Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
Comments
I think you, and others, are overstating that first point. Don't get me wrong, I can see the argument for going for it. But I also think there's a good case to be made for recognizing that the defense was playing a lot better than the offense at that point, and for trusting them to get the ball back to the offense with a fresh set of downs and only needing a field goal to win. I do think using that first timeout when it was used was questionable. But in the end, he was proven right to rely on a defense that had earned that trust with its play, so I don't know about writing off the result as dumb luck or "getting bailed out."
Oh, and timeouts aren't "wasted" on defense in the last few minutes. That's exactly when you're supposed to use them.
Sorry to get into the weeds, but I was thinking more about this assessment that Smart was "bailed out" by the defense and realized that it makes no sense. To reiterate, Smart deliberately placed his trust in a group that had earned it, to do the job that they were there to do, and they came through like he expected them to. That, quite simply, is not what getting bailed out means.
Georgia's third down conversion rate on offense was abysmal in this game, yet people are so sure that going for it on 4th and 3 was the obvious decision to make. Ok. If they fail, Cincy just need to pick up a handful of yards to get into field goal range. If the ensuing series carries out similarly to what actually did happen, and they make the field goal, then Georgia gets the ball back with the same amount of time, only they need a touchdown instead of a field goal. Winning becomes much more difficult and unlikely. So if the Georgia offense were to pick up that 4th down, despite struggling on third down all day long, and if we're adhering to any semblance of logical consistency, then it would have to be said Smart was bailed out by the offense.
So no matter what Smart decided in that situation, if it were successful, then we'd have to say that he was "bailed out" by the players who carried out the decision, and the phrase loses all meaning.
I know this is kind of a pedantic point by now, but it was bugging me. Sorry for the rant.
The defense didn’t “bail Kirby out” with three minutes remaining. They did exactly what Kirby expected them to do...get the ball back to the offense with time remaining to win the game. To my recollection, that’s exactly what happened! Good job, coach! The way the line was blocking, three yards was not anywhere close to guaranteed.
Kirby's plan to punt looks genius since the Cincy coach decided to throw it and stop the clock, Heck I even think they hiked it one time with 10 or more seconds still left on the play clock.
Kirby is a genius, or a bit lucky. You decide.
The Dawgs didn’t have the best game offensively, but it marked a dawning of a new day! How many times in Dawg history regardless of opponent have the Dawgs won while rushing for less than 50 yards?
Not since the Miss St game. or did we go over 50 then?
No, only 8 yards rushing that game. Roughly 400 passing
Best article by Bill for this crazy year of CFB.
E_Roc and ShoottheHooch...
First off, I wasn't the one to say the defense "Bailed him out"...that was Bill's words that I had quoted in those 2 paragraphs...although the defense was pretty darn key so I don't disagree with what Bill said. Our D played stellar and so did Cincy's defense.
Yes, our offense didn't move the ball very well, and the thinking is that since the offense was sputtering you are taking a BIG chance in giving back the ball to Cincy and then subsequently having to use all your timeouts most likely. IF you get the ball back then you have little time (maybe not even enough), no timeouts, and an offense that really isn't moving the ball well. I mean, Podlesny had to make the longest field goal of his career in order to win the game. It wasn't a chip shot.
SO there was a LOT riding on Kirby's decision and it all came together in the end. Luck is part of the game, and even Kirby knows he got away with one as he questions his own decision later. There is no doubt about that.
I'm a bit puzzled that people are debating the merits of what turned out to be a good call by Smart. I mean, Georgia did win the game after all. I know I've questioned some of Smart's sideline strategeries over the years and yes, I'll be the first to admit I complained loudly about the nature of this win, but it seems to me the final score is the best way to determine if it was a good call. Like others have stated, the defense was playing lights out at the time. Why not give them the chance to get the ball back?
So the offense was struggling. And apparently we don’t have a ‘can’t miss’ 3 yard play. We decide to punt and hopefully hold them and make them punt. Then we take over much further away than we were, with basically no time left. 👍
Got it..........
Cut and paste champion right here.
half the team was missing, Cinn stacked the line so we couldn’t run, we were on the wrong side of most every ref call, O line was embarrassing, almost entirely new secondary, COVID issues, poor punting, turnovers, noon start where we never play well, and just overall poor performance all around, down 21-10, and a super-motivated team with everything to prove... yet we find a way to win! Not the way we wanted to win and MUCH to work on but overcoming all that adversity is something to celebrate, and a game we normally give up and lose. Go Dawgs and optimistic about 2021!
Well Montana, there would have been a LOT riding on Kirby’s decision if on fourth and three he had turned it over to a sputtering offense and an OL that could neither run nor pass block and a running game that was netting less than three yards per rush. Dang straight Kirby needed to call a TO to weigh his options, all things considered. Even in hindsight his call was spot on! If our line with Cleveland and Hill had been intact it would have been a no brainer to go for it, but with pretty much our second unit playing, putting the game in the hands of a defense playing lights out and a strong legged kicker was the no brainer the way I see it!
"finished with just 45 net rushing yards on 24 attempts in the"
And herein lies a major problem. Add this total to our rushing total against Miss. St. and you get 53 yards TOTAL>
Little Tulsa rushed for 200 yards against the Bearcats 2 weeks ago. Tulsa got beat by Miss. St, by a couple of points. We beat Miss. St by 7. Tulsa rushed for 158 against Miss St. We had 8.
Thank goodness for the emergence of JT Daniels and the passing game. We recruit better than anyone not named BAMA and we can't rush the ball better than 53 yards in 2 games? Seriously?
Quit making excuses for drop outs and Covid and a lack of motivation. Our back up linemen are higher rated than most teams starters.
BAMA squashes Cincy, if they played them, and we are still catching our breath after being behind the whole game and eeking out a win. Just Wow! Wait til next year, or the one after. But we got another great recruiting class to gloat over!!