One of the things I've noticed is that, in the past two games, offenses have had to almost exclusively rely on big plays to get moving. I had an earlier thread that discussed this in regards to playing Georgia; Vanderbilt was even more in line with this reality of the defense.
Vanderbilt offense big plays (20+ yards): 65 yard run, 36 yard run, 33 yard pass - 134 yards on 3 plays
Vanderbilt offense - rest of the game: 200 yards on 50 plays, 4 ypp (35 rushing yards on 15 carries, 2.3 ypc / 4.9 ypa passing)
I feel this demonstrates why fans keep *thinking" that "Team X should have just kept running the ball" is a misunderstanding of the actual flow of the game.
Both Vanderbilt's and Georgia's rushing totals were bolstered by large runs - 5 UGA runs went for over 20 yards (29, 43. 43, 24, 21). These 5 runs equated to 160 of UGA's 227 yards rushing - this meant the rest of the game was 28 rushes for 67 yards (2.4 ypc). So if you're UGA's coach, what do you presume is the more likely scenario each time you hand off the ball - a big run (15.2% of the time) or a very short yardage gain (84.8% of the time)?
It also means that it's a very specific problem for the defense to fix, which I think we are seeing - adjustments made against Vandy watched their big plays evaporate almost entirely. In fact, the only time they threatened in the second half was after a 33 yard pass.
If the defense can shore up on the big plays, it could be one of the better defense in college football. This is already a defense where teams cannot expect to simply march down the field in a manner in which our offense is playing, and if our offense continue to eat clock the way they do then these explosive plays may be the only option for opposing offenses anyway.
Vanderbilt offense big plays (20+ yards): 65 yard run, 36 yard run, 33 yard pass - 134 yards on 3 plays
Vanderbilt offense - rest of the game: 200 yards on 50 plays, 4 ypp (35 rushing yards on 15 carries, 2.3 ypc / 4.9 ypa passing)
I feel this demonstrates why fans keep *thinking" that "Team X should have just kept running the ball" is a misunderstanding of the actual flow of the game.
Both Vanderbilt's and Georgia's rushing totals were bolstered by large runs - 5 UGA runs went for over 20 yards (29, 43. 43, 24, 21). These 5 runs equated to 160 of UGA's 227 yards rushing - this meant the rest of the game was 28 rushes for 67 yards (2.4 ypc). So if you're UGA's coach, what do you presume is the more likely scenario each time you hand off the ball - a big run (15.2% of the time) or a very short yardage gain (84.8% of the time)?
It also means that it's a very specific problem for the defense to fix, which I think we are seeing - adjustments made against Vandy watched their big plays evaporate almost entirely. In fact, the only time they threatened in the second half was after a 33 yard pass.
If the defense can shore up on the big plays, it could be one of the better defense in college football. This is already a defense where teams cannot expect to simply march down the field in a manner in which our offense is playing, and if our offense continue to eat clock the way they do then these explosive plays may be the only option for opposing offenses anyway.
