Why'd we take our foot off the gas in second half?

We threw the ball a lot in that game for sure but we only scored 11 points. I think Mertz completed 30+ passes but with little effect. So to be completely clear not only do we need to throw the ball when we see that matchup (say man cover one) but we also need to have solid and effective schemes + routes. What I mean to say is even with a lead if a team gives you man coverage in an attempt to stop the run you can and should take advantage of this. Part of that is not just calling the play but also having very strong high value receiver routes and sets to maximize that opportunity. An example of that not happening was us throwing in the third quarter on 3rd and 10 where every single receiver ran a hitch with the route ending before the first down line. So dumb. So, to your point, if they are shitty plays then sure - just run the ball. My counter argument is to have the same level of basic football scheming and creativity in the passing game as in the running game. In this way you can really shake up the defense. If I was unclear I apologize.

Additionally, I observe that what made the running plays work in the first half was UT simply giving us great looks from their linebackers. Had they done this from the get go I believe this game would have been a redux of the Utah loss. This, more than anything, is what concerns me.

Just my opinion - not an argument or saying I think you are personally wrong. Simply engaging in football talk!

 

Post game presser said it was to aggravate ofmgator12. No idea who that is, but perhaps CBN really took something personal earlier? I mean to go out of his way to do such is just nuts!

 

Great points. I suspect we’ll know more after the next two or three games

 

Yes…a 35-6 halftime lead. Like playing Russian roulette. Last time SOS used that game plan. He didn’t let off the gas the rest of that year…

 

We didn’t get the ball in the 2nd half until there was just 9 and a half minutes left in the 3rd after UT used 5 and a half min and TWO of their timeouts to turn the ball over on downs. So we’re up 26-7 at home with a loud rowdy crowd that has been causing them communication issues and false starts, and some of you think Billy should have been taking chances at that point throwing the ball more often which stops the clock in incompletions, plus an interception or strip sack really puts them back in the game with momentum. I don’t agree with that thinking. Billy was playing the odds at home. Now, if we got the ball at the beginning of the 2nd half instead and UT had all 3 of their timeouts still, then yeah, it would have been too soon to go that conservative.

 

Please don't confuse us with facts. The narrative is king for a few... the more speculative, counterintuitive and generally negative the better. Also, please don't forget the neg-spin in future - that is in the off chance you actually do see something positive worth noting.

 

Facts? Sorry but Tennessee opened the half with a field goal. Overall it was a Gator win because it did take 5 plus minutes off the board and they did blow 2 timeouts but at that point its a 2 score game with 9 minutes and change followed by a 3 and out. I'm not one carrying a pitchfork but it wasn't ideal. Not to mention a 3 and out after giving up a drive does take some off the crowd and momentum. Thankfully the defense did make some big plays to prevent some other scoring opportunities but I don't think it's viable long term to go so conservative at that point. It worked this time. People are happy. Discussing it here shouldn't be so argumentative. Not saying you.

 

Didn't Billy say as much in the PC after the game? Not trying to be
contentious, just trying to keep the facts straight while showing some
'round about appreciation for another poster trying to do the same.
But like they say...