One thing I noticed, while watching the CFP this year, is that for a team that everyone marveled over in Indiana, I couldn’t help but notice that they didn’t do anything “dazzling” on offense. But to be honest, maybe it’s because I never really watched them during the regular season, but I was expecting big plays, bombs, etc. Nah, we didn’t get that.
Instead, we got stout defense and efficient offense. Nothing fancy, but it works.
But was that Indiana alone? In all honesty, I don’t remember a lot of explosives for our guys this year, maybe only when we played someone else, like Tennessee. Also, the data guys keep insisting that Georgia is in the top 10 in offensive play efficiency but dang if it just doesn’t feel that way. Turns out, that not just a Bobo thing.
A few things at play – the 2023 clock change where the clock continues to churn after a first down, as well as transfer portal movement, could be contributors to the problem. A deeper dive into the post lead me to CFB Graphs by Parker Fleming, who did a data analysis on what’s been happening to the explosives as of late.
After reading through and processing his visualizations, he landed on a simple premise: the defenses have gotten better. Specifically, the biggest shot in the arm that prevented explosives was better first and ten defensive play. Seems like everything after that dictates whether more explosives can occur, so your first and ten situation is important…but defenses have that sniffed out.
Is this because of “see ball, get ball” reactivity of beefing up defenses through the portal while the new-look offense on the other side is still largely figuring out the playbook? Offenses seemed to be trending towards passing more on first and ten, as a result of 1st and ten yardage situations yielding little forward traction by running the ball first.
While this is all very Moneyball-ish, it could explain some of the decision making that makes us scratch our heads on Saturdays. Fleming ends on this note:
College football has largely trended towards the offenses in the 21st century, but it appears the pendulum is swinging back towards the defenses, at least in terms of explosive plays. Defenses have caught up. The big play isn’t dead, but it is much tougher to come by, and as a result, offenses need to push innovation, adjust their personnel preferences, and prioritize consistent success to provide more opportunities for the offense to get that big play.
On one hand, we’re in good hands with Kirby since defense is his forte…but that part of about offensive innovation might worry some readers when it comes to Mike Bobo. But if Georgia is one of the most efficient offenses in the country, then it would seem we’re meeting the call for consistent success in the latter part of that statement.
Oh, and personnel preferences…meaning, like, Cash Jones on 3rd down? That’s another conversation for another day.
Complementary football works. Run the ball, stop the run, limit turnovers, create explosives when they are there, don’t give up cheap field position, score TDs in the red zone, and win 1st and 3rd downs.
Amazing how most of that is completely driven by solid line of scrimmage play on both sides.
Due to NIL and the portal, placing a bunch of talented receivers and a qb on the same team for very long just isn’t happening. Basketball on grass is dead. And that’s a good thing.
I’m still pissed off at our clock management during the Tech game. If we would’ve lost I might’ve spontaneously combusted.
Our RB room is not what it once was. Tons of reasons for this and you don’t see other programs stocked with RBs the way they once were. This changes a lot of what an OC has to do and helps refine a defense.
Offenses get fewer possessions so fewer point. Defenses now are set up to stop explosive plays because it’s hard for an offense to have a 14 play 75 yard drive. I have a coaches book from the 1982 UGA coaching clinic that highlights “bend but don’t break”. It calls out the more plays an offense runs, the more lightly the offense makes a mistake (turnover, penalty, sack etc).