Know the opponent: Georgia Tech updates and articles

#277
#277
Techfan1 said:
No it's not, I'm not saying he will be better like some are saying with Dobbs . I'm saying he's capable. Two different things
Click to expand...

Capable is picking up a football or being on the field. I have no doubt a young QB will continue to get better no matter what team he plays with.
 
#278
#278
UT-Rex said:
Yep, it looks like you ran 60.4 plays per game last year, or approx last on the list of 128 (to GA's 73.2, Alabama's 72.9 and Tennessee's 72.4).

We scored 36.4 points/game to our opponents' 28.8 (45 on VT).
You scored 28.2 points/game to your opponents' 24.5 (30 on VT).
Click to expand...

pace of play
 
#279
#279
govols09 said:
So who do you think gets the start for Ga Tech? Still Jordan?
Click to expand...

I think Taquan Marshall will end up starting game 1. Idk if he will keep that spot all year though. He's a very good runner, a little Justin Thomas like. I'm just not sure about his passing yet.
 
#281
#281
Quote:
Originally Posted by VFL-82-JP View Post
Wasn't it you, though, who said, "If we don't fumble, we win going away"?

beej67 said:
That was me. I did some digging and I'll retract the statement.

Going back almost half a decade, we have lost five games where we didn't fumble the ball.

Clemson 2016
Pitt 2016
Clemson 2015
FSU 2014 (ACC Championship)
UGA 2013

That includes a great year, a good year, a mediocre year, and a terrible year. I think we can all generally agree that Tennessee is not a FSU/Clemson caliber team. (yet?) But UGA 2013 and Pitt 2016 were both teams in the range of Tennessee's 2017 expectations, so it's certainly possible.
Click to expand...

This trend shows you'll have 2 games lost in 2017 without a fumble -- one of your losses will be to the Vols with a fumble(s), but who will be the 2-loss teams without a fumble?
 
#282
#282
Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
Yep, it looks like you ran 60.4 plays per game last year, or approx last on the list of 128 (to GA's 73.2, Alabama's 72.9 and Tennessee's 72.4).

We scored 36.4 points/game to our opponents' 28.8 (45 on VT).
You scored 28.2 points/game to your opponents' 24.5 (30 on VT).

Techfan1 said:
So from this I would say the teams were pretty even on offense. If you look at the link I posted for offensive efficiency both teams were pretty comparable, with GT being just a tad better.
Click to expand...

No. Since 2013, you have scored no more than 30 points against VT. We scored 45 on them in 2016.

We are very likely to score about 45 on your defense, as well. You will not score 38 points on Tennessee's defense (as you did vs Vand), but maybe 28.
 
#283
#283
Techfan1 said:
I think Taquan Marshall will end up starting game 1. Idk if he will keep that spot all year though. He's a very good runner, a little Justin Thomas like. I'm just not sure about his passing yet.
Click to expand...

Found Taquan Marshalls practice video. :)
 

Attachments

  • tumblr_m2ieztzUW51r2l739o1_400.gif
    tumblr_m2ieztzUW51r2l739o1_400.gif
    607.1 KB · Views: 89
#285
#285
UT-Rex said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
Yep, it looks like you ran 60.4 plays per game last year, or approx last on the list of 128 (to GA's 73.2, Alabama's 72.9 and Tennessee's 72.4).

We scored 36.4 points/game to our opponents' 28.8 (45 on VT).
You scored 28.2 points/game to your opponents' 24.5 (30 on VT).



No. Since 2013, you have scored no more than 30 points against VT. We scored 45 on them in 2016.

We are very likely to score about 45 on your defense, as well. You will not score 38 points on Tennessee's defense (as you did vs Vand), but maybe 28.
Click to expand...
I'll try to make it simple, GT doesn't get as many drives as UT, so I would hope UT would score more. You're comparing apples to oranges.

And you mean the Vandy that we beat and y'all lost to? You know the Vandy that put up 40 on y'all. I hope you know our offense is better than theirs.
 
Last edited:
#289
#289
Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
Yep, it looks like you ran 60.4 plays per game last year, or approx last on the list of 128 (to GA's 73.2, Alabama's 72.9 and Tennessee's 72.4).

We scored 36.4 points/game to our opponents' 28.8 (45 on VT).
You scored 28.2 points/game to your opponents' 24.5 (30 on VT).



No. Since 2013, you have scored no more than 30 points against VT. We scored 45 on them in 2016.

We are very likely to score about 45 on your defense, as well. You will not score 38 points on Tennessee's defense (as you did vs Vand), but maybe 28.

Techfan1 said:
I'll try to make it simple, GT doesn't get as many drives as UT, so I would hope UT would score more. You're comparing apples to oranges.

And you mean the Vandy that we beat and y'all lost to? You know the Vandy that put up 40 on y'all. I hope you know our offense is better than theirs.
Click to expand...

I think we agree that that was my point (and our Def sadly imploded against Vand, who put up 45 on us; but this is Game 1 and I think we'll be back rejuvenated again for GT).
 
#291
#291
UT-Rex said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
Yep, it looks like you ran 60.4 plays per game last year, or approx last on the list of 128 (to GA's 73.2, Alabama's 72.9 and Tennessee's 72.4).

We scored 36.4 points/game to our opponents' 28.8 (45 on VT).
You scored 28.2 points/game to your opponents' 24.5 (30 on VT).



No. Since 2013, you have scored no more than 30 points against VT. We scored 45 on them in 2016.

We are very likely to score about 45 on your defense, as well. You will not score 38 points on Tennessee's defense (as you did vs Vand), but maybe 28.



I think we agree that that was my point (and our Def sadly imploded against Vand, who put up 45 on us; but this is Game 1 and I think we'll be back rejuvenated again for GT).
Click to expand...
My bad I misinterpreted what you were saying. I honestly think this will end up being a good game.
 
#292
#292
Techfan1 said:
So tell me a little something about GT, since you know them and everything? And my comment about the OL isn't an opinion from watching yall Play, it's based on what I've read from this site, so I'm not claiming it to be truth.

BTW GT had a better offense than UT last year.
Click to expand...

I look at points. UT ranked 29th in points per game and Tech 66th. You win games with points. But if you want to use yards then UT 39th and Tech 81st. Do your dang research D4h from Tech.
 
Last edited:
#293
#293
A true cut block isn't much if any more dangerous to the defender than hitting a guy high.[/QUOTE said:
The NFL banned cut blocks last year to protect the players, so at least the pros view these types of blocks as dangerous.
Click to expand...
 
#298
#298
govols09 said:
Watching prior games, and Justin Thomas was a great passer. I always assumed e couldn't throw well.

Tech made a lot of third and longs because of his ability to throw. Tech fans are you worried about replacing that passing production? It seems Jordan is much wake in that area.
Click to expand...

Most of you know my background. I loved Justin Thomas and I think his passing ability will be missed. He was a great QB for this system.
 
#299
#299
JacketVol said:
I look at points. UT ranked 29th in points per game and Tech 66th. You win games with points. But if you want to use yards then UT 39th and Tech 81st. Do your dang research D4h from Tech.
Click to expand...

You can't be serious right? Have you not seen any of my other post? Of course UT will have more points and yards, y'all run way more plays. So how efficient a team is matters. GT doesn't have as many drives, so that means the teams they play don't have as many drives, which means they don't have to score a ton of points, they need to be efficient. Let's look at it this way, would you rather your team score on 40 percent of its drives or 30 percent of its drives? A team can score on 30 percent of its drives and still score more than a team that scores on 40 percent of its drives because they get more opportunities. It's really not rocket science to understand that.
 
#300
#300
hikermanvol said:
The NFL banned cut blocks last year to protect the players, so at least the pros view these types of blocks as dangerous.
Click to expand...

No they didn't, I just saw the Falcons cut blocking in a game and they even showed a replay and talked about how good of a block it was.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top