Fourth and Goal - what went wrong?

[augustabuzz]

The play was defeated by a player with a history of making plays. Sometimes the other guy just makes a better play.

 

[croberts]

Jimmies and Joes

 

[Root4GT]

Guard took a step towards the outside man and was out of position. He should have blocked the LB.

This is the correct answer.

 

[7979]

I agree with this. I liked the play call. I think a lot of others backers would have been moving to cover the pitch. Skalski, the 8th year senior (TIC) had enough experience and savvy to sniff it out. I do wonder if the Pulling guard had a specific assignment or if the play is designed for him to have an option who to hit. Those former OLs on the board can probably answer that. It looks to me, as a layman, that he had an option and decided a split second too late to take the inside guy.

Also, for @7979 above, my guess (hope) is that CGC didn't make that play call, that CDP did. So, I am not sure to blame the particular play call on Collins is accurate.

OG whiffed...As a former GT offensive lineman I can assure you his assignment was to take first orange jersey that appeared across his face...Skalski was not playing read and react...he was run blitzing and "ran into" play of his career....Look, my problem is not with what play we ran or which coach called the dang play...it is with WHO we chose to get the ball to...Let's assume we scored on the inside screen...score is 14-12, and now ball is on the three again... who gets the ball on the 2-pt play?
Strength of this team is 4 deep RB play-makers...oh well....on to UNC...see you at MB stadium....

 

[bke1984]

OG whiffed...As a former GT offensive lineman I can assure you his assignment was to take first orange jersey that appeared across his face...Skalski was not playing read and react...he was run blitzing and "ran into" play of his career....Look, my problem is not with what play we ran or which coach called the dang play...it is with WHO we chose to get the ball to...Let's assume we scored on the inside screen...score is 14-12, and now ball is on the three again... who gets the ball on the 2-pt play?
Strength of this team is 4 deep RB play-makers...oh well....on to UNC...see you at MB stadium....

Exactly. It's the equivalent of avoiding throwing to Calvin when the game is on the line because that's what is expected of you.

It's not really the one play that bothered me so much as the series of plays. Honestly I would have been OK with the play call if we'd tried the backs three plays in a row and failed...then run the shovel. But no...we rollout and try to squeeze a pass into the corner that could have easily been picked - then we try a slow developing end around against a super fast defense - THEN we finally run and get HALF THE YARDS WE NEED ON ONE PLAY - Then we get cute and run the shovel pass. The first two play calls were the biggest problem to me.

We're just getting too cute at times in going away from our strength.

And under center I-form gives you a much better PA look than shotgun does IMO. You run 2-3 dives and try to punch it in - that doesn't work you bootleg out and hit a TE or try to scramble in. You don't have to run I-form all the time, but having that package has its benefits.

 

[FlatsLander]

OG whiffed...As a former GT offensive lineman I can assure you his assignment was to take first orange jersey that appeared across his face...Skalski was not playing read and react...he was run blitzing and "ran into" play of his career....Look, my problem is not with what play we ran or which coach called the dang play...it is with WHO we chose to get the ball to...Let's assume we scored on the inside screen...score is 14-12, and now ball is on the three again... who gets the ball on the 2-pt play?
Strength of this team is 4 deep RB play-makers...oh well....on to UNC...see you at MB stadium....

Not sure why you think Skalski was run blitzing when our 1 RB was aligned behind the tackle and went wide in that direction. If you watch Skalksi's helmet (admittedly not the best indicator) it's turned towards Yates, and as soon as the ball moves to Skalski's left, Skalski plants his foot and changes direction immediately.

I do agree that we should lean on our RBs more in short yardage situations, though. I really miss our identity under CPJ where he would say that if we can't convert on 3rd and 2, then we didn't deserve to win. Hopefully we can develop that type of go-to play soon for short yardage where we know we can always get it.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

Beamer talking about uGag, but the same is true about Clemson



Worth remembering

Yeah, I love Beamer's statement. A lot of folks on this site need to realize that when the talent gap is just too large, it is "all she wrote" without some equalizer. But, there is only so much a scheme will do for you when the other players are great, well-coached, and motivated.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

I don't really want to have this conversation, but as I stated on another thread, our best group is the RB's. CGC and CDP should have "lived and died" with getting them the ball on 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. But, I also believe lining up over center with quick hitting running plays would have been the right move with Jordan getting the physical hand offs. I'm not even sure we practice such a thing.

 

[Root4GT]

Not sure why you think Skalski was run blitzing when our 1 RB was aligned behind the tackle and went wide in that direction. If you watch Skalksi's helmet (admittedly not the best indicator) it's turned towards Yates, and as soon as the ball moves to Skalski's left, Skalski plants his foot and changes direction immediately.

I do agree that we should lean on our RBs more in short yardage situations, though. I really miss our identity under CPJ where he would say that if we can't convert on 3rd and 2, then we didn't deserve to win. Hopefully we can develop that type of go-to play soon for short yardage where we know we can always get it.

Seemed like Duke stopped us cold on 3rd/4th and short the last few years of the CPJ era causing us to lose winnable games. You still need to execute regardless of scheme.