Down in the first quarter

I joked the other day in my Observations post about how it would be nice if Georgia didn’t save its adjustments for halftime, but instead GATA’ed from the start.  It ain’t just my perception, either, judging from this Josh Hancher graphic.


A quick dive into’s situational stats makes it pretty clear the early issues largely reside with the pass defense.  In the first quarter, opponents have rushed for a measly 37 yards on 27 attempts (a 1.37 ypc average), with zero touchdowns and only three first downs.  Meanwhile, opposing passing attacks have managed their highest passer rating in the first quarter (147.46) while generating two touchdowns and 13 first downs.

The question I’ve got is pretty simple — is that a reflection of what opposing offensive coordinators are dialing up to surprise Lanning and Smart, or is it simply taking that long for Georgia’s defensive players to get their heads in the game?


Filed under Georgia Football, Stats Geek!

10 responses to “Down in the first quarter

  1. I think it’s a little bit of both. Coordinators are showing some things early. Smart and Lanning seem to be vanilla early. The players certainly seem to have to shake out the cobwebs.

    Once the adjustments take, the defense has played lights out.


  2. RangerRuss

    The opposing coaches have a plan. Then the Dawg’s D punches em in the mouth. That initial series is practiced repeatedly and along with adrenaline allows them to get a couple of scores. Then the reality of a better overall prepared team loaded with blue chip talent takes over.


  3. jrod1229

    Maybe the D is focused on shutting down the run initially knowing that a pass heavy team plays into the strength of the defense (the back 7 and rushers) and they won’t be able to sustain it? Force the opposing coach to know his only way to stay in the game is via the pass and then make adjustments to that.


  4. Russ

    This will bite us hard against Bama or other teams with elite offenses.


    • Macallanlover

      Yep. I get going in with a Plan A based on what is known, and the tendencies shown; but wouldn’t a chess player have a Plan B based on how we would attack ourselves? Waiting until after halftime is just too late to implement adjustments (which we are damned good at) when playing elite teams.


  5. Biggus Rickus

    You’re basically talking about two games where there was a bust in the first quarter. I don’t think there’s much to read into it.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. SlobberKnocker

    I think the opposing coaches coming in with a plan is the biggest of the factors. I think this was especially relevant against UT as Chaney knew our tactics as well as personnel (except a few newcomers). He knew where and how to attack us. I really believe he put that double move in front of LeCounte knowing his aggressive style and was testing.


    • jrod1229

      Dunno if you’re on 247 or anything but they broke down that play and the long and short of it was the LeCounte was screwed either way. It was the perfectly timed play against the defensive call we had.

      Assuming everyone did their jobs correctly, LeCounte had to either run up and jump the gun like he did, or they gain 30+ yards with an easy pass across the middle. He obviously guessed, wrong, but the reasoning wasn’t as simple as “dumb mistake”.


  7. FlyingPeakDawg

    You can’t cover everything. Looks like our D is susceptible to a decent QB able to get the ball to a very big target. But once we make the other team one dimensional (no one has run the ball on us yet), then we can be more aggressive on shutting down the opponent’s “go to” play. Nothing to worry about here on D.