Georgia Tech and Utah similar foes

by JazzyUte on Dec 26, 2011 10:38 PM MST in Sun Bowl

I hope you all had a great Christmas.

Of course, now that it's over, we're closing in on the Sun Bowl and the official end of the 2011 season.

For Utah, it's a chance to right things after a bit of a bump in the road against Colorado back in November. Georgia Tech, on the other hand, is just looking for any second-half traction heading into a new year.

The Yellow Jackets' path to the Sun Bowl is actually almost opposite of how the Utes' season played out.

Utah started '11 dropping four of their first seven games and falling to 0-4 in Pac-12 play. By late October, a bowl game looked increasingly unlikely. But, as we all now know, they've finished the season ripping off four of their final five to not only finish with a winning record, but also locking up a bowl bid.

Georgia Tech, though, began their season surging, winning their first six games and climbing as high as 12th nationally before the bottom kind of fell out.

Since that solid start, the Yellow Jackets are just 2-4 in their final six games. Because of that, they back their way into the Sun Bowl with a respectable, but hardly expected after that quick start, 8-4 record.

In my Q&A with a Georgia Tech blogger, I asked why there was a collapse at the end of the season and the consensus seems to be that it was mostly schedule that impacted the first half success and second half struggles.

It makes sense. Of the Yellow Jackets' first six games, only North Carolina and North Carolina State are going bowling. They had wins over 2-10 Middle Tennessee State, 2-10 Kansas, 2-10 Maryland and 1-10 Western Carolina.

Not exactly murderers row. You would expect no worse than 4-2 against competition like that. Throw in 3-9 Duke also, who was their eighth and final win, and five of their victories came against competition that won three games or less.

Of their four losses, all have come against teams that were bowl eligible (Virginia, Miami, Virginia Tech and Georgia).

That's not to say Georgia Tech doesn't have a good victory under its belt. They did steamroll Clemson, who entered that game sixth nationally, so it's obvious this team can win. They just haven't been consistent against better competition.

Sound familiar?

Utah faced a similar situation this season, albeit, as I said, really opposite of what Georgia Tech saw.

In the four losses Utah witnessed in that first half of the season, all were against teams that will have, or already have, gone bowling. In the four wins seen on the backside of the 2011 schedule, only UCLA gained a bowl berth.

So both these teams have pretty much taken care of business against worse teams and struggled against the better ones. The difference is that Utah has the worst loss of the two (Colorado) and Georgia Tech the best win (against Clemson).

Is that the difference maker and why, heading into this game, the Yellow Jackets are the favorite?

Maybe. Either way, I'm guessing Georgia Tech fans are looking at the Utes' schedule and thinking, "who have they beaten?" and, to a lesser extent, it sounds like Utah fans are doing the same. Clemson this year is definitely a mighty big feather in Tech's cap, especially since they won the ACC, but, outside that game, like with Utah, they struggled against the better teams and beat up on the bad ones.

In the end, Utah is an above .500 BCS team (unlike the last time these two teams met in the Emerald Bowl) and so is Georgia Tech.

The Utes own three victories over bowl bound teams. So do the Yellow Jackets.

So, something has to give here.

Who loses?

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Bang on RE: schedule

u(sic)GA opened with two losses, Boise and South Carolina, and there were calls for Coach Mark Richt’s head. Then they went on a tear, until meeting LSU in the SEC Championship. No more calls for Richt to go.

GT started with the easy games as you state, and we all looked at October/November as the REAL season.

VT, we could have won, but one of our LB’s got over-excited and punched the VT QB in the head. That penalty turned the game in an instant, and you could feel it in the stadium or on your TV; game over, could have been a big win. VT and Clemson are our two biggest rivals in the ACC (we don’t get FSU on the schedule enough).

Clemson; we played like we had nothing to lose, everything to gain, and everything clicked, especially on Coach Al Groh’s Defense. CPJ wanted to limit Clemson to 10 Offensive drives for the whole game; I think they had 12 total. The D kept Mr. Sammy Watkins (watch for him on Sundays) in check.

If CPJ can put together the miss-direction, confusion, and chaos that our Triple Option can cause, we can rip off some quick strike big plays (Rocket Reverse, great downfield cut blocking by the WR’s, the midline QB follows the B-Back for 8 yards). If we Pitch/Dive/Keep the way the playbook is designed, we can grind out some 8 minute drives and keep Utah’s Offense off the field. CPJ doesn’t carry a playsheet, he watches everything and makes Offensive changes on the fly as he sees weakness or the ability to confuse/distract/misdirect. It’s almost like he can draw up a completely new play with a twig in the dirt on the sideline during a march down the field. When it clicks, it is a joy to behold, even Stewart Mandel at CNN/SI says that watching GT on a roll is one of the joys of CFB.

My biggest concerns are: turnovers, especially on the pitch, but more importantly the attitude of the team at kickoff.

We’ve come out flat in almost every Bowl Game since 2005. The players didn’t want to be there (Boise at New Years’, San Francisco Nut Bowl, or last year against a fired up USAF team in Shreveport), or we were outmatched from the beginning (LSU/Peach Bowl).

Utah’s time off and time to prepare for the Triple Option is also a massive concern.

I was in Miami for the 2010 Orange Bowl, and Iowa read our playbook, RoadGraded us on the line, and the Triple Option is NOT made for come from behind games.

Our players have to WANT to be in El Paso, our Coaches have to bring new wrinkles to the Triple Option and keep the game on a fast pace and the ball out of Utah’s hands, and Al Groh has to have his Defense chewing razor blades and spitting out barbed wire.

QB Tevin Washington must command the team, make the correct reads, and baffle the Defense so that they become discouraged (see UNC game).

Also, as quoted by our esteemed Webmaster at “From the Rumble Seat”, “Gentlemen, it is better to have died as a small boy than to fumble this football.”-John Heisman, Turnovers will kill the Triple Option fast, sure, and final.

Yep, cliche time: It comes down to which team wants it more!

You'd do it for Randolph Scott!
RANDOLPH SCOTT!

by DressHerInWhiteAndGold on Dec 27, 2011 5:40 AM MST reply actions

While the GT triple option isn't made for comebacks...

The upside for them is that they likely won’t find themselves very far behind Utah if at all with our one-dimentional offense.

by fountainofute on Dec 27, 2011 12:44 PM MST up reply actions

Agreed...

Hell, even with powerful offenses, we never were able to pull away from triple-option oriented teams. In ’04, AFA kept the game closer than any team that season (still won by 14). In ’07, Navy took a big lead into the half, the Utes roared back, but could never shake the Midshipmen. They eventually won, but it took an interception at the very end to do it. AFA in ’08 was equally difficult, with a touchdown by Mack (I believe, memory is fading) in the final minute to put Utah up for good. AFA again in ’09 was overtime and in ’10, Utah built a sizable lead, only to blow it and almost blew the game in the final minutes before gutting out a very narrow victory.

I can’t recall the last time the Utes rolled a triple-option team. Every game against either AFA or Navy, or freakin’ Rice when Ken Hatfield was down there, was either close, or an ugly, ugly loss. :/

by JazzyUte on Dec 27, 2011 1:52 PM MST up reply actions

saw when your guy punched the VT QB's head

couldn’t believe he did that. like you said in that instant everything changed.

by khaostheory117 on Dec 27, 2011 8:43 PM MST up reply actions

He's a top quality guy

just caught up in the moment. He knows it cost us stopping their 1st down, and probably the game.

Logan is a beast of a QB. 6’6" or bigger, size 17 shoe. Big Tight End body with a rifle arm and dragged our slightly too small LB’s for many yards.

You'd do it for Randolph Scott!
RANDOLPH SCOTT!

by DressHerInWhiteAndGold on Dec 30, 2011 9:55 PM MST up reply actions

don't doubt he's a quality guy. just caught me way off guard

and oh yeah, first time I saw logan I was like that’s just not fair lol qb’s aren’t supposed to be built like that.

by khaostheory117 on Dec 30, 2011 10:25 PM MST up reply actions

I honestly don't care about Georgia Tech; not one bit.

For all I care, we could be playing Tulsa, Navy, Cal…anyone. I just want to see our defense penetrate and our offensive line open wholes for Juan Blanco. This will be a big game for Jeremiah Tofaeno, he could solidify a starting spot on next year’s line with a good performance.

I don’t respect people who live in Atlanta. What a backwards and degenerate society the south is.

by The Moose's Whistle on Dec 29, 2011 1:00 AM MST up reply actions

South is capitalized, like Mountain West, as it is a region.

Atlanta’s not really part of the South anymore because the city’s been taken over by folks from everywhere else, including these guys:

State
Rank Company Fortune 500 rank City Revenues
($ millions)
1 Home Depot 30 Atlanta 67,997.0
2 United Parcel Service 48 Atlanta 49,545.0
3 Coca-Cola 70 Atlanta 35,119.0
4 Delta Air Lines 88 Atlanta 31,755.0
5 Aflac 125 Columbus 20,732.0
6 Southern 147 Atlanta 17,456.0
7 Genuine Parts 215 Atlanta 11,207.6
8 First Data 236 Atlanta 10,380.4
9 SunTrust Banks 244 Atlanta 10,071.7
10 AGCO 340 Duluth 6,896.6
11 Coca-Cola Enterprises 347 Atlanta 6,714.0
12 Newell Rubbermaid 397 Atlanta 5,759.2
13 Mohawk Industries 427 Calhoun 5,319.1
14 NCR 469 Duluth 4,819.0

Yep, if it weren’t for Florida, Texas, and California, reality/redneck TV would have no Source material.

You'd do it for Randolph Scott!
RANDOLPH SCOTT!

by DressHerInWhiteAndGold on Dec 30, 2011 9:43 PM MST up reply actions

True

Utah’s time off and time to prepare for the Triple Option is also a massive concern.

But up until this year we also faced an Air Force team that ran the option. Not saying that AF and GT are the same but we are no strangers to the option attack.

"Football isn't a contact sport; it's a collision sport. Dancing is a contact sport."
Vince Lombardi

by GambitUte on Dec 27, 2011 8:19 AM MST reply actions

And they gave us fits every year.

Something that concerns me. Though I’m glad we don’t see them on our schedule anymore…

by darklightning8 on Dec 27, 2011 10:40 AM MST up reply actions

Every year...as did Navy in the Poinsettia Bowl in '07.

We’re no strangers to that option attack, but we’ve also never blown out an option team. Every game against the Falcons the last upteenth year came down to the final play it seemed.

The good news: the Utes are 8-1 against AFA/Navy since ’03. That lone loss came to the Falcons and it was by 8 in ’07 – the same year Utah beat a Paul Johnson influenced Midshipmen program.

My guess is that this game will be very, very, very close and will come down to the last play. I don’t foresee either team blowing out the other, since the Utes’ defense is always good enough at keeping the games against triple option teams close, but never good enough to ultimately dominate ’em.

by JazzyUte on Dec 27, 2011 1:56 PM MST up reply actions

This Utah team is the most gutless team we've had since 2000.

Georgia Tech rolled Clemson. They beat them solidly. Even if you count losing to USC by 9 points as a moral victory, there’s a big difference between beating up a top 10 team and losing by two scores to a top 10 team. And yes, we did lose to USC by two scores. The FG attempt to tie the game was so pathetic that the play itself deserved to take 6 points away from Utah. How does put virtually no effort into blocking his man with the game riding in the balance?? That was awful. The CU game was awful. This team has no heart.

by The Moose's Whistle on Dec 27, 2011 9:46 AM MST reply actions

What?

Gutless? This team is as gutty and hard-working as any we’ve ever had. They’ve done more with less. Totally disagree. You can’t pin a phrase as harsh as that one based on one blocked field goal. Besides, you go try to block Kalil. We’ll come visit you in the hospital.

by Joseph Silverzweig on Dec 27, 2011 11:37 AM MST up reply actions

Gutless?

A gutless team would have given up after an 0-4 start and just mailed it in.

A gutless team wouldn’t have gutted out four straight wins without its starting quarterback.

Yes, the Colorado game stunk. Yes, the Utes looked awful. But it was the law of averages, I guess. They were due for a bad game. It’s unfortunate it happened there, but all things considered, with what this team experienced, any fan who would call them gutless obviously didn’t watch a second of their games this season.

by JazzyUte on Dec 27, 2011 1:59 PM MST up reply actions

Moose has no heart...

When a team loses their top QB and has to redefine itself over a few weeks, it can give the perception of no heart. Think back to our undefeated runs: we had a healthy QB for the year! And they really didn’t have to be dominant QB’s with rifle arms (see: Brian Johnson). We have the defense, although our secondary needs improvement, to run the table. The Utes, like any quality BCS school hoping to make a BCS run, need to stay healthy and then we’ll see another 10-12 win season. Stanford would be in the Sun Bowl if it weren’t for Luck and its a likely destination for next year.

No heart=false.

Searching for an identity=true.

by Oo.ReAL.oO on Dec 27, 2011 10:12 AM MST reply actions

Who loses is right

This game is probably going to be about mistakes and focus. I think that puts the advantage solidly with the Utes, especially after what happened vs. Colorado.

by Joseph Silverzweig on Dec 27, 2011 11:35 AM MST reply actions

Always is. Gotta play smart, disciplined football in these type of games...

We’ve been fairly disciplined this season. There have been times, though, where emotion gets the best of us. No dumb penalties or turnovers and we should win.

by JazzyUte on Dec 27, 2011 1:58 PM MST up reply actions