Stats

Thursday, September 29, 2016

Clemson Review - Miami Preview


That game was zero fun.  Offensively we were just completely lifeless, as I am sure anybody reading this is already aware.  Paul Johnson talked a lot about execution and how we blew assignments and he is probably right but I doubt it would have mattered much.  I'm sure we could have done better but we weren't going to score much.  Their defensive front just destroyed us.  When your athletes can't consistently block their athletes any better than that, I don't really care if you get the assignments right or not.  You won't sustain success.  

We will know more about what that means after this weekend.  I am hoping that Clemson is loaded on defense and so we might still be a pretty good offense.  Louisville will test Clemson's defense.  If they hold Louisville to some respectable number like 2 points per possession (I'm assuming Louisville's offense is legit based on what I've seen so far), then we may be talking about a nasty defense.  If Louisville hangs 49 points on Clemson, then we are in trouble.  

Of course, we'll find out more about us before we even get to see the Clemson game.  Miami provides a real test, but one that almost certainly is more manageable for us.  The game sets up reasonably well.  Miami hasn't really been tested yet, but is getting lots of respect anyway.  And presumably they watched the game Thursday night, so I can't imagine they are real scared of us.  I like the way all of that sets up for us psychologically.  It isn't perfect for us though - this is Miami's first real game and its on the road so I'm sure they won't be flat.  But I do think we should have the mental edge at least early.  

Facing Mark Richt against is interesting.  This will be the best coached Miami team we've played since CPJ got here.  But it's also one of the lesser talented Mark Richt teams we've played since CPJ got here.  To be sure Miami has talent.  Yearby at running back is very good and he isn't even getting most of the carries.  Stacy Coley is a talented WR.  Kaaya is one of the best pro prospects at QB in the country.  I'm sure they have young talent on both sides.  But I suspect they aren't as deep with talent as the typical UGA team we have played under Richt.  So I'm intrigued at how this will play out.  

We absolutely will need to move the ball and eat clock like we did in 2014.  We should be able to do that, I think.  Miami's defense shouldn't be anywhere near as good as Clemson's.  Probably not as good as Boston College's.  But we haven't played a defense, other than those two, with talent at this level.  So who knows.  

Defensively I'm worried.  Miami hasn't been tested yet but they've looked good against lesser teams.  And we know Richt can coach offense, and we know what he can do with a QB like Kaaya.  Roof will bring his usual bend but don't break, I suspect.  I also suspect we'll continue our dubious streak of allowing a TD on the opening drive (which stands at 3 games since we allowed even Mercer to do it).  Kaaya only needs to be disciplined enough to take the check down when it is there.  As an experience QB, he should be.  

If the offense can play very well, we can win.  If not, we'll need some turnovers.  More than likely this will be a close loss, or maybe a 2 TD loss.  I'll be surprised if its any more than that.  

This should be the last week where we "don't really know" much due to lack of anybody playing anybody.  Going forward, everybody we play will have been tested and we will have been tested.  But this game still has some mystery.  I hope we find out we are better than we think.

As always, Go Jackets.  

Monday, September 19, 2016

Vanderbilt Review - Clemson Preview


The Vanderbilt game was basically an equal combination of what I expected, and what I wanted.  For the most part, sharp execution against a credible defense.  And a comfortable win that was never really in doubt in the second half.  But, of course, still a lot of bend but don't break against another sluggish offense.  To be fair, the final numbers were pretty impressive for the defense, which is all we should really care about, but I've been really not very impressed with Vandy's offense.  We'll know more about both in a few more weeks but my suspicion is Vandy moved the ball better than we should have let them.

I am concerned that we have so much trouble slowing down bad offenses.  Clemson, oddly, really hasn't looked very intimidating on offense to date.  After having one of the best offenses in college football in 2015, and returning the Heisman contender QB that everyone knows about and most of the rest of the talent, they are off to a thoroughly unimpressive start in 2016.  That's college football, I guess.

Thursday is the first game since Week 1 that Clemson will be remotely motivated to play.  So we could chalk up Week 1 to a pretty good and talented Auburn defense, and the fact that it was Week 1.  And Week 2 to being flat?  Sure they looked sharp against SC State but that's like us looking good against Mercer or Western Carolina.  Doesn't tell you much.

I still believe Clemson is a loaded offense and our defense will have its hands full.  Fortunately for us, Clemson is still mostly a finesse offense.  I like our chances to stop that sort of offense much better than say... Alabama.  We don't do so well with power.  We don't do so well against any offense really, but, perhaps a better chance to make plays against a finesse, speed based offense that is mostly going to try to spread us out and throw the ball.

Defensively, they are loaded with great athletes again.  The sort of defensive front that is just unblockable and could pose lots of problems.  A similar defense to the one that came into Atlanta 2 years ago and held Paul Johnson's best offense to 1 TD and 3 FG's in 8 possessions.  That was a battle between a great offense and a great defense.  This should be a great defense.  Remains to be seen whether our offense is close to that good (but last Saturday was encouraging).

So, yes, Clemson is loaded.  We know that.  I think if we play well, we have a perfectly good chance to keep this close and maybe pull the upset.  But we are mostly going to have to hope that the Thursday night home crowd, GT as an underdog at home, and Clemson's jinx at Bobby Dodd Stadium - basically all the usual voo doo - comes together like it always seems to in the ACC and particularly when GT and Clemson play.  Clemson tends to blow us out randomly when they aren't supposed to (2003, 2006, 2010).  And GT tends to give Clemson fits when we aren't supposed to (2000, 2007, 2011, heck even the loss in 2012 went down to the wire).  Plus just weird things happen in this series, like the punt fiasco in 2004, or the 24-0 start in 2009, only to have Clemson roar back to 27-24, and then choke the game away.

I could easily see this being another great one.  Or I could see Clemson winning 38-3.  We just haven't learned enough about these teams yet.  I feel pretty confident saying that we aren't going to pull a Louisville and beat the ACC's other heavyweight by 50 points.

I'll say Clemson gets more than they want, but ends up winning something like 31-24.  Hopefully I'm right about the first part and wrong about the second.  As always, let's go Jackets!!

Wednesday, September 14, 2016

Mercer Review - Vanderbilt Preview

The Mercer game didn't tell me a whole lot.  I already knew we had better athletes than Mercer and should be able to score if we executed.  When we didn't turn the ball over, we scored.  Not in dominant fashion.  But, 5 touchdowns on basically 8 possessions isn't bad.  And I already suspected our defense wasn't very good.  We played the classic Roof bend but don't break, and we bent plenty.  But didn't really break.  So, you know, ho hum business as usual.  Nothing to get excited about but also doesn't prove we can't win 10 games and play for an ACC championship.  As always, two weeks into the season, we don't know a whole lot.

Vanderbilt presents an interesting challenge.  They aren't very good.  But they aren't terrible either.  Something of a lite version of Boston College on both sides of the ball.  Their defense is solid, but probably not as big or fast as Boston College.  They won't make mistakes, but should be more blockable than BC was.  Offensively, so far, they may be hot garbage.  They looked ok against MTSU, especially if you focus on their running game.  But they scored 49 points in that game with healthy contributions from their defense and special teams.  Lots of short fields.  They currently sit #127 out of 128 teams in passer rating as a team.  Meaning they allegedly can't pass the ball at all.  Which is what I saw on opening night when they played South Carolina.  That was awful.  Solid defense, but atrocious offense.

So far this year, they have run the ball for more than twice as many yards as they have passing.  Their quarterback isn't very good.  So I'd expect them to try to run, run and run some more.  And I would be very surprised if a Roof defense got beat that way.  They'll probably have some success but not enough to score many touchdowns.  If its UGA and Chubb, or Ohio St. and Ezekiel Elliot, or similar, then sure I could see a team running it down our throat, potentially.  But I just don't think Vandy has the horses for that.  Either they hurt us passing the ball, or I don't think they score more than 10 or 13 points.

Offensively, we might not score much more than that.  Vandy is a solid defense with a few potential NFL players over there.  I expect us to move the ball, certainly much better than week 1, but whether that translates to touchdowns... we'll see.  I'll believe this team can execute consistently against a quality defense when I see it.  Its been over a year since I've seen it.  So I'm not making any assumptions.

But my guess is a slow, steady, low scoring game, but one we eventually pull out to win somewhat comfortably.  Something like 24-10 or maybe 28-13.   Definitely a game we could lose with a timely turnover or just poor execution, but we are the better team, and Vandy doesn't present significant scheme or talent challenges.  Just solidly coached, mostly mediocre players.  We usually beat that sort of team, especially at home.

As always, Go Jackets!

Friday, September 9, 2016

Boston College Review - Mercer Preview


There isn't a whole lot to preview about Mercer, as most of you probably know.  Can we lose?  Well, maybe.  We only led Wofford 24-19 in the 4th quarter two years ago.  In 2008, we beat Gardner Web by 3 points, preserved with a blocked FG as time expired.  Those two teams are roughly at Mercer's level, so I won't say its impossible.  But teams like Western Carolina are also at about that level.  In the recent past we've generally won these games by 40-50 points.  Obviously that's what I think we should expect this week.  Although actually, we may want to cheer for a close game, as the two mentioned above occurred in 2008 and 2014, the last two years we beat Georgia.  Football sometimes makes very little sense.

Anyway, this post will be primarily a Boston College review.  The game was certainly a frustrating one to watch.  But I can't say it was all bad.  Obviously we won, although it wasn't pretty.  The major negative is that the game did very little to assuage lingering concerns about the offense.  Specifically, that we still can't block anybody.  For now, we are left clinging to hope that Boston College's defense is excellent (as it was last year) and that we will have more success blocking other defensive fronts.  

The other major negative is that there really is no reason to think Boston College has much of an offense.  And our defense depended mostly upon turnovers and missed field goals to get stops.  If we can't force punts against Boston College... well, I guess we are left clinging to hope that their offense is improved.  Otherwise, maybe we can't stop anybody.

So what are the positives?  Well, the big one is that we won.  We found a way to win a game that we easily could have, should have, lost.  That alone is a huge change from 2015, where we frequently did the opposite.  Adding to this positive is the fact that Boston College is generally a pretty good program.  Yes, in the past 5 years they have gone 3-9, 2-10 and 4-8 (with the other two years being 7-6), but before that they were a regular 7-8 win team.  Hard to say what their status will be going forward, but the last 3 years they won 7 games, 7 games, and then 3 games.  I would suggest this year is likely to be a 6 or 7 win campaign.  That would mean they are a decent to pretty good FBS team, and that makes this a perfectly good win.  Scrapping out a hard fought game in week 1, in the rain, several time zones away.  That's a lot of variables.  Obviously, much about this season remains to be seen, but overall, I think the takeaway from this game is positive.

A smaller positive, but certainly not insignificant, is the fact that we managed to execute well enough to get the job done despite poor blocking.  Due to both teams running the ball so much, with mixed success, the clock ran all game and made for a very short game in terms of possessions.  We only had the ball 9 times, and, again, without blocking well, still managed to move the ball on 4 of those possessions.  Two touchdowns, one field goal, and one fumble after driving about 50 yards.  The game was very frustrating to watch, but in hindsight, not nearly as terrible as I thought at first.  

We will have to see if the blocking improves going forward.  This game should provide a good chance to get things sorted out without much resistance, but then Vanderbilt will be a very similar game to Boston College.  I don't think their front seven is as nearly as difficult to block, but they are still a good defense and a bad offense.  And we know we can make a bad offense look pretty good.  

But let's just enjoy the win for now.  I'll close with a look back at the first game of each year under Paul Johnson.

In 2008 we looked pretty good against Jacksonville St, and that led to a good year.

In 2009 and 2010 we looked mediocre against Jacksonville St and then SC State.   Those games led to a great year and a bad year.

In 2011 we looked fantastic in week 1, blowing out Western Carolina with ruthless efficiency.  And that led to a strong start but a fading finish, for an ok to pretty good year.

In 2012, we lost a close game we should have won in Blacksburg, and everyone was frustrated but mostly thought we would be good.  Because VT is always good, and that was on the road.  Well they ended up not being normal VT that year, and we had a mediocre year, eventually going 7-7 thanks to our "losing team bowl waiver" since we played in the ACC CG.  

In 2013 we looked great, murdering Elon, and that led to a mediocre year.

In 2014 we struggled mightily with Wofford (and then Tulane and Ga Southern) before going on to Paul Johnson's best year here.

In 2015 we looked fantastic, taking apart Alcorn St. (and Tulane) before losing 9 of the next 10.


The point of that exercise is to illustrate what most fans already know, but maybe could use a reminder - week 1 doesn't tell you much.  Probably for most teams, but certainly GT.  This team is going to evolve.  Hopefully its more like 2014 than 2011, or certainly 2015.  But for now, we are 1-0.  

As always, Go Jackets!