Tech 28

Georgia Tech 38 UNC 28

Georgia Tech 27 Miami 21

Georgia Tech 30 UVA 27

Somehow, I fail to see a lack of progress here, despite bad losses to Clemson and Ugag. And all this was after losing our starting BB for the season for the second straight year.

But, hey, we were beat by Clemson by 28 points and Ugag by 24! Obviously we are doing better now after getting beat by Clemson this year by - wait a minute while I check the math - a mere 66 points. Obviously the millennia has arrived.

I expect to watch you commit sepuku on Youtube if Duke beats us again.

From my post earlier in this thread:
In CPJs last 5 years he was:

• 1-4 vs. Duke
• 2-3 vs. Miami
• 2-3 vs. North Carolina
• 2-3 vs. Pitt
• 3-2 vs. Virginia
• 4-1 vs. Virginia Tech

That’s 14-16 against the Coastal over the last 5 years of his tenure. Add in Georgia and Clemson

• 0-5 vs. Clemson
• 2-3 vs. Georgia

That’s 16-24 against his annual opponents over his last 5 years.

Where is the progress here? 2 winning records over 5 years against 8 annual opponents? Is that progress?

In PJ’s first 5 years he was:

• 5-0 vs. Duke
• 1-4 vs. Miami
• 4-1 vs. North Carolina
• 0-0 vs. Pitt (No games in 1st 5 years, but won the lone game before 2014
• 3-2 vs. Virginia
• 1-4 vs. Virginia Tech
  
  
• 3-2 vs. Clemson (4-2 incl. ‘09 ACCCG
• 1-4 vs. Georgia

That’s 17-17 against annual opponents (regular season) and 14-11 against the current Coastal in his first 5 years. He only improved his record against 2 Coastal opponents, while his record regressed against 3. He beat Georgia one more time in his last 5, but was winless against Clemson. Everything @Lee said in his comment about other teams moving away from Tech is true. Tech was not getting better relative to other teams, and was in fact getting worse for the last 5 years of PJ’s career. That’s indisputable.

 

[Pointer]

I think this is a great hypothetical, but in terms of CPJ vs. CGC I think defense is the critical point, especially with CGC being touted as a defensive minded coach. ....

I think what is ironic and funny in a sad way is that just when college football moves to offense wins games, we go out and get a defensive minded coach lol. Will we ever get things right here??

 

[Jacket4Life9]

I keep seeing 73-7 references. I was at GT-UGA 2018. Had Kirby wanted to, as Dabo did this year, he could’ve put up 70-80 points. UGA scored without resistance on all first half possessions. Pulled starters early.

UGA ‘18 was “it” for me. I’ve never seen a GT team so PHYSICALLY DOMINATED to that extent. I’ll admit, CPJ was a far better football coach than CGC has shown thus far. That said, coaching issues can be fixed. We have to learn how to get more talent to the flats, and CGC is a step in the right direction on that front.

 

[ibeattetris]

Is giving up 68 points drastically different than giving up 73 points?

What are you even talking about anymore?

I've said a million times that CPJ's defenses were unforgivable. I'm not going to make up numbers to prove a point though.

 

[JacketOff]

What are you even talking about anymore?

I've said a million times that CPJ's defenses were unforgivable. I'm not going to make up numbers to prove a point though.

So you can take one sentence of my comment completely out of context and then claim I’m “making up numbers”? Interesting strategy. Whatever makes you feel better dude.

 

[g0lftime]

I agree that Kirby could have run up the score in that game. He put Eason in at QB and ran straight handoffs in the 4th quarter and we couldn't stop them. The look on PJ's face toward the end of the game told me he was done and realization he couldn't compete anymore with the top teams. I think he knew it was time to go. He could have forced a contract buyout but didn't. I have a lot of respect for him and that offense was a thing of beauty when it worked but the game changed over time and he didn't seem to adapt to it. We did have some great wins with him as well as some humbling losses.