Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Stan Van Gundy Fired As Head Coach Of The Magic

Field Position Comparisons: Clemson's O versus Georgia Tech's D

Two days ago, we showed that Clemson's D has forced a ton of punts. Today, we're showing you why the Georgia Tech defense is still in a rebuilding year. In 2009, we gave up a TD 27% of our opponents' drives but scored a TD 42% of our own drives. It was unfair trade in our favor. This season the gap has shrunk big time. We're scoring TD's 32% of our drives but giving up TD's 26% of the time. That is not good. Here's a look at the 2010 breakdown thus far based on our opponents starting field position and what their drives result in based on that field position:

Cu5_medium


Star-divide

Clemson's defense is much better than us at forcing punts and forcing turnovers. 78% of their opponents drives result in a punt or turnover. We are only forcing punts or turnovers 62% of the time. We're gonna have to step it up against Clemson considering they're also turning the ball over at a lot lower rate than we are per drive. Here's a breakdown of their drive result rates based on starting offensive field position:

Cu6_medium

Clemson has a fairly stale offense but if they're given good field position after a fumble, they've shown they know what to do with the football. GT could be staring down the barrel of road conference loss if our offense continues to turn the ball over.

Comment 3 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

There is a positive to be seen

Our defense allows a TD less often than Clemson’s does in nearly every yardage category. They force more punts, though.

by mjacksongt on Oct 21, 2010 10:35 AM EDT reply actions  

I am thrilled with the defensive improvement

but this does no good if the offense is bungling plays.

 Before the season began I actually thought this team might be better than last year. I figured having Nesbit back and a good stable of running backs would keep the offense humming. Then I figured that even though we lost two studs on defense our new coach would get improved play. I was right about the second part but I greatly underestimated how far the offense would fall off.

Somebody who is smarter than I am needs to explain this to me. Is it really just that our offensive line is so bad?

by Atlanta's original team on Oct 21, 2010 4:26 PM EDT reply actions  

O-Line

I think our kind of offense results in a higher chance of our O-Line personnel getting injured. We shuffle around our O-Line a lot, and as a result, it screws with timing, assignments, etc. Anytime you screw with timing in sports, the end result doesn’t happen exactly the way you want it. If the same O-Line would play every game together, they’d be awesome.

Really though – if you look at the statistics our offense is putting up some decent numbers – the lack of a true deep threat passing game does hurt a lot.

by gte071u on Oct 22, 2010 12:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to FromTheRumbleSeat, a "bastion of capitalization and grammar skills."

SHOP THE FROM THE RUMBLE SEAT STORE

Gameday Depot University Apparel


Regional Co-Managers

Hokiesplat_small BirdGT

Gravatar_small Winfield Featherston

Assistants to the Regional Managers

Ramblinracket_small Ramblin Jeff

Orwin_smith_small Jesse28

Dscn2741cropped_small orientalnc

Nate_small GTNate

Images_small Atlanta's original team

Small LilBroey700

Directors of Personnel

Small acedarney