- Messages
- 11,933
- Location
- Marietta, GA
They did stop! that's why you have to use the linkOMG, ATL1 is not happy with the O, stop the presses!!!
They did stop! that's why you have to use the linkOMG, ATL1 is not happy with the O, stop the presses!!!
I wonder if we see a game this year where we do not attempt a pass.
we will??? go a game w/o attemptng a pass or will throw because we are dared? (assume the later)Teams are gonna load the box and dare us to throw. I suspect we will.
Oops, forgot there will be an extra game for us this yearwebmasterst: 66176 said:... so we don't make the playoff as an undefeated conference champ?
Go big of go home 15 - 0!!!
yep.(assume the later)
....Meanwhile, Georgia Tech's 713 rushing attempts in 2013 were down from 808 in 2012. It was still a big number for almost every other program in the nation, but it was the Yellow Jackets' fewest since Johnson's first season.
........(Contrary to some beliefs, Johnson doesn't hate to throw the ball. Actually, he likes it very much... when it works. That's what he keeps telling folks but very few listen.)
We may just make the record highest this year. Whatever translates to more wins works for me. The offense is designed to let the run set up the pass. But if the D comes out with the box loaded, the run (from previous games) has already set up the pass.But to your point, the ratio of rushes to total offensive plays (no ST plays) was the lowest for the CPJ GT years. If I had to bet, I would think the lowest of any CPJ year including Navy and Georgia Southern.
Say what you will, but the offenses of 2011 and 2012 were better than last year and I'll tell you what it was primarily because of the extra crap that was put in and a QB that was not willing to take a hit; and please don't tell me it was because of the offensive line play as somehow the 2 are in no way related.
LOL, what? Offensive line play isn't related to offensive success?
OK then.
First off, my revised prediction is that I'm going to find a way to watch the games, drink beer and enjoy the games with other GT fans.
For what I hope and pray is the last time (fat chance):
The problem for the last four years has been the D. The problem for the last four years has been the D. The problem for the last four years has been the D. The problem for the last four years has been the D. The problem for the last four years has been the D.
The O has been fine for the last four years. The O has been fine for the last four years. The O has been fine for the last four years. The O has been fine for the last four years. The O has been fine for the last four years.
If we play slightly better D we will have a good, with luck, a great year. If we don't things will be roughly the same: a good O let down by a D that can't hold on 3rd down. Let's hope that won't happen, despite the D problems in the off season.
The offense struggled at times, but so does every offense. Hell, even Oregon got shut down a time or two. What's your point? The D has been the main problem over the last several years. Statistically and non-statistically speaking, the O has been well above the D on average, over the last 4 years. There's no way around that.GT vs Clemson 2013
Link
GT vs Virginia Tech 2013
Link
Go watch those 2 games and tell me how it was the D's problem in those games. In both games, the defense decently but the offense was inept.
And don't give me the drivel about it being Vad's fault either.
Watch the Clemson game where we gave up 3 sacks to the redshirt freshman #90....all of which he beat the single block of a B-back. Having a 225 pound back trying to block a 270 pound guy repeatedly in space is a SCHEME problem, not a personnel problem. (By the way there were personnel problems too...like our LT being beaten 3 times by a speed rush and that guy sacking Vad once and hitting him as he threw twice...causing incompletions both times).
Or watch the VT game on the very first play from scrimmage where the VT player gets his hand in and causes a fumble as Vad was separating from the mesh. Again, not a personnel problem...that's a scheme problem.
By and large, I agree the offense has been better than the defense but just repeating a mantra of "The problem for the last four years has been the D. " or "The O has been fine for the last four years. " over & over will not make it any more true.
I don't disagree with you; in fact, I agree with you.The offense struggled at times, but so does every offense. Hell, even Oregon got shut down a time or two. What's your point? The D has been the main problem over the last several years. Statistically and non-statistically speaking, the O has been well above the D on average, over the last 4 years. There's no way around that.
Truth is we need to get better in every phase, including ST's. But if I had to pick one unit where improvement would have the largest overall positive impact, I'd pick D.I don't disagree with you; in fact, I agree with you.
But while "The offense has been fine for the last four years" might be true overall, there were multiple games where that was just not true.
It's a team game and sometimes the defense has to cover for the offense and vice versa. In those 2 games I mentioned, the defense actually outplayed the offense.
It's a team game and sometimes the defense has to cover for the offense and vice versa. In those 2 games I mentioned, the defense actually outplayed the offense.