PDA

View Full Version : Can being to good hurt you?



Eagle_77
April 16th, 2005, 08:01 AM
I know that sounds funny but I have a theory here. Can teams that are extremely good suffer from just that? I believe that in some ways it hurt GSU last year.

Because of GSU's high scoring offense the first team played very little in the second half of its game. That really concerned me throughout the season. I remember going to the Citadel and us jumping out to a big lead. Sewak pulled the first team pretty early. The Citadel then started moving the ball on our D pretty well and put a few points on the board and our second team O really couldnít move the ball on the Citadel. My father then made the comment to me that he thought Sewak pulled the first team two early.

A fan behind us took offense to this and started telling us that we would be happy next year when these guys are the starters and they have lots of game time experience. While I am happy that our second and third strings were able to get a lot of experience, I still to this day stand by thoughts that Sewak pulled the team to early and it hurt us in the end.

Our first string didnít play in a close game against a good team all year until Furman. We know the outcome of that game and I blame it on our first stringers not knowing how to finish a game. They hadnít had to do it all year and when we came across a truly good team that we needed to finish the boys were a little lost.

The same thing happened against New Hampshire. We jumped out to a lead and if we would have performed the second half the way we did in the first then that game would not have been close. But we didnít perform the same and I believe itís because of the lack of second half experience our first team had.

Now I do not believe that a team should leave in its first team just to run up the score and I do believe that you need to get your second and even third teams game experience when capable. But I do not believe that you should do this at the cost of the current season like I believe happened last year. If your team has a good shot at the playoffs and a good shot at contending for a championship then you need to think in the now, not the next year.

Do you guys know of other teams you feel that have suffered from this?

UAalum72
April 16th, 2005, 09:54 AM
I seem to remember a New Year's Day bowl when Oklahoma, which had been pulverizing people all year, just sagged in the second half. A starting lineman said he hadn't played in the fourth quarter all year.

I think probably the key is to schedule at least two games (in conference or not) that will stretch your starters to the limit. You don't need to do it every game, though.

Eagle_77
April 16th, 2005, 10:14 AM
I think we had the two games covered going into the year. We had preseaon Top 10 UGA which the first team finished that game. Then we also had national quarter final Wofford as well as yearly foes in App St and Furman. I do not believe that many expected our 3rd string to finish the games against Wofford and App St. After the first game our starters did not finish a game until the Furman game and were not asked to do it again until the New Hampshire game.

eaglefan452
April 16th, 2005, 04:26 PM
It is kind of a catch 22 when you talk about leaving your 1st stringers in or not. On one hand, I don't know of a single coach that would not want to be way ahead by halftime and have the opportunity to let his backups play. On the other hand, those starters do get used to playing only one half of football and that probably hurt GSU last year late in the season. If you leave your starters in to keep them sharp, you are accused of running up the score, if you take them out, you are criticized when your team is finally in a tight game and loses, people think your team doesn't know how to play in close games.

My opinion is that there is no need to keep the starters in after the 3rd quarter when you are ahead by 30. You risk injury, not only through natural occurances from playing, but the opposition gets very frustrated and might start playing dirty. I am all for letting the bench players get some time. The reason that GSU has had the success that they have had is that they have been graced with the talent to be up big in some games and have let their younger players get some time, and when it comes time for those players to start, they already have some valuable game experience, something you can't teach in practice.

Tribe4SF
April 16th, 2005, 04:50 PM
When you play a pattycake schedule, not only do your players lack 4th qtr. experience, you really don't know how good you are. The SoCon usually provides a few tests each year. I think last year was an exception. This problem doesn't crop up in the A-10. Even the 2003 Delaware team had a loss and several real tests in the conference before blitzing the playoff field. They were a supremely confident and prepared team.

eaglesrthe1
April 16th, 2005, 06:14 PM
GSU has gone undefeated in conference play only once since joining the SoCon. The problem last year was that on two particular days they ran across quality teams that were better prepared. Fourth qtr play is not where you build endurance, it's where you demonstrate it. Endurance is built on the practice field.

HensRock
April 16th, 2005, 08:17 PM
I think we're being too black-and-white here.
It is possible to sub in SOME 2nd-3rd stringers with the starting offense when the game is well in hand at halftime. Then, as the game progresses, slowly sub more and more. But of course, never let the other team back into the game - it's a fine line.

ngineer
April 16th, 2005, 11:50 PM
I agree it can have an effect down the road. As the Patriot League has gotten more competitive, thereby resulting in more close games to the end, teams are better prepared when they get to the playoffs. The PL's performance in the past few years in the playoffs shows this. Even then, when we've had a blowout Lembo has substitued quite frequently. However, we generally rotate alot at a number of positions so there are usually a number of underclassmen/second deep players getting a lot of time.
There's also the concern about getting your top-line players hurt in a game that has already been decided.

Paladin1aa
April 17th, 2005, 11:26 AM
:p :p :p

blur2005
April 17th, 2005, 08:11 PM
Well, I don't know about being to good, or two good. But being too good could possibly hurt you.

colgate13
April 18th, 2005, 08:17 AM
Well, I don't know about being to good, or two good. But being too good could possibly hurt you.

http://www.greendale.org/police-car.gif

Everybody run! The grammar police are on patrol!!!!

Eagle_77
April 18th, 2005, 09:40 AM
When you play a patty cake schedule, not only do your players lack 4th qtr. experience, you really don't know how good you are.

I find this quote quite interesting. Going into last season there were 4 preseason Top 25's on our schedule one being in the Top 10 in I-A. Not sure how this is a patty cake schedule but us guys from the SoCon just donít know anything.

Also in every thread I have ever read about GSU's success in the playoffs A-10 fans say the reason for our success is because of our "patty cake schedule". We arenít so beat up, we are fresher, blah, blah, blah. Now itís the exact opposite in that our schedule hurts us? Which is it?

Now moving on to other things. I agree that you canít leave in your first string the whole game when it was out of hand at half time. But our guys usually didnít play but 2 series into the second half. At that time they come out knowing that they are out for good. My question is, is that too early? I would think you let them play most of the third at least unless of course you have 65-70 points by then. In most cases we were not in that situation.


Fourth qtr play is not where you build endurance, it's where you demonstrate it. Endurance is built on the practice field.

While I agree with this 100% this is not what I am saying. These guys are in GREAT shape that I personally can vouch for. But no amount of practice can teach you how to finish a game. Finishing has nothing to do with what kind of condition you are in. Itís a mental thing. There is a big difference in the 4th quarter with 2:00 mins to go and you are down by 4 and you have to make a drive and 2:00 mins in the 4th quarter and you havenít played since nearly half time and have been joking with your teammates for the second half. The latter is what our team did most and when we were put into the first scenario we didnít seem to know how to handle it.

OL FU
April 18th, 2005, 10:18 AM
When you get up by 21 in the first quarter you should pull your first string and then put them back in during the fourth quarter when the game is close again.

I only saw the last quarter of the New Hampshire game so I cannot speak to that. In my opinion, the Furman game could have gone either way so I don't think it was lack of close game experience.

putter
April 18th, 2005, 11:45 AM
Then you have the Griz 2 years ago. Beating North Dakota St 24-2 at halftime. Coach pulls the starters and they make a run at us. We put our starters back in and they could not get that rythm they had in the first half back and we lose 25-24!

Anovafan
April 18th, 2005, 12:11 PM
I think GSU wasn't battle tested last year. I'm not sure you can chalk that up to being too good, I think it had a lot to do with the level of competition in the Socon last year (i.e. not very good). If you throw GSU into the A-10 hopper last year and they make the playoffs, I think you would have a pretty battle tested team and one who may have been more confident in itself to win the UNH game. I saw GSU play a lot last year and they were good enough skill-wise to win the NC, certainly more talented than UNH. But when their backs were against the wall, they didn't know how to win.

Tribe4SF
April 18th, 2005, 12:36 PM
[QUOTE=Eagle_77]I find this quote quite interesting. Going into last season there were 4 preseason Top 25's on our schedule one being in the Top 10 in I-A. Not sure how this is a patty cake schedule but us guys from the SoCon just donít know anything.

Also in every thread I have ever read about GSU's success in the playoffs A-10 fans say the reason for our success is because of our "patty cake schedule". We arenít so beat up, we are fresher, blah, blah, blah. Now itís the exact opposite in that our schedule hurts us? Which is it?[QUOTE]

Maybe you missed the rest of what I said which was that last year was an exception in the SoCon. And preseason rankings mean squat. You either face good teams or you don't.

You didn't hear me say that an easy schedule makes you better prepared. What I said was that you don't know how good you are if you don't face good competition. Confidence builds from success. The bottom line for last year was that GSU was not as good as many thought.

The business about not getting beat up did not come from me either. Everybody has injuries in the course of the season. At the higher levels of I-AA, the only substitute for depth is luck.

blueballs
April 18th, 2005, 01:26 PM
I think GSU wasn't battle tested last year. I'm not sure you can chalk that up to being too good, I think it had a lot to do with the level of competition in the Socon last year (i.e. not very good). If you throw GSU into the A-10 hopper last year and they make the playoffs, I think you would have a pretty battle tested team and one who may have been more confident in itself to win the UNH game. I saw GSU play a lot last year and they were good enough skill-wise to win the NC, certainly more talented than UNH. But when their backs were against the wall, they didn't know how to win.

That's a fair analysis and may be very accurate as well.

GSU had one bad half against UNH in unfavorable conditions and it cast a pall and MOL ruined what had been a great year. As much as it sucks it beats the hell out of the deal Auburn got last year.

Such is the nature of the playoffs, if you have a bad series, half, game it can cost you a whole seeason's worth of great work. See the 1998 & 2001 GSU squads for further proof. Still, it beats the BCS.

ChickenMan
April 18th, 2005, 01:52 PM
GSU's triple option is far more susceptible to adverse weather conditions than most other 1AA offenses and that factor was very obvious in their loss to UNH.

ChickenMan
April 18th, 2005, 02:01 PM
Then you have the Griz 2 years ago. Beating North Dakota St 24-2 at halftime. Coach pulls the starters and they make a run at us. We put our starters back in and they could not get that rythm they had in the first half back and we lose 25-24!


Even worse... UD/UNH in '00. UD is up 31-3 at the start of the 4th quarter and ended up losing 45-44 in OT... their only regular season loss that year.

bluehenbillk
April 18th, 2005, 03:27 PM
I don't think it was GSU being "too good", but more like the Southern being too "top heavy". There's a lot of weeks off in that league. Even when the A-10 didn't play as well in the postseason it was usually a deep league.

The perspective about the Southern is GSU, ASU & Furman. Throw Wofford into the recent mix & then everyone else is a bye.

Eagle_77
April 18th, 2005, 03:46 PM
I started a new thread because there were already several going on about how googdthe A-10 is and how bad all other confernces are. The point of this post is not specifically about GSU but rather the theroy. I wanted to know if people thought that this could be a factor and was using GSU's last season as an example. So if there is anyway we can get back on track Im sure everyone would like that being that it has been made very clear just how good the A-10 is.

So once again. Does anyone think that it is a possibiltiy? Can anyone think of an instance where this has happened before?

GSUBass
April 18th, 2005, 06:51 PM
GSU's triple option is far more susceptible to adverse weather conditions than most other 1AA offenses and that factor was very obvious in their loss to UNH.
That's it...we need to build a dome over Paulson so adverse weather will not be a factor at home....


J/K.

OL FU
April 19th, 2005, 09:14 AM
I started a new thread because there were already several going on about how googdthe A-10 is and how bad all other confernces are. The point of this post is not specifically about GSU but rather the theroy. I wanted to know if people thought that this could be a factor and was using GSU's last season as an example. So if there is anyway we can get back on track Im sure everyone would like that being that it has been made very clear just how good the A-10 is.

So once again. Does anyone think that it is a possibiltiy? Can anyone think of an instance where this has happened before?

Well I gave my opinion and for once stayed on topic. I think not being tested can be a detriment in a close game. However in the example we are using, GSU last year, while it may have been a factor I didn't see any evidence it was a major factor. GSU and FU were two evenly matched teams. UNI and GSU were probably evenly matched also, but it was hard to see during the monsoon.

SoCon48
April 19th, 2005, 11:58 AM
You just named the top half of the league. That only leaves 4 teams. Don't know if I would call Citadel a "bye" as Delaware found out from the 3-9 Citadel team in 2000.

ChickenMan
April 19th, 2005, 12:14 PM
Don't know if I would call Citadel a "bye" as Delaware found out from the 3-9 Citadel team in 2000.


'00... UD 38 Citadel 0

maybe you meant KC's first UD team (6-6) in '02... Citadel 24 UD 20