Clemson Postgame Discussion

Discussion in 'Georgia Tech Football' started by CuseJacket, Oct 28, 2017.

  1. UgaBlows

    UgaBlows Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,528
    This, he was moving the ball in big chunks, no hesitation, no fear, and no dancing around. We could've been in this game if he had subbed in earlier in the game (and not gotten hurt). The B-back dive was working, the QB follow was working with MJ, the outside would have opened up after Clemson committed to stopping the middle.
     
  2. UgaBlows

    UgaBlows Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,528
    Yes i for one think that against certain defenses that MJ might be a better option. I am a huge TM fan, i love his game but last night was a bad matchup for him, hopefully he learned a lot, and learns from watching the game film.
     
  3. tech_wreck47

    tech_wreck47 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    5,155
    No way he had 25 yards, there were two guys right in front of him, maybe 5 yards away. But I do believe the fumble put us behind way to early.
     
  4. tech_wreck47

    tech_wreck47 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    5,155
    He had a couple first downs late in the game. That doesn't mean they wouldn't have adjusted and stopped what he was doing. Also TM scored on the very next series. The Clemson D was probably a little tired by the time MJ came in and TM scored.
     
  5. UgaBlows

    UgaBlows Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,528
    Furthermore i think we need to start using him on short and goal, TM struggles there
     
    DvilleJacket and GTech63 like this.
  6. g0lftime

    g0lftime Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    455
    What sort of nut case is the clemson defensive coordinor. His sideline antics are an embarressment to that staff.
     
    TechPreacher likes this.
  7. Milwaukee

    Milwaukee Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    1,761
    Venables is not embarrassing that staff imo.
     
    StingU2, kg01 and Ibeeballin like this.
  8. UgaBlows

    UgaBlows Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,528
    They never really stopped Benson, who knows though? All i'm saying is that against a defense like Clemson's where nothing works to the outside, you can't block for passing, and your QB is dancing around and losing yardage every play then it might be time to go straight at them. Our G-C-G combo was moving people, tighten the gaps and run your power QB and B-back in various ways behind Shamire and Braun. It worked vs. VT last year.
     
    COJacket and Techster like this.
  9. UgaBlows

    UgaBlows Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,528
    He irritates the crap out of me
     
    TechPreacher likes this.
  10. Techster

    Techster Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    7,525
    The direct plays were working. The dives with Kirvonte wasn't sexy, but they were effective. As was the midline/QB keepers from MJ. Problem was, I think Clemson got too far in front on the scoreboard and CPJ got a little antsy trying to play catch up. We weren't passing our way out of it last night. TM picked a bad night to look like a first year starter and our inability to extend blocks didn't help. On pass plays, our receivers would get jammed by their DBs, and our route progressions were F'd.

    The only bright spot last night was Harvin, Benson, and the little MJ got to play.
     
    UgaBlows likes this.
  11. Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau

    Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau Banned

    Messages:
    2,077
    Maybe make Wiffle Ball a major.
     
  12. jandrews

    jandrews Ramblin' Wreck

    Messages:
    158
    Agree with this. Being in the stands, the rain definitely didn’t help with some of our outside play calling which could of worked. I would have went with more body blows of b-back up the middle. The fumble and not punching it in for a touchdown after Benson’s long run were the game to me.
     
  13. Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau

    Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau Banned

    Messages:
    2,077
    We fumbled, Clemson scores a touchdown. Clemson fumbles, we get a 60 yard run to boot, and do not get a touchdown. Game, set, match.
     
  14. Jerry the Jacket

    Jerry the Jacket Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    903
    Well if you watched the game, it was pretty obvious that what we were trying to do on offense was not working for the most part against what they were doing on defense. Our defense played a little bit better against their offense but not good enough to win. Special teams was pretty much a wash. I just don't think this group of players (our team) has the skill/ability to beat their group of players without some fairly unpredictable series of turnovers or breaks in general. That is not a static situation. It does not mean it will always be that way. It gives us a good measuring stick to understand where we need to improve to compete more effectively with Clemson. We just have not been able to make those improvements or adjustments since 2014. It's not an impossible task, but we need to get to work and close the gap. I honestly thought we would compete much better than we did. I was wrong.

    Go Jackets!
     
  15. Boomergump

    Boomergump Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    3,126
    No single game is a predictor for the rest of the year. The tendency of posters to extrapolate wildly after individual games both amuses and disappoints me at the same time. Clemson is the better team, for sure. After seeing the game last night, it is pretty obvious. They would be an 80% chance to win every time they lined up against us. A lot of stuff would have to go right for us to win, which sometimes does in CFB.

    As far as how bad we looked, well, these are two observations of mine that offer an explanation for the nature of the loss. One of the two, I believe, would improve over time and give us a better chance to win in future games against them and the other probably not.

    1. The speed of the game was different. Clemson sped us up and forced decisions to be made quicker. We were not ready for it. You see it all the time in pretty much every sport when players move up a level. There is an adjustment time required for most athletes when dealing with faster players and smaller windows than they are used to. The better players adapt quicker. TM has a limited amount of experience running this offense. He has proven himself effective playing and reading at a certain pace. He really has not been forced to speed up his reads yet in his tenure, until last night. Clearly, he did not react well to the new speed and was unable to make adjustments on the fly. Last night's film has a chance to make a lasting difference with him, if he chooses to make the most of it. I give him a ton of credit for not making a bunch of turnovers trying to force the issue under that duress and wet field conditions last night. However, I criticize him for not making adjustments in his reads quicker and losing his poise and confidence under the fire. From the outside looking in, he seems like an amazing young man who will grow from this experience.

    2. Clemson was markedly better than us on both lines of scrimmage. We got beat with angles and speed. We got beat with level and force. It is pretty simple. Additionally, they are a faster team. If you look at the direction of travel of offensive players as players were going down, it says a lot. If you notice, there guys were always diving forward and falling forward as they were going down, adding 2 or 3 yards to every play. Our guys, not so much. That is an indication of relative strength, speed, agility, and technique.

    We have a chance to grow from this game and I believe our guys are predisposed to do just that. We are not a bunch of quitters like many who post on boards. We are better than we played, but we are not better than them. I still like this team and I would not be surprised in the least bit to see us beat VT and / or UGA. Both will be a challenge. That is what makes it fun.
     
    COJacket, Eastman, HelluvaPE and 8 others like this.
  16. ATL1

    ATL1 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    4,975
    I concur on everything except the short passing game. When I team is that aggressive, there has to be an quick effective way of neutralizing an aggressive defense. I hear you, but those plays are often neutralized with screens, slants, and dump offs to the flats have always been plays for that, and GT rarely does them.

    The passing game has been a consistent issue for this team since CPJ's arrival. It's to say that his O doesn't work, but against an athletic & disciplined defense we kinda know the outcome. That's getting old.
     
  17. JorgeJonas

    JorgeJonas Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    688
    Jordon played three plays. Can we not act like he has some kind of magic pixie dust?
     
  18. Animal02

    Animal02 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,343
    It comes from the same types that wanted Tevon benched in favor of Vad.
     
  19. kg01

    kg01 Helluva Engineer Featured Member

    Messages:
    6,569
    6-star post here folks.

    Too many-a yall are hovering around 1-star level
     
    Animal02 likes this.
  20. Animal02

    Animal02 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,343
    As always, you are a bit of sanity in a sea of Eeyores. This is the first game that Marshall faced a superior defense, and it showed. Almost no coaching can overcome that. Saw similar with all our previous QBs. End the end, for the most part, we end up with teams to be proud of.
     

Share This Page