Georgia's defense is improving . . . and perhaps the Bulldogs' offense is, too?
Year2 looks at the numbers and makes this interesting point:
"I don't know if we can chalk all of the improvement, especially in points, up to the defense alone. Georgia committed three turnovers in each of these games last year, as opposed to one turnover in each of this year's games. That helps out any defense. In addition, Georgia's punt coverage is a little more than four yards per punt better and its kickoff coverage went from allowing 25.71 yards per return in '09 to 17.57 per return this year. These two combined have resulted in about 40 yards of field position saved per game."
It's worth the read.
Go 'Dawgs!
over 1 year ago
T Kyle King
3 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
The only thing regarding the offense in there is about turnovers.
The others are about Special Teams.
It’s one thing to consider our turnovers in those games, but when factoring in the turnover margin, we were even in the South Carolina game and -1 in the Arkansas game. One a wash, the other a negative, and negative overall. I suppose saying, “you’re offense didn’t stink as bad as last year when it comes to turnovers.” is technically improvement, but it’s-not-as-bad-as-it-was is not the same as it’s-good.
The improvement in our defense based on Year2’s analysis is very interesting and encouraging. Taking anything from it positive about our offense is grasping at straws, at best.
Fair enough.
Hence, the question mark in my headline.
I just thought it was an interesting corollary to tankertoad’s (legitimate) point about how the offense put the defense in some bad situations last year with all the turnovers. (Of course, the defense didn’t exactly do us any favors by folding in quick-change situations; there were some one-play 60-yard touchdown “drives” that would have been one-play 80-yard touchdown “drives” if we hadn’t given the opposition such good field position.)
Go 'Dawgs!
I didn't notice the question mark. Sorry about that.
I didn’t mean for my response to sound like a retort to your post. More of me think aloud.
You bring up a good point about the improvement (since the turnover margin is an improvement) in offense helping the defense. It’s the age-old debate that college football fans have: a good defense helps the offense and a good offense helps the defense. But neither precedes the other. They should be taken in tandem. similar to the question, do you set up the pass with the rush or vice versa? Not exactly the same thing, since in that case, one does precede the other, but both approaches need one to work for the other to work. With offense and defense, I feel good about our improvements on defense, given our new scheme. I can’t say the same about our offense.
by marktheshark on Sep 21, 2010 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Dawg Sports
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
