Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Louisville Post Game
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="takethepoints" data-source="post: 751894" data-attributes="member: 265"><p>More on the game.</p><p></p><p>The Good:</p><p></p><p>The D had 8 TFLs and 3 sacks. That's <em>8 TFLs</em>. This isn't at all bad, folks.</p><p>Also, Clayton did very well; 2.5 sacks and 2 TFLs. I've discounted him before, but he may be as good as advertised. I doubt he'll draw a TE as an assigned blocker in future, however..Doubles for him from now on.</p><p>Sims did well under the rush, especially in the second half. Good throws at pretty much the last second. He has a decent release, but the main thing is that he knows how to wait for people to come open, This didn't hurt him against Louisville; their rush is nothing to write home about. In future, well …</p><p>The RBs did well again. Imho, we need to split the carries between Gibbs and Smith until Mason comes back. Gibbs is cuter; Smith runs harder. Not much difference. We could have used that 210 lb. guy out there a few times, however.</p><p></p><p>The Not So Good (You can't call anything much about a 19 point come from behind win bad.):</p><p></p><p>We had <em>another</em> kick blocked. The only reason this looks like an improvement is that we suck so bad at place kicking. And it was an extra point, not some 50 yard, wind-up FG. This has <em>got</em> to stop.</p><p>They had 471 yards of total offense, converted 9 of 17 3rd downs and 2 of 3 4ths, and held the ball 13 minutes more then we did. Ok, we made up for this a bit with the 8 TFLs and 3 sacks, but this is not a sterling D effort. We can't count on our opponents giving us the game with unforced turnovers going forward.</p><p>Why, in the name of all that's Holy, isn't Sims running the ball more? Ok, I get that we don't want him hurt, but if he got 10 or so dedicated carries a game, the running would be much more of a threat. He's big and fast; no reason to not use him.</p><p>We stettled down in the second.half, but we had some <em>very dumb</em> penalties in the first. I don't know what the coaches said at the half, but they need to start saying it at the <em>start of the game</em>. We looked well coached for the first time this year in the second half of this game.</p><p></p><p>Bottom Line:</p><p></p><p>If Tech can build on the second half performance then we could become a much more dangerous outfit. I don't know if our record would improve - I doubt it will - but we can make for some interesting moments for our opponents. And who knows? We might upset a couple of them.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="takethepoints, post: 751894, member: 265"] More on the game. The Good: The D had 8 TFLs and 3 sacks. That's [I]8 TFLs[/I]. This isn't at all bad, folks. Also, Clayton did very well; 2.5 sacks and 2 TFLs. I've discounted him before, but he may be as good as advertised. I doubt he'll draw a TE as an assigned blocker in future, however..Doubles for him from now on. Sims did well under the rush, especially in the second half. Good throws at pretty much the last second. He has a decent release, but the main thing is that he knows how to wait for people to come open, This didn't hurt him against Louisville; their rush is nothing to write home about. In future, well … The RBs did well again. Imho, we need to split the carries between Gibbs and Smith until Mason comes back. Gibbs is cuter; Smith runs harder. Not much difference. We could have used that 210 lb. guy out there a few times, however. The Not So Good (You can't call anything much about a 19 point come from behind win bad.): We had [I]another[/I] kick blocked. The only reason this looks like an improvement is that we suck so bad at place kicking. And it was an extra point, not some 50 yard, wind-up FG. This has [I]got[/I] to stop. They had 471 yards of total offense, converted 9 of 17 3rd downs and 2 of 3 4ths, and held the ball 13 minutes more then we did. Ok, we made up for this a bit with the 8 TFLs and 3 sacks, but this is not a sterling D effort. We can't count on our opponents giving us the game with unforced turnovers going forward. Why, in the name of all that's Holy, isn't Sims running the ball more? Ok, I get that we don't want him hurt, but if he got 10 or so dedicated carries a game, the running would be much more of a threat. He's big and fast; no reason to not use him. We stettled down in the second.half, but we had some [I]very dumb[/I] penalties in the first. I don't know what the coaches said at the half, but they need to start saying it at the [I]start of the game[/I]. We looked well coached for the first time this year in the second half of this game. Bottom Line: If Tech can build on the second half performance then we could become a much more dangerous outfit. I don't know if our record would improve - I doubt it will - but we can make for some interesting moments for our opponents. And who knows? We might upset a couple of them. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who was Georgia Tech's starting QB in 2023?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Louisville Post Game
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top