NC State Postgame

[Oldgoldandwhite]

Who held for the 2 fgs we kicked? If the same guy, then what he said doesn’t make much sense.

And extra points?

 

[Northeast Stinger]

That's a scheme defect. Geometry can help explain the problem when everyone is bunched with 1 yard to gain and the QB is 5-6 yards deep.

Feels that way. I understand that being further back is supposed to give you a better view of where the hole is opening but almost seems to build in a hesitancy when the defense is closing quickly.

 

[SWATlien]

Chris Cotter is a GT alum.
This should have produced a victory.
Sanders was the first WR to get 100 yards in a game since 15’. Camp had his streak broken. Sims has to calm down in the pocket and step up some, that said the OLine was not allowing him to go through his progressions and the WR were not getting separation. He was playing sandlot back there.

 

[Ibeeballin]

Who held for the 2 fgs we kicked? If the same guy, then what he said doesn’t make much sense.

After 7 blocked kicks this season, you would’ve had no issue trotting out Austin Kent as the holder right before halftime with the potential of a blocked kick return turning the game into a 3 score game?

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

Getting 2 short FGs instead of TDs was the difference in game to me.
Of course having TWELVE penalties didn't help.
otoh--may have been the best effort of yr on DEF..

In this day and age, it is hard to win football games kicking field goals. Back in the day, a field goal lead in the fourth quarter was money in the bank but those days are gone forever. The Rev. said something in the post game that disturbed me. He said something to the effect that Sims may never be as accurate a passer that this kind of offense demands. I should think that with a more run based offense like we have, Sims would be plenty accurate if receivers would get separation. But that is just me. I thought we played much better than most people assumed based upon our record going into the game. I do not see how it is possible to run ten more plays than the Pack, lead in time of possession by three minutes, seemingly run for a gazillion yards, have over 400 yards total offense and only score 13 points. Frustrating.

 

[Technut1990]

Collins said the reason he didn’t kick the FG in the first half is that we were down to our #3 holder who had never done it yet in a game even for a PAT, so he did t want to do that to him.

yeah I know but didn’t we have the same holder and kicker in the 2nd half ? Not trying to be smart but Collins unknowingly countered what he said about not taking the kick in the first half by saying they kicked the 2 in the 2nd half because “we needed points on the board”, and unless the personnel changed ( I don’t think it did ) we did kick under the same personnel situation In the 2nd half. The logic against the kick, ie being blocked, dosent change in the 2nd half, either of those could have been blocked and returned, the hold could be messed up etc.... you have to coach as if the players can perform their task in normal play, kickers kick and holders hold !

that’s exactly what I mean by over coaching/thinking. Do what normal football scenarios call for and you will confuse yourself less, as a coach. Always go for one rather than 2 unless it’s a must, kick when you should kick unless you are like on the 1 yard line and are trying to step on the other team, punt when it’s time to punt ( unless you are losing by 30 at the start of the 4th ). Variety is a strategy but not really a good one on a developing team. Establish your baseline before you stray off of it. Again a pitcher throws every breaking pitch off his fastball, you have to show you control the basics Before you start adding the thinking part.

dont get me wrong I understand his being hesitant given the kicking issues but that’s why I’ve been saying he should have been at least trying these FGs the whole year. And one more thing, b/c of the issues and my simplicity argument I’d say we just found a first string kicker and holder, until it’s shown we haven’t. No more ATL with the kicking game.

as it played out we still lose the game, the score would have been closer though and during the game it changes the football scenarios. We possibly lose 23-20 or State calls a different last 2 possessions of their game play And we pull out a win, who knows

 

[awbuzz]

Eh, this would mean more if there weren’t only 4 freshman getting meaningful playing time on offense in the conference. Sims, Gibbs, a RB from Syracuse, and a Pitt WR.

Coming into this weekend, Sims was 12th in the conference in passing yards, had the most interceptions per attempt, and was 7th in QB rushing. He may end up great, but the numbers this year haven’t been outstanding.

Where are your golf tinted glasses?

Facts are just that, facts.

 

[Technut1990]

Feels that way. I understand that being further back is supposed to give you a better view of where the hole is opening but almost seems to build in a hesitancy when the defense is closing quickly.

it does give you options in play calling though, RPOs, QB end runs and sweep type runs are more open

 

[Dress2Jacket]

The Rev. said something in the post game that disturbed me. He said something to the effect that Sims may never be as accurate a passer that this kind of offense demands.

I heard that too. I don't pretend to be an expert on QB play, but I value Richt's commentary there. Rarely (not never) have I seen a guy substantially improve his accuracy over time. I have seen inaccurate guys get better at decision making and reading defenses, but accuracy, not so much.

I do know that Sims puts the ball in the vicinity of the receiver. Does he put it in the optimum (or near optimum) place? Not often enough, from my perspectivie.

 

[LargeFO]

I heard that too. I don't pretend to be an expert on QB play, but I value Richt's commentary there. Rarely (not never) have I seen a guy substantially improve his accuracy over time. I have seen inaccurate guys get better at decision making and reading defenses, but accuracy, not so much.

I do know that Sims puts the ball in the vicinity of the receiver. Does he put it in the optimum (or near optimum) place? Not often enough, from my perspectivie.

Watch out for Peery in spring. I know it's cliche to like "the new guy", but he can really ball. Should be a great competition there.

 

[awbuzz]

don't see this game being played

GT AA wants it played so it doesn't have to beg that instead of a refund for season tickets that the $ be donated.

 

[awbuzz]

Really? Did he say that? I didn't hear it but if he did then thats an Alice in Wonderland type of excuse.

Yes, yes he did say it.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

After 7 blocked kicks this season, you would’ve had no issue trotting out Austin Kent as the holder right before halftime with the potential of a blocked kick return turning the game into a 3 score game?

What I have an issue with is going into hurry up on the one yard line. Give the ball to Mason. If he doesn't get in, give it to him again. I don't think they could have stopped us from the one yard line.

 

[billga99]

I heard that too. I don't pretend to be an expert on QB play, but I value Richt's commentary there. Rarely (not never) have I seen a guy substantially improve his accuracy over time. I have seen inaccurate guys get better at decision making and reading defenses, but accuracy, not so much.

I do know that Sims puts the ball in the vicinity of the receiver. Does he put it in the optimum (or near optimum) place? Not often enough, from my perspectivie.

I think that is too cut and dry a statement without putting it in context. We still need more receivers to aid in the passing game. Speed burners generally can get open short since DBs have to respect their speed and not get beat deep. We don't have enough of those type of receivers yet (or at least receivers that have been healthy). But most importantly is think of the number of games Sims has been under a severe pass rush. If he has more time, I think that alone would improve his accuracy. When you are making a lot of your throws on the run to escape the rush, most QBs accuracy goes down. Compare the amount of time QBs have at Alabama, Florida, Georgia, etc. to throw the ball. I also think some of this is scheme which hopefully will leverage our players skills more effectively in the future.

 

[takethepoints]

Not a bad performance, except where it counts. We lost the game because of penalties in the red zone. There were others, of course, but the ones down there were what hurt. If we get the game to 20 - 17 when we had the ball on the one twice, I think Tech goes on to win. But they had their chances too and actually blew a few more then Tech did. So, on to the opinions:

The Good:

• We kicked two field goals! We kicked two field goals! We kicked two field goals! And I repeat: we kicked two field goals! Problem = we didn't have enough faith in Stewart to kick one when it might have helped.

• The run game was really good. Mason got 21 carries and delivered 99 yards, again just like clockwork. Smith looked good. And - wait for it - we actually called some runs for Sims and he delivered. You know, he could have been doing this for some little time instead fo running for his life instead.

• The D performed well in the run game again. I was impressed. Again.

The Bad:

• 10 TFLs again? I'm not sure how we rushed for 261 net yards with that stat staring us in the face. This has simply got to stop. And I'm not sure why it hasn't. Shoot, Clemson had 11 and these people weren't anywhere near as good on D as the Tiggers.

• And, as usual, the opposing QB feasted on our secondary. This, given the DL problems, is more understandable. But it isn't good.

• The team's concentration in scoring opportunities was a problem again. Why do we keep getting penalties at the very time we should not? By this time in the season, even one as screwed up as this one, you would expect that to be abating.

But, like I said, not a bad performance. With another year or two of experience - you will notice that I didn't get on Sims's case; he's freshman - a game like this would have been a win.

 

[slugboy]

I think you can say that Sims had a bad passing game without saying he’s a bad QB or should be pulled.
Based on one box score I read, NC State’s QB had a QBR around 100, which wasn’t great, and was helped significantly by his receiving corps. Sims was under 70. His first half was inaccurate. His second half was run-heavy.
Sims’ running was a huge part of keeping us in the game. He deserves credit for that.
NCST got 309 passing yards, and we got 151. A better passing game could have eased our red zone issues and definitely gotten us more first downs.
NCST’s receivers made Hockman look like a much better QB. Sims wasn’t accurate, but our receivers, tight ends, and backs could have made him look better in the passing game.
Pitt is going to be a challenge. Sims can pass better than he did on Saturday, and I hope he does on Thursday.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Not a bad performance, except where it counts. We lost the game because of penalties in the red zone. There were others, of course, but the ones down there were what hurt. If we get the game to 20 - 17 when we had the ball on the one twice, I think Tech goes on to win. But they had their chances too and actually blew a few more then Tech did. So, on to the opinions:

The Good:

• We kicked two field goals! We kicked two field goals! We kicked two field goals! And I repeat: we kicked two field goals! Problem = we didn't have enough faith in Stewart to kick one when it might have helped.

• The run game was really good. Mason got 21 carries and delivered 99 yards, again just like clockwork. Smith looked good. And - wait for it - we actually called some runs for Sims and he delivered. You know, he could have been doing this for some little time instead fo running for his life instead.

• The D performed well in the run game again. I was impressed. Again.

The Bad:

• 10 TFLs again? I'm not sure how we rushed for 261 net yards with that stat staring us in the face. This has simply got to stop. And I'm not sure why it hasn't. Shoot, Clemson had 11 and these people weren't anywhere near as good on D as the Tiggers.

• And, as usual, the opposing QB feasted on our secondary. This, given the DL problems, is more understandable. But it isn't good.

• The team's concentration in scoring opportunities was a problem again. Why do we keep getting penalties at the very time we should not? By this time in the season, even one as screwed up as this one, you would expect that to be abating.

But, like I said, not a bad performance. With another year or two of experience - you will notice that I didn't get on Sims's case; he's freshman - a game like this would have been a win.

The crazy thing is that our QBs by eligibility next year will be:
Chayden Perry: Freshman
Tucker Gleason: Freshman
Jeff Sims: Freshman
Jordan Yates: rs-Freshman

LOL

 

[Oakland]

In this day and age, it is hard to win football games kicking field goals. Back in the day, a field goal lead in the fourth quarter was money in the bank but those days are gone forever. The Rev. said something in the post game that disturbed me. He said something to the effect that Sims may never be as accurate a passer that this kind of offense demands. I should think that with a more run based offense like we have, Sims would be plenty accurate if receivers would get separation. But that is just me. I thought we played much better than most people assumed based upon our record going into the game. I do not see how it is possible to run ten more plays than the Pack, lead in time of possession by three minutes, seemingly run for a gazillion yards, have over 400 yards total offense and only score 13 points. Frustrating.

I've been trying to find a video of that. I too heard it and I believe he said he was starting to wonder about Sims' passing accuracy. I can't quote him without hearing it again. He has a lot more experience dealing with quarterbacks than I every will so I respect his opinion. I just hope we get better and his view changes.

 

[Dress2Jacket]

I think that is too cut and dry a statement without putting it in context.

Funny. I worked pretty hard to NOT make it a cut and dried statement. ;-)

 

[jacketup]

Lets try some down and distance and field position awareness in our play calling, especially in the red zone. Something is not right when the O yardage stats are so high and the scoring is so low (not the first time).

Usually a sign that the OL is not getting it done. Our only blemish in 1990--UNC. 3 OT's out for the game. We kept moving the ball until the red zone, but couldn't score.

But I agree that the 4th and 6 call from about the 10 made no sense--I would have kicked the FG (or tried). If the score had been 23-16 when we took over with 3;30 to go, maybe we wouldn't have put the burden on Sims' arm when we were already struggling in the passing game.