Defense

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,694
Location
Georgia
The D looked really bad the first two possessions. They spotted clemson 7 with french like resistance.

But they seemed to find their legs a bit after spotting them 14 quick.

At that point the offense was too pathetic to matter.

Its a team loss. The D started out slow and the O sucked.

I am more dismayed that the talent disparity is so big between tech and other teams in our conference now we cant even compete. And lets face it. We werent close in this game.

I think as fans we all need to expect this from gt now. In big money football tech is a 7-5 program. No AD will fix this imo. The school is too limited, too hard on admissions, on top of nice but average facilities compared to the big boys. And fiscal limits. Then you add in just average coaching in spots and it makes it tougher.....

It is what it is. Folks just need to get used to the occasional upset, occasional flash in the pan every 6-7 years. Consistent losing to uga, clemson, miami etc with occassional upsets. But not going .500 vs these programs unless they drop off if things stay the way they are.

Flame away but lets face it we had our flash in 2014. Our reverse flash in 2015. Not its time for a few 6-6 7-5 years before the moons align in 2021 or so. Not being negative...just real with where we are
 

GlennW

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,189
I agree;

I'm probably as bummed about the Clemson game as everyone else, but I saw two positives in the game.

After the 1st Quarter, our Defense almost shut out their Offense the rest of the game. If we wouldn't have had that crazy Safety at the end of the half, that also gave them the ball back in good field position that led to a quick score (with our Defense right back on the field without rest), they shut Clemson out the entire Second Half and all of the Second Quarter except for those 9 points. We actually out-scored Clemson in the Second Half 7-3 (I realize they were knocking on the door when time expired and probably could have scored if they pressed for it, but still, I'm ignoring that as it didn't happen because you don't know if we could have intercepted, recovered a fumble, or time would have run out since they had no Time Outs remaining).

What lost the game against Clemson was our Offense. We were man-handled and Justin Thomas had no chance to make reads for pitches, runs, or times to set up for passes. The couple of times we adjusted our snap count Clemson jumped offsides, so that should have made it obvious that Clemson was jumping our snap count, and we should have changed it more early in the game to keep them honest. I personally would have gone no-huddle so PJ could see how their Defense was aligned and then either go off a quick snap on motion, get them to jump for a penalty, or make an adjustment call.

I would also like to say that Mills showed that he is a special Back, especially on his TD run, carrying 4 Clemson defenders on his back several yards to cross the goal line.
 

jandrews

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
275
We gave up an average of 5.4 yds per play. Clemson averaged 5.1 against auburn and 4.9 against Troy. I agree after the 1st quarter the defense stepped up. Going forward, what offense is nearly as talented as clemson? We have been playing the run well so I think we fair against Pitt well. Unc is a dynamic offense but really Williams was the one beating us lately. We will have to see what their new guy can do.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
The criticism of too much cushion by the corners is off base in this one IMO. (I think it's been wrong in some other games too but more arguable - in some of those no pass rush means have to give cushion).

Clemson has several elite WR. Guys we don't have the speed to hang with in bump coverage. They have a lot of wiggle too. How many times were we unable to tackle them without numbers? There were a few plays I wished we had tightened a bit on but generally, no. If we had not played "bend don't break" and had not used cushion to keep the WR in front of us, yeah they would have hung a 100 on us.
 

nod

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
713
Gamble was killing their OL, played great game.
Pass rush was nice, couple of sacks, lot of pressure.
Really like all the DB's, just need a little more experience. Was Simmons breakout game.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,011
The D looked really bad the first two possessions. They spotted clemson 7 with french like resistance.

But they seemed to find their legs a bit after spotting them 14 quick.

At that point the offense was too pathetic to matter.

Its a team loss. The D started out slow and the O sucked.

I am more dismayed that the talent disparity is so big between tech and other teams in our conference now we cant even compete. And lets face it. We werent close in this game.

I think as fans we all need to expect this from gt now. In big money football tech is a 7-5 program. No AD will fix this imo. The school is too limited, too hard on admissions, on top of nice but average facilities compared to the big boys. And fiscal limits. Then you add in just average coaching in spots and it makes it tougher.....

It is what it is. Folks just need to get used to the occasional upset, occasional flash in the pan every 6-7 years. Consistent losing to uga, clemson, miami etc with occassional upsets. But not going .500 vs these programs unless they drop off if things stay the way they are.

Flame away but lets face it we had our flash in 2014. Our reverse flash in 2015. Not its time for a few 6-6 7-5 years before the moons align in 2021 or so. Not being negative...just real with where we are

I'm already used to that...
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
Silver lining. Our guys on D fought hard and played well enough to get a W if the O had just done their part. We have a lot of young guys that are gonna get better and better moving forward.
 

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
5,137
I think as fans we all need to expect this from gt now. In big money football tech is a 7-5 program. No AD will fix this imo.

I would say "most AD's" rather than "No AD". It is going to take a complete game changer such as Dr. Rice. The average or typical guy is going to do about what the last 3 guys have done and keep things more or less 'status quo". Like in any other areas, the truly elite guys are hard to find.
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,694
Location
Georgia
I would say "most AD's" rather than "No AD". It is going to take a complete game changer such as Dr. Rice. The average or typical guy is going to do about what the last 3 guys have done and keep things more or less 'status quo". Like in any other areas, the truly elite guys are hard to find.

Not sure. Its changed so much since the days of rice. In this current environment with currently the way the school is.....i dont think any AD can do it. Really..... Just an opinion, but things need to change alot.....
 

SidewalkJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,666
I usually don't like to make comments like this, but after four games, I'm confident in saying that there are a few backups on D that have earned a starting spot. I've watched them come in and bring more speed, athleticism, and aggression.

I love all our guys, but I see some spots where I think it's time for change.
 

tech_wreck47

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,670
The offense was terrible from the first snap of the ball. The notion that our defense giving up a TD or two in the first quarter is in any way to blame for our offensive showing is a joke. Our first two drive were both 3 and outs that went backwards 13 yards. That is before the "pressure" of being behind by two scores. Our offense was the one that put pressure on the D to make plays, and the D responded. You want to blame the defense for the "self inflicted 9 points" on the safety, but it was the offense who had the ball with 4:40 left, went 3 and out, and then gave the ball back to clemson on our 45. Clemson should have never gotten the ball back, or if it did it should have been with little time left and a long field to drive.
I think you are missing my point, I'm not blaming the D for everything. I am however saying that the D did have something to do with the loss. If you are going to blame the offense for not moving the ball, why not put any blame on the D for allowing Clemson to drive it down field with ease the first quarter? They both played awful that first quarter, so your kinda having a double standard right? Did the D get better? Sure. But my point was about the first quarter. The offense looked unprepared the first half, no doubt, and that caused them to have to change their game plan the second half, although they did look better. If you don't think the D having the ball marched down the field on them the first drive doesn't put pressure on 18-23 year old who were probably saying we are gonna have to score a lot, then idk what to tell you. I will say it was mainly the offenses fault imo, but we cant say it was just them, because both sides played bad that first quarter. My thing with the D wasn't even the players, but there imo was no reason for us to be giving 7 and 10 yard cushions to their WR's, they eat us up with short passes, and that's what they are built around for the most part, I put that on coaching and not having a good game plan.
 

Ibeeballin

Im a 3*
Messages
6,082
The D looked really bad the first two possessions. They spotted clemson 7 with french like resistance.

But they seemed to find their legs a bit after spotting them 14 quick.

At that point the offense was too pathetic to matter.

Its a team loss. The D started out slow and the O sucked.

I am more dismayed that the talent disparity is so big between tech and other teams in our conference now we cant even compete. And lets face it. We werent close in this game.

I think as fans we all need to expect this from gt now. In big money football tech is a 7-5 program. No AD will fix this imo. The school is too limited, too hard on admissions, on top of nice but average facilities compared to the big boys. And fiscal limits. Then you add in just average coaching in spots and it makes it tougher.....

It is what it is. Folks just need to get used to the occasional upset, occasional flash in the pan every 6-7 years. Consistent losing to uga, clemson, miami etc with occassional upsets. But not going .500 vs these programs unless they drop off if things stay the way they are.

Flame away but lets face it we had our flash in 2014. Our reverse flash in 2015. Not its time for a few 6-6 7-5 years before the moons align in 2021 or so. Not being negative...just real with where we are

Im usually on your side, but it is waaayyy too early to mention talent disparity within the conference when we've only played 2 conference games!!! Calm down. One game is not indicative of the next game and definitely not the season. If that is the case, Clemson is in for a rude awakening next if they can only score 26 only us with gifted safety
 

Jay Alexander

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
271
Im usually on your side, but it is waaayyy too early to mention talent disparity within the conference when we've only played 2 conference games!!! Calm down. One game is not indicative of the next game and definitely not the season. If that is the case, Clemson is in for a rude awakening next if they can only score 26 only us with gifted safety

Agree, the fact is we got whupped at the line of scrimmage for an entire half. It is what it is. Learn from it. Flush it. Take out any frustration on Miami. Good football teams don't lose 2 in a row.
 

Chas_Jacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
374
TV announcers said Lawerence was 6'5" and 340lbs. I didnt see a belly on him and he was fast. Not much of a stretch to say he could be starting for some NFL teams. Hard to deal with that.
 

jeffgt14

We don't quite suck as much anymore.
Messages
5,897
Location
Mt Juliet, TN
TV announcers said Lawerence was 6'5" and 340lbs. I didnt see a belly on him and he was fast. Not much of a stretch to say he could be starting for some NFL teams. Hard to deal with that.
Yea that dude may be a more athletic Vince Wilfork. I haven’t seen a NT like him in quite some time. He may be the sole reason why I think Clemson will beat Louisville. He’s a linebackers best friend.
 

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,030
We got whooped. On both sides of the ball.

CU never pulled their starters, and they went for gold even on the last drive, but they maybe seemed more conservative in their play calling after their last TD.

That being said, our D did hold them to basically what they 'did against Troy, a little better than 2 ppd. I don't know why we don't seem to play D in the first quarter.

Our O on the other hand got stopped. It really wasn't that much worse than BC against the run, but we couldn't (didn't try enough?) pass protect to get that going like we did against BC. I really think we need to develop a max-protect scheme, maybe bringing in Weimerskirch at B (full) back when we can't get the running game going.

Nevertheless, I agree with @Ibeeballin that we can't throw the baby out. We don't play another D that will likely have this kind of advantage against us until georgie based on last year's ppd stats. I think VPI may be closer to vandy athlete wise.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
We do seem to have issues executing our zone D at times. Sometimes seems like guys just float in the zone a bit, back on their heels, and wait for the ball to come their way instead of playing the man entering their zone.
 
Top