Some Impressive Stats

Boomergump

Boomergump

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,281
to throw your way. A this point in the season with 27% of the schedule completed:

38 total opponent drives defended, 19 three and outs

34 opponent 3rd downs defended, 9 converted

First Downs: TECH 75, opp 43

Rushing Yards: TECH 1181, Opp 301

Ave per rush: TECH 5.8, opp 3.8

Ave yards per passing attempt: TECH 11.7, opp 5.7

Total Offense: TECH 1461, opp 793

Ave per play: TECH 6.5, opp 4.8

While I think we have some better opponents still left on our schedule, these kind of numbers represent a team that is pretty dominant. If you take away a couple stats that were not mentioned above (namely STs and fumbles) we would be crushing teams at biblical proportions. OK maybe not "biblical" but you get my drift. There is a lot of water yet to go under the bridge and, while these stats don't mean everything at this point, they aren't meaningless either. We are building something.
 

gtg936g

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,142
The troubling trend to me is our 3rd down conversion percentage. We need that to be > 60% to really have a dominant offense. Eliminate a few errors and we are there. There is no doubt in my mind this could be a greater offensive team than 2014 if we can clean it up.
 
Boomergump

Boomergump

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,281
gtg936g said:
The troubling trend to me is our 3rd down conversion percentage. We need that to be > 60% to really have a dominant offense. Eliminate a few errors and we are there. There is no doubt in my mind this could be a greater offensive team than 2014 if we can clean it up.
Click to expand...
Over 60%? Wow. You are demanding. I hope we can get there. Just to give a little history on that stat: the GT 2014 offense, which set all time records for the decade old (approximately) offensive efficiency statistic (by a pretty wide margin, if I recall correctly, it actually caused them to redefine the stat itself) only converted 3rd downs at 58%.
 
GTHomer

GTHomer

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
920
Boomergump said:
Over 60%? Wow. You are demanding. I hope we can get there. Just to give a little history on that stat: the GT 2014 offense, which set all time records for the decade old (approximately) offensive efficiency statistic (by a pretty wide margin, if I recall correctly, it actually caused them to redefine the stat itself) only converted 3rd downs at 58%.
Click to expand...

I agree. In this game, there were several 3rd and short situations where we ran wide instead of the dive or midline however overall we've done well this year on 3rd done. For the most part, I though Pitt emphasized defending the wide plays.
 

gtg936g

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,142
Boomergump said:
Over 60%? Wow. You are demanding. I hope we can get there. Just to give a little history on that stat: the GT 2014 offense, which set all time records for the decade old (approximately) offensive efficiency statistic (by a pretty wide margin, if I recall correctly, it actually caused them to redefine the stat itself) only converted 3rd downs at 58%.
Click to expand...

I don't think I stated what I meant very well. After the UT game we were at something crazy like 75%. We have been below 50% after that and our competition hasn't been elite. While we have gained a lot of yards, I would not yet classify our offense as dominant because of our turnovers and third down efficiency. 60% after playing UM, VT, Clemson is unrealistic, but based in our opponents to date it is reasonable IMO.
 
dressedcheeseside

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,219
GTHomer said:
I agree. In this game, there were several 3rd and short situations where we ran wide instead of the dive or midline however overall we've done well this year on 3rd done. For the most part, I though Pitt emphasized defending the wide plays.
Click to expand...
I think Coach out guessed himself in the chess match on those. He expected, as many would, Nardummy to concentrate assets in the middle to stuff the dive.

I still think we could have beat defender to the edge if we don't cut back.
 
GTHomer

GTHomer

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
920
dressedcheeseside said:
I think Coach out guessed himself in the chess match on those. He expected, as many would, Nardummy to concentrate assets in the middle to stuff the dive.

I still think we could have beat defender to the edge if we don't cut back.
Click to expand...

Fair assessment! As a fan, it seemed that whenever we ran the dive or midline, we always got positive yardage. I understand the need to mix it up to keep them guessing.
 
Boomergump

Boomergump

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,281
gtg936g said:
I don't think I stated what I meant very well. After the UT game we were at something crazy like 75%. We have been below 50% after that and our competition hasn't been elite. While we have gained a lot of yards, I would not yet classify our offense as dominant because of our turnovers and third down efficiency. 60% after playing UM, VT, Clemson is unrealistic, but based in our opponents to date it is reasonable IMO.
Click to expand...
OK. I hear you and agree for the most part. At this point we could easily be over 60%, but the sledding will get tougher in the weeks ahead.
 
ilovetheoption

ilovetheoption

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,816
Interestingly, QB's and BB's have gotten 83% of the carries this year, while's AB's have only gotten 17% of the carries (they have gained 24% of the yards)

I wonder how much of that can be attributed to the way defenses are defending GT and how much to a new QB not quite being as comfortable getting the ball pitched.
 

gtg936g

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,142
ilovetheoption said:
Interestingly, QB's and BB's have gotten 83% of the carries this year, while's AB's have only gotten 17% of the carries (they have gained 24% of the yards)

I wonder how much of that can be attributed to the way defenses are defending GT and how much to a new QB not quite being as comfortable getting the ball pitched.
Click to expand...


Great question. I don't have the answer, but I would say there are a few other things to consider. We have trouble getting to the MLB, and have a really good G-C-G. Given those factors I think it makes a lot of sense to CPJ to run inside until the defense stops it. It will be interesting when we play UM, VT, and especially Clemson. They have the DTs to match our push up the middle.
 

GoldenTornado

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
12
ilovetheoption said:
Interestingly, QB's and BB's have gotten 83% of the carries this year, while's AB's have only gotten 17% of the carries (they have gained 24% of the yards)

I wonder how much of that can be attributed to the way defenses are defending GT and how much to a new QB not quite being as comfortable getting the ball pitched.
Click to expand...

I had also noticed the AB's just aren't getting the ball very much so far, but 3 games might be too small of a sample set to read much into it.

To the degree it's meaningful, it might just be because the dive and the QB keeps have been working so well. Our starting QB and BB are the #2 and #3 rushers in the ACC.

I ran the numbers from our four good seasons under CPJ (08, 09, 14, 16). The A-backs got the ball from a low of 22.4% in 2008 to a high of 25.1% in 2009 (but that's assuming that Anthony Allen never lined up at B-Back in 2009).
 

dfwjacket82

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
27
One other stat: had seven guys with a rush of 10 or more yards Saturday

I have no idea how many we usually have when we do well.

seems like that would add some confusion for opposing DCs
 

Yaller Jacket

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
979
It doesn't look to me like we are getting to the edge very well this year. Or another way to put it is we don't outrun the defense to the corner and several defenders are out there with us. I don't know whether that has to do with the way other teams are defending, poor blocking, or whether Marshall is a tad slower than Justin was.
 
GTBandit22

GTBandit22

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,255
Pitt had their safeties in the alley all day. They weren't going to let the rocket beat them. They were daring us to throw or run inside where they hoped they could get off blocks and stuff the B back. We chose the latter and our B backs made them pay.
 
Top