IMHO there were 2 critical strategic errors by the coaches:
1) Abandoning misdirection when it was working so well. In principle, when facing someone larger, stronger, slower and with less endurance you want to force them to run, to change directions and get them frustrated. Make them feel that all of their strength and effort are accomplishing nothing. Compound the fatigue with demoralization. That's exactly what the opening drive did to Georgia's defense.
LSU's defense was clearly hyped up and over pursuing badly. The setup was perfect and the first 2 plays gashed them with misdirection. Then Herman dials up a low-percentage deep shot. A combination of a misread by Duvernay and a good tackle by Delpit on the next play forces a punt. Sustaining drives was more important than getting quick points early on. If the opening drive goes 10-12 plays, Texas likely breaks LSU's defense in the 2nd quarter instead of the 3rd.
This is compounded in goal to go on the next 2 drives. LSU's DL is still fresh. Why run straight at them? It literally plays to their strength AND gives them confidence from facing (and beating) the expected instead of confusion and frustration. The defense's over focus on the run became clear with the 4th down PA pass but execution failed. That play or similar concepts like pop pass to the TE or fake lead block and pass to the flats was available on every down in goal line.
2) Getting cute with the pass rush. Occasional 3 man rushes while dropping 8 are OK if you can occasionally bring that 3rd rusher from an unexpected angle. There was too much vanilla base 3 man rush, which just gave Burrow time and confidence. I even saw a 2 man rush at one point. As if to overcompensate for that, Orlando brought a lot of 6 man pass rush as well. That got home once but also clarified the coverage read too quickly. It was kind of a bipolar performance: either and easy read of the coverage or an easy read of the pressure.
What seemed most effective overall was 4 and 5 man pressures. Those allowed a good mix of unexpected angles while still keeping some doubt about the scheme in the secondary. It seemed like Orlando almost gave up by using so much cover 4 late to protect the CBs. Static 2 high safety look made it easy to read BOTH the rush and the secondary when only 4 defenders were near the LOS. That was the trap Georgia Southern fell into last week with similar results. And Orlando again overcompensated with max pressure on 3rd and 17 instead of 4 or maybe 5 pass rushers to force a quick throw while leaving enough behind to clean up.