Hot take: Our defense got slightly better against Louisville.
Here are our results compared to the projection:
The projection saw our defense giving up 32 points. We underperformed by one point. We overperformed on allowed yards by 47 and first downs by 1. Our total defense bonus changed after this game to +3% (I think we were either right at 0 or +1% going into this game).
So yes - as I mentioned before, Louisville is the first of a few DECENT teams on our schedule after having faced a slate of appalling defenses. Our defense did about what was expected compared to their previous games.
It was the offense that really underperformed compared to their previous games. Our offensive bonus dropped a few points after this game and we underperformed across the board (except rush yards) - and especially underperformed in the all-important POINTS department. Oddly enough we outgained Louisville by almost 100 yards, did not suffer any turnovers, and still lost handily. Odd and rare circumstances.
Just my unprofessional take on our offense - we stopped taking shots downfield. At the end of the game we finally took some shots and actually had a little success - but when it mattered - against Louisville AND against Georgia - we played ultra conservative and did not take shots. I think Cade does best and plays most free when he's slinging it...
I know there is a tactic of 'taking what the defense gives you' - but at what point do you define yourself as an offense and refuse to let a defense define what you are. I think we need to go ALL IN on what has been successful - live or die by the big play offense. But what do I know.
Here is what the spreadsheet says SHOULD be the results IF both teams perform to their averages:
Yikes, right?
The formula does give a home-field advantage. On a neutral field it would place us as a 2-point winner. Let's see if we let the VT defense define our offense or if we dictate the pace and play.
GO TIGERS!
Here are our results compared to the projection:
The projection saw our defense giving up 32 points. We underperformed by one point. We overperformed on allowed yards by 47 and first downs by 1. Our total defense bonus changed after this game to +3% (I think we were either right at 0 or +1% going into this game).
So yes - as I mentioned before, Louisville is the first of a few DECENT teams on our schedule after having faced a slate of appalling defenses. Our defense did about what was expected compared to their previous games.
It was the offense that really underperformed compared to their previous games. Our offensive bonus dropped a few points after this game and we underperformed across the board (except rush yards) - and especially underperformed in the all-important POINTS department. Oddly enough we outgained Louisville by almost 100 yards, did not suffer any turnovers, and still lost handily. Odd and rare circumstances.
Just my unprofessional take on our offense - we stopped taking shots downfield. At the end of the game we finally took some shots and actually had a little success - but when it mattered - against Louisville AND against Georgia - we played ultra conservative and did not take shots. I think Cade does best and plays most free when he's slinging it...
I know there is a tactic of 'taking what the defense gives you' - but at what point do you define yourself as an offense and refuse to let a defense define what you are. I think we need to go ALL IN on what has been successful - live or die by the big play offense. But what do I know.
Here is what the spreadsheet says SHOULD be the results IF both teams perform to their averages:
Yikes, right?
The formula does give a home-field advantage. On a neutral field it would place us as a 2-point winner. Let's see if we let the VT defense define our offense or if we dictate the pace and play.
GO TIGERS!
