1. Welcome to Georgia Tech Swarm! JOIN US and be a part of the SWARM! GO JACKETS! THWg!

Studying the last 12 teams to play for a national title

Discussion in 'Georgia Tech Football' started by presjacket, Jun 25, 2014.

  1. presjacket

    presjacket Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    522
    [​IMG]
    http://coachingsearch.247sports.com...2-teams-to-play-for-a-national-title-29323773

    The above chart and link show some key stats from the last 12 teams to play for a national title.

    I thought it might be fun to compare to Georgia Tech in those categories:

    Year........Yards/rush......3rd down%.......RZ TD%........TO/game......TO margin
    2013...........5.46................51.4...................81.6................1.85.................-4
    2012...........5.39................45.6...................66.1................1.50................+4
    2011...........5.74................53.9...................72.7................1.46................+2
    2010..........5.58................40.4...................57.4...............2.08.................-6
    2009..........5.22.................52.3..................64.5................1.29.................+8
    2008.........5.55.................36.7...................46.2................2.08................+2

    stats from http://www.cfbstats.com/2013/team/255/index.html

    Looks like we need to hold on to the ball and force some turnovers to have a great season.
     
  2. JazzyD95

    JazzyD95 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    727
    "Looks like we need to hold on to the ball and force some turnovers to have a great season."
    Well duh?
     
    Rock likes this.
  3. presjacket

    presjacket Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    522
    We compare well in the other parameters listed on the chart.
     
  4. jeffgt14

    jeffgt14 We Suck

    Messages:
    5,370
    IMO defense wins championships so without much defensive statistics, this chart doesn’t do much for ME.
     
    CornerBlitz, Rock and Animal02 like this.
  5. AE 87

    AE 87 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    12,968
    I agree that you have to look at both offense and defense, but the OP was just offering the table from another site for comparison.

    Imo, turnovers and self-inflicted wounds like false-start penalties and missed receivers have been our biggest problems on offense. However, our D has been less than average.
     
    vamosjackets and jeffgt14 like this.
  6. AE 87

    AE 87 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    12,968
    Last 6 years, FEI Def:
    2013: FSU 5, Aub 10
    2012: Ala 4, ND 16
    2011: Ala 1, LSU 2
    2010: Aub 8, Ore 4
    2009: Ala 1, Tx 9
    2008: FL 1, OK 19

    Last 6 years, FEI Off:
    2013: FSU 12, Aub 7
    2012: Ala 5, ND 12
    2011: Ala 11, LSU 17
    2010: Aub 1, Ore 15
    2009: Ala 5, Tx 14
    2008: FL 3, OK 1

    Obviously being good in both offense and defense is preferable but only Aub 2010 won the MNC with less than a top 5 D and with the worst D in the MNCG.
     
  7. 33jacket

    33jacket Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    4,511
    i think for the offensive picture some measure of the passing game should be in this; whatever a relevant stat is. yards per attempt? or yards per game or something?

    Total offense is probably good to have in there too. Then its a more complete offensive picture

    One thing have to be careful about TO Margin, that is as much to do with D as O. However TO a game is good....
     
  8. JohnnyMcKnight

    JohnnyMcKnight Banned

    Messages:
    36
    All 12 of those teams had the capacity to run a 2-minute offense in the year that they made it to the Title game, going into year-7 GT FB does not have that capability.
    Given this new playoff system we are not likely to make a serious run at the CFB playoff with our offense as currently configured.
     
    Rock likes this.
  9. Rock

    Rock Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    615

    DING DING DING!!!
     
  10. Rock

    Rock Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    615
    my bad... read yours wrong. disregard
     
  11. forensicbuzz

    forensicbuzz Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    3,262
    Our ability to run a 2-minute offense (although I disagree with your conclusion) is irrelevant. If we don't put ourselves in a position where we have to go 80 yards in 90 seconds to win, it's a non-issue. Also, any time the ball is in JT's hands, we're potentially in a 10.6 second offense.
     
  12. Rock

    Rock Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    615
    not entirely accurate.

    There were some teams that won NC's that had to win big games running the 2 min O. one of the Bama vs LSU regular season games sticks out.
     
    JohnnyMcKnight likes this.
  13. forensicbuzz

    forensicbuzz Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    3,262
    I seem to remember that we could move the ball pretty quickly when we had to. It wasn't very successful most times, but we could do it if the efficiency was there. No, we don't have a 2-minute drill, that comment was a little tongue-in-cheek.

    Bottom line is this offense, the way it has been run, isn't really designed to move the ball long distances in short time periods. Typically that involves a high percentage of passing downs, which is counter to what we do. Could we insert a package for this specific purpose?, I think we did in the Spring.
     
  14. Whiskey_Clear

    Whiskey_Clear Banned

    Messages:
    10,488
    Our 2 minute offense has been fine moving the ball down the field in short amounts of time. IMO where it has failed is scoring once we get inside the 30 yard line in those situations.
     
  15. Boomergump

    Boomergump Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    3,255
    This is a pretty interesting study. Obviously the data isn't comprehensive enough to draw firm conclusions, as several critical categories for football success are missing. However, it is nice to know that we are competitive with typical natty teams in terms of 3rd down, RZ efficiency, and ave per rush. It is a place to start. Obviously, we need to turn it over less and, perhaps more importantly, create more TOs on defense. It seems that TO margin is a critical factor in ANY teams drive for a championship. None of of the finalists had to overcome a negative TO record on their way.

    The two minute drill discussion is interesting, but if I had to choose between a dynamic two minute offense and a plus 15 TO margin at season's end, I would go with the latter and it wouldn't be close.
     
    forensicbuzz likes this.
  16. JohnnyMcKnight

    JohnnyMcKnight Banned

    Messages:
    36
    If we aren't scoring with it (2-min. off.), then it is not fine.
     
  17. forensicbuzz

    forensicbuzz Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    3,262
    This is what I was saying. Because we haven't been able to punch it in, we haven't been very successful. Historically, we either stalled or threw a pick. Very seldom have we run out of time.
     
    danny daniel likes this.
  18. 33jacket

    33jacket Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    4,511
    I think the point is every team on this list had to rely on a 2 min drive once during the year to win. Period. And they did it.

    But did they do it cuz they were just the best team in the land as winning it all proved or cuz of scheme?

    Perhaps the fact we have sucked at 2 min regardless of scheme is simply cuz we just suck. As evidence by 7-5 seasons. Let me tell you. The 5 is far more than lack of 2 min execution.

    Get the 5 fixed. Then we can worry about the one where we may need 2 min execution. Right now its about fixing TOs, defense, and coaching a bit more for field position to help the d. Then after that we can do things to maximize the o.
     
    JohnnyMcKnight and Rock like this.
  19. Whiskey_Clear

    Whiskey_Clear Banned

    Messages:
    10,488
    I realize my post was lengthy....your reply makes me wonder if you took the time to read the WHOLE thing.
     
    Squints likes this.
  20. Rock

    Rock Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    615

    this made me literally LOL.
     

Share This Page