Demosthenian

quote:

---

Probably the two most pretentious fanbases in the nation.

---

No; if you mean "wealthiest" per capita, sure they're up there as far as land grant universities go (but to exclude private schools---Duke, Stanford, Vandy, Northwestern, SMU, TCU---lacks ready logic); if you mean "entitled", I can point to about half a dozen programs in a line between Texas and Michigan that are worse (TX, Nebraska, Ohio St, Notre Dame, Michigan, Penn St), and if you just mean bow-tie wearing cornballs with gout, I think Ole Miss, Maryland, and all those private schools still have you beat.

They're somewhere between South Carolina and Vandy. Maybe like how UGA used to be before Michael Adams retired, the Georgia Way went bye-bye, and the school embraced a real separation from academic instiution and athletic department.

Something I can see UNC especially, and probably UVA, doing once they have the cloak of invincibility that an SEC membership provides them

quote:

---

why don't you post over there?

---

I may; I’d been wanting the option to for a long time, but I’m not convinced yet I have the deft touch to slot into conversations with the frequent posters and accomplish anything productive. It’s a pretty close-minded place and not worth my personal aggravation to expose myself to the policeman bullshite a lot of the posters self-assume.

All of this is way more gray area than black-and-white, and UGA posters esp. don’t (no longer?) seem to have that level of intelligence.

I know what I’m getting on tRant. It’s a place to troll and not be too serious. I can get on board with that game. It’s also remarkably self-deprecating in the honest messages that are shared.

quote:

---

FooManChoo

---

Breath of fresh air around here. Thanks for the clear-eyed post. Can you post more on the UGA board as well? It’s pretty stale over there.

Rewatched the game and UGA should be commended for stringing together long drives, it’s excellent OL play and protection, and the way Peanut and Bo ran the ball. That was maybe the best OL blocking I’ve seen by the Dawgs against a high-caliber opponent in my ~30 years of watching.

Also, Stockton’s composure and toughness can’t be overstated. And he plays at a high level under stress. His “game manager” performance and knowing when to push and call his own number is dialed in: he knows how to bet on himself with the ball in his hands and win more often than not.

That said,

UGA had a bunch of poor tackling and not wrapping up occasions that allowed Bama to convert first downs and drive the field. KJ Bolden is pretty undisciplined, but his athleticism is masking it at the moment. Gabe Harris giving up on Keelon in the open field on his 21-yd gain; there’s no excuse for jogging through a play and giving up.

The lack of care of the football should have been a killer…I guess dogs also have 9 lives however. Stockton’s tight throws (most were ill-advised—and the timing of most of them being on 3rd-and-long was nauseating—yet every one of them was converted), Sacovie had 2 bad special teams decisions on punts, UGA’s recovery of the botched punt, and Peal’s fumble self-recovery.

Obviously the missed calls were unfortunate, and distracted from a great game: the DPI on KJ and KJ’s targeting on RCW (while inadvertent) (and the missed facemask while we’re on it), were all calls you’d like to see in a high-quality game. The late hit on Gunner I agree also should have been flagged (and again was simply an inadvertent mistake).

I do think a few things can be true:
• UGA may have a higher floor, but Bama’s ceiling matched quality of play UGA had out there and the teams were equal
• The team that wanted it more won
• Nevertheless, the breaks that went UGA’s way (both the lucky ones and the missed calls) were critical to UGA winning, and I don’t believe they win without most of those going in their favor
• I DO want to play Bama again, as I think we’d be better the next time around from a discipline and scheme perspective, as I think UGA’s ultimate ceiling is higher

Hope to see you in the SECCG :cheers:

YPP ignored field position. Bama dominated Georgia with starting field position. Those elements cancel each other out mostly.

I’m interested to hear why you think UGA won the game, but it wasn’t due to net YPP (nor TOP, which is related to these two data points)

UGA - 24
Bama - 21

Bama scores three times on play-action deep balls, But UGA manages a long drive each quarter, of course with the 3rd one or so stalling out in a FG.

Final drive we convert 2 4th downs and punch it in by the thinnest of margins for error, with no time remaining and Bobo’s crayons all broken and down to nubs

quote:

---

We dont know much about UGA given their current schedule but assuming uga is legit then I'd vote Bama number one especially if they win convincingly

---

if Bama wins convincingly, how would you have any indication from here that “uga is legit”?

That’s the whole problem, if UGA loses then they were overrated and not actually that good. If UGA wins, then it’s a solid win over Bama.

quote:

---

Ole Miss: 120th Nationally/ 15th SEC

---

You lost to this team? With the greatest offensive genius of our time as your HC?? Bhahahaha

quote:

---

You are arguing about the psychology of facing a ranked team like that is an obstacle

---

Suffice it to say your reading comprehension appears to be lacking as well.

quote:

---

That is the dumbest thing I have read on this board in a month.

---

Way to be an antagonistic flamer as you try to derail the conversation.

quote:

---

Who gets down for a "Gameday" games? Honestly

---

by all means go argue with yourself. Please do it elsewhere

quote:

---

It depends on your goal

---

I think the universal goal is more fundamental than that. It’s: “is the team whose schedule I’m looking at good or not? And you try to short-cut all the analysis and debate by comparing W-L records.

My point is that if you compare W-L records as a proxy for how “good” a team is—which includes ability to outperform an opponent (talent, execution) as well as having the ability not to beat themselves (psychology, discipline)—then I’m unconvinced only looking at end of season rankings is inarguably better than looking at GameTime records too.

With respect to GameTime v. final ranking indicating the “quality” of the opponent—“quality” meaning how good they are on paper, like for informing oddsmakers—then yes I agree final ranking is a better indicator of realistically how good a team was during that historical time span (e.g. that prior season)

Agree with everything above. The more interesting question to ask is what effect does the opponent’s GameTime ranking have on the psychology of the coaches and players themselves at the time the game is played?

Rising to the occasion to upset a highly ranked team early in the season (Ole Miss v. LSU), or a highly ranked team having an inflated sense of self and getting beaten by an unranked team (Michigan v. W. Michigan), or a talented but nervous team going up against a top-5 opponent and beating themselves (OU v. UGA) are all real and annual outcomes.

In conclusion, knowing the GameTime rankings I believe DOES help add context to the quality of a specific victory, and therefore I’m unconvinced whether one ranking or the other is objectively “more valid”

quote:

---

Drink

---

Drink isn’t on the hot seat. LSU fans acting like Landry and Presley starting middle school girl-esque rumors