Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

This may be a game that BGSU could win. It's hard to believe I'm saying this but I still have confidence in our student athletes for this game.
1. They may be looking past us and we could steal this game.
2. The percentages are in our favor for a win. Just like the Browns!
3. Take advantage of the turnovers.
4. Slow the game down use all the clock. If they don't have the ball , they can't score!!!!!!
5. Weather may be in our favor.

6. Any coaching will be a plus for our team. That's if they listen to Jink or his staff anymore!

Final score:
BGSU:30
GT: 28.

GA Tech 48
BG 17

GA Tech may score more if BG turns the ball over or has several 3 and outs.

BG Defense now last in YPG. Last in TD allowed. 128 out of 130 in Defense efficiency.

GA Tech #3 rush offense at 335 YPG.

In the context of the Burt Reynolds classic "Deliverance"...Tech is going to be the redneck, we're going to be Ned Beatty.

GT 63

BG 20

Squeal like a pig

BG can't stop simple zone reads and straight dive plays, so one can only imagine the amount of pain the option is going to inflict on this defense. Couple that with a team that looks to be mentally checked out and you're going to have a recipe for disaster.

GA Tech 70 (yep)
BG 14

Counting down the days to hockey season.

hiway44 wrote:This may be a game that BGSU could win.

No.

The Ramblin' Wreck is going to run us over.

It won't be Cumberland bad. But it's going to be bad.

I feel like the reason this could be closer than we think is because of the offense they run. The triple option bleeds the clock, allowing only 10ish possessions per team. They'll run all over us, but they may not have the time it takes to score 70ish.

I see this being along the lines of a 38-24 game that isn't as close as the score indicates.

Schadenfreude wrote:It won't be Cumberland bad. But it's going to be bad.

Nice esoteric John Heisman reference.

mbenecke wrote:I feel like the reason this could be closer than we think is because of the offense they run. The triple option bleeds the clock, allowing only 10ish possessions per team. They'll run all over us, but they may not have the time it takes to score 70ish.

I see this being along the lines of a 38-24 game that isn't as close as the score indicates.

I see what you are saying but it implies BG can effectively move the football and eat clock thus keeping our D somewhat fresh. If BG can do that then I see it as a 45-13 score but if not, Ga Tech might have to figure out how not to score a hundy. Triple option can roll up the score really fast on a tired D.

My guess: GT 66, BG 9.

mbenecke wrote:I feel like the reason this could be closer than we think is because of the offense they run. The triple option bleeds the clock, allowing only 10ish possessions per team. They'll run all over us, but they may not have the time it takes to score 70ish.

I see this being along the lines of a 38-24 game that isn't as close as the score indicates.

Watch the second half of the Maryland game. They did not have much problem running the ball exclusively and scoring a bunch.

Tech in a laugher...until I see something otherwise. 58-14.

BG has opened a 27.5-pt dog.

jpfalcon09 wrote:BG has opened a 27.5-pt dog.

Take the Jackets.

So here's a stat I need to do. Take all our opponent's rushing average in games other than BG. Calculate average differential between average and against BG. This stat would show how much more successful our opponents are against us than anyone else on the ground. Apply that to GT's average rushing yards to predict the number of rushing yards this Saturday. Set that as over / under.

Update, the number is 708 yards. If GT rushes their average (331 ypg) x opponent percentage average against BG (214%). 708 yards.

There's another way to calculate it where you take all opponent rushing yards as one stat (as opposed to averaging opponent averages if that makes sense). In that case the number is 595 yards.

Either way I'll take under. I don't think a team can possibly run 708 or 595 yards in 60 minutes. Especially Georgia Tech's slow-paced offense.

(Please don't take that as a challenge.)