- Messages
- 11,430
Huh? Seems like you are asking me to prove a negative. Anyway, I posted the stats in reply to this comment: “I don't think we have won a game against a big physical team that had better athletes than us without passing effectively.” The stats I posted were intended to show that is irrefutably untrue if their point was that we need to complete a good number of passes to beat big teams. We have beaten plenty of very good, ranked, factory programs with less than 5 completions.
We lose a bunch of games because we can’t pass. Miami last year, where we couldn’t move the ball at all in the second half, and couldn’t complete a pass to get a first down. UVA last year. Arguably USF this year where we couldn’t catch up. Would have helped against Clemson this year. Against both Pitt and Duke this year, our running game either let us down or cost us (by three fumbles).
How many games do we need to see where we can’t catch up?
Even looking at the VT game, the entire game turned on the VT fumbled punt. Up until then, we were trading blows. VT forced a punt, and if they’d caught it, I think the pressure would have been on us, and the game could have gone more like Duke. Instead we got a lead and put the pressure on them.
Almost any defense wants to make the other team one dimensional. We shouldn’t do our opponents work for them.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk