With all of the talk about the defense against GT

[DaKoolAidisORANGE]

I agree with OP I had this discussion with my co-workers. Not being able to sustain drives gassed our D early, they played well on the first handful of possesions. Could say Paul Johnson started to out coach, but those guys were gassed early. I think the D showed a lot of heart and determination in a big moment by being able to suck it and stop that 2pt try so good on them, they have promise.

Offense is another story, the O-line looks lost again.

 

[TennesseeTarheel]

Well, it would've really sucked if we lost, but we didn't. And most of us on these forums didn't even have to get out of our armchairs to do it.

 

[Evet Vols]

Agreed. Being able to sustain a drive would be nice.

Defense wasn't great at first but was doing pretty good. I think they were getting tired because of offense and not subbing enough.

 

[Volnado]

I keep hearing from Vol fans that if Bama had played Ga Tech they would have shut their offense down which I completely agree. The problem is, we are not Bama and neither is any other school in the country. Saban has almost ruined college football with his dominance. Before the Saban era, just about all Vol fans would have been pretty happy to squeak out a win like we did. If you throw out Bama for comparisons sake, then we all look a lot better.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

I keep hearing from Vol fans that if Bama had played Ga Tech they would have shut their offense down which I completely agree. The problem is, we are not Bama and neither is any other school in the country. Saban has almost ruined college football with his dominance. Before the Saban era, just about all Vol fans would have been pretty happy to squeak out a win like we did. If you throw out Bama for comparisons sake, then we all look a lot better.

Maybe they would have, and maybe they wouldn't have.

0:58 mark -- Saban talking about a Group of 5 (Sun Belt) triple-o team they played, and how it went:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bEa5MI3WwQ&t=91s[/youtube]

A transcript of some of his key points:

"You all don't remember the Georgia Southern game, do you?

"I don't think we had a guy on that field that didn't play in the NFL...and I think that team won a national championship.... And they run through our ass like **** through a tin horn, man, and we could not stop 'em.

"Could not stop 'em.

"Could not stop 'em."

 

[24/7vol]

Our game plan was to outscore them early b/c the triple option is a bad offense when playing from behind. Dropped passes put us behind the 8 ball early. Once our offense started clicking we were scoring fast. Without the dropped passes we would have been up 21-0 at the end of the 1st and this game looks completely different.

Exactly..it's hard to sustain drives with five dropped passes in the first half alone.

 

[Volnado]

A transcript of some of his key points:[/QUOTE]

That's hilarious....As much as I dislike Saban, I do like his interviews.

 

[FranklinVFL]

Time of Possession:

UT: 18:33

GT: 41:27

Who wouldn't be gassed if you were on the field almost 75% of the game?

 

[UTK]

We will know more about the defense when we play the Gators. If they can't stop that putrid offense, it will be a long season.

 

[river rat]

What's the big deal about the triple option offense? If it's so impossible to defend, why doesn't everybody run it? Also, why would a team expect their DL to perfom better against a "traditional" offense? Asking for a friend.

 

[marvin616]

What's the big deal about the triple option offense? If it's so impossible to defend, why doesn't everybody run it? Also, why would a team expect their DL to perfom better against a "traditional" offense? Asking for a friend.

I think having the kicker AND punter on the field every play really keeps the defense confused.

 

[river rat]

I think having the kicker AND punter on the field every play really keeps the defense confused.

Oh. I see. Almost worked for GT, apparently.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

What's the big deal about the triple option offense? If it's so impossible to defend, why doesn't everybody run it? Also, why would a team expect their DL to perfom better against a "traditional" offense? Asking for a friend.

Second part first, Rat: you play best against what you practice most against. And you practice most against what your own offense runs. Simply because 1s-versus-1s and 2s-versus-2s scrimmage periods during practices are what they are, and college 'scout teams' are not nearly the self-re-inventing machines that you hope to find in the pros.

So if your own team is a version of the spread, and over half the teams you're going to face this season run some version of the spread, that's your defense's strongest suit, defending against the spread.

The quirky offense that you're only going to see one time all year (heck, maybe one time every five or ten years!) is not going to be the sweet spot for your D.

...

Now the first question: most teams don't run it because there is better out there. The triple-option is not designed to attack fast and score often. It does not take advantage of the entire field, side to side and scrimmage line to goal line. People STOPPED using it because there were new concepts and formations that worked better.

So now that the triple-o is quirky and isolated enough to be effective as a "gimmick," why don't more teams shift back to it to take advantage?

That question, I'm not sure I know the answer to. Seems a few would. For instance, why doesn't Vandy? Or Boston College? It's not like they're having huge success with what they've got (in recruiting or on the field)...why not go for the niche?

*shrug* can't answer that one for you...err, your 'friend', Rat.

 

[marvin616]

Good explanation JP. Sorry RR, I couldn't pass up the joke.

Another reason is it is not a system a really good QB would want to play in because they wouldn't be able to showcase their talent to the NFL.

 

[river rat]

Second part first: you play best against what you practice most against. And you practice most against what your own offense runs. Simply because 1s-versus-1s and 2s-versus-2s scrimmage periods during practices are what they are, and college 'scout teams' are not nearly the self-re-inventing machines that you hope to find in the pros.

So if your own team is a no-huddle zone-read-option spread, and over half the teams you're going to face this season run some version of the spread, that's your defense's strongest suit.

The quirky offense that you're only going to see one time all year (heck, maybe one time every five or ten years!) is not going to be the sweet spot for your D.

...

Now the first question: most teams don't run it because there is better out there. The triple-option is not designed to attack fast and score often. It does not take advantage of the entire field, side to side and scrimmage line to goal line. People STOPPED using it because there were new concepts and formations that worked better.

So now that the triple-o is quirky and isolated enough to be effective as a "gimmick," why don't more teams shift back to it to take advantage?

That question, I'm not sure I know the answer to. Seems a few would. For instance, why doesn't Vandy? Or Boston College? It's not like they're having huge success with what they've got (in recruiting or on the field)...why not go for the niche?

*shrug* can't answer that one for you...err, your 'friend', Rat.

Thanks for that clear, cogent answer. I will pass it along to my "friend."

 

[volfan102455]

What's the big deal about the triple option offense? If it's so impossible to defend, why doesn't everybody run it? Also, why would a team expect their DL to perfom better against a "traditional" offense? Asking for a friend.

Google triple option and defense or defending the triple option, flexbone etc.

 

[volfan102455]

I keep hearing from Vol fans that if Bama had played Ga Tech they would have shut their offense down which I completely agree. The problem is, we are not Bama and neither is any other school in the country. Saban has almost ruined college football with his dominance. Before the Saban era, just about all Vol fans would have been pretty happy to squeak out a win like we did. If you throw out Bama for comparisons sake, then we all look a lot better.

Then you and they do not understand the challenge with the shutting down that type of offense.

I think Bama would have probably got ahead on the scoring and that would have forced GT out of their game plan.

The type of offense GT runs normally stops themselves more than the other team with bad QB reads and lack of execution or needing to hurry up because they are behind. It leads to bad reads, lack of execution and mistakes.

 

[KBVol]

I keep hearing from Vol fans that if Bama had played Ga Tech they would have shut their offense down which I completely agree. The problem is, we are not Bama and neither is any other school in the country. Saban has almost ruined college football with his dominance. Before the Saban era, just about all Vol fans would have been pretty happy to squeak out a win like we did. If you throw out Bama for comparisons sake, then we all look a lot better.

Understand your point, nobody really compares to Alabama. But if Bama's program folded tomorrow and we give up 655 yards to any team in the country on Friday, it'll be beyond disappointing....again

 

[smokey0625]

Let's take a look at the offense. Folks, I'm blaming both sides on this one. This falls straight on Jones who should've had the team more prepared. I seen a bad offense in the first half and a horrible defense from the second quarter going forward. Think about it for just a minute, how much of a difference would it have made if the offense didn't go three and out until getting the first 1st down midway through the second quarter (someone correct me if I'm wrong on the timing.) We didn't even have to score that many points up until the time, we just needed a sustainable drive. 6-8 play drives, maybe more, would have made a world of difference on our total yards given up and would have been a lot easier on our defense not being so tired. Don't throw the defense under the bus without looking at the offense as well.

Don't know if I'm minority, but we won. I don't care.

 

[river rat]

Google triple option and defense or defending the triple option, flexbone etc.

I did. Every thing I read said it is impossible to defend.

 

[KBVol]

Time of Possession:

UT: 18:33

GT: 41:27

Who wouldn't be gassed if you were on the field almost 75% of the game?

Well, play better, much, much better defense, get a third down stop here and there and get off the freaking field....then the other team won't rack up 41 minutes of possession time and you won't be as gassed. It's not as if it was predetermined that "GATech, you're getting the ball for 41 minutes tonight, Tennessee you're only getting 18". No, our horrid defense is the biggest reason why GaTech possessed the ball all night long.

 

[KBVol]

Maybe they would have, and maybe they wouldn't have.

0:58 mark -- Saban talking about a Group of 5 (Sun Belt) triple-o team they played, and how it went:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bEa5MI3WwQ&t=91s[/youtube]

A transcript of some of his key points:

Think Saban was slightly exaggerating when he said "we could not stop them", certainly in comparison to us not being able to stop GaTech.....Alabama gave up 14 1st downs and 341 total yards.....Tennessee allowed GaTech 33 1st downs and 655 total yards.....huge difference.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Think Saban was slightly exaggerating when he said "we could not stop them", certainly in comparison to us not being able to stop GaTech.....Alabama gave up 14 1st downs and 341 total yards.....Tennessee allowed GaTech 33 1st downs and 655 total yards.....huge difference.

I don't think he was exaggerating at all, KB, from his perspective. Those 341 yards came from a then-FCS team that half the people on this board probably never heard of. They put 341 yards on Bama, in one of the years Bama won the national championship.

Consider this:

Ga Tech (a Power 5 team that went 9-4 last year) put 655 on us (a Power 5 team that went 9-4 last year). Let's call that a peer-to-peer 655.

By comparison, Georgia Southern (who are in the Sun Belt now but were a Division I-AA team in the Southern Conference in 2012 when they played Bama) ran and passed for 341 yards against the Tide (soon to be 13-1 national champions), in a year when Ga Southern played primarily teams like Wofford, Samford, Furman, Elon, and The Citadel.

I think Saban was saying precisely what he meant.

Furthermore, I'd say that the 341 yards Ga Southern gained on Bama was very comparable to the 655 Ga Tech gained on us, considering the skill disparities involved.

 

[Carl Pickens]

Receivers had some big drops in the first half.... drive killing drops.

 

[savannahfan]

Exactly my point of why I refuse to throw the D under the bus at this time. You take away just 2 of those 3 and outs and we're probably talking over 100 yards taken off of that total yardage that was given up.[/QUOTE

I still do not understand after 4-5 great recruiting classes, we still can't sub lineman to remain fresh. Just don't seem to be able to development good back ups. It may be not being able to practice (2 a days, ect,) as much as in the past, but just don't understand it.