SB Nation User Blog: SG Standard

Switching lines vs NYI

SG Standard — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 19:24:05 -0000

Does anybody know the Thrashers started the game with different lines and pairings than we have seen lately? In the first period, everything was switched up except the Little-White-Russian line and the Hainsey/Boris pairing. After things got out of hand, it got back to normal for a while, but then things were crazy again in the third. I didn't see any explanation in the AJC today and I was just curious if anybody had any insight. It just seemed strange to mix things up after the team had been playing some pretty good hockey. As odd as it was, I was thrilled to see Kovy and Peverly with Little in the third. Ever since they played together last season, I've been waiting to see Kovy and Little together again, and I would give some serious consideration to keeping that as the top line from here on out.

Pioli to the Chiefs: Time to Panic?

SG Standard — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 03:01:46 -0000

I don't know if everybody has heard, but Scott Pioli is leaving New England to take the GM position with Kansas City. Now, I realize that on the surface, this affects the Falcons in absolutely no way whatsoever. Up until a few minutes ago, my thinking went "Hey, him leaving will hurt the Patriots, which means that everybody else wins!" I was enjoying myself at the expense of the Pats until my dad dropped this one on me-"I hope the Patriots don't throw the bank at Dimitroff." My mood changed instantly. With his success this past season, he must look awfully attractive to the team that we got him from.

So please, talk me off the ledge. He wouldn't really bolt to go back to New England, would he?

Mike Smith is Coach of the Year

SG Standard — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 17:56:52 -0000

Mike Smith is Coach of the Year

He beat Sparano by one vote. Looks like our team is finally in good hands.

Lets talk draft!

SG Standard — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 05:03:46 -0000

Yeah, this is how I'm going to cope. No dwelling on today here. The season was awesome, but we as Falcons fans finally have a team that we can look forward to competing for years to come. So, with that in mind, lets take a look at the draft.

Offense-We're pretty much set. A team can never have too many offensive linemen, and some of ours are getting up there in age, but other than that, I really don't see much need to spend a pick on that side of the ball. This should be a defensively loaded draft for the Falcons.

Defense-The biggest areas of need, if you ask me, are a disruptive, pass rushing defensive tackle in the mold of Rod Coleman and a linebacker to replace Keith F'ing Brooking (his new name forever, as far as I am concerned. I pin today's loss entirely on him. Ok, so I dwelt a little. Sue me.) Also of need, though perhaps slightly lesser, are a safety to groom as a replacement for Milloy and a bigger, more physical cornerback who can match up with a big wide receiver better than a guy like Houston or Grimes could. I'm not giving up on Anderson just yet. So an outside linebacker and an DT. Without knowing who would be available at pick twenty-whatever (it does feel awesome to have a pick that late, doesn't it?) I would prefer to work on the defensive line first. So who would y'all have in mind at those positions? Think I'm off base on what needs help? C'mon. Lets chat.

Garcia may not play Sunday

SG Standard — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:54:49 -0000

Garcia may not play Sunday

Jeff Garcia simply kills the Falcons. Just him not playing would be huge, but when you add the fact that Luke McCown is their next option...

Tubberville Fired

SG Standard — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 23:49:12 -0000

Tubberville Fired

Guess Bobby Petrino has a resume to update.

Falcons Release Jennings

SG Standard — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 01:47:18 -0000

Falcons Release Jennings

Our long national nightmare is officially over. Looks like our old pal Vishnu was looking out for us.

I Really Hate Auburn

SG Standard — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 00:40:56 -0000

(Reader’s Note-What follows is being written with the rational part of my mind turned off. This post is not based on logic and clear headed thought, as I usually attempt to do. Rather, what you are about to read is powered by anger, fury, and pure grain, unfiltered, 200 proof hatred. As a result, things may get a bit profane. However, since this is a family blog, I am replacing all words I would not want my mother to hear me say with a word from a random word generator. Use your imagination.)

Around this time of year, there is a lot of talk about the Deep South’s Oldest Rivalry. Much of it centers on how the relationship between Georgia and Auburn is one of grudging respect. We may not get along, but an observer won’t see the type of animosity that we Bulldogs reserve for Florida or that our opponents have for Alabama. People will point out how Auburn gave Georgia Vince and Erk, and we returned the favor in the person of men like Pat Dye and Will Muschamp. All this, you may hear, makes the annual Georgia/Auburn tilt a more respectful rivalry. To this line of thought, I have but one response.

Epicure that.

I hate Auburn. I hate them with the a burning passion that rivals the destructive power of a thousand suns all going supernova at the exact same time. I hate everything about Auburn. If there is something that relates to Auburn, I hate it. If I hear that a person describes their hair as being auburn colored, I will not speak to them until they admit it is actually reddish-brown. I hate tigers, I hate orange, and I hate people named Jordan or Hare.

I hate the town. For those of you lucky enough to have never set eyes on the Ugliest Little Cowtown On The Plains, let me paint you a picture-think of the setting of every post-apocalyptic movie you have ever seen. Now multiply the desolate dreariness they portray by about 8976. That is what the Auburn/Opelika area is like. There is a drugstore, a tree, and an Applebee’s. That’s about it. There is nothing to do. There is nothing to see. There is no history worth mentioning. It is fitting that they cover a tree with toilet paper after victories. This is because Auburn is the rectum of the south. (For those keeping score at home, Columbia, South Carolina is the armpit of the south and Gainesville is that region between the male excretory organs. Now back to our regularly scheduled rant, already in progress). Were a squadron of B-52s to get their orders crossed up and accidentally carpet bomb the Auburn/Opelika metroplex into a smoldering crater of oblivion, the world would be a much prettier and happier place. If you ever want to see why the term “flyover country” was coined, visit Auburn. Otherwise, there is really no reason to ever go there.

I hate their athletics. I detest them far too much to limit my fury to their football team. It’s true, I reserve a special brand of hate for those fallible doyens, but it doesn’t stop there. Oh, no. I hate their baseball team, their basketball team, and everything else from gymnastics to the sidereal swim team. I don’t know if they have an equestrian team, but if they do, I patina hate them too. It’s not just on general principles either, and it certainly has nothing to do with jealousy or envy. I hate them because they cheat. We all know that they have been put on probation so many times for a variety of reasons that any school run by a person with half a parsimonious brain would be able to cover up, but that just scratches the surface. I have heard stories of underhanded and shady dealings concerning all sorts of non-revenue sports. If a school is willing to do half the things I have heard to land a good volleyball player, I must assume that each member of their football team could foot the bill for his own moon base by the time he reaches junior year. Cheating cypripediums.

I hate the school. If there is a dumber tradition than “War Eagle”, I am yet to find it. I don’t care about the story behind it. The noisome War Tiger Goat-antiquarians need to pick a mascot and settle on it. Bulldog fans don’t call the hogs, and you won’t find a stadium full of Penn State fans yelling “Gator Bait!” I know that the average Auburn fan might not be able to tell the difference between an eagle and a tiger, but ignorance is no excuse. The rest of us appreciate the easy way to make fun of you. Really, we do. But it is just embarrassing. While we are talking about the school, I can’t stand the women at Auburn. Sometimes, it can get hard to tell them apart from the livestock grazing in the seemingly endless fields that surround the campus. If somebody wants to go cow tipping in Auburn (which I imagine is the only way one can stay entertained in that doula-hole), they need only head for the nearest sorority house.

More importantly, I hate the idea that Auburn claims offer something in the way of “academics”. I use that term as loosely as possible. The fact that Auburn is a member of the SEC will only serve to make my degree from UGA look bad based solely on association. I just know that one day, there will be an Auburn grad working under me whose incompetence will make my life miserable. I have no doubt that their uxorious idiocy will ever cease to amaze me. And yet, this person will think that he is has the ability to process thought simply because he has a degree from Auburn that says something like “Animal Husbandry” on it, when in reality, that piece of parchment isn’t even fit for me to wipe my moiety with. I have a friend who attended Auburn on an athletic scholarship. When he told me where he was going, I asked him how he planned on getting a job afterwards. His response? “Job? I’m just going to use my eligibility up, then go to school somewhere that can give me an education.” I was sitting in front of a man at a professional sporting event a few weeks ago. I have sat in front of this man for years and know that he is an Auburn fan. In conversation, even he admitted that “the best thing to ever happen to Auburn football was UGA raising their admissions standards.” There are many, many more examples that prove that Auburn is the excoriating worst school on the variegated planet.

No matter how you look at it, Auburn is a blight on humanity. It is a stain on the conference, the region, and the nation. I will not go back there for any reason unless I am absolutely compelled to. I won’t even go to watch their sad-sack, sorry excuse for a football team get their unifiers handed to them by a superior team from a superior school that hails from a superior college town. Of course, that applies to pretty much every college that fields a ranunculaceous football team.

I hate Auburn.

Go Dawgs!! Beat the ever loving, mother cogitating chayote out of those Auburn lemniscates!

My adventure in resume ranking continues

SG Standard — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 00:24:39 -0000

In this weeks Blogpoll thread, I tried to help out by averaging the rank of best wins, best losses, and strength of schedule of the top nine teams. Today I got really bored, so I decided to make a top 25 poll out of the same formula, with one minor tweak.

I looked at every team with two losses or less, and stacked them up against each other. I used only the 40 two loss or better teams because, as bored as I was, I didn't want to do this for all the 1A schools, and a three loss team probably wouldn't have been ranked anyway. I used the following criteria-

Sagarin strength of schedule-the team with the hardest schedule gets 1 point, next gets 2, and so on, all the way to 40 points for the team in the pool with the weakest schedule. This had a weight of .3

Quality of wins-I looked at the three best wins for each team. I used my best judgement to determine which teams wins looked the most impressive. I then ranked them 1 to 40, 1 being the most impressive. This also had a .3 weight

Quality of losses-all the undefeated teams tied for first. From there, it was ranked in order of the one loss teams that lost to the highest ranked team, then the two loss teams. This also had a .3 weight

"Style Points"-This is the tweak I referred to. Since how a team performs on the field matters, I gave the last bit of weight to a measure which was the average of a team's national rank in yards per play, yards per play allowed, scoring offense, and scoring defense. I included this not only to use a better idea of how a team had been playing, but also to remove some of the bias that came from me ranking the quality of wins and losses. The team with the lowest average rank got 1 point, and so on. This had a .1 weight.

In the end, I added all the weighted scores together, and the team with the lowest score was ranked #1. The results were actually pretty interesting, and in some instances forced me to rethink the way I had previously been judging some teams

1. Texas
2. USC
3. Alabama
4. Penn State
5. Oklahoma
6. UGA
7. UF
8. Oklahoma state
9. Ohio state
10. Utah
11. Boise St
12. Mizzou
13. TCU
14. Texas Tech
15. UNC
16. LSU
17. Michigan St
18. UCONN
19. Minnesota
20. Cal
21. Pitt
22. Ball State
23. GT
24. Oregon
25. FSU

The first thing I noticed was the lack of love for Texas Tech. They were really being treated the way you would expect a mid major to be. They did well in style points and in quality losses, but a lack of quality wins and a weak schedule really hampered them. That should shake out over the next few weeks, one way or the other.

I was also surprised (shocked, actually) by how high USC was ranked. The loss to Oregon State didn't register at all. This was due to the fact that they were ranked highest in style points, had wins over two ranked opponents, and (much to my surprise) had the hardest schedule of any team I looked at. This got me to thinking-even with a loss, has USC's body of work been more impressive than that of Penn State or Alabama? Outside of a pair of stellar first halfs against a swiftly sinking Clemson squad and UGA, Alabama hasn't necessarily been as impressive all around as USC. USC performed better against their common opponent with Penn State, and the Trojans also have a win over Oregon to hang their hats on. A very unexpected ranking, to be sure, but couldn't it maybe be justified?

Does anybody else have thoughts on the way this little exercise of mine turned out? I really think its interesting to look at, considering that this takes a much more objective perspective on things I ever have before. Also, I would like to point out that I am in NO WAY trying to steal the thunder from Kyle's blogpoll post. I just kind of got into the whole ranking thing I came up with, and decided to let it play out as far as it could.

A Discussion on the UGA Pass Defense

SG Standard — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 21:13:50 -0000

This is a continuation of a subject that was started in another fanpost, but its something that probably needs to be discussed, dissected, and vented about. Without further ado, I give you one man's thoughts on the UGA pass defense.

The way I see it, most of our defense seems to be geared around the prevention of getting beat with a long pass. To do this, our coaches have decided to just play soft on the corners from the get go, decreasing the risk of getting beat deep. Unfortunately, this style of play opens up the ability to get dinked and dunked absolutely to death with short passes (examples such as Vandy 06 and, oh, I dont know, two weeks ago readily come to mind, though there are many, many others). Now, if there is enough of a pass rush, allowing for the QB to be hurried into making an inaccurate throw or hurrying the pass, getting the ball out than the receiver expects, this can work. It is very difficult to make a throw with a hand in your face or a defensive lineman on your back (just ask Colt Brennan), and the mere disruption of timing on some plays can result in incompletions (this is especially true against a spread passing attack like UF). However, the Dawgs, for a variety of reasons, simply aren't capable of applying that kind of pressure. If there is no rush, however, something needs to be adjusted. The corners need to be tightened up into press coverage to compensate for the fact that the quarterback will have more time than we would like to give him. In such a situation, a team cannot leave intermediate passing routes open by continuing to play soft. Otherwise, you end up with results that do nothing more than rev the engine of the Fire Willie Martinez Bandwagon. Other than the whole losing games aspect, I have several problems with this approach.

1) It plays into the hands of pretty much any opponent.

If you have a semi-capable quarterback under center, he should be able to make the throw on a 8 yard out or a ten yard curl. If you are playing tight on the line, a corner has the ability to get a hand on the ball, disrupt the pattern (possibly buying more time for the defensive line to get in the QB's face), or even jump the route if the QB doesnt have the arm to zip a pass right in. In the SEC, you will more often than not see quarterbacks who are willing and able to devour such a defense. Playing such a defense gives any team a blueprint for moving the ball successfully on us. It doesn't matter if we are playing a run first offense, such an adjustment can, and should, be made (Alabama, again). Additionally, by playing off the line 8-10 yards and then backing off even further on the snap, you are essentially taking your cornerbacks out of the play. This relates to my second problem...

2) It takes one of our best defenders out of the game.

Asher Allen can cover like a mad fiend. He doesn't need to have a large cushion to avoid getting beat. He is talented enough to break up a short route or to stay with his man going deep. To a corner back of his talents so far off the line of scrimmage is not making the best use of our personnel. If we ran a defense that had Ellerbe and Curran start 15 yards off the line, there would be outrage. They would be entirely out of position from the outset against the run. Essentially, our defense is hindering Allen in such a way.

3) I would rather get beat by the deep ball than by short passes.

If a defense gets beat on a deep ball, it can be chalked up to many different things. A coverage was blown, a mismatch was created by motion, a perfect pass was thrown, something of that sort. Generally, it is a problem that is specific to that one play only. However, if a defense repeatedly allows short passes, thus enabling the defense to drive down the field, it is a symptom of a problem with the scheme as a whole. Repeatedly allowing similar plays to beat you means that you have a weakness and it is being exposed. It is not a problem specific to a single play, it is a problem specific to the defense that is being run. Trying to stop a low percentage, highly difficult deep ball while continually giving up a high percentage, low difficulty short pass is simply not logical. Additionally, relatively shorter, yet still effective passes keep our defense out on the field. It swings time of possession in our opponent's favor, something a team with as many injuries as the Dawgs have can't afford.

This is something that should have been fixed a long time ago. There were times in the past, with a vicious pass rush, that the Dawgs could afford to play it safe in the secondary. However, teams change. Between injuries and the loss of a key pass rusher to graduation, the Dawgs have been forced to adapt. This is a weakness that was blown open for all the world to see last week. Down 31-0 is not the time to keep playing it soft. Something has been shown to be wrong on the defensive side of the ball. It is something that needs to change.

Thoughts? Comments? Any other ideas on why the Dawgs continue to play such a defense? Anybody think no changes need to be made?