Cuse Postgame

[stinger78]

Weirdly, the entrenchment on this issue obscures an obvious fact. The opposing team may be better than you but that doesn’t mean they automatically should come back from a fourth quarter deficit and beat you. Most teams with fourth quarter leads, no matter what the pregame odds were, usually win.

I haven't seen the numbers on that, but intuitively I think that is the case.

 

[Randy Carson]

I guess it would be mystifying to other posters to say instead that my favorite music is beach music by the Tams, the Coasters, the Drifters etc.

Chairmen of the Board, The Embers, Fantastic Shakers, Archie Bell and the Drells...

 

[TampaBuzz]

I guess it would be mystifying to other posters to say instead that my favorite music is beach music by the Tams, the Coasters, the Drifters etc.

Me too....

 

[tmhunter52]

If we have already mailed it in against 4 teams we play regularly then maybe I will pick another team. Im not saying we should beat all of those teams all of the time but getting wins against them every once in a while shouldn't be impossible. Clemson lost to Duke, Miami, and NC St. FSU was taken to the wire by Miami and BC. Are those teams way better than us? No. We should be able to get our shots in against those guys as well. UGA is the only team on our schedule that we need to come back down to earth a little. 7-5 wouldnt be a disaster but it would be pretty mediocre. If we have great talent and a great coaching staff like many proclaim then its time to start seeing results.

I never will understand why our fans want to denigrate Tech so often. We led that game in the 4th. If your ahead in the 4th you should win the game, IMPO.

As Tech football fans, we have grown to accept the adage that what can go wrong, will go wrong…

 

[stinger78]

As Tech football fans, we have grown to accept the adage that what can go wrong, will go wrong…

I guess so.

 

[Root4GT]

Sure. I’m one of the main ones who say it’s OK to disagree. I don’t think that’s the issue. What I refer to specifically in this case is that for some reason, when Tech leads in the 4th quarter, our (good) fans cannot allow that our team “should” win that game. I’ll guarantee you that both Miami and UNC feel like they should have won their games with us. I’ll guarantee you that Smart’s team feels like they should win any game they lead in the 4th. In fact, I’ll guarantee you, were you to ask them, that Brent Key and his staff feel like they should win any game in which they have a 4th quarter lead. At that point you’ve won 3/4 of the game and only have to win the final 1/4. Why is it that Tech cannot do adopt that position as well? This I don’t understand and I feel like it reflects a lower opinion of our program.

Sorry, that’s my opinion and you all are free to disagree. I still consider such a person, in this case Root, a great fan. But I have to ask why GA Tech cannot believe they “should” win a game that they’ve already won 3/4 of.

We have lost 2 games with a lead going into the 4th quarter this year - Louisville and BC. We won one game trailing going into the 4th quarter - UNC. Bottom line is we are an average P5 team with a bad defense and a good but inconsistent offense so there is no guarantee we will win or lose based on the score at the end of the 3rd quarter.

 

[stinger78]

We have lost 2 games with a lead going into the 4th quarter this year - Louisville and BC. We won one game trailing going into the 4th quarter - UNC. Bottom line is we are an average P5 team with a bad defense and a good but inconsistent offense so there is no guarantee we will win or lose based on the score at the end of the 3rd quarter.

You keep sidestepping my point, Root, and this is my last post on the matter. Here it is:

I'm not saying a 4th quarter lead means that you "will" win, I'm saying it means that you "should" win, and that if you don't then you've lost a game that you should have won. It's really a very simple statement.

You certainly don't have to agree, that's perfectly fine, but at least understand and articulate my point after all this back and forth.

 

[57jacket]

You keep sidestepping my point, Root, and this is my last post on the matter. Here it is:

I'm not saying a 4th quarter lead means that you "will" win, I'm saying it means that you "should" win, and that if you don't then you've lost a game that you should have won. It's really a very simple statement.

You certainly don't have to agree, that's perfectly fine, but at least understand and articulate my point after all this back and forth.

You expect root to admit he was wrong about something? LOL. Never happen. He's ALWAYS right. LOL

 

[slugboy]

We have lost 2 games with a lead going into the 4th quarter this year - Louisville and BC. We won one game trailing going into the 4th quarter - UNC. Bottom line is we are an average P5 team with a bad defense and a good but inconsistent offense so there is no guarantee we will win or lose based on the score at the end of the 3rd quarter.

The fourth quarter is one of those places that the “talent composite index” would tell you something if it was predictive.
Clemson is #5 at 918, Miami is #12 at 860, UGA is #2 at 978, UNC is #17 at 806, FSU is #20 at 766, Louisville is #28 at 744, and we’re #35 at 711. We’re #6 in the ACC and ahead of most of the teams we play.

UGA will just grind on teams, and in the second half the seams will burst and they run amok on offense and defense. Teams with a deeper bench can wear you out, and a third quarter lead can vanish really quickly. That’s part of the explanation—especially with our defense. Like a boxer, our defense was good in the first three rounds against a lot of opponents, but the body blows racked up, and we gave up a lot of points (actually, the third seems to be a bad quarter for us).

Clemson ground us down. Louisville ground our defense down, and our offense stalled at the same time. Miami was grinding us down, but Cristobal is a bad gameday coach. BC and BG are, according to that Talent Composite, not in our league, but they ground us down. So did UNI a couple of years back.

It’s a question of consistent and deep performance of our front 6 in defense plus our offensive blocking (OL, TE, WR). That’s a combination of want to and of be able to. This is something bowl practice should help with.

The other factor is consistency and efficiency. Sorry to bring up Johnson’s Flexbone offense, but it was consistent and efficient. It was reliable. If he had a lead in the third, he wasn’t guaranteed a win, but it felt as inevitable as the Eagles going for it on 4th and 1. We don’t have that reliability on offense. Hopefully that’s something we build up this offseason with extra practices.

Against Syracuse, our success rate was 47%. Syracuse’s was 49%. Overall, for the season, our success rate (how well we stay ahead of the sticks) is just 42.6%—good enough for #53 in the country. We’re about #100 in success rate on defense. We’re feast or famine on offense, and we lean towards famine on defense—with the occasional feast of a turnover or punt. Syracuse was what the doctor ordered for us, though.

If I understand our offense, our TEs are supposed to be H Backs too—tight ends in the passing game and tall fullbacks in the running game. They’re an extra pulling guard, and a potential bruiser RB. That hasn’t really clicked yet, but you can see where they’re blocking. Finding a consistent 3.5 yards per play is a big deal for us, and that’s one of the areas we need it.

On defense, there’s the occasional 3rd and 8 conversions, but we’re just on the field too long. That’s a partial explanation of how Duke beat Clemson but Clemson pushed us around.

 

[awbuzz]

Listen, ill leave after this. Mods can delete my account if they want, I don't really care. But you guys need to learn how to handle opinions that may differ from yours. We all have different opinions on the state of the program. You guys blew up this thread with nonsense because you couldn't handle one fairly minor comment. Best holiday wishes to you all and Go Jackets!

JMO, no need to have account deleted, nor for you to leave GTSWARM.
I understand your initial thoughts and we you voiced them. Hindsight is that maybe a separate thread to voice a tempered opinion would have been better, but such is life.
100% agree that too much of this thread went down that rabbit hole.

GO JACKETS!!

 

[Root4GT]

You keep sidestepping my point, Root, and this is my last post on the matter. Here it is:

I'm not saying a 4th quarter lead means that you "will" win, I'm saying it means that you "should" win, and that if you don't then you've lost a game that you should have won. It's really a very simple statement.

You certainly don't have to agree, that's perfectly fine, but at least understand and articulate my point after all this back and forth.

I get your point, it is reasonable. Also in my opinion, the better team will usually win when the score is close at the start of the 4th quarter and they are down one score. That happens more than not because the better team has more playmakers who generally are better at coming thru a crunch time.

In the GT vs Louisville game GT has a terrible defense and Louisville has a good offense which favors them.

“Should” takes all credit away from the team that came back for the win. I give GT lots of credit for the comeback win against UNC. I give Louisville lots of credit for the comeback win against GT. Louisville also came back to win games when down starting the 4th qtr against Miami and UVA.

I think we get each other’s points but simply disagree.

 

[Root4GT]

The fourth quarter is one of those places that the “talent composite index” would tell you something if it was predictive.
Clemson is #5 at 918, Miami is #12 at 860, UGA is #2 at 978, UNC is #17 at 806, FSU is #20 at 766, Louisville is #28 at 744, and we’re #35 at 711. We’re #6 in the ACC and ahead of most of the teams we play.

UGA will just grind on teams, and in the second half the seams will burst and they run amok on offense and defense. Teams with a deeper bench can wear you out, and a third quarter lead can vanish really quickly. That’s part of the explanation—especially with our defense. Like a boxer, our defense was good in the first three rounds against a lot of opponents, but the body blows racked up, and we gave up a lot of points (actually, the third seems to be a bad quarter for us).

Clemson ground us down. Louisville ground our defense down, and our offense stalled at the same time. Miami was grinding us down, but Cristobal is a bad gameday coach. BC and BG are, according to that Talent Composite, not in our league, but they ground us down. So did UNI a couple of years back.

It’s a question of consistent and deep performance of our front 6 in defense plus our offensive blocking (OL, TE, WR). That’s a combination of want to and of be able to. This is something bowl practice should help with.

The other factor is consistency and efficiency. Sorry to bring up Johnson’s Flexbone offense, but it was consistent and efficient. It was reliable. If he had a lead in the third, he wasn’t guaranteed a win, but it felt as inevitable as the Eagles going for it on 4th and 1. We don’t have that reliability on offense. Hopefully that’s something we build up this offseason with extra practices.

Against Syracuse, our success rate was 47%. Syracuse’s was 49%. Overall, for the season, our success rate (how well we stay ahead of the sticks) is just 42.6%—good enough for #53 in the country. We’re about #100 in success rate on defense. We’re feast or famine on offense, and we lean towards famine on defense—with the occasional feast of a turnover or punt. Syracuse was what the doctor ordered for us, though.

If I understand our offense, our TEs are supposed to be H Backs too—tight ends in the passing game and tall fullbacks in the running game. They’re an extra pulling guard, and a potential bruiser RB. That hasn’t really clicked yet, but you can see where they’re blocking. Finding a consistent 3.5 yards per play is a big deal for us, and that’s one of the areas we need it.

On defense, there’s the occasional 3rd and 8 conversions, but we’re just on the field too long. That’s a partial explanation of how Duke beat Clemson but Clemson pushed us around.

Good points. If a team’s defense wants to be on the field less simply stop the other team’s offense more often. That is a core issue for GT’s defense. Can’t stop the opponent often enough.

 

[forensicbuzz]

JMO, no need to have account deleted, nor for you to leave GTSWARM.
I understand your initial thoughts and we you voiced them. Hindsight is that maybe a separate thread to voice a tempered opinion would have been better, but such is life.
100% agree that too much of this thread went down that rabbit hole.

GO JACKETS!!

Certain fonts are "ignored" for a reason. Addition by subtraction is an actual thing. I don't know what's been said going back and forth (see first comment), but some fonts do need to just go away.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Depth wins 4th quarters. Teams that have better depth on offense can wear down defenses and teams that have quality depth on defense can shuttle in fresh players to keep up with offenses trying to make a comeback or protect a lead. We have a lot of talent on our team, but we still need to work on building quality depth.

 

[roadkill]

The problem I have with the 4th quarter “should win” arguments is that they oversimplify the situation, overlooking the statistical variance of who possesses the ball at the beginning and end of the quarter.
Teams don’t start a new 15-minute game at the beginning of the 4th quarter - one team already has the ball and may be in good field position. And each team is likely to have only 2, possibly 3 more possessions at that point, with a strong likelihood that one team is going to have an extra possession. I’ve seen a lot of games where I thought, “The team that has the ball last will win.” And this was true – our 2014 barn burner against UNC comes to mind (we lost because we scored too fast on our last possession). So, if you enter the quarter with a touchdown or less lead, the game outcome depends quite a bit on the timing of possessions and how many each team has left.

Good points have been made about the importance of depth in the fourth, and this is also a key factor. I was very concerned about Syracuse’s run game/ball control wearing our defense down; fortunately, they were up to the task last Saturday.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Good points. If a team’s defense wants to be on the field less simply stop the other team’s offense more often. That is a core issue for GT’s defense. Can’t stop the opponent often enough.

That’s true but we also are not consistently playing “complimentary football.” When our defense gets a stop, and they only have so many of those in them per game, it would help immensely if the offense didn’t immediately go three and out. Too many times this year we got a stop but then immediately put the defense back on the field with worse field position. Grinding our weak defense down is much easier if our offense can’t keep them off the field.

 

[danny daniel]

The problem I have with the 4th quarter “should win” arguments is that they oversimplify the situation, overlooking the statistical variance of who possesses the ball at the beginning and end of the quarter.
Teams don’t start a new 15-minute game at the beginning of the 4th quarter - one team already has the ball and may be in good field position. And each team is likely to have only 2, possibly 3 more possessions at that point, with a strong likelihood that one team is going to have an extra possession. I’ve seen a lot of games where I thought, “The team that has the ball last will win.” And this was true – our 2014 barn burner against UNC comes to mind (we lost because we scored too fast on our last possession). So, if you enter the quarter with a touchdown or less lead, the game outcome depends quite a bit on the timing of possessions and how many each team has left.

Good points have been made about the importance of depth in the fourth, and this is also a key factor. I was very concerned about Syracuse’s run game/ball control wearing our defense down; fortunately, they were up to the task last Saturday.

D coaches did a good job pregame scheming and an equally good job substituting during the game (with the exception of those red zone late subs). It may not be an ideal scheme against everyone but whatever the D scheme did to allow our LBs to greatly participate in the game was a spectacular improvement. The whole D was energized at a faster speed but the added and significant contribution by the LBs was a change we have needed all year. Hope we can capture that LB play going forward.

 

[WreckinGT]

When I post and get a few negative responses, I can live with that. Chocolate and vanilla.

When I post and mob with torches and pitchforks forms, odds are the problem is not with the mob.

Why should any negative post incite a mob? It just doesn't seem like a logical or reasonable reaction to an internet post you don't like. I figured some people would disagree, and there were some good posts refuting my points, but 10 more telling me how awful of a fan I am, how unhappy and sad my life is, how I should find another team to root for, etc. just seem a little childish. It's not that serious guys.

I like to imagine how these things would go in real life. A group of Tech fans are discussing the game and becoming bowl eligible. One fan says he is still disappointed and that he expected a bit better from the season and is surprised how far our expectations have fallen in 4 years. Obviously some are going to disagree with him and the conversation will probably move on to something else. I doubt that most people in the room are going to come over to tell him how awful of a fan he is and how they feel sorry for him and tell him how miserable he is and drag that on for another half an hour. The internet does weird things to people.

 

[Root4GT]

That’s true but we also are not consistently playing “complimentary football.” When our defense gets a stop, and they only have so many of those in them per game, it would help immensely if the offense didn’t immediately go three and out. Too many times this year we got a stop but then immediately put the defense back on the field with worse field position. Grinding our weak defense down is much easier if our offense can’t keep them off the field.

We simply aren’t that good if a football team currently thus a 6-5 record with one win over a FCS Team.

We have lapses on Specual Teams, see Cuse long punt return. We have lapses on offense as you pointed. We have occasional stops on defense and we have managed to get a good number of turnovers.

Mostly the issues with consistency come from not being able to consistently win at the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball. This year the offense has taken a very nice step up on OL play while the defensive line has taken a step back.

That makes for inconsistent play and some wild game swings.

Still it’s real progress from the past few years.

 

[billga99]

D coaches did a good job pregame scheming and an equally good job substituting during the game (with the exception of those red zone late subs). It may not be an ideal scheme against everyone but whatever the D scheme did to allow our LBs to greatly participate in the game was a spectacular improvement. The whole D was energized at a faster speed but the added and significant contribution by the LBs was a change we have needed all year. Hope we can capture that LB play going forward.

I am not sure the Syracuse game is a good indicator of linebacker play against other teams. Against Syracuse, they ran the majority of the time or did quick WR screens. What they didn't do was pass downfield. Linebackers normally need to get involved with the run and also drop back to prevent passing in the short and intermediate zone. With the pass drop back not required against Syracuse, they could concentrate on the run. Against teams that mix up the run and pass, it is a more complicated scheme for the LBs. Obviously UGA is great and has tremendous TEs. But against more teams at our level, the ability of LBs to make plays on the run and not leave huge holes in the 5 to 10 year pass zones is what makes a Linebacker successful.