Kirby knows that we know that he knows ($$)…
Smart said emphatically after the game that the Bulldogs should be able to get that short yardage. On Monday, he was asked more specifically how they can do it. He wasn’t going to tell future opponents any changes the coaches might make but went into the thought process.
“I mean, you be creative,” he said. “You have to sit and think, ‘Are we in the best personnel grouping to do it? Are we giving it to the right side? Are we attacking the weakness of the defense?’ There’s all kinds of things that go into it. Where are their best players, where are our best players?”
Like I said, he knows telegraphing the play with heavy personnel sets over and over again and then jamming the ball straight into defensive alignments set to flood the A and B gaps is likely to be a failing strategy against SEC opponents, and yet Georgia keeps doing it, with the same results. Is he crazy, or crazy like a fox?
So were the more predictable run-up-the-middle calls a simple belief that Georgia should be able to do it or a case of holding back a call to use in the postseason? Smart wasn’t going to say so, obviously.
The problem I have with a Kirby Smart, 3-D chess grandmaster theory here is that the Dawgs have so many goal line options — Bennett read option keepers, passes to a couple of gifted tight ends, coming out in spread formations to give the backs more room to maneuver are just a few things to come to my non-Monken mind — that it seems like non-stop manball is a complete waste of strategic effort. Think I’m gonna have to go with the “Georgia should be able to do it” theory of the crime. Your mileage may vary, of course.
You must be logged in to post a comment.