We're Not As Bad As We Looked Saturday

I agree that the outcome of last weeks game is not a perfect barometer for how we will be as a team. So on premise, this makes sense. HOWEVER, assuming that because we got run roughshod by Bama that we are not a bad team is also not accurate.

This weekend's game will be a much better litmus test. Bama is and was a bad matchup for us, just given their strengths and ours. I still take issue with how the team was prepared for the moment and their complete failure to take the punch and figure out a way to fight back, but that in and of itself is not sufficient to make a judgement on what the team is capable of.

I think the key things to look for in this weeks game are:

* OL play - do they block well or do they get pushed backwards a la last week
* Lambert - does he panic again or does he settle back into an easy rhythm making the short to intermediate throws and opening the running game back up
* Defense - Can our defense actually get lined up correctly and play well in coverage while remaining gap sound and not getting crushed by Dobbs legs
* Offensive playcalling - does it remain as stale as what we saw last week or do we remember that we have tight ends and that Sony and Chubb can be on the field at the same time

Yeah we are as bad s we looked Saturday. IF we play that game 100 times in good weather we get beat as badly or worse 90 times and lose 100 times. We haven't played anyone BUT Alabama...the other 4 teams we have played would win 6-8 games BETWEEN them if they played a Alabama's schedule. South Carolina may be as bad as they have been ever...and that is saying something...and Vanderbilt is Vandy. The other two were rent a wins, the first of which had a pretty good day offensively.

We are very evenly matched with what is apparently a LOUSY UT team who is waaayyyy closer to being 5-0 against quality opponents than we are (Arkansas is better than anyone we have been this year). Oklahoma would beat us as badly as Alabama...UT should have won that game. UT had Florida beat.....I'll bet a Coke right now that we don't look any better against the gators this year than we did last year.

I don't think we beat UT.....they are desperate for a win and we are completely one dimensional offensively and will allow UT 350 or more yards. If we do beat UT they are DONE.....Jones has lost complete control....

quote:

---

Akin to pro wrestling, this Saturday's game should be a coaches leave town match. The coach of the losing team quits during the TV interview after the game. It is the only honorable thing to do.

---

How are you gonna say the play calling was stale? We couldn't run the freakin' ball and everybody knows if you can't run the ball you can't pass the ball. All Bama had to do was put 7 guys in the box pre-snap and play ball. Their front six or 7 played stronger and faster than ours. Bama was running cover two all game long because they didn't have to commit one of their safety's to stop the run.

Any defense in college that is that talented with Bama's speed and can play cover 2 without getting gashed in the run game is going to dominate. It's hard enough to pass the ball with 1 safety let alone 2 deep. Play calling was not the issue, execution was because our O-Line sucked. Richt this week is pandering to his players, their families, recruits, and the fans by saying the loss was a result of bad play calling.

Schotty runs a lot of wide zone. The only difference in wide zone and running inside zone, or right at them as Richt called it, are the number of steps before the O-line gets to the guys they are blocking. Inside zone is quicker where as wide zone takes longer. It's not a play call issue because it's the same principle just slower to develop. Execution was our problem not play calling.

quote:

---

everybody knows if you can't run the ball you can't pass the ball

---

This is absolutely not true. In fact, just about every analyst that covered this game before it was played echoed my sentiments by very explicitly saying something along these lines:

"UGA is going to find gaining rushing yards very tough against this elite front 7 so it's going to come down to Lambert making some throws into tight windows to open up running lanes."

With that said, while I agree with you that execution was definitely a problem, to claim that there were not issues with the offensive gameplan is akin to giving them a free pass. If you know ahead of time that the front 7 is categorically better than you in pretty much every way, dialing up runs up the middle on 1st and second down when your Oline is getting no push seems like a poor decision though it happened plenty.

Splitting attention by having Michel and Chubb on the field at the same time is another way to draw Safety attention which I didn't see much. (If at all?)

We did actually have decent time to pass in many cases (a few notable exceptions), but what I saw was guys trying to beat 1:1 coverage, rather than play calls designed to help beat the man coverage they were up against. Rub routes, bubble screens, crossing routes... anything that might have allowed you to get a man out of position or a half step behind to open up receivers. Instead it was down field targets at the only receiver creating separation "Mitchell" who had a safety keyed on him the entire game.

Ultimately, we could argue this until we're blue in the face as it's a chicken and egg scenario, but my point in the previous post was predicated on the fact that last week is *not* a good measuring stick so I'm reserving judgement until I see how they respond this week.

We can argue all day against the first half of your post and either your going to come to my side, I'll come to your side, or we'll disagree forever and hate each other for no legitimate reason.

What I will argue with is that Chubb and Michel on the field at the same time will draw safety coverage. I'd debate that is being entirely inaccurate as they wont roll a safety down into coverage to stop the run if they are dominating the O-line and it doesn't matter where Michel goes if they are playing cover two, which Bama was all game, because the two are dividing the field in half and providing help with everything deep.

Secondly, you state we are "trying to beat buys 1:1 rather than call plays that beat man coverage" What exactly do you think 1:1 is? That is man coverage and its just down to our receivers beating their corners. You can run almost any route with a few exceptions against man coverage if your guy is more physical and quicker through his breaks than your corner.

third, Mitchell doesn't have a safety key'd on him. A safety playing man defense on Malcolm Mitchell is highly unlikely as he is the best player on the perimeter for us and likely going to generate a match up with their best corner. Safeties play halves, quarters, or thirds. They rarely line up over the best guy and cover them one on one.