GAME DAY: GEORGIA BULLDOGS VS AUBURN

I just went back and, cringing, watched some of that "game" from this past weekend.

I have a question, and I'm not asking in a sarcastic tone at all, I mean that. I ask this very respectfully.

What can possibly be changed that would cause us to beat Auburn (or Alabama) in the SECCG?

(Obviously we can't get bigger or faster, and we aren't going to make any coaching changes between now and then . . . so within the realm of what can be changed, what can be changed that would reverse that outcome?)

Our offense has to be able to stay on the field.

I think the defense can adjust, but they will wither with another bevy of 3 and outs.


Plain and simple for me, it comes down to the offense being creative enough to negate those types of D-line.

We've already said it..attack the edges... chip the ends with our TE's.... try to create mismatches with our TE's.. unbalanced lines....quick slants.... screens.... maybe consider actually involving Swift.

I saw things I thought would have given us a competitive shot, but I seriously don't know if Chaney can do it. We've done
unbalanced lines, slants, and gotten Swift more involved so those things I know we have in the arsenal. Here's the real
problem though...

I have not seen us ever chip with the TE's and have them still release into the pass patterns. With Chaney it has been one
or the other. They either stay in and protect or they go out, and it's fairly obvious which one its going to be. Speaking of TE's...
in the rare occasion we do actually pass to them, the patterns are rec ball vanilla. We have not gotten a mismatch on a 'backer and stretched the field at all. Even if we can't protect well, just the threat of Nauta taking a linebacker deep would make a
D think a bit differently. Even if it didn't work, it sets other things up. I also thought a tunnel screen would have destroyed them, and regular screens would have slowed down that rush. The issue though is that these things and a few more are not any thing
I have seen in Chaney's play book and I have absolutely ZERO belief in his recognition of the need for them, or ability to put
them in.

Those things might not reverse the outcome, but I think they would give us a punchers chance.

Honestly... even with a better line, here in the SEC you are going to run up against a team or two that you can not dominate.
If you can't dominate them, then you have to outmaneuver them... and again; Chaney has done nothing to indicate to me
he can do outmaneuver any good DC.

Just like wart says, and many of us have said previously, the offense has to be creative enough to neutralize an aggressive front 7 that's stacking the box... and it's not rocket science... swing passes, screens, sweeps, TE passes... stuff most middle school coaches have figured out... and Kirby has to have the aggressive "we're the hunter, not the hunted " approach he spoke of after the SC game... running the ball at the end of the half with :20 left and 0 timeouts because you're worried about a sack is, for lack of a better word, pussified.... not hunter

sadlerdawg wrote: Just like wart says, and many of us have said previously, the offense has to be creative enough to neutralize an aggressive front 7 that's stacking the box... and it's not rocket science... swing passes, screens, sweeps, TE passes... stuff most middle school coaches have figured out... and Kirby has to have the aggressive "we're the hunter, not the hunted " approach he spoke of after the SC game... running the ball at the end of the half with :20 left and 0 timeouts because you're worried about a sack is, for lack of a better word, pussified.... not hunter

100% this...

This is why you don't waste your timeouts.

Even if you have, you have to trust your QB to throw the ball away instead of taking a sack.

The football gods do not reward playing not to lose. They never have... they never will. When I saw this I looked at my wife
and told her we were probably going to miss the FG. It can't be proven.. it can't be backed up by scientific fact, but it just seems
to happen that way.

Playing decisions made out of fear are rarely a good thing. Almost always, it's the losing team that did that over the course of
a game.

ogredawg wrote: Eason will transfer. The coaching staff sent a clear message to him Saturday when he did not play. The coaches stated this is Fromms team good or bad. Eason will never see the field again in a Dawg uniform imho

He will be slinging it in Miami

Does Kirby still have the no Miami transfer rule in effect? If yes, no slinging for Jacob in Miami.

I can’t fault Kirby for enforcing this. Right or wrong, he is going to be judged by what he does, and what richt does. With the gator meltdown and FSU struggling, the U is going to prosper. Heck, this might be their year. I see Miami winning a natty in the next five years. There is just so much talent down there. Look at the head coaches who won there back in the day.

Restrict away would never hold up in court if Eason wanted to go to the U all he would have to do is sue Kirby and UGA and would win