Defending Georgia Tech's Option Requires Shift in Defensive Thinking

(Josh Nesbitt and Anthony Allen are but two heads on a dragon that's mighty tough to slay)

Saturday night, Georgia Tech travels to Starkville, Miss., for an old-fashioned Southern hootnanny with the SEC's other Bulldogs.

And while Yellow Jacket fans might be a bit more ambivalent toward these pups than the ones out 316 from Atlanta to Athens, Saturday's match-up with Mississippi State presents yet another test for the eternally-ambiguous Jackets.

While the faces change in this game we play of preview and prognostication, the tune somehow always remains constant: Can Team X stop the run? If so, surely they'll stop Georgia Tech.

Last weekend, it was UNC, who came in ranked seventh in the country against the run and left quite humbled in a 24-7 loss that saw the Jackets roll out 317 rushing yards.

Now, it's no secret that the Jackets make a living running the football, so what I'm going to say next might sound like telling you 3+3=Beethoven's 9th.

Having an impressive run defense isn't the key to stopping Georgia Tech offensively.

Because the Jackets aren't necessarily a running team. 

Blasphemy, you say?

A running team is a team that relies on the run, that executes it's run game better than it's passing game, that has its best playmakers in its offensive backfield. Georgia Tech certainly fits that description.

But run defenses stop run offenses, and run offenses are built around the traditional idea of a running back behind a quarterback taking a hand-off or pitch and reading the line of scrimmage, looking for the best path forward.

Rarely is that what Georgia Tech does.

Consider: Tech's worst rushing performance this season came against Miami, who held Georgia Tech to 95 yards on the ground.

But one week later, the Hurricanes got torched for 272 rushing yards against Virginia Tech, and Miami's run defense is 86th nationally.

Conversely, UNC was supposed to be good against the run game, and Georgia Tech beat the Heels like they stole something.

So enlighten us, you say, as to why you make this argument? What must a team do, if not play the run well, to stop Georgia Tech?

The answer—strong, disciplined assignment football for 60 minutes (or maybe more)—is easy. The reasoning behind it requires a bit more explanation.

The every-team described above, with it's downhill rushing attack and it's star tailback, that's a rushing team in a statistical sense but also from a standpoint of mentality.

Statistically speaking, yes, Georgia Tech is a running team. But the mentality, the goal of the offense, if you will, is very much similar to every other spread offense in college football: It excels in spread the football to a variety of playmakers in a variety of creative ways, keeping defenses off balance from play to play.

Georgia Tech runs the ball much better than it passes, but the running is merely a mechanism, a means to an end.

The offense isn't built around a strong running game, it's built around putting the ball in the hands of those who will do the most damage. The only way it differs from most spreads is that the action takes place behind the line of scrimmage.

Hence, a standard run defense won't do the trick. Like any other creative or distinctive offense, a total team effort is required to effectively shut it down, so analyzing statistics just won't suffice.