Game 1 Key Decisions

[CuseJacket]

Cheeky thread title. Deal with it.

Overall I have no major beefs with the coaching nor decision-making last night. We saw two fairly even teams ebb and flow throughout the game.

That said, there were a few moments that I thought were "key" and have seen some referenced in the postgame thread:

1. Situation: 2Q - Last Louisville drive of 1st half. 3rd and 5 from the Louisville 18. Clock rolling with ~20 seconds to go.
   1. Key Decision: Let the clock roll.
   2. Alternative Option: Should we have called a timeout? Letting the clock roll felt just a little conservative. Ultimately I agreed with Key's decision to let the clock roll, ignoring the outcome of the subsequent INT with 5 seconds left, but I thought Key might choose to be aggressive in this situation and stop the clock.
2. Situation: 2Q - CPLee INT at the Louisville 37 yard line. GT ball with 5 seconds remaining.
   1. Key Decision: Attempt the FG
   2. Alternative Option(s): Some have suggested Hail Mary. But in the moment I preferred a 3rd option - a quick hitch or out to pick up 5-8 yards. Why? My perception has been that Stewart doesn't have the leg for this kick. In fact, when I saw we were attempting the FG, I assumed Birr or another kicker would be run onto the field. Now, I realize we run the risk of burning all 5 seconds, but we had our timeouts and worst case King throws the ball into the ground immediately. To be clear, I don't know what Stewart is capable of as I'm not in practice every day, but he's never demonstrated accuracy beyond 40+ nor has he demonstrated a big boot. I felt the FG attempt as attempted was a recipe for failure so much so that I'm equally surprised Louisville didn't put a returner back in the end zone to take advantage of this.
3. Situation: 4Q - GT ball with ~4 min to go on. 1st and 10 on Louisville 16 yard line with clock rolling. Louisville up 29-28.
   1. Key Decision: Drop back pass.
   2. Alternative Option: Drain the clock. Let me be clear. I support the play call. I think there's way too much time even if we try to drain the clock, and I liked being aggressive. But hindsight 20/20 being what it is.... I don't know if the play called was one that is slow-developing, if King held the ball too long, if the coaches should have been aware that our QB could be in a compromised/game-changing position because of OL/DL match-ups, etc etc etc. Louisville also had at least two timeouts left. Very easy to Monday morning QB this decision given the result. It was arguably the most important play of the game, and I can't help but wonder if there was a lower risk play call to at least ensure we get 3 points out of the drive (I still believe in Stewart at that range).

Thoughts on the above? What other decisions were you debating from the comfort of your couch, the stands, etc.?

I've seen some suggest our 3Q drives were conservative. I'm not sure I agree. There were two failed drives and a total of 8 plays. Several variations of those plays appeared to work with great success in 2Q, so I didn't fault the attempts at that time.

 

[JDjacket]

For me personally the one that hurt was after our big first down to get to the 19 early in the 4th leading 28-23. We then play for a FG(which we missed) 3 straight run plays each giving us a yard. We had some good momentum on that drive and should have continued passing to try and get the TD. We had only gained 1-2 yards on every run play that drive.

 

[CuseJacket]

I almost forgot...

Situation: 4Q, Down 8 points and ~3 min to go. GT ball. 4th and 6 from our own 29 yard line.
Key Decision: Go for it.
Alternative Option: Punt. We had 3 timeouts. Could our D force a 3 and out? Given that we forced only one 3 and out in the 2nd half, the trend line suggests it was unlikely that our D steps up. Ultimately the play call on 4th down "worked" in that King hit our TE in the hands. Catchable ball that needs to be hauled in but was dropped.

 

[slugboy]

After halftime (3Q), I thought we moved to a tighter offensive formation on the first series. Did we have two tight ends? Anyway, we went from spreading Louisville out to playing in the middle. We ran in the middle multiple times, into the strength of their defense, which we concentrated by having a tighter formation.

I don’t think we were running to keep them honest—I think we were trying to burn clock. Unfortunately, we went 3 and out—which game them more clock.

It was a weird halftime adjustment, both in formation and in what we called. We’d been very successful in the second quarter—why did we go away from what was working?

 

[Root4GT]

Cheeky thread title. Deal with it.

Overall I have no major beefs with the coaching nor decision-making last night. We saw two fairly even teams ebb and flow throughout the game.

That said, there were a few moments that I thought were "key" and have seen some referenced in the postgame thread:

1. Situation: 2Q - Last Louisville drive of 1st half. 3rd and 5 from the Louisville 18. Clock rolling with ~20 seconds to go.
   1. Key Decision: Let the clock roll.
   2. Alternative Option: Should we have called a timeout? Letting the clock roll felt just a little conservative. Ultimately I agreed with Key's decision to let the clock roll, ignoring the outcome of the subsequent INT with 5 seconds left, but I thought Key might choose to be aggressive in this situation and stop the clock.
2. Situation: 2Q - CPLee INT at the Louisville 37 yard line. GT ball with 5 seconds remaining.
   1. Key Decision: Attempt the FG
   2. Alternative Option(s): Some have suggested Hail Mary. But in the moment I preferred a 3rd option - a quick hitch or out to pick up 5-8 yards. Why? My perception has been that Stewart doesn't have the leg for this kick. In fact, when I saw we were attempting the FG, I assumed Birr or another kicker would be run onto the field. Now, I realize we run the risk of burning all 5 seconds, but we had our timeouts and worst case King throws the ball into the ground immediately. To be clear, I don't know what Stewart is capable of as I'm not in practice every day, but he's never demonstrated accuracy beyond 40+ nor has he demonstrated a big boot. I felt the FG attempt as attempted was a recipe for failure so much so that I'm equally surprised Louisville didn't put a returner back in the end zone to take advantage of this.
3. Situation: 4Q - GT ball with ~4 min to go on. 1st and 10 on Louisville 16 yard line with clock rolling. Louisville up 29-28.
   1. Key Decision: Drop back pass.
   2. Alternative Option: Drain the clock. Let me be clear. I support the play call. I think there's way too much time even if we try to drain the clock, and I liked being aggressive. But hindsight 20/20 being what it is.... I don't know if the play called was one that is slow-developing, if King held the ball too long, if the coaches should have been aware that our QB could be in a compromised/game-changing position because of OL/DL match-ups, etc etc etc. Louisville also had at least two timeouts left. Very easy to Monday morning QB this decision given the result. It was arguably the most important play of the game, and I can't help but wonder if there was a lower risk play call to at least ensure we get 3 points out of the drive (I still believe in Stewart at that range).

Thoughts on the above? What other decisions were you debating from the comfort of your couch, the stands, etc.?

I've seen some suggest our 3Q drives were conservative. I'm not sure I agree. There were two failed drives and a total of 8 plays. Several variations of those plays appeared to work with great success in 2Q, so I didn't fault the attempts at that time.

Good questions. I am a believer that post play results influence people's opinions more than the actual decision/play call. I would not have called a TO. We had all the momentum going into half and there was no reason to give them an opportunity for a big play.

The FG decision was ok. Looked like Stewart's range is about 50 yards. That was better than a Hail Marry. The quick 5+ yard play would have been a good call as well. Not sure we are very good at such plays right now. Disn't have many last night.

4th quarter drives show the delima. Three runs and a missed FG - bad play calls, possibly. 1st and 10 at the 16, pass play QB sacked/lost fumble, bad play call maybe. I don't have issue with the play calls. The execution was poor on all the plays resulting in zero points in two good opportunities!

 

[GaTech4ever]

What about in the second half when we had them pinned back and chose to decline a false start. Making it 2nd and 10 from the 10 rather than 1st and 15 from the 5. Not even a decision I questioned in retrospect, we in the stands were all puzzled why we declined it before the next play even started.

 

[leatherneckjacket]

Did not mind declining the penalty in the second half or going for the FG at end of the first half.

Thought we should have stopped the clock on 3rd down to at least force them to punt prior to the half. We ended up getting the ball on the interception, but no time to move into Stewart's range.

Hated the three run plays prior to the missed FG in the second half. That was Brent channeling Chan Gailey there.

Also hated the play call on the sack and fumble. Not that it was a pass, but that it was a long developing play and not something quick. Thry did have Haynes roll to his right, but he held the ball way too long. The non block by the left guard was pathetic

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

Cheeky thread title. Deal with it.

Overall I have no major beefs with the coaching nor decision-making last night. We saw two fairly even teams ebb and flow throughout the game.

That said, there were a few moments that I thought were "key" and have seen some referenced in the postgame thread:

1. Situation: 2Q - Last Louisville drive of 1st half. 3rd and 5 from the Louisville 18. Clock rolling with ~20 seconds to go.
   1. Key Decision: Let the clock roll.
   2. Alternative Option: Should we have called a timeout? Letting the clock roll felt just a little conservative. Ultimately I agreed with Key's decision to let the clock roll, ignoring the outcome of the subsequent INT with 5 seconds left, but I thought Key might choose to be aggressive in this situation and stop the clock.
2. Situation: 2Q - CPLee INT at the Louisville 37 yard line. GT ball with 5 seconds remaining.
   1. Key Decision: Attempt the FG
   2. Alternative Option(s): Some have suggested Hail Mary. But in the moment I preferred a 3rd option - a quick hitch or out to pick up 5-8 yards. Why? My perception has been that Stewart doesn't have the leg for this kick. In fact, when I saw we were attempting the FG, I assumed Birr or another kicker would be run onto the field. Now, I realize we run the risk of burning all 5 seconds, but we had our timeouts and worst case King throws the ball into the ground immediately. To be clear, I don't know what Stewart is capable of as I'm not in practice every day, but he's never demonstrated accuracy beyond 40+ nor has he demonstrated a big boot. I felt the FG attempt as attempted was a recipe for failure so much so that I'm equally surprised Louisville didn't put a returner back in the end zone to take advantage of this.
3. Situation: 4Q - GT ball with ~4 min to go on. 1st and 10 on Louisville 16 yard line with clock rolling. Louisville up 29-28.
   1. Key Decision: Drop back pass.
   2. Alternative Option: Drain the clock. Let me be clear. I support the play call. I think there's way too much time even if we try to drain the clock, and I liked being aggressive. But hindsight 20/20 being what it is.... I don't know if the play called was one that is slow-developing, if King held the ball too long, if the coaches should have been aware that our QB could be in a compromised/game-changing position because of OL/DL match-ups, etc etc etc. Louisville also had at least two timeouts left. Very easy to Monday morning QB this decision given the result. It was arguably the most important play of the game, and I can't help but wonder if there was a lower risk play call to at least ensure we get 3 points out of the drive (I still believe in Stewart at that range).

Thoughts on the above? What other decisions were you debating from the comfort of your couch, the stands, etc.?

I've seen some suggest our 3Q drives were conservative. I'm not sure I agree. There were two failed drives and a total of 8 plays. Several variations of those plays appeared to work with great success in 2Q, so I didn't fault the attempts at that time.

Interesting situations. Personally, and people will flame me for this but that is OK, I don't think the coaching decisions cost us this game as much as the poor tackling and blocking along with the absolutely zero pressure on Plummer. Those three things mattered more in my opinion than the coaching decisions.

 

[Root4GT]

Did not mind declining the penalty in the second half or going for the FG at end of the first half.

Thought we should have stopped the clock on 3rd down to at least force them to punt prior to the half. We ended up getting the ball on the interception, but no time to move into Stewart's range.

Hated the three run plays prior to the missed FG in the second half. That was Brent channeling Chan Gailey there.

Also hated the play call on the sack and fumble. Not that it was a pass, but that it was a long developing play and not something quick. Thry did have Haynes roll to his right, but he held the ball way too long. The non block by the left guard was pathetic

On the fumble it appeared King looked for a quick throw but he didn’t pull the trigger then simply held the ball far too long. I haven’t watched the replay of that play yet so I could be wrong.

 

[takethepoints]

After halftime (3Q), I thought we moved to a tighter offensive formation on the first series. Did we have two tight ends? Anyway, we went from spreading Louisville out to playing in the middle. We ran in the middle multiple times, into the strength of their defense, which we concentrated by having a tighter formation.

I don’t think we were running to keep them honest—I think we were trying to burn clock. Unfortunately, we went 3 and out—which game them more clock.

This was something I was afraid might happen: we were trying to run the O like Bama or Ugag would. Tech doesn't have the OL to do that. Indeed, I wondered why the coaches thought we did, especially with Jordan out. The run blocking in the first half was certainly not reassuring; there were way too many stops for short gains. Spreading them out worked, however, and King did a good job on the few option plays we called. I know I'm a broken record on this, but we need to run more option plays and King needs to run more when we do. He has real running talent and using that would help every phase of the game.

Disappointing loss, but we played pretty well for a first game. Other then the above, that is.

 

[alagold]

Really the game was very even overall.The differences were 1- the poor tackling on our part 2- the QB fumble on the missed block 3-the missed gimme FG. also-I wonder what Key and team learned from the flat 2nd half. -- or-Makes one wonder if they are not in good enough shape? We will look back on this as a VERY missed oppty I believe..

 

[g0lftime]

After halftime (3Q), I thought we moved to a tighter offensive formation on the first series. Did we have two tight ends? Anyway, we went from spreading Louisville out to playing in the middle. We ran in the middle multiple times, into the strength of their defense, which we concentrated by having a tighter formation.

I don’t think we were running to keep them honest—I think we were trying to burn clock. Unfortunately, we went 3 and out—which game them more clock.

It was a weird halftime adjustment, both in formation and in what we called. We’d been very successful in the second quarter—why did we go away from what was working?

I thought at the time we were trying to burn clock with a lead. Live and learn. It was a bad decision in hindsight but shows we need work on run blocking.

 

[Southern psu fan]

3 plays that killed us imo. The missed FG, the turnover in the 4th and the TE not catching the ball on 4th down to move the chains. We played hard but to get the win you have to come up with plays that win games and last night we come up a little short but you have to be very proud of the effort the team had, I am but the loss still stinks lol. These were nitty gritty crunch time plays I’m talking about.

 

[Jacket0323]

After halftime (3Q), I thought we moved to a tighter offensive formation on the first series. Did we have two tight ends? Anyway, we went from spreading Louisville out to playing in the middle. We ran in the middle multiple times, into the strength of their defense, which we concentrated by having a tighter formation.

I don’t think we were running to keep them honest—I think we were trying to burn clock. Unfortunately, we went 3 and out—which game them more clock.

It was a weird halftime adjustment, both in formation and in what we called. We’d been very successful in the second quarter—why did we go away from what was working?

Over thinking can hurt as much as no thinking

 

[tsrich]

Cheeky thread title. Deal with it.

Overall I have no major beefs with the coaching nor decision-making last night. We saw two fairly even teams ebb and flow throughout the game.

That said, there were a few moments that I thought were "key" and have seen some referenced in the postgame thread:

1. Situation: 2Q - Last Louisville drive of 1st half. 3rd and 5 from the Louisville 18. Clock rolling with ~20 seconds to go.
   1. Key Decision: Let the clock roll.
   2. Alternative Option: Should we have called a timeout? Letting the clock roll felt just a little conservative. Ultimately I agreed with Key's decision to let the clock roll, ignoring the outcome of the subsequent INT with 5 seconds left, but I thought Key might choose to be aggressive in this situation and stop the clock.
2. Situation: 2Q - CPLee INT at the Louisville 37 yard line. GT ball with 5 seconds remaining.
   1. Key Decision: Attempt the FG
   2. Alternative Option(s): Some have suggested Hail Mary. But in the moment I preferred a 3rd option - a quick hitch or out to pick up 5-8 yards. Why? My perception has been that Stewart doesn't have the leg for this kick. In fact, when I saw we were attempting the FG, I assumed Birr or another kicker would be run onto the field. Now, I realize we run the risk of burning all 5 seconds, but we had our timeouts and worst case King throws the ball into the ground immediately. To be clear, I don't know what Stewart is capable of as I'm not in practice every day, but he's never demonstrated accuracy beyond 40+ nor has he demonstrated a big boot. I felt the FG attempt as attempted was a recipe for failure so much so that I'm equally surprised Louisville didn't put a returner back in the end zone to take advantage of this.
3. Situation: 4Q - GT ball with ~4 min to go on. 1st and 10 on Louisville 16 yard line with clock rolling. Louisville up 29-28.
   1. Key Decision: Drop back pass.
   2. Alternative Option: Drain the clock. Let me be clear. I support the play call. I think there's way too much time even if we try to drain the clock, and I liked being aggressive. But hindsight 20/20 being what it is.... I don't know if the play called was one that is slow-developing, if King held the ball too long, if the coaches should have been aware that our QB could be in a compromised/game-changing position because of OL/DL match-ups, etc etc etc. Louisville also had at least two timeouts left. Very easy to Monday morning QB this decision given the result. It was arguably the most important play of the game, and I can't help but wonder if there was a lower risk play call to at least ensure we get 3 points out of the drive (I still believe in Stewart at that range).

Thoughts on the above? What other decisions were you debating from the comfort of your couch, the stands, etc.?

I've seen some suggest our 3Q drives were conservative. I'm not sure I agree. There were two failed drives and a total of 8 plays. Several variations of those plays appeared to work with great success in 2Q, so I didn't fault the attempts at that time.

The problem with a quick hitch to gain 5 yards in that situation is that UL knows it's coming and there's a decent chance that can turn into a pick-six. I was fine with how Key played that one. We were only a couple yards short, so worth the try.

I really was not happy with the sequence leading up to the other FG attempt. That was some lame-*** conservative BS playcalling when the offense was in a groove.

 

[cpf2001]

I didn't like kicking the long FG attempt before half instead of taking a shot but I get it.

Playing for 3 late in the game though after your D has gotten shredded and your run game is getting stuffed in the second half, though... settling for the FGA there was rough from a strategy standpoint. That's the key one to me.

 

[jeffgt14]

Situation 1: Right decision by far

Situation 2: 5 seconds is more than enough to get 4-5 more yards. Disagree with our decision but not a deal breaker.

Situation 3: Right decision by far. We needed a TD not a FG with how our D was getting steam rolled. That was by far the worst play of the game by King. Held on to the ball way too long and left it out in the open for a double. You knew the game was over the very second he made that slight hitch and held the ball out.

Situation 4: Right decision. We weren't stopping them.

 

[BleedGoldNWhite21]

I was not happy with the conservative play calling up 28-23, where it seemed like we were OK settling for a FG. A lot of the moments you guys have mentioned are definitely worth discussing, but I can live with all of those decisions. I can’t help but feel we had Louisville’s D rattled a bit after moving the ball and we let them off the hook and of course missing the FG made it that much worse.

 

[bobongo]

I almost forgot...

Situation: 4Q, Down 8 points and ~3 min to go. GT ball. 4th and 6 from our own 29 yard line.
Key Decision: Go for it.
Alternative Option: Punt. We had 3 timeouts. Could our D force a 3 and out? Given that we forced only one 3 and out in the 2nd half, the trend line suggests it was unlikely that our D steps up. Ultimately the play call on 4th down "worked" in that King hit our TE in the hands. Catchable ball that needs to be hauled in but was dropped.

I got no problem with the decision to go for it here. Just need to execute.

On the others in the OP:
1. I would call a time out, but I doubt it makes much difference here. But maybe...
2. Definitely try a quick out. Very little chance, if any, he hits from what, 54 yards? Had to try and get a little closer.
3. No problem at all with this decision. Too much time to think about draining the clock here. You go with your best play. Again, the problem was execution.

 

[AUFC]

I don't like the quick out idea.

- You're up 15 points going into halftime. More points is nice but not the end of the world if you don't get them.

- You just saw your opponent turn the ball over to possibly giveaway points.

- The quick out is predictable with no timeouts - route could be jumped and housed.

Key and I have been very in-line with decision making since he took over. Especially compared to TFG who would try to convert 4th downs on our own 25 in the 1st quarter.