I Was Right And I Was Wrong
Last week, I wrote about how it all starts up front. I was right about that. I also wrote that we wouldn't learn much from the trip to Lawrence. I was wrong about that. After the jump, let's delve into this mess for the last time. It'll be cathartic. I hope.
For some reason, I decided to chart this game, and did so up until the last few minutes of the fourth quarter. Looking back over my game notes, I see several recurring themes. The first thing that jumps out is Tech's inability to get pressure with four rushers. If you can't get pressure with four, that likely leads to bringing additional rushers. When that happens, you run into the next recurring theme from my notes: weakness against screens and draws. Kansas was very willing to invite five or six pass rushers up field, only to run right by them with draw plays, or render them irrelevant to the play with screens to backs and receivers.
There were several issues with tackling, and a costly roughing the passer penalty on a 3rd down in the fourth quarter (no doubt an expression of frustration), but the biggest problem, and one that may rear its head all year, is the inability to get pressure with four pass rushers. I'm not of the opinion that talent is the issue, or that the scheme is the issue. Saturday's problems were the result of a lack of focus, and lack of effort.
The same holds true for the offense. Stephen Hill dropped multiple passes, one of which would have been a TD, are symptomatic of a lack of focus. I only see one sack given up in my game notes, but the glaring thing is that I wrote "OL standing around". Lack of effort, plain and simple. The same lack of focus and effort manifested itself on the third down play of the possession preceding Kansas' last score, which was a botched snap. Coach Johnson was visibly disappointed in this play, and he let Bedford know about it as he came back to the sideline.
The upshot of all of this is that these problems are fixable. There were some drives that the offense looked crisp, and the blocking looked sound. The counter option was a viable play most of the afternoon, Anthony Allen had some good runs, particularly in the first half. There were a couple of new wrinkles, or at least what looked like new wrinkles. On the fourth Tech possession, Roddy Jones was motioned from left A back out into the right slot, and the ensuing play was a pass to (I believe) the B back in the right flat. I don't recall seeing that before, but it was effective, and it's certainly low risk.
I realize that a lot of things went wrong, but I think that most of them can be fixed. I've heard through the grapevine that the coaches have put in some long hours following the return from Lawrence, and I expect that the effort we see this coming Saturday will be vastly improved.
8 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Lethargic
That’s the word I would use to describe the way Tech looked on Saturday. They looked like they just didn’t care about winning the game. Hopefully, that will be corrected by the time the team rolls into Chapel Hill this weekend.
by Donttouchthewreck on Sep 14, 2010 12:49 PM EDT reply actions
Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy
Stephen Hill is getting his education paid for to catch balls that hit him in the gut/hands. Embry Peeples and Anthony Allen are getting their educations paid for to catch passes that hit them in the hands — the kind that I could catch even while paying for my own education. Sure, Nesbitt’s not the prettiest passer around, but Jesus, if our guys would just catch the goddamn ball he would look a hell of a lot better!!!
thanks younglefty
With all of our sucess over the past two seasons, a little humble pie goes a long way. As mentioned in your notes, I do hope the Lawrence incident is used as a good swift kick in the jimmy. we wince. we recover and do a better job guarding our nads.
by twojackets on Sep 14, 2010 9:29 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
good read....
also.. why dont we have more passes that are for 5-10 yard range… we seem to always wanna throw it deep and throw it deep… we need to throw in some more 5 yard passes. these besides getting yardage, will give Nesbitt and the receivers more confidence in throwing and catching respectively.
This is my Family Tradition
by The_GT_LineageX11 on Sep 15, 2010 12:05 AM EDT reply actions
I agree
but the argument may be that there is more “traffic congestion” in this range due to the defense playing up to stop the run. Defenses are “thinner” in the deep secondary because of run support.
by Atlanta's original team on Sep 15, 2010 7:34 AM EDT up reply actions
and
Thomas was THAT good. I want to believe in Hill (reference the great TD pass on the run). Saturday will be very telling of what to expect for the remainder of the season.
by twojackets on Sep 15, 2010 9:14 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Almost all passes are play action
Very rarely does Nesbitt just line up and throw. There is usually at least some lateral motion or run fake. As a result, the receiver is farther downfield when the pass gets made.
Also, not to put too fine a point on it, Nesbitt ain’t a pocket passer. He is not a guy who reliably throws a 10 yard out to the wide side of the field with pinpoint accuracy. Throwing downfield takes advantage of his arm strength and allows receivers to adjust if the throw is a little off.
by first and thom on Sep 15, 2010 9:47 AM EDT up reply actions

by 






















