“We want to make the subjective objective.”

Before you turn your nose up about stuff like this, aren’t you even the least bit curious what analytics might have suggested Georgia run on that fourth-and-one against Vanderbilt?

Advertisements

22 Comments

Filed under Strategery And Mechanics

22 responses to ““We want to make the subjective objective.”

  1. A10Penny

    I’m wondering if their analysis goes so deep to consider Chubb vs. Michel vs. McKenzie, and whether they should still run the McKenzie play after Vandy got to see it due to the penalty.

    Like

    • I was told by some guy I had never seen post here that I didn’t know what I was talking about yesterday when I dare suggested that call was terrible. He, of course, blamed the players and said poor Chaney had his hands tied behind his back when he made that call. It was the wrong call before the timeout … it was idiotic after the timeout.

      Like

      • Gaskilldawg

        I do not know which coach takes the blame Smart had his headset on and knew the call before the timeout. Smart had time to overrule it during the timeout.
        I do not quarrel with anyone criticizing Cheney, but I think Smart share the blame, too. He is Chaney’s boss and it is Smart’s duty to tell Chaney “no” during a timeout when Chaney makes a bad call. .

        Liked by 1 person

      • 69Dawg

        +1000. Even Pee Wee coaches know better than to show the opponent the play, get a time out and then run the damn play. Dumbest call of the last year or any year.

        Like

      • What about Bob

        I didn’t blame the players and I didn’t say Chaney’s hands were tied behind his back. I did say that the o-line had been being stoned all day long by Vandy’s defense which is likely why Chaney called the play he did, and that is the part I don’t think you understood.

        I do disagree that the call was “idiotic” and I then said we will have to agree to disagree. I respect your opinion and you could very well be right and I could very well be wrong. But just because I disagree with you, don’t be going and putting words in place of what I actually typed.

        And I have posted here before, but I mainly read because I work 60 hours per week and also am in school.

        However, if this is how you are going to treat a long time reader and fellow Dawg fan, you can piss off for all I care. There are plenty of other good Bulldog blogs and fan sites without the UGAAA bashing and politics that provide actual content on UGA sports.

        Like

        • I apologize I came across that way. No excuses.

          I find it extremely frustrating that many place the blame for last year on the players and give the coaching staff a complete pass for the results last season. I stand by my assertion that play call was bad, and the lack of execution made it worse. Jim Chaney couldn’t dial up a game plan worth a damn last year … regardless of personnel. The guy has 20+ years of experience as an offensive coordinator and his play calling last year was worse than Bobo’s was when he was called all sorts of names as a young coordinator. Chaney deserves every bit of criticism he has received this offseason.

          If you disagree with that, we’ll definitely have to agree to disagree.

          Good luck with your studies and work.

          Like

  2. EagleDawg

    If that is the case, why would you need to pay a coach $4-5 million a year if you can get a computer to make the decision?
    Fritz has a selective memory (disclaimer- bitterness from an Eagle alum). That game was lost because he had his QB take a direct snap for the only time in his tenure – LET ME REPEAT THE ONLY TIME IN HIS TENURE – to run a QB sneak on the goal line, which resulted in a botched snap and turnover when we were driving to go up 24.
    Too many intangibles in a football game to make decisions purely on percentages. They might contribute to a good decision, but give me a coach who is intelligent enough to recognize his players, the situation and make a decision. A good game coach’s gut is right more than it’s wrong.

    Like

    • You think Nick Saban’s being paid seven million a year for his gut? Bless your heart.

      Like

      • Hogbody Spradlin

        Gut might be a little strong of a word, but he is paid for making judgments, which involve subjective factors. Professionalism if you want to call it. Maybe even art.

        Besides, Saban doesn’t a seven million dollar gut. I’m getting there though.

        Like

      • Paloaltodawg

        Saban took a pay cut? 😜

        Like

      • EagleDawg

        No, which is why I qualified my remark with “good game coach”. His ability to recruit, develop and run a program – uber successfully – is why he is paid like he is. But he’s obviously doing something right on game day, which is why I would want him and not a computer making decisions.

        Like

  3. DC Weez

    I don’t know about analytics but the only other coach that would have called the McKenzie play is Kyle Shanahan.

    Like

  4. Macallanlover

    Unfortunately coaches are usually criticized/hailed over the results of a specific call, not the call itself since (theoretically) every play can be run for a successful result at any given time. When we judge someone as a lousy, or great, play caller it should be done over the course of a total game, or season. We all know that isn’t going to happen given the emotions of fans, but it is the only correct way to judge a coach, imo. Some may be better in red zone calls, short yardage plays, etc., but to take one specific play and paint a coach’s reputation with it is short sided to me.

    My concern with Chaney’s play calling was I felt it was poor over the course of most of the 2017 season, not just the play against Vandy. The same way I can feel Bobo was an excellent play caller for UGA, and do not take points away from him because of the play from the 3 yard line in the game against SC in 2014. If you called the plays fans want/expect all the time I suspect you would not be very successful as an OC. Being capable of having several options available, and unpredictable enough to use any of them at any given time, is what keeps defenses off balance. And calling the least likely one, and have it fail, is what generates the most vocal response.

    In 2016 it seemed Chaney had no answer for certain defenses, or else he chose to not utilize the different weapons he had at his disposal. That was frustrating, and let’s all hope we see something different in 2017 or we will fail to meet even reasonable expectations. I won’t blame it all on any one play, and will have to remember even a perfect play call doesn’t work if someone misses a block, or overthrows a wide open receiver. His job is to make enough good play calls to put us in a position to win, not make the perfect call periodically.

    Liked by 1 person

    • 69Dawg

      Had the play been run when called it would not be the dumbest call of the year but as I stated above to line up in the formation, then have a time out and line up in it again and run what I’m fairly sure was the play they were going to run in the first place was just stupid. The Vandy HC/DC had to know that one of two things were going to happen, either we were going to do a fullback dive with Nick or a sweep with Mckenzie. There DL was smart enough to stone our terrible OL so he just let his LBs worry about McKenzie. Granted the LB made a good play but there was never any doubt once he laid hands on McKenzie he was down. Just damn dumb.

      Like

    • W Cobb Dawg

      “My concern with Chaney’s play calling was I felt it was poor over the course of most of the 2016 season, not just the play against Vandy.”

      Agree. Chaney has been consistently mediocre throughout his career – 2016 was a normal year for the guy. One can only hope 2017 will be an aberration and his O is successful.

      Like

  5. Uglydawg

    As far as Ga. Southern kicking the FG against NCSt goes,
    I’ll guarantee you, as much as I love CMR..he would have done the same thing.
    It cost UGA a game against UCF a few years ago. A damn bowl game.. Opening drive…Georgia drives the field and bogs down on the goal line..fourth and (maybe 1) and CMR kicks a moral killing (for UGA) and building (for UCF) Field goal. Even if UCF had stuffed the fourth down effort, they would have been left in the shadow of their own goal posts.
    They went on to defeat an uninspired Georgia team. That was the moment I realized CMR wasn’t going to be our Moses. He was enamored with 3 pointers.
    Saban has had his moments too. ” Kick 6″ will be remembered forever as Auburn’s excision of the memory of “Fourth and Dumb” by CPD.
    And Tennessee’s Hail Mary against us soothed the scars of the hobnailed boot.

    Like

    • Uglydawg

      (Don’t usually worry too much about typos, but I meant “morale”…certainly not “moral” as I typed. Changes the whole meaning of the point..my bad)

      Like

  6. Just
    Stoopid
    Coaching
    end of story

    Like

  7. The analytics provide an overarching philosophy for what to do in the situation. It doesn’t provide the play call or the execution. When you start looking at yards per play, yards per run, field positioning, # of possessions, # offensive plays – when you have high averages, those teams should probably eschew kicking fg’s or punting and going for it. The risk/reward is should lead to more points per game and more wins.

    However, if you are going to go for it on 4th down more often, then you better have the right kind of plays called. I don’t have the analysis, but I would suspect that teams that run their base offense plays have more success in those situations rather than the surprise plays or plays that are not run as often or against their basic offensive philosophy.

    With apologies to Don Banks from Sports Illustrated, the Seahawks were right to have called a pass on 2nd down from the 1. I believe they had just timeout left. If you run Marshawn Lynch in a hurry up goal line situation from a 3 receiver set and he doesn’t make it, you have to burn a timeout and guarantee that you will only have 1 more play if you call a run. If you spike it, you could get two plays or you could try for the end zone on a pass on 2nd down when you have 3 wideouts on the field. The problem with what happened was the play call. Seattle ran a inside short slant on the goal line with a 6 foot qb that took the receiver into the teeth of the defense. There were lots of hands up, lots of obstacles to tip the pass. If Seattle throws a fade where only the receiver has a chance, it is much better call. If Wilson executes as coached, only the Seattle receiver would have had a play on the ball. If you score you win. If the ball falls incomplete you can bring in the goal line set and pound it into the line twice with a timeout left.

    Like

  8. Bulldog Joe

    Which analytic program ordered the Sky Kick® and put our best pass rusher in the back of the endzone in ‘coverage’?

    Better check who the programmer is.

    Like

  9. Irwin R. Fletcher

    At some point you have to figure Google and Amazon will create tech that calls plays better than coordinators.

    ‘Alexa…what’s the call on 3rd and 3?’

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s