Miami Postgame

CuseJacket

CuseJacket

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
18,958
Miami Hurricanes’ coaches used a few special tricks to beat Georgia Tech
A graduate assistant — he declined to say whom — recommended Miami’s scout-team offensive line, which normally consists of redshirting offensive linemen, instead use fullbacks, of which Miami had a roster surplus. The smaller, quicker “linemen” would be able to simulate Georgia Tech’s cut-blocking techniques with greater ferocity.

It worked perfectly. In the game, the newcomers brushed off blocks with regularity, having a better idea of how fast real-life linemen would dive at their legs.

“The speed was slower to me,” Pinckney said. “It was way faster to me with the scout team. … I’m not down-talking [Georgia Tech], but in practice I got cut like seven times. Not at all today.”

Said Quarterman: “For two weeks straight we had been running past these little guys, using our hands, trying to defend them. When we came into the game and the linemen were bigger, our speed was on another level.”
Click to expand...
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
@AE 87
I'm not saying I'm satisfied with the D. There is a whole lot of room for improvement on that side. But I am seeing improvement there so I'm encouraged. Not long ago I wasn't sure we'd ever see a D capable of getting 3 n outs. We are getting those again thankfully. But yes, we are still too inconsistent, still take too many bad angles, still fail to wrap up well enough, and are just not getting turnovers much at all. But I'd have given good money for this D on some Tevin Washington teams.

The D is improving and I think we have some young players with good potential. Coaches gotta bring that potential out of em.

I thought the Olline did a better job today. Still turned too many defenders loose but we also mashed them quite a bit on some good drives.

Keep improving, upward and onward. No easy games left.
 
AE 87

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,016
Whiskey_Clear said:
@AE 87
I'm not saying I'm satisfied with the D. There is a whole lot of room for improvement on that side. But I am seeing improvement there so I'm encouraged. Not long ago I wasn't sure we'd ever see a D capable of getting 3 n outs. We are getting those again thankfully. But yes, we are still too inconsistent, still take too many bad angles, still fail to wrap up well enough, and are just not getting turnovers much at all. But I'd have given good money for this D on some Tevin Washington teams.

The D is improving and I think we have some young players with good potential. Coaches gotta bring that potential out of em.

I thought the Olline did a better job today. Still turned too many defenders loose but we also mashed them quite a bit on some good drives.

Keep improving, upward and onward. No easy games left.
Click to expand...

No worries. I agree that we're getting better. Still, I disagree with the language of "good enough to win."
 
AE 87

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,016
Supersizethatorder-mutt said:
We DID play good enough to win today. Can't say that every week.
Click to expand...

We gave up a TD every other drive on average till nearly the end of 3rd qtr, 3.5 ppd is huge O terrible D.

Our 2014 D scored about 3.5 ppd vs pwr5 opp on average and was one of the best Os ever. Saying our D played good enough is comparable to our O being better than that year and.their D average.
 
Supersizethatorder-mutt

Supersizethatorder-mutt

Banned
Messages
13,443
Location
Augusta, GA
AE 87 said:
We gave up a TD every other drive on average till nearly the end of 3rd qtr, 3.5 ppd is huge O terrible D.

Our 2014 D scored about 3.5 ppd vs pwr5 opp on average and was one of the best Os ever. Saying our D played good enough is comparable to our O being better than that year and.their D average.
Click to expand...
Look, I'm not saying I am satisfied with our D, but they DID play well enough today to win the game if JT hadn't fumbled twice in 10 seconds
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
Ppd isn't good. Conceded. But if we don't gift 14 pts off fumbles, scoops, and scores, we could have won. Ifs and buts being what they are we didn't. We need a D that can bail us out when the wheels come off like this and we don't yet. You won't win many games doing this though. LT on that first one....smh. Our pass pro isn't as improved as I thought it was after first 3 games.

How did the offense ppd compare?
 
awbuzz

awbuzz

Helluva Manager
Staff member
Messages
11,504
Location
Marietta, GA
If, and that's a big if, the o-line consistently quits allowing unfettered access to the back field we'll be damn good on O. Until then, we not most teams, are good enough to overcome being blindsided, etc. Behind the line of scrimmage.
 
iceeater1969

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,953
dressedcheeseside said:
People are being ridiculous, but that is to be expected after a loss. When teams are clearly more talented, you should lose. (Clemson). When teams are more talented, but not playing to their talent level, you got a shot. (Miami) When you shoot yourself in the foot against these teams, you got no shot. But to say we "should have won." That's plain silly.

We played really well at times, but then again, we played really poorly at times too. Unfortunately, the two plays where our left side OL completely collapsed, we lost 14 points. Game.
Click to expand...
The pass rush from left side was by the lb/safety who rushed around the end. The play was a roll right pass. The left ab went out for pass instead of hitting the.rushing lb. Sure looked like the ol had plenty of guys to block (7 man dl and 6-came) The left tackle had a guy infront of him as did will. When jt stopped to pass , he was hit by lb who ran free. Please advise if I am in error.

I thought the ol played pretty well. They had few if any subs after devine went out. Will watch the tape.
 
Top