Another upgrade

Mike Honcho wrote: Agree about the D, thriller...and i do still think CTG is using these non-con games to try out stuff on defense that we'll need for the meat of our schedule...i.e., less concerned about stats as he is building depth/developing schemes. As for the O, the thing I like the best is seeing aspects of no less than three different offensive styles being ran successfully...bread n butter I formation, shotgun pro-style/pistol formation, and 4 receiver spread. Should cause difficulty in game-planning for opposing D's, and should help our o-line by keeping defenses from stacking the box on us or getting too sophisticated with blitz packages. On the subject of our o-line, we definitely need to clean some things up, but I'm proud of our guys, especially the young pups for learning the assignments necessary to run the different formations.

Overall, glad to see an all around "team" that can bail either side out when necessary and not be a liability to the other. Defense has had some hiccups, but we did play the game yesterday without three of our best defenders.

Mike, from where I sit, a quality post.

Think that there has been a lot of "game planning" going on through the first three games.

Missouri, caused some concerns for me, but regardless of what their fan base and media hypes had to say after the game was over, the final score did not stack up to what I read on the internet or the way I viewed the game. I would pose this question to the Missouri Tigers . . . . want to play the game again for all the marbles? Missouri, mean this sincerely . . . welcome to the SEC. One flaw . . . the SEC ran Urban Meyer out of the Southeast with the same basic offensive plan that you have.

Mike, really like the word "team". This group of "coaches" and "players" seem to understand the meaning, not sure prior to a year or two back that it meant anything.

Another game where our offensive play calling seemed cohesive. Nice to see that. One or two more weeks like that and we may have a gen-U-ine trend going.

Wartdawg wrote: Another game where our offensive play calling seemed cohesive. Nice to see that. One or two more weeks like that and we may have a gen-U-ine trend going.

Wartdawg, beginning to belive what you said.

Well we've got to keep it up.

We've had stretches when things have seemed well and then inexplicably gone back into
the 5 play playbook during a critical game.

Wartdawg wrote: Well we've got to keep it up.

We've had stretches when things have seemed well and then inexplicably gone back into
the 5 play playbook during a critical game.

Exactly wart. This is why I am holding off on Bobo's promotion to coach until after the next three games!!!

sadlerdawg wrote:

wlayton wrote: Hmmmmm..........I find it interesting that COACH Bobo (not Bozo) kinda carried us tonight.

While I agree with that statement, and I am prepared to upgrade bobo to Bobo (notice the capitalization), I'm not quite ready to bestow Coach onto him yet. I'll reserve that until after the next 3 games.
I was impressed with his play calling again tonight. Using the run to set up the pass, TE use, FB use, misdirections, intermediate passes, even a swing pass (although Murray owes Gurley a meal for almost getting him killed). All these things that have been absent for years are actually working (go figure).
Nice to see a deviation from the screen, bomb, draw, punt.

Interesting link just posted sadlerdawg. Really like comments from McGarity in the article. This one in particular.

“I don’t want money to be a reason somebody sticks around,” McGarity explained. “I don’t want them to stay because of some longevity bonus. I want them to be here because they want to be here.”


blogs.ajc.com/uga-sports-blog/2012/09/17...logs_uga_sports_blog