a look at last year's SEC games. First up Tennessee. This game should probably not be remembered at all but here it is warts and all. From the Gator perspective this game's offensive plan was attacked by critics as being way to conservative and predictable, and conversely for UF calling a time out before the first half instead of running out the clock. It also marked the end of the QB rotation between Martin and Leak. UT won the game 24-10 converting on a hail mary pass before half and on another long pass (57 yards) to the UF 1 yard line where Gus Scott got turned around in coverage. UT's defense was probably the dominant squad on the field that day but UF's defense also preformed well. The game really turned out to be a game of field position, ball control, and the two big plays UT made in their passing game. Gator play selection: Officially UF ran 71 plays from scrimmage. UF ran the ball 26 times and threw the ball 45 times. UF only gained 73 net yards rushing or a 2.704 average per carry, counting yards lossed on sacks. First down: I wanted to look at the number of efficient first down plays the Gators had in this game. I will define an efficient first down play as a play that gained 40% of the yards needed to pick up a first down. UF ran 31 plays from first down. They ran 15 times and passed 16 times, which is a pretty balanced attack. UF had 7 out of 15 efficient runs and 8 of 16 efficient passes on first down. Again not as bad as I remembered it to be. Second down turned out to be less successful. I defined an efficient second down play to be one that gained 60% of the yards needed to pick up a first down. UF ran 23 second down plays of which only 10 were successful. UF ran the ball 8 times and passed it 15 times. Either UF did not have confidence in the run game or UT dared them to throw given the Gator QB situation. Of the 8 runs UF had a successful play 4 times meaning for the most part they were able to get into a third and short situation half the time they ran the ball on second down. Passing the ball on second down appears to have been overall a bad choice. UF had only 6 successful plays out of 15 when they passed on second down. Abandoning the ran was also a theme on third down. UF faced 15 third down plays and converted only 5 first downs (33%). This is below the stated goal for the 2004 season of 40% or better on third down. UF only ran the ball 3 times on third down and passed it 12 times. The result was no better running or passing- UF converted 33% of the time in both situations, 1-3 running and 4-12 passing. On third and short (3 yards or less) UF was 2-4. On third and medium (4-7 yards) UF was a misrable 1-6. UF got itself into managable third down situations 10 times but converted only 3 first downs- not good. UF was actually able to convert third and long (8+ yards to go) on 2 of 4 plays which is pretty good. UF was also 0 for 2 on 4th down attempts late in the game from inside the UT red zone (you might recall UT fumbling while running out the clock). It would appear that the play calling was not ultra conservative so you might conclude that the UF players were the ones who were actually playing it tight and not taking any chances- through design? who knows? Big plays: defined as a run for over 10 yards and a pass over 20 yards. UF had 5 big plays for the entire game, 1 run and 4 passes. Ben Troupe caught 3 of the 4 big pass plays. Although the play by play is sketchy in parts it appears UF took two shots down the field in the passing game- 1 to Troup on a flag route and the other to Dallas Baker. UF threw at least 8 screens (3 that were incomplete). UF QBs threw 2 INTs during the game 2 throw aways, and one dump off to Fason. That leaves about 27 passes where presumably UF QBs had an option to throw the ball to different zones? Were they looking for Troupe on too many plays? Three incomplete passes went his way. Baker and Small both had 4 incomplete passes thrown in their direction. Can you put it on the receivers not getting open? Field Position: UF had 13 drives for the game. Only two were begun on a short field (defined as beginning the drive at midfield or in the opponent's territory) One began right at midfield and the other late after UT's fumble. UF's average starting drive was its own 21- again not good. UF punted only 6 times for a net average of 42.5 per kick- both good. UT also punted 6 times, UF had only 11 yards in returns). UT's average field position was no better than UFs, its own 22. UT gained 20 more yards of offense and was 6 of 15 on third down and completed only 50% of their passes. Yet the Vols controlled the clock 35:33 (minutes/seconds of possession) and controlled the lead for the entire second half. How? They ran the ball 50 times (out of 74 plays), 5 runs of 10 yards or more, and two big pass plays. 204 of Tennessee's 374 yards came on these 7 plays. Their 67 other plays netted 170 total yards (2.5 per play). UT, however, was content to stick to its game plan (despite losing Houston to injury) and play field position. The Gators, however, seemed to lack the confidence to think they could win this type of game. Because of that you get the inability to settle for a 3-0 lead at the half and the failure to run the ball on second and third downs even when those plays were just a successful as passing the ball. Bottom line UF running backs had 6 carries in the second half and UF passed it 26 times, more if you count plays where UF was going to pass the ball but the QB was sacked or took off running). **UF backs carred 20 times for 76 yards for the game- not game breaking stuff but given they lack of attempts they were not given much of a chance, Davis carried 20-78 by way of comparison). UT ran it 30 times in the second half (2 were the QB taking a knee). The game was a one score game with 14:00 left in the 4th quarter after UF scored their only TD. So UF was not in a position of playing from way behind but they acted like they were. UF apparently learned almost nothing from this game and it almost would cost them at Kentucky.