Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
The College Football NERDs had best 53 minute discussion & breakdown on Natty I'd heard..
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 11
| visibility 1

The College Football NERDs had best 53 minute discussion & breakdown on Natty I'd heard..


Jul 1, 2019, 12:05 AM

and the two Bama Nerds intellectually discussed all the unreal stats & reasons why Bama lost & Clemson won (while complimenting Tiger Team & Coaches over & over).

Very astute, professional conversation & breakdown from both Nerds of both teams strengths, flaws, coaching staffs & their good to bad play call decisions on each drive which enlightened me 100% more of the hidden facts & strategies that worked so well for Clemson & not for Bama which resulted in a blow-out.

Find On You-Tube.

badge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonorlightbulbbill.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


That was a really good watch. But I am still amazed that all


Jul 1, 2019, 2:30 AM

these statisticians and pundits don't seem to fully realize what we are doing. First, we aren't going to surprise anyone anymore, and second, we play chess, every game and for all year long. So yeah, you're not going to be able to run a computer program of our tendencies and have it spit out a game plan counter-scheme. Because we know everyone is trying to do that. And all year, we show as absolutely little as possible in every game, aside from what we want to throw out as a red herring, and our coaches are masters at the "####" season long game. And all the pundits that go on about sluggish offenses and uninspired play calling and all that stuff, we are sandbagging as hard as we can so no one gets a read on us. So when ND or Alabama opens up that Clemson box of chocolates at playoff time, they ain't got no idea what they gonna get.

It very much reminds me of when IBM's Deep Blue "beat" Gary Kasparov in chess in the 90's. Kasparov was furious because of what the Deep Blue team did. He said, "the reason you play a series or 3 or 5 or 7 is to track tendencies, which you cannot do over one game. So every night after their match, The IBM team would COMPLETELY reprogram Deep Blue to have a radically different strategy for the next match, while they would catalogue all they learned from Kasparov so Deep Blue could "learn" from game to game. So effectively, Deep Blue was playing the same opponent every game, and Kasparov was playing a different opponent every game. In the end, Deep Blue beat him in however many rounds it was, but when he was asked what it felt like to lose to a computer, Kasparov said something to the effect of "Deep Blue didn't beat me, and army of Deep Blues beat me." That's what we do to opponents in the post season. and very, very effectively.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: That was a really good watch. But I am still amazed that all


Jul 1, 2019, 7:45 AM

Indeed. One thing I mentioned a lot last year in my football conversations was how often it seemed we were using something like 1.5 pages of the playbook in most games, combined with playing 50-60 players in the first half and 80+ in most games.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: That was a really good watch. But I am still amazed that all


Jul 1, 2019, 8:05 AM [ in reply to That was a really good watch. But I am still amazed that all ]

That's what I said all last season, We're Sandbagging! Particularly during the SC game. With the bowl games approaching, we started doing the dumb blonde routine. I love our coaches!! :)

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I dont think we were sandbagging against SC at all


Jul 1, 2019, 9:27 AM

The coaches certainly didn't act that way. I think they exposed some stuff in our secondary and our method of playcalling and getting ready for snaps that the staff was able to fix later.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

So, the coots helped us prepare for the Bama Beat Down?


Jul 1, 2019, 1:31 PM

They will love hearing that!

2024 purple level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"It is not part of a true culture to tame tigers any more than it is to make sheep ferocious."
--Henry David Thoreau


Re: That was a really good watch. But I am still amazed that all


Jul 1, 2019, 11:19 AM [ in reply to That was a really good watch. But I am still amazed that all ]

+1. I have been saying the same thing for years about Dabo. He plays conservative during the first 3/4 of them season and then little be little starts opening up the playbook. Sometimes it makes for boring games but it produces winning results.


Message was edited by: DirtyTiger2000


flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

We do hold some stuff back - like the stacked WR sets we used in the playoff


Jul 1, 2019, 11:28 AM

to counter press coverage - but I feel like most of our sandbagging is just due to playing lots of players. For the most part our offense runs the same stuff all year outside of a few wrinkles we always break out for the playoff.

I think the "we don't open up the playbook" stuff is largely a false narrative. Especially in 2017 when weren't really sandbagging as much as we were literally incapable of opening up the playbook due to QB limitations.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

YouTube link


Jul 1, 2019, 7:14 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2LaA9Z7kt8&t=97s

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: The College Football NERDs had best 55 minute discussion & breakdown on Natty I'd heard..


Jul 1, 2019, 12:18 PM

I kinda like it but I don't like their Alabama "dumbness" in playcalling take, mostly on the predictability. They are kinda right in the revisionist take but not quite perfect.

There is a difference between knowing what is coming and being to be able to stop what you know is coming. I don't think that Alabama was poorly coached, I think they did not adapt (well). In the past 14 games, it worked and worked against some decent defensive minds. We started snuffing it out and they did not have an option B that worked. BV just found the right point to stiffen up.

The other thing I think is more on-the-nose: Bama never really had an instance of playing while not steamrolling, even with Georgia, the offensive "threat" was not as looming as Clemson as we were a much more productive offense. Very little of that game was more than 7 point difference and not that much different than the 1st half of both games (sans the last 2 minutes). Meanwhile, we went from -2 to +15 in about 10 minutes. The 3rd was really different as although UGA had a early score in the 3rd, they went 27 minutes without points. We put up 14 points in the 3rd. In contrast Alabama was trying to limit our possessions and not get into a Oklahoma scoring contest because we could score and we had a D to limit crucial downs (as seen in the Natty).

Oh well, I do like their take but I think calling Alabama playcalling "dumb" is missing the point that they were outplayed and outcoached.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: The College Football NERDs had best 55 minute discussion & breakdown on Natty I'd heard..


Jul 1, 2019, 2:32 PM

FutureDoc said:

I kinda like it but I don't like their Alabama "dumbness" in playcalling take, mostly on the predictability. They are kinda right in the revisionist take but not quite perfect.

.



My first thought was that hindsight is 20/20. We did not know that they would be so run heavy on 3rd down during the game. It was cricized because it didn't work, though runs on 3rd and 3, especially when you are going to go for it on 4th, will work in most cases. They considered 5 yards a win for Bama on 1st down, but that assumes more success on 2nd, 3rd and 4th and short.

I didn't hear any criticism for our predictability on 3rd down. They also talk about it being a different ballgame without 4 big plays on 3rd down as if we were 4-4. We had 4 successful plays, 4 big plays, and 4 where we FAILED to convert. If we are going to change the outcome on the 4 big plays, then they should also consider changing the outcome on the other 8 3rd down pass plays.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I wonder if Dabo has seen this youtube video?


Jul 1, 2019, 1:19 PM

If so, I wonder what his take on the youtube video was? This video could potentially give Dabo some food for thought.

As an aside, the talk show host(s) never pointed out that Clemson substituted a lot during the game as we did all season long, and that Alabama got gassed as the game progressed. Had Alabama substituted during the regular season when they could instead of running scores up, they would have had a better chance against us. I guess that Nick just likes having the press worship him more than improving his team?

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

No matter who you vote for, BUY AMERICAN...it's a vote for American jobs.


Replies: 11
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic