Bruce Wayne
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,870
Or my alternate thread title: "Consecutive Good 'Unit Possessions' Key In Close Games"
I think that a fundamental problem Tech has had the last several years in our many close losses has been not so much the "Big Mo" momentum battle in terms of long stretches of game as that is hard to get against a good opponent anyway. My frustration is in the smaller scale issue of "mo" simply being passed like a baton for consecutive "possessions" from one "unit" (offense/defense/special teams) to another or of failing to have consecutive good performances by a single unit.
In my viewing the D and Special Teams have been the most likely units to fail to follow up on a good possession by another unit with a good one of their own. However, against the better teams on the schedule the Offense has frequently struggled as well to have consecutive good possessions. This isn't shocking since the better teams on the schedule tend to have the better defenses and athletes.
After such close games the message boards light up with CPJ offensive haters blaming the O for putting too much pressure on the D while those who love the offense can point out CPJ's maxim that "it is still ok to win a game 7-6 every now and again, great defensive games do happen in football from time to time."
For me the real frustrating element is simply too few consecutive strong "possessions" by all three Tech units. The "here we go again" aspect of a large chunk of the VT game took this form.
Hence I want to praise the Tech defense for forcing punts and turnovers in consecutive possessions and the punt and kicking teams with Rodwell and Butker for consecutively giving the defense good starting position to work with after possessions where the offense stalled.
If Roof wants to play a bend not break style and still try and induce opponent errors and turnovers, then the kicking team (and Offense to a lesser extent) has to give him enough of the field to work in.
In Luginbill's immediate postgame interview with CPJ on the sidelines he started off with a question on the offense (everyone hyper-focuses on CPJ's offense) and much to his credit as head coach (not just offensive coordinator) CPJ immediately changed the topic and praised the defense. I just want to add in the kicking teams, especially punting, to CPJ's praise of the defense for the VT win by giving the offense the time and chances to score more points than VT.
I think that a fundamental problem Tech has had the last several years in our many close losses has been not so much the "Big Mo" momentum battle in terms of long stretches of game as that is hard to get against a good opponent anyway. My frustration is in the smaller scale issue of "mo" simply being passed like a baton for consecutive "possessions" from one "unit" (offense/defense/special teams) to another or of failing to have consecutive good performances by a single unit.
In my viewing the D and Special Teams have been the most likely units to fail to follow up on a good possession by another unit with a good one of their own. However, against the better teams on the schedule the Offense has frequently struggled as well to have consecutive good possessions. This isn't shocking since the better teams on the schedule tend to have the better defenses and athletes.
After such close games the message boards light up with CPJ offensive haters blaming the O for putting too much pressure on the D while those who love the offense can point out CPJ's maxim that "it is still ok to win a game 7-6 every now and again, great defensive games do happen in football from time to time."
For me the real frustrating element is simply too few consecutive strong "possessions" by all three Tech units. The "here we go again" aspect of a large chunk of the VT game took this form.
Hence I want to praise the Tech defense for forcing punts and turnovers in consecutive possessions and the punt and kicking teams with Rodwell and Butker for consecutively giving the defense good starting position to work with after possessions where the offense stalled.
If Roof wants to play a bend not break style and still try and induce opponent errors and turnovers, then the kicking team (and Offense to a lesser extent) has to give him enough of the field to work in.
In Luginbill's immediate postgame interview with CPJ on the sidelines he started off with a question on the offense (everyone hyper-focuses on CPJ's offense) and much to his credit as head coach (not just offensive coordinator) CPJ immediately changed the topic and praised the defense. I just want to add in the kicking teams, especially punting, to CPJ's praise of the defense for the VT win by giving the offense the time and chances to score more points than VT.