Kirby Smart has won in every SEC stadium he has coached in except for Ole Miss' Vaught Hemingway Stadium, where the Bulldogs will play on Saturday night.
Read the full story here
I get what you’re saying. And have respect for your comments. But against Ole Miss with Chambliss I think we would fare better with the long methodical drives.
For Two reasons: 1) It keeps Chambliss and his high power O off the field. 2) It keeps the Dawgs defense rested. Actually there’s a #3 it would tend to better gas and weary the Ole Miss defense. Just my humble opinions. If the Dawgs Need to score quickly then Yes they will need the type offense you referred to. But hopefully they wouldn’t need that to happen. Go Dawgs !!
Nice article although I am not interested in point spread or stadium wins. I am concerned with our ability to generate sustained drives and to contain their quite talented QB. We have the talent to win and with some diverse play calling , I think we can keep them off balance enough to take the W.
Just for fun….I went back and took a quick look at that Ole Miss vs Florida Game….and changed my mind when i saw, Ole Miss just played Auburn. So….lets compare that one instead, since both UGA and Ole Miss recently played Auburn.
Imo….both Florida and Ole Miss are different teams than they were, a month ago. Time stands still, for no player or team. Everybody is "experienced" to some extent, now.
So…."Auburn vs Ole Miss"……well, actually there's not much to compare there, either. Just run the freakin' ball. UGA's Auburn loss produced 300+ yds passing and 100+ yds rushing. Lol….theoretically, they shouldn't have lost.
The turnovers cost UGA more than anything and get this….the Dawgs only had 4 penalties. All 15 yarders, that were timely for Auburn and non-reviewable for a total of 60 yards. THAT's what beat UGA at Auburn….imo. Referees & Turnovers. It's a killer. Lol
The Dawgs won't have a problem hemming up Ole Miss's Offense. Stop two guys and you stop the Rebels…imo. How hard is that for the likes of Georgia?! And Ole Miss doesn't have the defense to stop UGA….So…there's that. Lol
Dawgs….49. Rebs….10
I can’t speak well to how FL ran effectively against Ole Miss. What I do know if they have a first round draft pick at DT, and it doesn’t take a genius to know Ole Miss is going to load the box and force Gunner to pass. And they’ll be ready to prevent the bubble screens from generating more than 3-4 yards. Sorry Bobo. Is Gunner able to play under center? It would open up the play action.
Conservative, long drives present more opportunities to make mistakes. For a long drive to work, we have to execute almost every play flawlessly and the opposition has to scheme for fewer O looks. Not a good margin play. That's why KS wants more explosive plays. Or, he did at one time.
Disagree! Throwing the ball just say you threw it…is the fastest way to lose a game. Far more "bad things" can happen with a gunslinger than a gritty short game. That's why you rarely see a prolific passing attack destroy a great defense.
But, a ground game? Mixed with an occasional pass to keep their defense honest or move the chains on 3rd down….Works. And, that's UGA identity. Always has been….always will be, under Smart.
IMO…..That's when Saban's Tide started going off the rails. The passing attack tasted good….so, he bellied up and gorged himself on the likes of Smith, Waddle, Williams, etc.. Now, just look at em. Lol.
Go Dawgs….just keep doin' whatcha do. Play strong D and run the ball down their throat. The Dawgs and Kirby Smart…are Champs….not, Chumps like Bama, USC, OSU and all the rest, looking for the lightening strike. Lol
I've never understood why a 12-play, 75-yard touchdown drive is considered better football than scoring on four or five plays. Both produce seven points. One just requires considerably more things to go right. The other is more efficient.
Every additional snap creates another opportunity for a penalty, missed block, sack, turnover, or negative play. A conservative offense doesn't eliminate risk. It accumulates it.
Against average teams, you can methodically grind out long drives. Against elite defenses, asking an offense to execute 12 or 15 consecutive plays without a mistake is asking for trouble. One holding penalty, one tackle for loss, and suddenly you're punting or settling for three.
Explosive passing plays change that equation. They reduce the number of plays required to score, force safeties to defend deeper, discourage defenses from crowding the line, and create more opportunities for the running game.
And spare me the argument that long drives keep your defense rested. That's wonderful when they end in touchdowns. Not so wonderful when you consume seven minutes, settle for a field goal, and watch the opponent score seven in four plays.
I'm not advocating abandoning the run. I'm advocating using it as part of an offense designed to score touchdowns, not merely possess the football.
Championship football isn't about how many plays you can execute. It's about how efficiently you turn possessions into points.
The object of football is to outscore your opponent, not win a time-of-possession contest. Nobody hangs a banner for leading the nation in 14-play drives.
Go Dawgs.
Not trying to be a smartass or know-it-all….but, if you've ever played 4 quarters on the defensive line….against an equally good offensive line….you'd get it. Trust me. That's why you hear the words "win in the trenches" from the gumflappers every week on TV. Lol. If ya can't do that….hang it up.
Sustained drives of 10+ plays, will grind a defense to dust…if your offense is good enough to sustain long drives and stack first downs and hold onto the ball (no turnovers)….And….Your defense can get off the field in 6 downs or less. You win. It's just that simple.
It's extremely demoralizing and puts pressure on their offense….which helps make THEM make the mistakes and turn the ball over.
Imo….They aren't robots. They get tired…and, can be mentally beaten before the scoreboard indicates it. You see teams collapse every week in the 4th quarter….with a lead. Because of long sustained drives. The ones that allow the comebacks are usually the quick strikeoffenses that aren't built or the 4th qtr..
The Offensive Line doesn't have to work as hard as their defensive couterparts….cause, they know where the play is going. Just sayin'. Lol
In other words take what the defense gives you……and in the words of Kirby Smart, "get the explosives where you can".
So, be conservative and go for the short plays unless you can execute an explosive play?
Not sure what we've accomplished here.
Then don't be.
@DawgfromILM Hey no sarcasm or disrespect. You and I are just exchanging our opinions. Which is the fun part here. KS, Bobo, and the Dawgs are gonna go their thing any way. But I thought my points of 1) Keep Chambliss and his high powered O off the field. 2) Keeping our Defense rested 3) Wearing on Their Defense. I thought those were good points.
You pointed out that the more plays the more potential for mistakes that could turn the ball over. You like many Dawgs fans want more deep throws. OK. I get that. When they work they are indeed a thing of beauty.
BUT unless your receiver is wide open you’re asking the QB to make a pin point pass when it’s contested. That can lead to a pick six or put the rival in excellent field position. So let’s say your defense has just battled and got a good stop. Then your QB comes out throws it deep for an INT ! Then your weary defense has to come right back out on the field !!
For Me I say Run the ball, make the short to intermediate passes. Then IF you’ve got a WR or TE wide open down field then Yes of course throw that long bomb. But Contested long bombs scare me !! Just my humble opinions. I’m certainly not a coach or expert.
Oh and by short to intermediate passes I DONT mean always the bubble screen stuff !! Throw it over the middle to our Big TEs !! I’ll say your comments are very reasonable. I just see it through a different lens. What ever happens hope our Dawgs beat Ole Miss !!
Glad we didn’t listen to you at the Bama game.
No need to get snarky. It’s just my opinions like yours are just opinions. I doubt Kirby will be calling either of us to draw up plays. And if you go back and look we’ve won plenty of games by running the ball. I tried to respectful to you. Is it asking to much for you to do the same ?
@DawgfromILM. Um citing the Bama game might not be the best to prove your point. Dwight Phillips rushed for 120 yds. in that game. He was the only RB listed in the box score because he had the most yds. Don’t know how much our other RBs had. Gunner did have a good night there as he passed for 249 yds. But I don’t know how many deep passes he made as that’s not listed. I think a team can win Both ways. West Coast teams throw deep passes Allot. But they’re not exactly know for their defenses either. So it boils down to a matter of opinions.
No…."conservative" implies you are trying to hold on to something….such as a lead.
What i'm talking about, is the most certain way of beating your opponent in Football. A "physical" contest….in which you break your opponent. Mentally and physically. You do that….and they will fear you, the next time you play. That puts points on the board before you even play again.
Saban and the Bear had that going for them….just sayin'. There's all sorts of ways to win ballgames….but, only a few ways to Win Championships. And the Dawgs are Elite at both….
"Running the ball" & "Defense". They pass when they need to or when the defense gives it to em by loading the box. As long as you can keep the opponent honest….by showing them, they can't focus on any " one player" or "one offensive threat"…..you make them defend the Whole Field. Opening up all sorts of opportunities.
If you can run the ball 15 times on a drive….eat up 10-11 minutes of clock….exhaust the other teams defenders….and give your defense a rest……..Why wouldn't you? Just askin'.
You can either, do that…or "quick score" like Stockton did vs Alabama with two quick strikes for a TD….and in turn put your defense back on the field to let the opponent grind on Them, instead.
Lol….fortunately….UGA is built for the 4th quarter. So it's like Brer Rabbit goading Brer Fox to chase him into the briar patch…."Brer Rabbit as you recall…was born and raised in a briar patch.". Lol
Imo, Navy….It's okay to overthrow a deep "covered" receiver every now and again if you don''really need the points…but, want to loosen the defense up. Lets em know that you are ready willing and able….if they blow an assignment. It puts more pressure on the backend of the defense….meaning they won't be able to charge the run and plug up holes in the line.
IMO….A properly trained Bulldog opponent….must respect the pass, the run and the ability of Stockton to extend plays and run like Larry Zonka….allowing profitable running lanes for your backs, whenever you choose to run it between the tackles.
Otherwise….they stack the box and Stockton's arm and legs go to work. Lol….choose your poison, sort of.
It's virtually impossible, for the majority of Teams out there to "defend the whole field". That takes speed and talent…with depth at all positions
@BigDawg61. If you can run the ball 15 times on a drive….eat up 10-11 minutes of clock….exhaust the other teams defenders….and give your defense a rest……..Why wouldn't you? Just askin'. EXACTLY !!! You gas Their Defense while Resting yours !! Plus you keep Chambliss and his high octane O on the sideline helplessly watching as the game clock slips away !!
I love a beautiful deep pass well executed as much as anybody. But Contested deep passes are a dangerous beast. They can lead to pick 6s or give the rival excellent field position. A contested deep pass calls for your QB to make a very precise pinpoint throw. So Sure if your guy is wide open deep yeah by all means chunk the ball to him.
But the key to beating a team with a QB like Chambliss is Run, Run, Run with short to intermediate passes mixed in. I Will say that we need to throw over the middle to our big TEs more or to the boundaries. NOT the horizontal screen passes. Those are not making forward progress. And every team in the country knows CMB loves calling those.
So use those Big and Tall TEs more over the middle. Let Dandridge and Taylor try to get open down field. But primarily Run the ball !! That’s Ole Miss weak spot !!
Yep. I think at Ole Miss on their home turf is gonna be a tough challenge. But if our defense plays close to as good as they did vs the mud lizards, Dawgs Win !! CMB likes to run the ball. The Dawgs O line is great For running the ball. And I think every Dawg is hungry for vengeance against Stale Piss Oops Ole Miss ! 🤣
The numbers:
Passing: 18-of-22 (81.8%), 249 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT.
Efficiency: 11.3 yards per attempt.
Explosive completions (20+ yards): Four for 129 yards, accounting for 52% of his passing production.
Deep completions: Three for 103 yards and a touchdown.
Longest completion: 53 yards on second-and-17.
Rushing support: Dawgs gained 206 yards on the ground.
Those four explosive completions produced more than half of Stockton's passing yardage on just four plays.
And consider that 53-yard completion on second-and-17. One aggressive throw accomplished what might otherwise have required several successful plays just to recover from a negative down.
The takeaway: Stockton has demonstrated he can stretch the field against a quality defense. Explosive passing and a productive running game aren't competing philosophies. They complement each other.
The Alabama game showed what that combination can accomplish.
The question isn't whether Stockton can throw deep. It's whether we'll consistently give him the opportunity.
This is how you win national championships.
Lol….that's just it, Navy. If you have a Defense like UGA's…you USE IT!…to Your advantage.
My guess is….Our Defense will wind up getting gassed by the 2nd half…IF….they have to chase that quarterback all over the field. UGA has no choice but to play it that way (defense & running game).
Kirby sure as hell….doesn't want to get in a track meet style ballgame with the likes of Chambliss…and….Lacy is supposed to be back, too. So, there's that.
Imo….the Dawgs need to get on the board first. By passing or trick play, if necessary. That sets up the rest.
Go Dawgs!!!
Nobody's arguing against physical football. I'm arguing against confusing physicality with predictability.
A 15-play, 11-minute drive sounds wonderful—assuming you score seven. But every snap is another opportunity for a penalty, negative play, or turnover. And if that marathon ends in a field goal, congratulations. You've won time of possession and lost the scoring battle.
You want to break an opponent mentally? Try pounding them with the run, then hitting a 50-yard touchdown pass when they load the box. Nothing demoralizes a defense quite like discovering it can't stop either.
Against Alabama, Stockton completed four explosive passes for 129 yards—52% of his passing production. The Dawgs also rushed for 206 yards. That's physical football AND explosive football.
And Saban didn't win championships by treating the forward pass like a misdemeanor.
The goal isn't to see how many plays it takes to score. It's to make the defense fear that you can score on ANY play.
That's how you make an opponent defend the whole field.
The interest in the OM game, in some large part, is the curiosity around whether the elite Dawgs or the Auburn Dawgs show up.
Are you expecting our D to shut down Chambliss' talent at creating efficient, explosive plays? If they don't we may be trading 3s for 7s—do the math.
Apologies, squid. You know I have great respect for you. I'll stick to the facts in the future.
Go Navy beat Army!
I agree. It's gonna take an all hands effort and some unnatural imagination from Bobo like we delivered in Tuscaloosa. The Florida plan is not going to work.
So let me get this straight. Auburn beat the Dawgs because of turnovers and referees, but Ole Miss beating Auburn 45-15 tells us nothing? That's some impressive selective analysis.
Here's what you're overlooking: Auburn outrushed the Dawgs 192-113. That's a 79-yard advantage on the ground. We threw for 327 yards and still lost. Why? Because Auburn was more effective controlling the ground game, and our mistakes made matters worse.
You can't preach physical domination as the foundation of championship football, then dismiss a game in which the opponent physically outperformed us on the ground. If winning the line of scrimmage is your measuring stick, you don't get to put it away when the results are inconvenient.
And dismissing Ole Miss's offense because we only have to "stop two guys" is a fascinating defensive strategy. I'm sure nobody else has thought of it.
Turnovers and penalties contributed to the loss. Absolutely. But blaming the referees doesn't erase what happened between the tackles.
I like the Dawgs to win, too. But 49-10? Against a ranked SEC opponent, on the road, with an offense that just managed 27 points against Florida, seven courtesy of the defense?
There's confidence, there's optimism, and then there's predicting football scores with a bourbon-soaked crystal ball.
Dawgs 31-27. And I'll be delighted to be wrong by 39 points.
You're actually using Nick Saban as an argument AGAINST explosive passing? You might want to revisit the history books.
Saban's 2020 national championship team beat Ohio State 52-24. Mac Jones threw for 464 yards and FIVE touchdowns. DeVonta Smith had 215 receiving yards and three TDs—in the FIRST HALF.
Somehow, all that passing didn't prevent Saban from collecting another national championship ring.
And remember the Dawgs' 65-7 destruction of TCU? Stetson Bennett threw for 304 yards and four touchdowns. Apparently Kirby didn't get the memo that championship teams should only pass when absolutely necessary.
Nobody's advocating throwing just to throw. That's a straw man. We're advocating an offense that can punish a defense through the air AND on the ground.
The irony is that explosive passing makes a physical running game MORE effective. Safeties can't crowd the box when they're worried about getting beaten over the top.
Physical football and explosive football aren't opposites. The best championship offenses do both.
And suggesting Saban's dynasty went off the rails because he discovered the forward pass? That's an interesting interpretation of winning another national championship.
The goal is to make defenses fear every play—not give them 15 consecutive opportunities to stop one drive.
Now we're getting somewhere! After lecturing us about the virtues of running the ball down their throats, you're suggesting we open with a pass or trick play to score quickly?
Welcome to the explosive-offense argument. We've been expecting you.
Here's what you're missing: Nobody's advocating a track meet. We're advocating an offense capable of scoring without requiring 15 consecutive successful plays.
And if Chambliss is as dangerous as you say, shouldn't we want touchdowns instead of seven-minute drives that might end in field goals?
You protect your defense by scoring points, sustaining possessions when necessary, and forcing the opponent to play from behind. Not simply by running the clock.
But here's my favorite part: You want to use an explosive play to establish the lead, then apparently put the forward pass back in storage.
Why abandon the very weapon that helped get you ahead?
The best offenses can grind out a drive OR score in three plays. That's not abandoning physical football. That's making the defense defend everything.
You're making my argument. You're just limiting it to the first possession.
