So would I.
Bingo. King makes the run game more dangerous because of his ability to slip through a crease and his speed. That means that on options and draws the D is in a heap of trouble if they come down on the runners. It is very hard to predict what will happen when things get jiggy out there and King is on the field. I think everyone saw how valuable he is on Saturday.
I always wonder why people keep looking for Blackburn to be impactful. He has has several major injuries. In his 4th year now and he has 1 reception. Very sad that injuries seemed to have derailed a very talented young man.
He had 5x as many last year. We might be extrapolating a bit too much.
So is he injured again?
No.
It has been reported that King has special chemistry with Chase Lane developed when both were at A&M so Chase plays when King plays. Pyron has special chemistry with Leo developed from working together on the 2nd team. I have no idea why Leo didn't play against ND with Zach as QB. But I still have hopes of seeing Leo having a good game with Pyron Saturday against VT.
Yes, there are definitely issues, but you’re missing the main ones. We got dominated in the trenches.
You can’t look at the score in the vacuum like that. With a tighter score, ND probably changes their strategy. They played wildly conservative on offense because it was working and it was low risk.
You can’t just draw up plays in the dirt and tell guys to do this and do that. You have to practice it extensively or you’ll have a ton of penalties, busted plays and turnovers.
They did take a field goal and also a punt, which aren't conservative. I think that was their offense, and those were the reads that worked.
This. I was about to reply with the question "What part of faking a field goal attempt and a punt attempt are wildly conservative and low risk?"
The story on offense:
| Production | Notre Dame | Georgia Tech |
|---|---|---|
| Scrimmage Plays | 69 | 66 |
| Yards | 396 | 346 |
| Yards/Play | 5.74 | 5.24 |
| EPA | -4.42 | -12.17 |
| EPA/Play | -0.06 | -0.18 |
| Passes | 30 (43%) | 39 (59%) |
| Yards | 195 | 247 |
| Yards/Play | 6.50 | 6.33 |
| EPA | -6.10 | -5.34 |
| EPA/Play | -0.20 | -0.14 |
| Rushes | 39 (57%) | 27 (41%) |
| Yards | 184 | 77 |
| Yards/Play | 4.97 | 2.85 |
| EPA | 1.68 | -6.83 |
| EPA/Play | 0.04 | -0.25 |
| Rushing | Notre Dame | Georgia Tech |
|---|---|---|
| Scrimmage Plays | 69 | 66 |
| Rushes | 39 (57%) | 27 (41%) |
| Power Run Attempts (Down ≥ 3, Distance ≤ 2) | 3 (8%) | 2 (7%) |
| Successful Power Runs (Rate) | 3 (100%) | 1 (50%) |
| Stuffed Runs (Yds Gained ≤ 0) | 6 (15%) | 6 (22%) |
| Stopped Runs (Yds Gained ≤ 2) | 17 (44%) | 14 (52%) |
| Opportunity Runs (Yds Gained ≥ 4) | 16 (41%) | 10 (37%) |
| OL Line Yards | 49.8 | 34.1 |
| Per Carry | 1.28 | 1.26 |
| Highlight Yards | 69.5 | 17 |
| Per Rush Opportunity | 4.34 | 1.70 |
Sure I can. It’s only a generalization based on what each team did in that set of variables. GA Tech changes its strategy, too, BTW. Just as certainly it would have played out differently, as you say. It’s a complex system, strongly impacted by feedback loops.
Are you able to compare the first half and second half stats? Just from watching the game in the stands, it seemed to me that the run game was horrible the entire game, but that the passing game was good during the first half, and dropped off greatly during the second half. Just casual observation, it looked like we ran the standard offense until after ND scored in the second half to go up 2 scores. (Maybe until they scored the FG, but I can't remember). It seemed during the game that the passing stats were very close to 100% in the first half, then when we tried to go pass-happy the percentage and effectiveness dropped significantly.