Tech vs. Louisville

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,032
slugboy said:
I haven’t watched the video. If I do, I’ll probably fast forward chunks of it if it’s too long.

Parker Fleming is a good stats guy. For a preview, you can look at previous year game tape, previous year stats, previous year player ratings, or get invited to meaningful practices for both teams this year (if you can find them). The last option won’t happen often, and for people who are trying to preview a ton of teams, it’s not gonna be practical even with a private plane and an unlimited budget.

If you’re using film: We started the year with a terrible offense and ended the year looking like we knew what we were doing with a third or fourth-string QB. You probably need Western Kentucky or Valdosta game film to see this year’s offense (with different players). For Louisville, you need to watch Purdue film with mostly different players.

On defense, Louisville had a better rated defense than us last year. We were pretty good. We’ve changed over some coaches, and hopefully look good at LB.

If someone previews this game based on last year, it’s pretty smart to think Louisville slides a little on defense and gets better on offense, and we slide or hold even on defense and get better on offense.

That probably leaves Louisville at a 7-point favorite. To win this game, we need to have gotten much better on offense and maybe better on defense with a decent group of transfers. All that would be invisible to almost anyone forecasting this game.

It’s what I’m hoping to see, though.

This is a murky game to preview—more than most with both head coaches kicking off the season as new HCs at their schools
Click to expand...
2022 defensive stats
- Total defense - we were # 115 - very bad
- Scoring defense - we were #84 - not very good
- First down defense (number given up) - we were #86 - not very good
- Rushing defense - we were #108 - very bad
- passing efficiency defense and passing yards allowed - we were #47 - petty good!
- Red Zone defense - we were #40 - better than average
- 3rd down conversion rate - we were #68 - average
- 4th down conversion rate defense - we were #115 - very bad (limited numbers 12 of 14 converted)

There is a whole lot of area for improvement on defense as we were not a good defense last year! It all starts with the Defensive Line.
 
slugboy

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,490
Root4GT said:
2022 defensive stats
- Total defense - we were # 115 - very bad
- Scoring defense - we were #84 - not very good
- First down defense (number given up) - we were #86 - not very good
- Rushing defense - we were #108 - very bad
- passing efficiency defense and passing yards allowed - we were #47 - petty good!
- Red Zone defense - we were #40 - better than average
- 3rd down conversion rate - we were #68 - average
- 4th down conversion rate defense - we were #115 - very bad (limited numbers 12 of 14 converted)

There is a whole lot of area for improvement on defense as we were not a good defense last year! It all starts with the Defensive Line.
Click to expand...
The efficiency numbers are generally good—top 40ish or so. A lot of our numbers are skewed by our offense 3-and-out’ing. The last post gave you the DFEI rankings.

Here’s some info from Game on Paper (https://gameonpaper.com/cfb/year/2022/team/59). Purple is bad, deep purple is horrible. white is mediocre or middling, green is good. Success rate against the run is bad—we have problems in our run defense. Plays per game is horrible overall at #112. It’s not so much that they couldn’t get off the field, it’s that they got off the field and went right back on.

For the rushing defense, remember that we got torched by Ole Miss on the ground, and that skewed the numbers a bit. That game deserves to be included in the numbers, but we got better after that.

What people should see here is that the defense was good, and the offense was one of the worst in FBS, and the special teams were also some of the worst in FBS. Our defense was good enough for us to get 5 wins.

Georgia Tech 2022 Game on Paper.png
 

stinger 1957

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,473
Sounds like Brohm is going with what he can put his teeth into and that is his offense which I expect he can get ready and our defense which he already knows and can see. He's strictly guessing what we do on offense and we'll be trying to get an offense going that has never been run by our kids. Can we put enough offense together that can run successfully in the time we have to do so? I have no idea. Generally defense can play better than offense in early part of season. If that is how it goes then we have a shot. I'm guessing the 8.5 pts about right.
 

GT33

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,173
MWBATL said:
I remain very concerned about Louisville and think those that believe this is a solid win for GT are....overly optimistic (to be polite). In truth, I have NO IDEA how this game will turn out, but I generally view both programs as coming into this year as huge unknowns.
Click to expand...
We’re going to beat them like a rented mule. Maybe the rented mule part is optimistic, maybe we’ll only beat them like a red headed stepchild. Still, we’re going to beat them and it will be good.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,032
slugboy said:
The efficiency numbers are generally good—top 40ish or so. A lot of our numbers are skewed by our offense 3-and-out’ing. The last post gave you the DFEI rankings.

Here’s some info from Game on Paper (https://gameonpaper.com/cfb/year/2022/team/59). Purple is bad, deep purple is horrible. white is mediocre or middling, green is good. Success rate against the run is bad—we have problems in our run defense. Plays per game is horrible overall at #112. It’s not so much that they couldn’t get off the field, it’s that they got off the field and went right back on.

For the rushing defense, remember that we got torched by Ole Miss on the ground, and that skewed the numbers a bit. That game deserves to be included in the numbers, but we got better after that.

What people should see here is that the defense was good, and the offense was one of the worst in FBS, and the special teams were also some of the worst in FBS. Our defense was good enough for us to get 5 wins.

View attachment 14521
Click to expand...
Our defense was overall poor last season. They had a few solid games. Against the better offenses they struggled.

The offense was horrible and did the defense no favors. Special Teams were even worse ACC me really hurt the team

Improving STs should be easy. Just don’t be horrible.

The defense will be challenges to improve. We lost 4 of the best players on defense. Clearly need some guys to really step up.

The offense should be better. Again it was horrible last year so just being “ok” will be a big step forward.

Really hard to predict how the team will preform this year
 
Augusta_Jacket

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,094
Location
Augusta, Georgia
Root4GT said:
Our defense was overall poor last season. They had a few solid games. Against the better offenses they struggled.

The offense was horrible and did the defense no favors. Special Teams were even worse ACC me really hurt the team

Improving STs should be easy. Just don’t be horrible.

The defense will be challenges to improve. We lost 4 of the best players on defense. Clearly need some guys to really step up.

The offense should be better. Again it was horrible last year so just being “ok” will be a big step forward.

Really hard to predict how the team will preform this year
Click to expand...

My gut feeling is that we will see the offense improve drastically. The OL, which has been the biggest issue the last 4 years, returns all 5 starters. Continuity on the OL will hopefully prove beneficial to us for once. The two man race for QB should provide enough competition to give us no worse than a consistently adequate signal caller. That in and of itself is a major improvement. RB will be fine, and an improved OL will aid them greatly. WRs and TEs are the real question marks on the offense, but there is talent at both positions, so we should see someone emerge in each position group. For an offense that finished second to last in P5 football last year in OFEI (thanks BC for sucking worse than us) we should be able to make major gains.

Similar on STs. Other than our punting woes, we really need to focus on kick coverages. Our PK will be fairly reliable from 40 yards in. I don't know how much more leg he will have on FGs, but his KOs won't be an issue, as he had ~ 60% touchback rate last year. We were so bad last year that any improvement in these areas are likely to aid us a ton.

I wouldn't be surprised if we regressed a bit on D though. Losing an NFL caliber EDGE rusher and two All-ACC caliber LBs in addition to the outstanding defensive player this spring leaves major holes. Better play from the secondary and people stepping up are critical for us.

All in all, I feel we will win at least 5 games, with a punchers chance at a bowl game or better.
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,862
Keep in mind that the statistics look at all Div 1 teams. IMO that means a P5 team that is avg in a ranking - so in the 60's, is actually below avg among its peers as most of the top spots are taken by the P5 schools and most of the lower rankings are taken by the non P5 schools.

For example, the DFEI ranking, shows 41 for GT. That sounds above avg, but that is just 34th among P5 teams (and ND) - so just right at avg.
30-45 in most of the rankings for Div 1 would mean an avg P5 team. Below the Top 45 is generally going to be a below avg P5 school in that metric. Something in the Top 30 makes you an above average P5 team.

For example, as bad as the OFEI ranking is for GT - #112, it is even worse when you consider only 3 P5 teams were lower.
GT was also dead last (among all Div 1 schools, not just P5 in terms of Special Teams efficiency.)
GT's overall efficiency was #92- that is bad, what is worse is that only 6 P5 teams had a lower overall efficiency - basically meaning GT was in the bottom 10% of all P5 schools in overall efficiency.

Based purely on the efficiency metrics GT had an average P5 defense, a bottom 10% P5 offense and a bottom 5% P5 special teams.
Interestingly, GT had games against 2 P5 teams with lower efficiency that itself (UVA and VT) and a third game against a program whose efficiency metrics put it just 2 spots higher (Miami). ACC Coastal really was something of a train wreck last year.
CBK still has a big project ahead of him.
 
slugboy

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,490
RamblinRed said:
Keep in mind that the statistics look at all Div 1 teams. IMO that means a P5 team that is avg in a ranking - so in the 60's, is actually below avg among its peers as most of the top spots are taken by the P5 schools and most of the lower rankings are taken by the non P5 schools.

For example, the DFEI ranking, shows 41 for GT. That sounds above avg, but that is just 34th among P5 teams (and ND) - so just right at avg.
30-45 in most of the rankings for Div 1 would mean an avg P5 team. Below the Top 45 is generally going to be a below avg P5 school in that metric. Something in the Top 30 makes you an above average P5 team.

For example, as bad as the OFEI ranking is for GT - #112, it is even worse when you consider only 3 P5 teams were lower.
GT was also dead last (among all Div 1 schools, not just P5 in terms of Special Teams efficiency.)
GT's overall efficiency was #92- that is bad, what is worse is that only 6 P5 teams had a lower overall efficiency - basically meaning GT was in the bottom 10% of all P5 schools in overall efficiency.

Based purely on the efficiency metrics GT had an average P5 defense, a bottom 10% P5 offense and a bottom 5% P5 special teams.
Interestingly, GT had games against 2 P5 teams with lower efficiency that itself (UVA and VT) and a third game against a program whose efficiency metrics put it just 2 spots higher (Miami). ACC Coastal really was something of a train wreck last year.
CBK still has a big project ahead of him.
Click to expand...
Offense was nearly in the bottom 25% overall. It’s hard to overstate how bad the offense was last year, and harder still on special teams. Considering that the FG and PAT team wasn’t that bad, it shows how bad the punt units were.

If I recall correctly, our offense was in the bottom 5 for going for it on 4th down when the numbers said you should. That shows an enormous lack of faith in our offense—especially when you consider the chosen alternative was rolling out possibly the worst punting unit in FBS.

I’ll have to look it up, but that #41 FEI defense may be the highest ranked defense we’ve had in a decade.

Edit: the FG unit eventually wasn’t that bad after Key got it fixed
 
Last edited:
roadkill

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,821
slugboy said:
Offense was nearly in the bottom 25% overall. It’s hard to overstate how bad the offense was last year, and harder still on special teams. Considering that the FG and PAT team wasn’t that bad, it shows how bad the punt units were.

If I recall correctly, our offense was in the bottom 5 for going for it on 4th down when the numbers said you should. That shows an enormous lack of faith in our offense—especially when you consider the chosen alternative was rolling out possibly the worst punting unit in FBS.

I’ll have to look it up, but that #41 FEI defense may be the highest ranked defense we’ve had in a decade.
Click to expand...
Hard to gauge us based on the full 2022 season, since we had a coaching change and to me appeared to make significant strides towards being at least average.
I don’t have the stats for our before/after Key transition last year, but have some reasons for optimism. Special teams improved significantly once Key took over. Kelley (2/6) is no longer with the team. Stewart (12/13) was solid once he took over. Key fixed our blocked punt problem debacle, although coverage still needed work, and will no doubt be an area of focus in camp. On offense, we started to look like we had a plan. The defense balled out in the UNC game at the end of ACC play. We held uga to below their season average - although I’m not sure we can take much away from that game.
 
slugboy

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,490
roadkill said:
Hard to gauge us based on the full 2022 season, since we had a coaching change and to me appeared to make significant strides towards being at least average.
I don’t have the stats for our before/after Key transition last year, but have some reasons for optimism. Special teams improved significantly once Key took over. Kelley (2/6) is no longer with the team. Stewart (12/13) was solid once he took over. Key fixed our blocked punt problem debacle, although coverage still needed work, and will no doubt be an area of focus in camp. On offense, we started to look like we had a plan. The defense balled out in the UNC game at the end of ACC play. We held uga to below their season average - although I’m not sure we can take much away from that game.
Click to expand...
It is hard to find opponent-adjusted stats on a week-by-week basis, but you could probably do something with fastR or another stats library.
Our weaker opponents were generally after the coaching change, with UGA a big exception.
I do compare our 2022 UGA game against 2021 UGA and ND and see a lot of progress. I give Key boatloads more credit than TFG. Depth issues still.
 

MacJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,363
Looking at the rosters, I’d say we’re pretty even overall. Broom hit the portal really hard and improved their overall quality a notch or two. We will need to run the ball on offense and attack their inexperienced OL and get after their QB to win.
 
roadkill

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,821
slugboy said:
It is hard to find opponent-adjusted stats on a week-by-week basis, but you could probably do something with fastR or another stats library.
Our weaker opponents were generally after the coaching change, with UGA a big exception.
I do compare our 2022 UGA game against 2021 UGA and ND and see a lot of progress. I give Key boatloads more credit than TFG. Depth issues still.
Click to expand...
You could argue that our schedule after the coaching change was no weaker, even discounting uga. Prior to the change we had 2 tough teams, one team (UCF) that we could have beaten, and one cupcake.
After the change, aside from uga, we had Pitt, FSU, Miami, and UNC, and went 2/2 against them. Duke went 9/4.
 

g0lftime

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,915
I
roadkill said:
Hard to gauge us based on the full 2022 season, since we had a coaching change and to me appeared to make significant strides towards being at least average.
I don’t have the stats for our before/after Key transition last year, but have some reasons for optimism. Special teams improved significantly once Key took over. Kelley (2/6) is no longer with the team. Stewart (12/13) was solid once he took over. Key fixed our blocked punt problem debacle, although coverage still needed work, and will no doubt be an area of focus in camp. On offense, we started to look like we had a plan. The defense balled out in the UNC game at the end of ACC play. We held uga to below their season average - although I’m not sure we can take much away from that game.
Click to expand...
I am still delighted that Downs dropped a sure touchdown in the end zone in our game against UNC.Sometimes you just need a little luck.
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,862
g0lftime said:
I
I am still delighted that Downs dropped a sure touchdown in the end zone in our game against UNC.Sometimes you just need a little luck.
Click to expand...
I am very grateful that arguably our 2 best wins came with a huge dose of luck.
Downs dropping that pass, which should have been a relatively easy catch, was the difference between a win and a loss.
How many passes did Pitt defenders drop against GT in that game. A couple would have been TD's the other way.
I'll still take it, and CBK's team was a significant improvement over CGC, but that 5-7 was really close to being 3-9.
Not going to deny that I greatly enjoyed the outcomes of both of those games and GT definitely looked better coached after the change than before it.

The 4 wins came by a total of 13 points (all one score wins). The 4 losses came by 76 points. A 4-4 record with a -63 point differential is an incredible pull, but it suggests be careful about setting your expectations too high. Going 4-1 in one score games is something that is hard to replicate.

Of course, all that said I am thinking a 6-6/7-5 season, so my pre-season optimism is still there.
 
Top