Tennessee Volunteers vs. Mississippi State Bulldogs: game preview
Stats and stuff after the jump, but first the key observations:
- Neither team has had very much success on offense this season. If you define "very" as "almost" and "much" as "no" and then correct for the double negative, which is really just way too much work, so just know this: we both stink on offense.
- Both teams have very good defenses.
- Mississippi State's pass defense is better than it's rush defense and should provide Tennessee with a much-needed opportunity to get its running game going. We could double our production by gaining two net yards this week.
- Expect Tennessee to have trouble converting third downs on offense, and don't get too excited if our third down defense appears to improve: the Bulldogs aren't very good on third down offensively.
- Bizarre prediction: Tennessee wins 2-0 by forcing a safety in OT. Ha, ha, funny. Ha ha. Ha. I'll be here all week. Make that weak.
Okay, so the stats:
Tennessee rush v. Mississippi State defense |
Tennessee pass v. Mississippi State defense |
Mississippi State rush v. Tennessee defense |
Mississippi State pass v. Tennessee defense |
89 (9) |
93 (9) |
20 (4) |
25 (8) |
76 (11) |
11 (3) |
91 (10) |
92 (8) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Field Goals |
Tennessee punting v. Mississippi State punt return |
Mississippi State punting v. Tennessee punt return |
Intangibles |
T-54 (T-8) |
111 (12) |
50 (9) |
|
T-87 (11) |
104 (12) |
102 (10) |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Hey, maybe we can actually run the ball against these guys. Throwing it may be another matter altogether. We shouldn't have any trouble stopping the Bulldogs' offense, and lo! something approximating a push for the punting game! Getting out of holes dug early in the season sure takes a long time, doesn't it?
Here's how the teams look next to each other in each of the key statistical categories currently used in the RTT Ready, Fire, Aim BlogPoll Computer Ballot:
Rank |
Team |
WL |
SOS |
PED |
RD |
3DO |
TD |
PEO |
EXP |
OPPG |
TO |
3DD |
AVG R |
W AVG |
84 |
![]() |
85 |
22 |
11 |
76 |
81 |
28 |
99 |
38 |
42 |
103 |
10 |
54.09 |
778.93 |
86 |
![]() |
85 |
55 |
25 |
20 |
97 |
21 |
101 |
45 |
29 |
104 |
89 |
61.00 |
781.13 |
Raise your hand if you ever thought you'd see Tennessee ranked below Mississippi State in any poll. I see no hands, and it's not just because there are no people in the room with me and my trusty computer. It's because nobody saw that coming. We'd better have made some improvement on third down offense this week because when we have the ball the respective rankings are 97 and 10 in their favor. Defensively, the Bulldogs are no better at converting them than we are at stopping them, so there's that delicious crumb.
Aaaand the context for the numbers:
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Wow, that's like mirror-image stuff there, isn't it? We both lost to Auburn because of offensive futility. We both lost to a top 5-ish team and to a top 10-ish team. We both lost to and won games against nobodies. Huh. We Are! Mississippi State!
So what's it all mean?
-
Both offenses are positively putrid. In the bottom 20 kind of stuff. Both offenses will be going against pretty good defenses.
-
Mississippi State is better at stopping the pass than stopping the run, which of course means that we will try to win the game with our 101st-ranked passing attack. Jackson's Dictate memo is gathering dust in a file somewhere. How can someting in a folder in a drawer gather dust? It's been there a looooong time.
-
Third downs. Again. Key. Yes, I know you're getting tired of reading that, and I'm tiring of writing it, but unless we fix our problems on third down this week, it's going to be a long night for our offense. Tennessee is ranked 97th in third down conversions and will be going against Mississippi State's 10th-ranked third down defense. Fortunately, the Bulldogs' own third down offense is about as bad as our third down defense.
-
Look for a defensive contest and the first game in NCAA history to be decided by a safety in overtime. Woo!
9 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Matching system to talent instead of talent to system?
Joel (sorry I called you Hopper in the other post),
I keep hearing the demise of the program because of recruiting? But, haven’t we over the last several years, except for one (cannot remember) ranked in the top ten recruiting classes?
I ask because as we have discussed, I focus on the intangibles of why the team might be having trouble, but when combined with your statistical ability, it comes up with close answers.
I think that our recruiting has been as good as any top tier team. My theory on why we are having troubles is that Fulmer and staff are not adapting a system to the type of talent they have, and instead keep forcing the talent they have into an out of date system (read your comment on how GA defense knew where we were running too). I know what Dave Clawson system was when he arrived, but still hearing a lot of rumors of Fulmer overriding decisions (and by what I see during games, it appears so).
I bet if you did a statistical comparision with our recruiting classes in the last few years, then we would find recruiting is not the issue, it is how we use the talent we have. I would also go further and theorize that as a result, the players are not playing to their full potential in a system they do not believe or feel comfortable in.
Don V
Don Vandergriff
Right on target. For the most party, these are the same players as last year. What has changed? The offensive scheme. Now we learn that it’s not true Clawball after all; it’s a kluge of Clawfense and Fulfense. The result is NONsense. The team is caught in a trap because Clawson has to subordinate his offensive scheme to the head coach’s final judgment. It’s a mess we will all have to bear out the rest of the year. If things change, it will only be because we have scrapped one scheme entirely. If we we still see ineptness on Saturday, it will be ClawFul.
ClawFul. Funny!
I had thought of that earlier when hearing reports about the offense being some kind of Clawson/Fulmer hybrid. The best I could come up with was:
FulSon Prison Blues
second place:
The Rocky Top Blender Bender
by David Hooper on Oct 17, 2008 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Tennessee wins...
… by two TDs. Nick Stephens is steadily getting his feet under him and the game is at home. 17-3, UT sends the Dogs packin’.
Orange and Blue Hue: The World through GATOR-colored Glasses -- http://www.orangeandbluehue.com
I agree.
I think UT wins this one significantly. Compared to where the season started, UT has made some changes that have already shown some improvements. I don’t think the 1 net yard problem we had against UGA will continue; the causes are fortunately correctable mid-season. (I.e., defense reading the plays and QB unable to keep defenses honest.) Stephens appears calm enough to be able to establish himself as a legitimate option in the offense, which should keep MSU from completely selling out against the run. If UT can manage that much, the running game will find traction.
by David Hooper on Oct 17, 2008 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions
I think even more if...
Fulmer lets Clawson go, now that he has a quarterback. I feel for this game, everything comes out of the bag.
Or else, another loss or painful victory.
Phillip is neither a bad person or dumb, he is just bull headed staying with the system that worked in the 90s, keep pushing players into his old system. But, he will adapt, as we saw last year.
Don
Don Vandergriff
Can't lose
I don’t think Fulmer can lose this one. i believe his job is quite literally riding on victory.
Orange and Blue Hue: The World through GATOR-colored Glasses -- http://www.orangeandbluehue.com
This much is true: is UT loses this one, Fulmer’s a goner. He might not survive even with a win, but he definitely won’t survive with a loss. Especially if it’s another inept performance by everybody not named Berry.
by David Hooper on Oct 17, 2008 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions
"We could double our production by gaining two net yards this week"
We could triple our production!!!!!!!!!
I say we increase our production by 1000%!!!!
The production increase could be staggering!!!!!

by 


























