Interesting pass rush stats
- Thread starter Deleted11512
- Start date
Yep. Our offense lost the game, not the defense.
For all the complaining about our lack of pass rush, the data says we didn’t get a rush the majority of the time bc they were throwing it so quickly. When they dropped back into a true passing set, we got pressure on 4 of the 6 attempts and forced 2 INTs. It suggests that if teams drop back on us, there’s a good chance we’re going to get pressure.
So the takeaway is, use the UNC game plan by using quick throws, rollouts and one can expect a fair amount of success on the offensive side of the ball.
Yeah, that's not unusual. That's how Duke kept Leonard clean. Most of his attempts were quick passes. But that's not what made them successful against us. What made them successful is inexperienced guys (or guy, I should say) in the secondary that gave up 3 big plays. Nelson never turned to the ball on a poorly thrown TD pass that should have been intercepted. He got burnt badly on another TD pass. Kilgore bit on play action that left the middle wide open on the 34 yard pass down to the 1 yd line. Better execution on those 3 plays and we're having a different discussion. Helms had another stat that showed that Maye was ineffective when throwing against Dial/OD. His success came on the nickel/S positions. And we had guys getting their first snaps in those positions.
But as another poster said, D certainly was not the issue.
Just facts my guy. It wasn't an ugly as it seemed, that's all I'm saying. I apologize for trying to find something to positive about going forward. We suck and will likely go 3-9 this year. That better for you?
I was initially pretty annoyed with the D in the game, but overall I think they did a fine job against possibly the best QB we'll face this season. They shut UNC out for most of the 2nd half and picked Maye off 2x. Their two 2nd half TDs came on drives that started near mid-field, which isn't the D's fault.
That's how I feel about analytics in baseball! "Sure, he's only batting .210, but look at his exit velo and his wmarbic!" (yeah, i made that last one up but they have many contrived categories of statistics now)
Well, that's how the coaches read it. Why? Bc they want to identify the REAL issues and correct them. They only have so many hours of practice. Can't waste any on things aren't real issues.
When I read the revisionist history of a lost football game from the loser's perspective, the quoting of stats to show "it really wasn't that bad of a loss and if this or that had happened we would have won the game" I am reminded of something my stepfather says about football games. "They don't ask how, they just ask how many".
When a team loses, the coach and the players should say "they did what they had to do to win and we didn't" and that should be the message.
Pretty sure the players and coaches have said that consistently over the last week. Nothing you or I say on this board has any influence whatsoever on the performance of the team.