Replay Study: GT Offense vs Clemson

[Skeptic]

Clemson was basically using 8 against the run.

When you are flooding eight and in the main those guys are better athletes than our guys, stuff happens. That, and that defensive guy from Clemson is one sharp tack.

 

[orientalnc]

When you are flooding eight and in the main those guys are better athletes than our guys, stuff happens. That, and that defensive guy from Clemson is one sharp tack.

Clemson correctly assumed our pass offense was not sophisticated enough to react to 8 vs 5 on the LOS. With their talent differential and the numbers, JT simply had no time to operate.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Clemson correctly assumed our pass offense was not sophisticated enough to react to 8 vs 5 on the LOS. With their talent differential and the numbers, JT simply had no time to operate.

They didn't rush 8 guys.

 

[orientalnc]

They didn't rush 8 guys.

I agree, but they had eight guys in the box on every play. With their talent, somebody was bound to beat their blocker on almost every play. It worked for them. Still, had we not made the mistake that gave them the safety and resulting TD, the game would have been much closer and the narrative this week very different.

 

[Rock]

1.The offense does not have the WRs to beat CBs 1 on 1 .Therefore the Safeties can run free anywhere.--to help on pass, rush on bback,explode to outside on corner run
2. our Off line blocking is either too complicated or the guys are not good enough--way too many "non-blocks"
3.With no big TE (or tall Aback ) we can't burn LBss that cheat on rush ,with quick over the middle pass
4.JT is too short to see them even if they were open
5. The backs still only block well 50% of time AT MAX
These are huge problems vs good defs or even fair defs (see dook)
until this improves expect struggling Off and struggling team

LOL!
I love how they list him at 5'11.. He is 5'9 maybe. I am 5'10 and taller than him standing beside him.

 

[jeffgt14]

LOL!
I love how they list him at 5'11.. He is 5'9 maybe. I am 5'10 and taller than him standing beside him.

I usually disagree with you on just about everything known to mankind but yes I strongly believe JT’s height affects him as a QB. He doesn’t throw much over the middle at all (a lot by design but the designs are to help him). I can’t count the number of times an AB has been wide open by 20+ yards deep over the middle and JT never sees him. I think Clemson’s 6’5” NT was causing all sorts of problems for JT seeing anything. This is also a huge reason I’m not big on Marshall being QB next year unless he proves to be as explosive as JT.

 

[alagold]

I'm gonna quote all these dumb things you said after the Miami win.

I'm listening for your reply .Nothing .WOW-- we lost by 14 AT HOME! Notice #2 on the list--that is 14 pts I would berate you for your ignorance but for someone as you it isn't worth it--I just wish you had put your money where your mouth is

 

[orientalnc]

I unlike this. There's no benefit associated with berating other posters.

 

[GTRanj]

I'm listening for your reply .Nothing .WOW-- we lost by 14 AT HOME! Notice #2 on the list--that is 14 pts I would berate you for your ignorance but for someone as you it isn't worth it--I just wish you had put your money where your mouth is

Hmm let me throw some facts out there unlike yourself.

22 first downs to Miami's 18

361 to Miami's 355 total yards.
267 of those were rushing yards, for a team that doesn't know how to block, they sure got lucky stumbling upon all those yards on Miami's four and five star d linemen.

Completion attempted 11-19 to 13-19 for Brad Kaya.
Kaya got many more yards, but JTS height disadvantage sure didn't look too bad on those dimes he was dropping to our receivers, which I concede to you we don't have the talent we normally do otherwise his stats would look much better.

And finally, three turnovers to none (only two matter since the last one was garbage desperation). That is the difference in this game. Not your dumb reasons. Sure blocking could be better, it always can be. CPJ is even critical of those after many wins, but to say the offense struggled would be dumb. If you're gonna say something, back it up with facts.

 

[alagold]

Hmm let me throw some facts out there unlike yourself.

22 first downs to Miami's 18

361 to Miami's 355 total yards.
267 of those were rushing yards, for a team that doesn't know how to block, they sure got lucky stumbling upon all those yards on Miami's four and five star d linemen.

Completion attempted 11-19 to 13-19 for Brad Kaya.
Kaya got many more yards, but JTS height disadvantage sure didn't look too bad on those dimes he was dropping to our receivers, which I concede to you we don't have the talent we normally do otherwise his stats would look much better.

And finally, three turnovers to none (only two matter since the last one was garbage desperation). That is the difference in this game. Not your dumb reasons. Sure blocking could be better, it always can be. CPJ is even critical of those after many wins, but to say the offense struggled would be dumb. If you're gonna say something, back it up with facts.

I knew IF you said ANYTHING it would be how close we came.There are only TWO facts in this game that are relevant. 1--We LOST. 2--We lost by 14 at home as only 7 pt underdogs. I didn't ever think we wouldn't be in the game.We were --big deal.I'm glad you are happy.

 

[GTRanj]

Look I'm sorry you base your football knowledge on the spread and who was an underdog. I base it on FACTS.

FACT 1 we ran our offense fairly well against them.

FACT 2 They won because of 14 gifted points.

I saw our team was more than competitive against a team who was "picked" to win. If not for those GIFTS i truly believe Tech would win. You can ask guys on here who review the film and have way more knowledge than me on the subject and who may even coach such as @Boomergump and I feel they would agree more so with me than you.

I could care less about what the spread was, or who the talking heads picked to win. This game was there to be won. It was not lost for the reasons you mentioned. Again blocking and other intricacies of our offense could have been better, but the reasons you stated for us going on to lose, were not the reasons we lost. This makes my original point still valid, despite the loss.