Texas Georgia game thread #2. This time it's serious.

[caryhorn]

Georgia is our nemesis this year.

Can't gripe about our Defense -- we just held a top 5 team to 16 points in regulation. Not shabby at all.

Our blocking was indeed a bit shaky.

We had some very good WR play.

The fake punt against our Special Teams was the key to the game.

We lost our first SEC Championship game in OT. Georgia gets the credit, as they won it in the end.

I'd rather have won and got the bye, but as others point out, we're still in a pretty good position.

I agree with you ^^^ about most things. Just a slight caveat, though. Their fake punt was creative in a way I’ve never seen before. Remember they took a delay of game penalty trying to draw us offside, setting them back five yards. They had to make 6.5 yards for the first down. I’ve never seen a fake punt following a delay penalty. This totally surprised the team and our coaches.
Kirby’s trick play was gutsy. And obviously the creep deserves credit for it.

IMO, the key to the game was Missing two routine field goals. If Auburn makes either we are ahead at the end of regulation.
Our below average kicking game is our Achilles heel.

 

[caryhorn]

Carry, I disagree. If you need evidence, just look at how we dominated Georgia in the first half. They couldn’t run… at all. How were they able to run the ball in the second half? Their dual threat quarterback, who is half the talent of an Arch Manning, made the difference.

With Manning at quarterback, the defense cannot pin their ears back, and they cannot sell out to stop the back. If they do, Arch will kill them.

We dominated them in the first half because Quinn was driving the team with accurate passes and time consuming drives.
Georgia had success in the second half because our defense relaxed when the freshman came in; and because Coach K didn’t pressure him. Why we didn’t blitz the hell out of them in the second half is baffling. Finally K started blitzing and it resulted in an interception.
Pressure the second half and we would have won in regulation.

 

[LHABSOB]

And everybody knows that that person is Arch.

Don’t include me in your errbody. I think a lot of people are going to be surprised and disappointed in our QB play next year. I hope I’m wrong and y’all can call me out next season. I trust Sark is playing the QB who gives us the best chance to win.

Having said that, I think Arch would give us a nice change up and don’t think he’s being utilized correctly or enough.

 

[caryhorn]

He might not change the blocking, but mobility is a great equalizer. Arch has wheels. And when a QB is a REAL threat to run, it impacts what the DL does...something Texas failed to remember against Beck's replacement...

I think what Texas failed to remember about the Georgia qb replacement is that he is a true freshman with no experience in a big time game. So they didn’t consistently blitz/pressure him into mistakes until late in the game. And we did get an interception then. For some reason K laid back and gave him time to make decisions.

 

[nashhorn]

Why we didn’t blitz the hell out of them in the second half is baffling.

My comment then and now.

 

[caryhorn]

I wish there was an edit function but you can't ask for everything. "Our" big fatties....

There is an edit function. It is located on the lower left. It is the dots. They show up after you submit your post

 

[Saint Jimmy]

There is an edit function. It is located on the lower left. It is the dots. They show up after you submit your post

Hahaha. I meant to type exactly THAT. Texas lost to Georgia twice mostly because OUR BIG FATTIES got their asses kicked. Texas actually would have won the second game but the SEC and media big money decided that they couldn't let big rich Texas win another conference title. Big gambling money might have also played a role.

Most division 1 college football games are not "fixed" or influenced. However, several key games every year ARE "influenced" for various reasons. I've noticed it for at least 2 decades now. I know football and I know how calls and non-calls can easily influence and turn around - if not outright decide - games. Some of the silliest football fans I've ever encountered say "Officiating cannot determine a game." Hahaha.... That's an incredibly stupid statement. I'm older now but give me an officials uniform and let me pick three fellow officials and I'll show you. I've seen a number of big college games through the years that look as fixed as All Star Wrestling.

 

[dukesteer]

We need the dues....

Hahaha. I meant to type exactly THAT. Texas lost to Georgia twice mostly because OUR BIG FATTIES got their asses kicked. Texas actually would have won the second game but the SEC and media big money decided that they couldn't let big rich Texas win another conference title. Big gambling money might have also played a role.

Most division 1 college football games are not "fixed" or influenced. However, several key games every year ARE "influenced" for various reasons. I've noticed it for at least 2 decades now. I know football and I know how calls and non-calls can easily influence and turn around - if not outright decide - games. Some of the silliest football fans I've ever encountered say "Officiating cannot determine a game." Hahaha.... That's an incredibly stupid statement. I'm older now but give me an officials uniform and let me pick three fellow officials and I'll show you. I've seen a number of big college games through the years that look as fixed as All Star Wrestling.

In Game 1 we knocked on the door, politely. In Game 2 we pounded on the door, but had almost every break and call go against us. And as usual lately, we could not execute in the red zone.

That said…

While I do believe we can win it all — this year — I don’t believe we will unless Sark starts strategically inserting Arch. Quinn deserves massive kudos for getting us to where we are, but to climb to the mountain top, we will need more than Quinn. We can talk about the OL until the cows come home, but realistically, can we really expect perfection, and against a front seven the caliber of a Georgia? It’s not going to happen.

Quinn has a ceiling. We have all seen it. Look at the underperformance in three of the past four games. 17 against TAMU. 20 against Arkansas. Vandy.? Need I continue?

Arch brings a more diverse skill set, and he presents more challenges for the D. I am not suggesting that we replace QE or that we start Arch but my gosh, USE HIM Sark!

Strategically use Arch, and we will win the big prize. Don’t, and it will be Deja Vu all over again…

 

[Saint Jimmy]

In Game 1 we knocked on the door, politely. In Game 2 we pounded on the door, but had almost every break and call go against us. And as usual lately, we could not execute in the red zone.

That said…

While I do believe we can win it all — this year — I don’t believe we will unless Sark starts strategically inserting Arch. Quinn deserves massive kudos for getting us to where we are, but to climb to the mountain top, we will need more than Quinn. We can talk about the OL until the cows come home, but realistically, can we really expect perfection, and against a front seven the caliber of a Georgia? It’s not going to happen.

Quinn has a ceiling. We have all seen it. Look at the underperformance in three of the past four games. 17 against TAMU. 20 against Arkansas. Vandy.? Need I continue?

Arch brings a more diverse skill set, and he presents more challenges for the D. I am not suggesting that we replace QE or that we start Arch but my gosh, USE HIM Sark!

Strategically use Arch, and we will win the big prize. Don’t, and it will be Deja Vu all over again…

This will probably surprise you but I agree with that. Ewers is one dimensional. Manning can run and create more plays. Regardless, even if Manning plays and plays well, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A RUNNING GAME. Texas mustered something like 35 and 55 yards rushing in two games against Georgia. If Manning plays against Clemson and plays well but Texas has somewhat less than 100 yards rushing, even Texas' outstanding defense probably won't be able to salvage a win.

Many Texas fans are getting caught up in the Ewers/Manning debate and completely missing what to me, at least, is the root issue - a running game that just disappears, at times. That also explains many of the problems inside the 20.

Thank God I'm not a coach. We'll probably rush for 250 against Clemson and lose. C'est la vie.

 

[Phil Elliott]

Can somebody please explain to me what exactly the UGA DL does that causes such a mismatch for us? I mean, G Tech put 27 points on them in regulation and 42 overall, and also rushed for more than 250 yards. Other teams have done better than us against UGA. What does UGA do to us that they do not do to others and why can't we figure it out after 2 games?

 

[Gylcomer]

With a dual quarterback defenses typically prefer zone. Otherwise the offense sends everyone deep and there’s no one with speed around once the QB scrambles past the LOS.

So defense can use all schemes if the QB isn’t very mobile.

 

[dukesteer]

- a running game that just disappears, at times. That also explains many of the problems inside the 20.

My point with respect to the running game is that a mobile quarterback neutralizes the ability of a talented front seven like Georgia’s to sell out on the run, because the quarterback can takeoff and kill them.

The case study is Georgia Tech, who gashed this same Georgia team with players that probably wouldn’t make Texas‘s roster. Yes, they did it because of their scheme, but they also did it because of a mobile quarterback.

Not only do we have a mobile quarterback, but we have one that will probably — and rapidly — develop into an elite passer as well. (If he isn’t already.) Why aren’t we using him, at least situationally?

 

[SabreHorn]

Can somebody please explain to me what exactly the UGA DL does that causes such a mismatch for us? I mean, G Tech put 27 points on them in regulation and 42 overall, and also rushed for more than 250 yards. Other teams have done better than us against UGA. What does UGA do to us that they do not do to others and why can't we figure it out after 2 games?

It's not so much what the Georgia DL does as it is what our OL doesn't do - that's BLOCK!

 

[Saint Jimmy]

My point with respect to the running game is that a mobile quarterback neutralizes the ability of a talented front seven like Georgia’s to sell out on the run, because the quarterback can takeoff and kill them.

The case study is Georgia Tech, who gashed this same Georgia team with players that probably wouldn’t make Texas‘s roster. Yes, they did it because of their scheme, but they also did it because of a mobile quarterback.

Not only do we have a mobile quarterback, but we have one that will probably — and rapidly — develop into an elite passer as well. (If he isn’t already.) Why aren’t we using him, at least situationally?

Again, I've thought about this more than a retired middle class Texas alumnus/fan should think about it and I agree. A mobile quarterback can help open up the running game BUT a running quarterback is no substitute for a running game. If you play Manning and give him a standard mix of plays and the offense scores a couple of times, do you just let him play? I guess so. Ewers has done his bit and his draft stock would suffer some but he's done enough to get drafted somewhere.

 

[Saint Jimmy]

Can somebody please explain to me what exactly the UGA DL does that causes such a mismatch for us? I mean, G Tech put 27 points on them in regulation and 42 overall, and also rushed for more than 250 yards. Other teams have done better than us against UGA. What does UGA do to us that they do not do to others and why can't we figure it out after 2 games?

Great question. I'm not knowledgeable enough to answer it completely. They are big and strong and very talented..... We did get called for quite a bit of "holding"....

 

[Phil Elliott]

It's not so much what the Georgia DL does as it is what our OL doesn't do - that's BLOCK!

Well, OK, but why do we not do this only against UGA? Why can we block well against a$m, against UM, but we cannot block against UGA but G-Tech can?

 

[Saint Jimmy]

Well, OK, but why do we not do this only against UGA? Why can we block well against a$m, against UM, but we cannot block against UGA but G-Tech can?

One clue might be that Georgia ranks 36th in rushing defense against pretty stout competition. Texas ranks 15th in rushing defense. Clemson ranks 87th in rushing defense.

 

[Walking Boss]

Can somebody please explain to me what exactly the UGA DL does that causes such a mismatch for us? I mean, G Tech put 27 points on them in regulation and 42 overall, and also rushed for more than 250 yards. Other teams have done better than us against UGA. What does UGA do to us that they do not do to others and why can't we figure it out after 2 games?

In my opinion, Texas running scheme does not match up well with UGA defense. In an overly simplistic analysis, Texas bread and butter is the outside zone with the weakside guard and/or guard tackle pulling to the run side all of which is relatively slow developing. Without any running threat from the qb to occupy the weakside de, he can track down the running back from behind easily. UGA defensive tackles are quick enough to shoot the gaps and cause problems for the pulling O-lineman. In addition, UGA LB's can completely ignore the qb and flow to the play side. Another factor is that UGA has big db's and Texas WR's are not big so they have a hard time maintaining blocks on the edge (hence holding calls). Texas most effective runs were more downhill type runs inside. I actually think that Gibson's running style works better against an UGA defense as he runs more like Etienne. I only recall one Manning play on about the UGA 20 where he kept it for a 5-yard gain. I thought Sark should have left him in there and run a pass play or qb draw or even another play if the d-end took Manning hand off.
Contrast this scheme with UGA which appeared to be more man blocking and downhill especially off tackle. They sprung a long one on this type of downhill play. Get downhill fast and pop through to the second level.

 

[HalRex]

A dual threat qb can effectively neutralize one defender amongst the front 7. An Arch red zone package could be very effective especially if he utilizes his passing skills because, to this point, he’s only been used as a runner in that situation. Red zone RPO? The only worry would be his decision making/processing speed as an inexperienced qb in the condensed red zone area.

 

[VYFan]

Georgia is, I think, 54-4 in the past four years; I am willing to bet that for the combined ranking of recruiting for the classes currently playing, they are #1 by a long shot. They did just enough to beat GTech , just enough to beat us—they aren’t a hit-all-cylinders kind of team, but they combine being very talented, very scrappy, and well coached.
Their receivers couldn’t get open against us; ours couldn’t get open against them; Etienne is better than Tre; otherwise the talent was fairly close and we are scrappy and well coached, too.
Result: they win in OT when the defenses tire, with their better back.
You guys are overthinking the QB.
—oh and, our kicker missed 2 FGs

 

[Chinstrap]

Not saying this is the case with Sark, but over many years of watching players in club and high school soccer, I have noticed that too many football coaches look down their noses at the soccer players. They refuse offers from soccer coaches to develop the kickers on the football team. I have personally witnessed this. Many high school football coaches are arrogant asses and with your knowledge of high school football in Texas I know that I am not telling you anything. Soccer players not only have the leg, but they are also great athletes.

Can somebody please explain to me what exactly the UGA DL does that causes such a mismatch for us? I mean, G Tech put 27 points on them in regulation and 42 overall, and also rushed for more than 250 yards. Other teams have done better than us against UGA. What does UGA do to us that they do not do to others and why can't we figure it out after 2 games?

Failure to threat with a run game. Failure for receivers to get open. (With Texas speed at receiver why no space between receivers and defenders?) Failure to pick up blocks to protect. Inability to hold block for good pocket. Failure of play calling.

QE gets about 3 seconds to get rid of the ball when playing GA. That means someone has to be open in that amount of time. Either a dump assignment or crossing patterns. Bottom line, if the window of time is that short, someone needs to be open. or you do not have a passing game. So just put a receiver or running back in to take the snap and run baby run.

Plenty of blame to go around.

 

[Saint Jimmy]

"Arch"...... I'm surprised at the large number of fans who are on a first name basis with the Mannings.

 

[hornde68]

PM me a mailing address to send to.

We dominated them in the first half because Quinn was driving the team with accurate passes and time consuming drives.
Georgia had success in the second half because our defense relaxed when the freshman came in; and because Coach K didn’t pressure him. Why we didn’t blitz the hell out of them in the second half is baffling. Finally K started blitzing and it resulted in an interception.
Pressure the second half and we would have won in regulation.

One block and one less celebration on the int and we win on a pick six. Terribly hard to look at that wide open green field and not cry. . Oh, the what ifs.

 

[hornde68]

Private essage

 

[Chinstrap]

In my opinion, Texas running scheme does not match up well with UGA defense. In an overly simplistic analysis, Texas bread and butter is the outside zone with the weakside guard and/or guard tackle pulling to the run side all of which is relatively slow developing. Without any running threat from the qb to occupy the weakside de, he can track down the running back from behind easily. UGA defensive tackles are quick enough to shoot the gaps and cause problems for the pulling O-lineman. In addition, UGA LB's can completely ignore the qb and flow to the play side. Another factor is that UGA has big db's and Texas WR's are not big so they have a hard time maintaining blocks on the edge (hence holding calls). Texas most effective runs were more downhill type runs inside. I actually think that Gibson's running style works better against an UGA defense as he runs more like Etienne. I only recall one Manning play on about the UGA 20 where he kept it for a 5-yard gain. I thought Sark should have left him in there and run a pass play or qb draw or even another play if the d-end took Manning hand off.
Contrast this scheme with UGA which appeared to be more man blocking and downhill especially off tackle. They sprung a long one on this type of downhill play. Get downhill fast and pop through to the second level.

Tie up the fat boys on offensive line and let the backers clean it up.