Revisiting a minor moment in a lost cause

For what it’s worth, and it’s probably nitpicking on my part to bring it up, but did anyone else find the decision in the first quarter to go for it on fourth and seven on the Tech 33 a bit questionable in light of Richt’s comments during the season about how the defense has been hampered by other teams being given short fields due to shortcomings by the offense and special teams?

It’s fair to note that after the change on downs the defense, after giving up one first down, did get a stop and force a punt, but the decision allowed Tech to flip the field.  Morgan Burnett then scored on a pick six on the following offensive series for Georgia.

I just have this feeling that four years ago in a similar situation, playing with a much better defense, Richt wouldn’t have hesitated to take a delay a game penalty and then punt with the hope of pinning Tech deep in its own territory.

Like I said, maybe it’s just me, but I thought it was a strange decision at the time.


Filed under Georgia Football, Strategery And Mechanics

6 responses to “Revisiting a minor moment in a lost cause

  1. We were pretty much moving at will at the time and the defense was doing a decent job. I’m surprised that we didn’t go for the onside kick after the last score. At that point our defense had not stopped GT in quite some time and Richt was betting on a 3 and out.


  2. Ben

    This jumped out at me, as well. My comment was the utter lack of confidence in the kicking game. Even a delay of game might not have given enough room to pin Tech deep, especially with the poor kick coverage we’ve seen lately.

    As much weeping and gnashing of teeth we have with the defense, we’ve got to figure out the kicking game, also. That third facet is so important, and it has been something the Georgia tradition can hang it’s hat on. If just two of our three parts are working, we may be 10-2. Only one, though, and we’re at 9-3 with a loss to Tech.


  3. JasonC

    Without looking up the game stats/drive charts, I believe that Tech had been starting at the 40 thanks to several OOB KOs, so letting them start at the 33 was an improvement.

    But, yeah, I thought a delay and punt was smarter also. I think with Blair’s late-season struggles and the weather, I FG was out of the question.


  4. I believe that Tech had been starting at the 40 thanks to several OOB KOs, so letting them start at the 33 was an improvement.

    Even that didn’t work out – Stafford was sacked for a seven yard loss on the play.


  5. Macallanlover

    I agree it was a more a lackof confidence in Blair Walsh on a wet field. I must admit I agreed with the decision at the time, but it just didn’t work out. I cannot 2nd guess CMR for this, I am just impressed CMB didn’t try to run Stafford and chose to pass the ball instead. Not a bad decision given our ability to pass the ball on GT and the slim chance we would execute on Special Teams with a pooch kick.


  6. Hackerdog

    Don’t forget the 8 foot tall DE that Tech uses as a middle blocker on field goals.