GT at uGA Post Game

Jackets2004

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
4
G
Two distinct ways to look at that game:

1. GT is clearly on the rise. We went toe to toe with arguably the best program in the country that is loaded with 4* and 5* talent. Our stats were superior and our QB was clearly superior. But they simply had more depth and they wore us down. Tech fans know the feeling from Gt's prime years under O'Leary-Friedgen-Hamilton going against the loaded FSU teams under Bowden. Similar deal then.

Fans were treated to an absolutely epic, historic football game. It was an excellent display of sport: courage, fortitude, competitiveness, effort. That game is what football is supposed to be about. Only one team could win.

Funny, watching the game I did not think the officiating was too biased. They missed a few Pass Interference calls on us. The targeting calls have been mystifying to me all year. In the previous few years they were calling targeting all over this place. This year, they seem never to call it any more. They missed one on us as well. So, it is not inconsistent. Holding calls are missed all the time. Both fumble reviews were obscured by the mass of bodies. As I reviewed the thread, I was surprised by any suggestion that the officials stole the game. That game was decided by the players and coaches.

The long hug after the game was one of the more touching things I've seen in football. Two top-notch coaches.

2. That game should never have gone to overtime and our coordinators are not above criticism for this one. I understand that we were decimated in the back end, but Santucci and Key went into the soft zone too early in the second half and gave UGA a chance. It would have worked without the Haynes King fumble, but that is the thing with Key, he plays the clock game with a very narrow margin for error.

Two ways to play with a 2-3 score lead in the second half: play the clock or go for the boot on the neck. Analytics may suggest to play the clock and sell out to avoid the chunk play, but human psychology may suggest to go for a big play at the cost of a big play. Overload a side, try to press. Their QB is not that good.

Against our offense, UGA made a late adjustment to bring pressure up the middle which I think Buster failed to adjust to and cost us the game, especially in OT. In the two-point try festival, UGA was charging up field and Buster was calling for these long out-routes. g0lf noted that the rocket toss would have been a good call and I was yelling for that play also. I envied UGA's call for a short slant. They were bringing the safeties on the blitz and that area vacated by the blitzing safeties in the middle was open. Jamal Haynes was an outlet for three of those plays. I'm not a huge option fan, but the A-back option play would have been good.

The short point was that GT needed to get the ball out of the pocket quickly against what they were showing. Buster needs to re-think his two point conversion strategy against teams strong up the middle.

Tons to be proud of, no reason not to be optimistic that we are on the rise. It certainly is a far flippin' cry from 55-0. But, the tough pill to swallow is that we blew our chance to win it.

Singleton really needs to refine his route running. On the first half throw into the end zone where the throw was behind Singleton for the drop, Haynes King put the ball exactly where it had to be. Singleton arrived in a big hole in the UGA zone in the middle of the End zone, King sees him throws it right to him but Singleton Inexplicably drifts right into the safety and Singleton can't reach back for the ball, which was where the receiver should have sat down on that route. That is a bad error. Maybe a move to running back for him?
Great post but respectfully disagree with you about why this game was lost (because UGA wore us down). In my humble opinion absolutely no excuse for Tech's coaches going into a soft prevent-style defense with 5 to 6 minutes still left in the game. That basically handed UGA a TD in under 2 minutes time, and also the momentum, and left our offense in a bind so that we HAD to get 3 first downs (with UGA all timeouts left) in order to keep them from getting the ball back and tying. Tech outplayed UGA the entire game; this is all on coaches, not on our players getting worn down. I'm not mad at Key, I just hope he learns from it, and if in similar situation in future (with lead) plays to win (not play not to lose). Thanks
 

Jackets2004

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
4
Again you have to remember how depleted our secondary was due to injuries by that point in the game.
I understand, but if they simply play regular defense as they had throughout the game, rush at least 4 (and possibly 5) guys, and don't go into a soft prevent giving UGA easy quick 10 yards per play - even with depleted secondary - does UGA go all the way down the field and score in less than 2 minutes? I suppose it's possible but highly improbable. Give the guys a chance to stop them; in this case the coaches completely took that ability away from them.
 

MtnWasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,059
Again you have to remember how depleted our secondary was due to injuries by that point in the game.
That doesn't mean you have to play them in a soft zone. And the personnel losses do not correspond exactly to the timing of the change in defensive strategy.

It appeared to me that the staff decided to play the soft zone due to time and score and not player loss. We tried to rope-a-dope them and it didn't work. We went into the soft zone too early in the game. We needed one more stop or one more score or needed to go soft zone later in the game.

It was a strategic decision that did not pan out.

Personally, I am not a prevent guy. I do not think, analytics be damned, that giving up the big play is so bad if you are going for the game clinching stop. Being aggressive keeps the players dialed in. Going prevent kills player initiative, IMO. It is a psychological thing.

So, when I see a team go prevent and it fails, I want to roast the coaches for it.

But Key prioritizes shortening the game. He is a huge clock guy.
 

Jackets2004

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
4
Would you have gone to a soft prevent defense with 5 to 6 minutes still left on the clock? Wasn't hindsight - I was in disbelief when they did it at the time, and still am. Sorry to be cynical.
i find it aughable to blame the coaches for the loss. They had a great game plan. In EVERY game you can find a play and say" oh, he should have called this or that". Hind sight and second guessing is dumb when you played an overall great game.
 

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
5,138
That doesn't mean you have to play them in a soft zone. And the personnel losses do not correspond exactly to the timing of the change in defensive strategy.

It appeared to me that the staff decided to play the soft zone due to time and score and not player loss. We tried to rope-a-dope them and it didn't work. We went into the soft zone too early in the game. We needed one more stop or one more score or needed to go soft zone later in the game.

It was a strategic decision that did not pan out.

Personally, I am not a prevent guy. I do not think, analytics be damned, that giving up the big play is so bad if you are going for the game clinching stop. Being aggressive keeps the players dialed in. Going prevent kills player initiative, IMO. It is a psychological thing.

So, when I see a team go prevent and it fails, I want to roast the coaches for it.

But Key prioritizes shortening the game. He is a huge clock guy.
I hate prevent defenses and agree about the psychological effect of switching from aggression to passive mode. But we use the word “analytics” a lot. And we see many respected and well paid coaches who do this. So it does make me wonder what the math(analytics) say about making this move. The data must say it’s the right thing to do. After all, the data can’t be wrong can it?
 

Bogey

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,788
By not even reviewing the fumble play for targeting, clearly indicates that college football is saying that we have the rule on the review of targeting clearly defined, and which can also be initiated by the replay booth if it is not called by the on field officials, to help prevent serious injuries to the brain and nervous system of our football players, EXCEPT when a review may negatively impact the financial interests of our TV telecasters. In that case, the health of the players become a secondary issue that can be overlooked.
Why Brent Key is not infuriated by this situation in which one of his players was the victim of such a play is beyond me.
 

jepherson

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
52
I hate prevent defenses and agree about the psychological effect of switching from aggression to passive mode. But we use the word “analytics” a lot. And we see many respected and well paid coaches who do this. So it does make me wonder what the math(analytics) say about making this move. The data must say it’s the right thing to do. After all, the data can’t be wrong can it?
It wasn’t “wrong”… it worked as planned. Save for the bs targeting fumble, we run out the clock and walk home.

But I still don’t like it. Play your game, stick with what has been working.
 

BleedGoldNWhite21

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,519
Also, how does Key not challenge the tipped ball on PI? It is reviewable, which to my understanding means it’s challengeable. We had the time outs and if it goes our way, the game is basically over.
 

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
5,138
By not even reviewing the fumble play for targeting, clearly indicates that college football is saying that we have the rule on the review of targeting clearly defined, and which can also be initiated by the replay booth if it is not called by the on field officials, to help prevent serious injuries to the brain and nervous system of our football players, EXCEPT when a review may negatively impact the financial interests of our TV telecasters. In that case, the health of the players become a secondary issue that can be overlooked.
Why Brent Key is not infuriated by this situation in which one of his players was the victim of such a play is beyond me.
Key may be infuriated but probably understands that griping about a single call in which there were a multitude of player, coaching and referee errors is not a good luck. It also goes against his mantra of “it’s up to us”. I don’t want him griping publicly…I don’t like the sour grapes attitude from anyone, let alone the face of the program.
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,125
Location
Augusta, Georgia
I hate prevent defenses and agree about the psychological effect of switching from aggression to passive mode. But we use the word “analytics” a lot. And we see many respected and well paid coaches who do this. So it does make me wonder what the math(analytics) say about making this move. The data must say it’s the right thing to do. After all, the data can’t be wrong can it?

In theory, you are trading yardage and a possible future score for minutes off the clock. As we had a two TD lead all we had to do was take the next possession and get a FG to ice it. The fumble killed us.
 

7979

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
367
Location
Nashville
By not even reviewing the fumble play for targeting, clearly indicates that college football is saying that we have the rule on the review of targeting clearly defined, and which can also be initiated by the replay booth if it is not called by the on field officials, to help prevent serious injuries to the brain and nervous system of our football players, EXCEPT when a review may negatively impact the financial interests of our TV telecasters. In that case, the health of the players become a secondary issue that can be overlooked.
Why Brent Key is not infuriated by this situation in which one of his players was the victim of such a play is beyond me.
Boys...the name of the broadcast is "The SEC on ABC".......LOL....
Refs did not cost us this game. They were horrible but.....
 

MtnWasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,059
I hate prevent defenses and agree about the psychological effect of switching from aggression to passive mode. But we use the word “analytics” a lot. And we see many respected and well paid coaches who do this. So it does make me wonder what the math(analytics) say about making this move. The data must say it’s the right thing to do. After all, the data can’t be wrong can it?
This is a topic too big for this thread, but I will chime in that as a person who did science for a living and crunched numbers, there is certainly such a thing as bad science. For numbers to provide insight, you have to ask them the right questions. It is still an endeavor of human creativity.

Football is a human endeavor and humans are not machines. Inspiration, passion, altruism...so many intangible factors that are problematic if not impossible to quantify. Football is not the Craps table where there are definitive odds.

Sun Tzu did not entitle his book, "The Science of War," it is called "The Art of War." Football is like that. Trying to quantify such things is a formula for defeat (pun intended).
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,750
Also, how does Key not challenge the tipped ball on PI? It is reviewable, which to my understanding means it’s challengeable. We had the time outs and if it goes our way, the game is basically over.
As I said when VT only had to go 9 yards to get a first down because of the misplacement of the sticks, somebody should be watching a TV monitor and alerting the coach to things like this. He can't see it from the sideline. Either we don't have anyone doing that, or they're not doing their job. Would have saved us this ball game.
 

kg01

Get-Bak! Coach
Featured Member
Messages
15,362
Location
Atlanta
IMO the longer the game went on the harder it got to scheme around the difference in DL and DB play especially with so many injuries. But Key has shown an ability to recruit on the lines we haven’t seen in ages so… lets get to the point we don’t have a fourth quarter letdown.

It wasn’t just UGA. We let FSU, UNC, NCST all back into games late. ND pulled anway in the second half. And we failed to stop Cuse and Louisville in critical spots.

I don’t think that will stay a pattern with the incoming guys. Credit to these guys for doing as much as they did in just two years post-Collins, but the future is real bright.

I think it was mainly trying to hide secondary limitations due to injuries.

I gotta say, and the broadcast shockingly agreed, we dominated the LOS on both sides pretty much the whole game.

They kept pleasuring themselves about uGA's nonexistent size and talent advantage but that did not really bear out the way they assumed it would.
 

Darthdad

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
48
the 2 point shootout was a stupid tv network panic over correction to the LSU/A&M 7OT game. I don't think there's anyone who likes the new OT rules over the previous ones. Honestly worse than PK shootouts in soccer
If player safety was actually a concern (LOL, we know it isnt), they would simply bring back ties except for the playoff. Otherwise, just go with an extra 15 minute period. No sudden death.
 

cpf2001

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,389
I think a prevent defense might have been a “reasonable” move (even though i never really like them) BUT I think it needs to slow them down more. Our prevent didn’t take up enough additional clock - 75 yards in two minutes. I think the injuries had a lot to do with that. It wasn’t just too easy.

In the end we gave up TDs on 6 straight possessions, excluding the 1-play Hail Mary and including the 2 OTs; the last 4 of those were passing TDs. Just had nothing left in the tank.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,367
I agree that the difference is more obvious deeper down the depth chart but not across the first 22 for each. Imo, Uga without Beck looks about like a UNC or Miami to my eyes. At the end of the game it was their first team receivers ( who drop about as many as they catch ) against our 3rd team CB’s. They exploited that as one might expect.
They are not as stacked as in 2021 & 2022. ESPN has 4 Georgia players as 1st round picks for the 2025 NFL Draft. They really do have a ton of talented players. Our guys really played to the top of their ability.
 
Top