It was obviously a strange game. It was the first game in the Paul Johnson era where GT gained more yards passing than rushing (365 to 297). We also gained the most total yards in the Paul Johnson era (662). We also scored the most points in the Paul Johnson era (63).
[disclaimer - the above is just my opinion. I am 98% sure everything I said is correct, but I did not check any of it. If that lack of journalistic integrity bothers you, feel free to send a complaint to my editor...]
We also played the worst opponent we have faced in the Paul Johnson era. And its not really close. Western Carolina is not only an FCS team, they are a very bad FCS team. One of the worst teams in the Southern Conference, in fact. To put this in perspective, 2010 Jacksonville State and 2010 South Carolina State (the opening game/scrimmage opponents in 2008, 2009 and 2010) were 13 points better (Jax St.) and 7 points better (SC. State) than Western Carolina, at the end of 2010, according to Jeff Sagarin’s poll.
Essentially, all weak opening games are not created equal. Western Carolina was a team we should have annihilated. And we did. So no problems there, but also not that much to get excited about. We could be great or we could be just like last year.
Offense
I would be much more excited about the passing game if:
1 - We gained 360 passing yards against athletes comparable to ourselves
2 - I did not think Paul Johnson was going out of his way to boost the confidence of our WR’s and QB’s
3 - We did not call plays early in the game that were very out of character.
The bottom line is, if you have significantly better athletes, AND you catch the other team off guard, you should be able to do whatever you want. It was clear to me that Western Carolina prepared for our running attack (as they should). Frankly, I am a little concerned with the success they had stopping our running game. (More on that in a minute).
We showed up looking to throw the ball, and we did so early and often. Western Carolina was unprepared, and I am not sure it would have mattered if they had been prepared. We simply have better athletes. Our WR’s had little trouble getting open, and the throws were pretty routine. Additionally, much of the damage was done on very easy WR screen type passes, where they just could not tackle our guy.
In short, I’m not sure if our success has more to do with us or them.
However, last year our execution in the passing game was atrocious at times. Specifically, we had great difficulty catching the ball. With that in mind, it was encouraging to see us catch the ball, even if the WR’s were open and the throws were easy. You have to start somewhere.
On the whole, I expect little to change in the passing game (except, hopefully, our ability to execute). I expect Paul Johnson to call the plays more or less the same as he always has (which is to say, Paul’s playcalling will be based largely on what the defense is doing). And I expect us to run 75-80% of the time, and generate about 75% of our yards on the ground. Even in the passing onslaught that we hit Western Carolina with, I did not see any new passing plays, or anything that our passing offense could not have done last year, had we simply caught the ball better.
The running game does concern me, if only a little bit. Specifically, the offensive line. We had trouble overpowering Western Carolina. To put it mildly, we should be able to overpower Western Carolina. That’s not good. We gained 297 yards on 48 rushing attempts. That is good for 6.18 yards per carry. Last year we averaged 5.6 yards per carry. So, that seems to be pretty good. Honestly, I’d like a bigger margin, given how bad I think Western Carolina really is, but overall, maybe thats not terrible.
However, Orwin Smith gained 77 yards on one long TD run. Besides that, we gained 220 yards on 47 carries. That is 4.68 yards per carry. I don’t really care if that is manipulating the stats. I don’t want to be able to find a subset of 47 rushes against Western Carolina where we average only 4.68 yards per carry. That worries me.
There are two points that still allow me to be cautiously optimistic. First and foremost is the fact that we jumped all over them in the first quarter. We did exactly what we were supposed to do. On our first four drives, we only ran the ball 8 times and 3 of those runs went for touchdowns. In that scenario, its easy for players to get flat. Ideally, you would like for your players to play hard the entire game, but they are humans. They know when the game is basically over, and its just difficult to stay focused. When its 28-0 to end the first quarter, its very easy to let up and lose your edge.
The second reason is that our offensive line is very young. Actually, the whole team is very young. But especially the offensive line. You would expect that O Line to not play anywhere near its full potential in its first game with this group of 5 starters. I expect them to improve dramatically over the course of the season. Additionally, they are supposed to be maybe the most athletic and talented group Paul Johnson has had at GT.
Basically, Thursday’s game was not very informative for a lot of reasons. But, I did see many things that I liked. Tevin looks more comfortable, confident, and more in control. We have a lot of young players that I believe look very talented. And our offense overwhelmed an outclassed opponent very quickly.
Special Teams
Not much worth looking at here. And that is concerning. This was supposed to be a focal point of the offseason. And we looked sloppy fielding punts, our kick coverage did not blow me away, we had a lineman (really??) attempt to fall on a punt and fumble it, and - the big one - we let Western Carolina block a field goal and return it for a TD.
Thats pretty terrible.
However, it was the first game, and we are a young team. These things will happen. Even as young as we are, it would not have been unreasonable to expect better special teams play than we had. But, we should also expect to improve. It will need to happen quickly, because UNC is only 3 weeks away. And Kansas can beat us, as they showed last year. And really, Middle Tennessee State is not a bad team. They almost beat Purdue at Purdue last week.
In short, if we don’t play well, we could be in very losable games very quickly. And a significant special teams error or two could easily cost us a chance to win in a close game.
I’ll withhold further judgment for now, but special teams will be an area to watch closely this weekend.
Defense
For the second straight year, I was really more curious to see the defense than the offense. When you are as bad as we have been on defense the last two years, the defense starts to get a lot of attention. I thought Groh, overall, did a pretty good job last year. But, its a complex scheme, and it takes a while to get everyone playing without thinking, which is necessary in order to play fast enough to be a good defense.
Thus, I was very curious to see what we looked like in year 2.
On the whole, I am somewhat indifferent. Not particularly impressed, but did not see anything that concerns me too badly.
Western Carolina did not do a whole lot to us. The defense really only gave up 7 points, on one somewhat lazy drive in the second quarter. Besides our defense letting that drive go 70 yards in 13 plays, the catamounts offense did not threaten our end zone much at all.
The special teams essentially gave up 14 points, thanks to a FG return TD and a fumbled punt allowing Western Carolina to take over at our 3 yard line. I don’t blame the defense at all for those 14 points.
However, we did give up 300 yards, one long TD drive, and a few too many easy pass plays to a team that we athletically outclassed. That prevented it from being a great performance.
I have decided that the fairest way to judge the defense (and the whole team, really) is based around the first quarter. Or, more accurately, you judge while the game is somewhat close. The reason for this is simple, and has basically been explained above. The relative motivation levels of the two teams change very differently during the game. Western Carolina probably does not lose much motivation no matter what happens. They show up expecting to lose, and nothing really changes when the score is 28-0. They still want to work on their offense, and get better. Conversely, once we get a lead, we begin liberally subbing to get our bench some experience, and its very difficult to stay focused and givie 100% effort when the game is clearly out of reach.
Is this a perfect way to judge the defense? No. Of course not. But, the fact is, in a game like this, I don’t think there is a really good way to judge the defense (or the offense). This is the best we method we have.
I’ll set the arbitrary rule that, in a game where the home team expects an easy blowout, the starters will play hard for at least 1 quarter, and beyond that, will begin to let up a little bit once the lead gets to be more than 3 TD’s. (So, 24 points or more. If that happens in the first quarter, then the let up probably starts around the end of the first quarter).
I think thats a somewhat accurate standard.
So what did the defense do during that period?
Well, at the end of the first quarter, the game was already out of reach (more than 3 score lead), so we’ll just look at the first quarter.
During that period, the defense performed as follows:
- 6 possessions for Western Carolina
- 25 plays, 54 yards.
- 2.16 yards per play allowed
- 3 first downs allowed
- 3 sacks
- 1 forced fumble
- 5 punts forced
So, that is actually pretty dominating. Which is exactly what I expect against a team we should dominate. But still, its good to see. Their longest drive went for 25 yards, and they never made it into our territory, except for when they started there thanks to a Charles Perkins fumble. But, on that drive, they started at our 31, and we pushed them 3 yards backwards and forced a punt.
The rest of the game was ok. Allowed 301 total yards, on 77 plays, for a little under 4 yards per play. Gave up 7 points. 5.3 yards per pass, and 2.6 yards per rush. Both of those are pretty good numbers, but probably not as dominating as they could have been.
But, as I stated, when the game was in doubt, we were very dominating.
That begs 2 questions:
1 - Does a dominating performance against Western Carolina mean we will be better able to defend teams like Virginia Tech, UGA, Miami and Clemson?
2 - If so, can we play good defense for more than 1 quarter?
Obviously, any answer to those questions is just a guess at this point. But we can, at the very least, compare the defense’s performance to past years against our season opening weak opponent. Again, Western Carolina is significantly worse than even those teams (Jacksonville St. and South Carolina St.) but the comparison may still be useful.
In comparing these games, I’ll use the same standard. At a minimum, we will look at the first quarter. After that, the defense’s performance “counts” up until we get a lead of more than 3 scores.
| Year | Points per Possess. Allowed (Season) | Points Allowed (while opening game in doubt) | Points per Possess. (while opening game in doubt) | Yards Allowed (while opening game in doubt) | Yards per Play (while opening game in doubt) | Yards per Possess. (while opening game in doubt) |
| 2008 | 1.69 | 0 | 0 | 49 | 2.23 | 8.16 |
| 2009 | 2.27 | 7 | 1.16 | 136 | 4.12 | 22.67 |
| 2010 | 2.25 | 3 | 0.5 | 175 | 4.38 | 29.16 |
| 2011 | ? | 0 | 0 | 55 | 2.16 | 9.16 |
I think its important to note that the 2008 defense was pretty good, and the 2009 and 2010 units were well below average. And I think its equally important to note what a good defense does to an outclassed team while the game is in doubt (compare 2008 to 09 and 10).
I try not to put too much stock in the stats compiled in blowouts, as these games don’t really matter. Often they can be misleading. Just because you blow out an FCS team, that does not mean you are necessarily good. And conversely, if you struggle more than you should, that does not mean you are bad. But, I wonder if there is at least a correllation there, and how strong it is.
In any case, the above numbers make it appear that our 2011 defense may be more like the 2008 defense than the defense of the last two years.
Obviously, we can’t really know that at this point in the season. And I can’t stress enough that Western Carolina is bad. Still, I’m encouraged to see us play how we are supposed to play.
In 2009 and 2010, we allowed our weak opening opponent to move the ball far too easily, far too early in the game. Maybe that should have alerted us that we had problems on defense.
Hopefully, our performance in the 1st quarter against Western Carolina means we have fixed many of those problems.
Overall, after reviewing the game tape and the stats, I feel pretty good about the opener. We have a lot of things to work on, but I also see plenty of things to be excited about. We are young, and should get better. But the potential is there, and we seem to have a good attitude.
No comments:
Post a Comment