Breakdown Of The Run Game In COFH

[yeti92]

What does that even mean? We scheduled a harder patsy? If UGA schedules BG they get a loss or they look weaker? That we scheduled BG as a tough opponent?

We scheduled BG to lose to us.

Perhaps I misunderstood, was the discussion not about whether uga or Tech had a tougher schedule?

The toughest teams on our schedule were Louisville, Ole Miss, and Clemson. They stomped Ole Miss.

And uga. uga is part of our schedule, I'm not sure why they keep being left off.

If I were to rank both schedules combined, from easiest to hardest opponents:

SC State
UT-Martin
Ball State
Vandy
UAB
Wake Forest
Virginia
Bowling Green
South Carolina - Syracuse
Florida - Boston College
Auburn
Miami - Georgia Tech
Kentucky - North Carolina
Tennessee - Clemson
Louisville
Ole Miss - Ole Miss
Missouri
uga

I matched up teams that I think are roughly equal from each side.

 

[slugboy]

Perhaps I misunderstood, was the discussion not about whether uga or Tech had a tougher schedule?


And uga. uga is part of our schedule, I'm not sure why they keep being left off.

If I were to rank both schedules combined, from easiest to hardest opponents:

SC State
UT-Martin
Ball State
Vandy
UAB
Wake Forest
Virginia
Bowling Green
South Carolina - Syracuse
Florida - Boston College
Auburn
Miami - Georgia Tech
Kentucky - North Carolina
Tennessee - Clemson
Louisville
Ole Miss - Ole Miss
Missouri
uga

I matched up teams that I think are roughly equal from each side.

You’re right—I was responding to a later idea that they’d have any difficulty with our schedule. The original post was about the idea we played an easier schedule (we didn’t). That was SEC homerism by the YouTube guys.

But swap our schedule for theirs, and you get about the same results

Original post below:

It's interesting that they said we played an easier schedule than them. They played:

UT Martin
Ball State
UAB
(and Vanderbilt)

That's a lot of fluff for a team supposedly contending for the natty.

For the film study: uGA had "clumps" of defenders who weren't able to get to the edge, and also weren't able to stop the QB keep up the middle. Basically they had defenders in no-man's land. They got out-schemed. It's a shame we lost this one.

/

 

[takethepoints]

Lots of what we do is RPO, so we need to keep lineman at the LOS in case the pass option comes available to the QB. I’m not remembering the exact play you reference, but there are several examples of what you’re saying. There was talk in another thread on H King fake reverse keeper also; he had an option to throw it so linemen didn’t get to the second level when it looked like they could’ve blocked a LB or S.

Hadn't thought of that, but the play involved was a called run (or looked like it, at least). It starts at 14:11. Again, if there had been someone on the safety I bet Dontae would have either scored or gone a good way on. But no. Btw, on the next play if King had gone toward the center of the field - where he had two blockers - he might have scored.

Also, the Ugag commentators are just covering up. Their DL got beat, pure and simple.

 

[stinger78]

Perhaps I misunderstood, was the discussion not about whether uga or Tech had a tougher schedule?


And uga. uga is part of our schedule, I'm not sure why they keep being left off.

If I were to rank both schedules combined, from easiest to hardest opponents:

SC State
UT-Martin
Ball State
Vandy
UAB
Wake Forest
Bowling Green
South Carolina - Syracuse
Florida - Boston College
Auburn - Georgia Tech
Miami
Kentucky - North Carolina
Tennessee - Clemson
Louisville
Ole Miss - Ole Miss
Missouri
uga

I matched up teams that I think are roughly equal from each side.

I would roughly agree, though I might flip BGSU and WFU. So, assigning a number for each place low to high:

UGAg - 2 + 3 + 5 + 7 + 10 + 11 +12 + 14 + 18 + 19 + 20 + 21 = 142
GA Te - 1 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 11 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 20 = 110

 

[yeti92]

I would roughly agree, though I might flip BGSU and WFU. So, assigning a number for each place low to high:

UGAg - 2 + 3 + 5 + 7 + 10 + 11 +12 + 14 + 18 + 19 + 20 + 21 = 142
GA Te - 1 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 11 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 20 = 110

I think I had them flipped originally, but multiple ranking systems have Bowling Green 15ish spots or more ahead of Wake Forest, sitting 70-85 vs Wake at ~95, and they did beat us where Wake lost to us.

 

[roadkill]

I think I had them flipped originally, but multiple ranking systems have Bowling Green 15ish spots or more ahead of Wake Forest, sitting 70-85 vs Wake at ~95, and they did beat us where Wake lost to us.

Yes. Objective resume-based ranking systems like Colley's have Bowling Green ahead of WF. We still shouldn't have lost to BG (a rent-a-win), but fans were comparing the loss to our losses to much lesser teams. BG is FBS and was no pushover this year. By the way, I didn't see Virginia on the list, and Colley's ranks them below Wake.

 

[stinger78]

Yes. Objective resume-based ranking systems like Colley's have Bowling Green ahead of WF. We still shouldn't have lost to BG (a rent-a-win), but fans were comparing the loss to our losses to much lesser teams. BG is FBS and was no pushover this year. By the way, I didn't see Virginia on the list, and Colley's ranks them below Wake.

BGSU is FCS, but they are D1, and UVA is right ahead of Wake.

 

[slugboy]

BGSU is FCS, but they are D1, and UVA is right ahead of Wake.

Bowling Green is FBS—they’re in the MAC. We’re FBS, in the ACC.

SCST was our one FCS game this season

 

[roadkill]

BGSU is FCS, but they are D1, and UVA is right ahead of Wake.

Nope. "The Bowling Green Falcons football program is the intercollegiate football team of Bowling Green State University. The team is a member of the NCAA, playing at the Division I Football Bowl Subdivision, formerly Division I-A, level; BGSU football competes within the Mid-American Conference in the East Division."

Some ranking services may have UVA above Wake; Colley's doesn't. For what it's worth, Colleys also has Vandy below just about every FBS team, including Ball St.

 

[stinger78]

You’re right. BGSU is G5 but they are FBS.

 

[roadkill]

A bit of a tangent here but we are used to assuming G5 teams to be auto-wins, however, even CPJ’s teams struggled and/or lost against them at times. The best G5 teams will usually be ranked by season’s end and are capable of beating all but the upper-tier (ranked) P5 teams now. They get 85 scholarships too, but they just don’t generally have the large fanbases and funding of the P5.

 

[stinger78]

A bit of a tangent here but we are used to assuming G5 teams to be auto-wins, however, even CPJ’s teams struggled and/or lost against them at times. The best G5 teams will usually be ranked by season’s end and are capable of beating all but the upper-tier (ranked) P5 teams now. They get 85 scholarships too, but they just don’t generally have the large fanbases and funding of the P5.

Yea, but this was not BGSU this season. That was a real bad loss for Tech.

 

[yeti92]

nm

 

[dmurdock]

Yea, but this was not BGSU this season. That was a real bad loss for Tech.

Now that the regular season is over, take a look at Bowling Green's season. They were 7-5 on the year but their 5 losses were to undefeated Michigan, undefeated Liberty, one loss Toledo (Mac West champion), two loss Miami-OH (MAC East champion) and 9-3 Ohio. They clearly were the 4th best team in the MAC, and we should be better than the 4th place team in any of the G5 conferences, but this was not a Citadel type loss. BG was 1-3 when we played them and they lost the week after us to drop to 2-4, so I think that is why most on this board think of them as a really bad team and thus a really bad loss, but I think they were a better (or at least more capable) team than most on this board are giving them credit for.

 

[stinger78]

Now that the regular season is over, take a look at Bowling Green's season. They were 7-5 on the year but their 5 losses were to undefeated Michigan, undefeated Liberty, one loss Toledo (Mac West champion), two loss Miami-OH (MAC East champion) and 9-3 Ohio. They clearly were the 4th best team in the MAC, and we should be better than the 4th place team in any of the G5 conferences, but this was not a Citadel type loss. BG was 1-3 when we played them and they lost the week after us to drop to 2-4, so I think that is why most on this board think of them as a really bad team and thus a really bad loss, but I think they were a better (or at least more capable) team than most on this board are giving them credit for.

It was a bad loss. The only real discussion is how bad a loss that it was.

 

[roadkill]

It was a bad loss. The only real discussion is how bad a loss that it was.

I think that's what we are doing here.

 

[stinger78]

I think that's what we are doing here.

Maybe so, but that's pretty useless... no one ever agrees to that level of specificity on a message board these days. Ha!

 

[roadkill]

Maybe so, but that's pretty useless... no one ever agrees to that level of specificity on a message board these days. Ha!

I think the issue isn't too specific - it's that some fans tend to put the BG loss in a tier of its own compared to our other losses, when in fact BG's season record indicates otherwise. It was indeed shocking at the time we played them.

To illustrate - to which team below is our worst loss based on various rankings and independent gauges of team strength?

	GT	Team A	Team B
Colley's ranking (resume-based)	58	65	75
Massey's ranking	60	99	80
FEI rank	52	78	84

The BC loss was bad, but it's not talked about in the same way as Bowling Green. BC is team B, BG is team A. I think they are both in the same tier of badness, with BC being slightly worse.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Really good break down on our offense versus the mutt’s D. It’s actually done by two mutt fans, believe it or not.

If you are a glutton for punishment, they have a breakdown of their O versus our D. I did not watch that one.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

It's interesting that they said we played an easier schedule than them. They played:

UT Martin
Ball State
UAB
(and Vanderbilt)

That's a lot of fluff for a team supposedly contending for the natty.

For the film study: uGA had "clumps" of defenders who weren't able to get to the edge, and also weren't able to stop the QB keep up the middle. Basically they had defenders in no-man's land. They got out-schemed. It's a shame we lost this one.

/

There are three phases to a football team. We have one good one.