🔥🔥🔥 Good Take on our Current Challenges

[chewybaka]

An interesting take Midtown. Down near the bottom of the comments, was one that I thought was spot on. Paraphrasing here but the poster basically said that during the press conference for Signing Day, Geoff kept his head down as though he was "beaten down". The poster followed that up by observing that the Atlanta media has been merciless. Further, he observed that as fans little more can be accomplished by continually denigrating the man, though God knows, he bought a lot of this on himself. That said, I agree that there is little point (I am including myself here) in continually belittling him for a number of reasons: for one, redemption is a story as old as athletics, he just might have a new chapter to add. Secondly, these things can turn around on a dime, not saying it will, saying it might. Third, how many of us brought into the hype and hoopla? I know I did. Let's see how next year plays out. We may be in for a pleasant surprise...or more of the same in which case the problem of what to do about Geoff will take its natural course.

Nice post…

I could kick myself, but olde CGC is starting to get me cautiously optimistic with his new coaches, signings, portal escapades and focus on wining.

I’ve gotten past my disillusionment and have had fun with the signing day results and am intrigued to see this upcoming year at BDS….of course I always am!

But the people on this site who claim to be experts on the “transition” suggest we are at least two more years away from having a winning team.

I get excited too about the recruits and transfers until I realize most of them won’t see the field any time soon and those who do will probably be part of a four win season.

I have started taking very seriously the Collins supporters around here who have continually said it’s a 7 year transition. And, by the way, many of them don’t count 2020. So 2026 is the earliest we see the really big payoff of the Collins hire.

Hope springs eternal ...

 

[forensicbuzz]

But the people on this site who claim to be experts on the “transition” suggest we are at least two more years away from having a winning team.

I get excited too about the recruits and transfers until I realize most of them won’t see the field any time soon and those who do will probably be part of a four win season.

I have started taking very seriously the Collins supporters around here who have continually said it’s a 7 year transition. And, by the way, many of them don’t count 2020. So 2026 is the earliest we see the really big payoff of the Collins hire.

You should be ashamed of yourself for this inflammatory post. NO ONE has EVER claimed to be an "expert of the transition," whether they said 3 years or 7 years. No one has ever stated, that I've read, that we're 2 more years from a winning team. Such a strawman argument you've set up. These kind of passive-aggressive comments shows that you're not trying to create a dialogue to learn about someone else's perspective, you have an agenda and part of that is to denigrate someone who's opinion is different than yours. Shame on you.

See how that works? Instead of stating my opinion, I directly attacked you and your opinion. It doesn't promote discussion, just argument? The above was hyperbole, with some real opinion built in.

Personally, I think it's a 4-5 year transition to the type of OL CGC and CBK wanted, but I thought we'd be further along in wins in Year 3 because of other intangibles. We could have and should have had 5-6 wins this year. That's ultimately on the coaches. Many of those games were winnable. I expect we'll be around 6-7 wins this upcoming season, depending on several unknowns, but I'm optimistic. The Covid year created other issues, so I do think we're behind schedule. I understand why people are disheartened, but I think the constant attacks on our staff is harmful and, as fans, we should stop that. Just my opinion.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

You should be ashamed of yourself for this inflammatory post. NO ONE has EVER claimed to be an "expert of the transition," whether they said 3 years or 7 years. No one has ever stated, that I've read, that we're 2 more years from a winning team. Such a strawman argument you've set up. These kind of passive-aggressive comments shows that you're not trying to create a dialogue to learn about someone else's perspective, you have an agenda and part of that is to denigrate someone who's opinion is different than yours. Shame on you.

See how that works? Instead of stating my opinion, I directly attacked you and your opinion. It doesn't promote discussion, just argument? The above was hyperbole, with some real opinion built in.

Personally, I think it's a 4-5 year transition to the type of OL CGC and CBK wanted, but I thought we'd be further along in wins in Year 3 because of other intangibles. We could have and should have had 5-6 wins this year. That's ultimately on the coaches. Many of those games were winnable. I expect we'll be around 6-7 wins this upcoming season, depending on several unknowns, but I'm optimistic. The Covid year created other issues, so I do think we're behind schedule. I understand why people are disheartened, but I think the constant attacks on our staff is harmful and, as fans, we should stop that. Just my opinion.

Not sure at all what the first part of your post was about. I keep getting attacked for supposedly making up the idea that some people think the transition will take several years. I will not concede that point. People have said that.

Also, whenever I have politely asked people to explain why some programs seem to turn things around in 2-3 years and we are projecting anywhere from 5-7 years for a turnaround I’m told that I am a silly ninny who knows nothing about building an offensive line. You will forgive me if I get tired of being attacked simply for being skeptical rather than people offering solid data to prove their point.

As far as I can tell, you have offered opinions with fairly clear qualifiers and timelines, presented in a reasonable way. May your tribe increase. You are a distinct minority among a crowd that generally just says “Get over the 9 wins in three seasons and quit complaining.”

 

[BuzzDraft]

Dig deeper into this one. If there is a reason that we should retain CGC for another year or two, it's this.

And yes, this was a Collins implementation.

Stansbury.

I met with the assistant AD at the Edge in spring 2017 to discuss helping GTAA develop and staff the program they were putting together.

 

[MidtownJacket]

Stansbury.

I met with the assistant AD at the Edge in spring 2017 to discuss helping GTAA develop and staff the program they were putting together.

Have you stayed involved? I’m definitely curious to learn more about it.

 

[takethepoints]

You are a distinct minority among a crowd that generally just says “Get over the 9 wins in three seasons and quit complaining.”

What gets me about these same posters is that they were so sure that we had descended into mediocrity and now are more then willing to accept that getting to 5 - 6 wins next year will be a great achievement because … reasons.

Sorry, Charlie. 5 - 6 wins four years into any football transition is a mediocre performance. And should be called out for it. Provided that we get to 5 wins next year, that is. I thought we'd win 4 this year and that's about what I expect in 2022. We have lost a bundle of good players, especially on D.

 

[CEB]

What gets me about these same posters is that they were so sure that we had descended into mediocrity and now are more then willing to accept that getting to 5 - 6 wins next year will be a great achievement because … reasons.

Sorry, Charlie. 5 - 6 wins four years into any football transition is a mediocre performance. And should be called out for it. Provided that we get to 5 wins next year, that is. I thought we'd win 4 this year and that's about what I expect in 2022. We have lost a bundle of good players, especially on D.

my opinion; 5-6 wins next year is both the floor and an achievement. Looking at our schedule, that means we are at least .500 in conference, which is a tall order. It’s a shame, but given where we we are now; CGC is in that spot.
Original link / Article is pretty much right on.
I think the staff would have been better served to tone down the gimmicky aspects of the “culture” outside of the locker room.
That said, we know the goal was a 180 in culture / perception and rightly or wrongly, that is CGC’s charge. I do think this is “his way” but I also think it was embraced and fully encouraged... we were all hoping (expecting) the wins would result. Let’s face it, if we had top 20 D performances and were getting back to 7 wins, we’d all be jumping around for “money down.” When the wins don’t follow, it looks silly and then you’re faced with scrapping it all (oh, you don’t know what you’re doing?) or making silly statements like wtte of “the culture is in place and now we can coach football” to make it seem like it’s all part of the plan when clearly things are not going as well as expected.
It seems like the message still resonates with 18-22 year olds, which is good, and I hope it continues. But all the messaging in the world isn’t worth much if it can’t be coached into the “W” column. That’s where the jury is clearly still out. In the meantime, the messaging certainly has been the easy target for angering / polarizing a fan base...

 

[forensicbuzz]

Not sure at all what the first part of your post was about. I keep getting attacked for supposedly making up the idea that some people think the transition will take several years. I will not concede that point. People have said that.

Also, whenever I have politely asked people to explain why some programs seem to turn things around in 2-3 years and we are projecting anywhere from 5-7 years for a turnaround I’m told that I am a silly ninny who knows nothing about building an offensive line. You will forgive me if I get tired of being attacked simply for being skeptical rather than people offering solid data to prove their point.

As far as I can tell, you have offered opinions with fairly clear qualifiers and timelines, presented in a reasonable way. May your tribe increase. You are a distinct minority among a crowd that generally just says “Get over the 9 wins in three seasons and quit complaining.”

I understand. I make a distinction between taking 4-5 years to build an OL and how long it takes to start winning games. I think they're tied, but not inextricably. I think as the OL gets better, we'll get better, but I also think with better defensive performance this year we could have won 6-7 games with the offense we had. In other words, our offense clearly had plenty of room for improvement, but if our defense had improved as much as our offense did, we would have won at least 5 or 6 games.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

I understand. I make a distinction between taking 4-5 years to build an OL and how long it takes to start winning games. I think they're tied, but not inextricably. I think as the OL gets better, we'll get better, but I also think with better defensive performance this year we could have won 6-7 games with the offense we had. In other words, our offense clearly had plenty of room for improvement, but if our defense had improved as much as our offense did, we would have won at least 5 or 6 games.

I expected 7 wins this year and was surprised by how the team collapsed, certainly led by the defense.

I don’t know what to expect next year but I am less hopeful than I was prior to this year because of the sheer number of things that have revealed themselves to need improvement. If it were just the offensive line and/or the secondary, for instance, I would feel better about our prospects.

Your response makes sense but it implies a more orderly progression than the chaos we saw this year. I will hope you are right.

 

[takethepoints]

I understand. I make a distinction between taking 4-5 years to build an OL and how long it takes to start winning games. I think they're tied, but not inextricably. I think as the OL gets better, we'll get better, but I also think with better defensive performance this year we could have won 6-7 games with the offense we had. In other words, our offense clearly had plenty of room for improvement, but if our defense had improved as much as our offense did, we would have won at least 5 or 6 games.

I agree but I doubt it takes 4 - 5 years to build an OL. Our problem early on - especially in 2019 - was that we never got a solid 5 on the field at once. Everyone was hurt at one time or the other and we didn't have any continuity at all. While we heard a lot of that again this year, the depth was sufficient that performance should have been much better, imho. This is especially the case since we have had very few career ending injuries (Paul's OL curse) and transferred in experienced OLs. I put OL failings down to coaching, pure and simple, and I'm tired of hearing excuses for it.

I think a lot of our foibles this year came down to a lack of killer instinct when the game was on the line or, to be more exact, a lack of confidence in our schemes by the players. Again, coaching. It often looked like we expected to lose and our failure to keep games close compounded that. I hope this improves, but evidence on the ground that it will is pretty sparse so far.

 

[cthenrys]

I agree but I doubt it takes 4 - 5 years to build an OL. Our problem early on - especially in 2019 - was that we never got a solid 5 on the field at once. Everyone was hurt at one time or the other and we didn't have any continuity at all. While we heard a lot of that again this year, the depth was sufficient that performance should have been much better, imho. This is especially the case since we have had very few career ending injuries (Paul's OL curse) and transferred in experienced OLs. I put OL failings down to coaching, pure and simple, and I'm tired of hearing excuses for it.

I think a lot of our foibles this year came down to a lack of killer instinct when the game was on the line or, to be more exact, a lack of confidence in our schemes by the players. Again, coaching. It often looked like we expected to lose and our failure to keep games close compounded that. I hope this improves, but evidence on the ground that it will is pretty sparse so far.

Player development and game day prep / execution have been far more impactful than any transition effects. In those two areas, we aren’t doing well and in the latter I think you’d be hard pressed to find a team doing worse.

But hey I’m not a good fan for seeing things that way I guess

 

[Techster]

Not sure at all what the first part of your post was about. I keep getting attacked for supposedly making up the idea that some people think the transition will take several years. I will not concede that point. People have said that.

Also, whenever I have politely asked people to explain why some programs seem to turn things around in 2-3 years and we are projecting anywhere from 5-7 years for a turnaround I’m told that I am a silly ninny who knows nothing about building an offensive line. You will forgive me if I get tired of being attacked simply for being skeptical rather than people offering solid data to prove their point.

As far as I can tell, you have offered opinions with fairly clear qualifiers and timelines, presented in a reasonable way. May your tribe increase. You are a distinct minority among a crowd that generally just says “Get over the 9 wins in three seasons and quit complaining.”

The reason I always point out that every coach since Bobby Ross (it's actually further back if you do the research) has won at least 6 games (bowl eligibility) by their 3rd season (outside of Bill Lewis, but he at least won 5 games his first 2 years) is because it shows it does NOT take 5-7 years to "turn things around". Curry and Ross had a MUCH more difficult job than Collins. On top of that, Collins has the transfer portal to get experienced OLs and DLs. None of our previous coaches had that option.

Saying it takes 5-7 years also flies in the face of the fact that NO offensive lineman or defensive lineman gets to play for 5-7 years. This is college football, not professional football. By year 3, coaches know whether or not a player will be a contributor. Look at our starting OL this season:

Devin Cochran -RSr
Kenny Cooper - RSr
Ryan Johnson - RSr
Mike Minihan - RJr
Jordan Williams - Fr (2nd year)

Outside of Jordan Williams, you have 3 guys who have been in college for 5 years, 1 guy who was in college for 4 years, and a freshman that's been in college for 2 years. You don't get much more experienced than that. Cochran, Williams, and Johnson were recruited specifically for our offense, while Cooper and Minihan couldn't be beaten out by CGC's recruits, which means they were good enough to play at the ACC level, or CGC isn't recruiting as well in the portal and from HS ranks as he should.

The DL and DE, though not as experienced as the OL, also had multiple guys who've been in college for 3+ seasons.

We had the 5th most talented roster in the ACC. Not just the Coastal, but ALL of the ACC according to 247. We definitely did not finish 5th overall in the ACC. IMO, that's a coaching issue, not a talent issue.

 

[forensicbuzz]

I expected 7 wins this year and was surprised by how the team collapsed, certainly led by the defense.

I don’t know what to expect next year but I am less hopeful than I was prior to this year because of the sheer number of things that have revealed themselves to need improvement. If it were just the offensive line and/or the secondary, for instance, I would feel better about our prospects.

Your response makes sense but it implies a more orderly progression than the chaos we saw this year. I will hope you are right.

I think this is the wake-up call for CGC. He realizes it's do or die.

 

[Jacket05]

The reason I always point out that every coach since Bobby Ross (it's actually further back if you do the research) has won at least 6 games (bowl eligibility) by their 3rd season (outside of Bill Lewis, but he at least won 5 games his first 2 years) is because it shows it does NOT take 5-7 years to "turn things around". Curry and Ross had a MUCH more difficult job than Collins. On top of that, Collins has the transfer portal to get experienced OLs and DLs. None of our previous coaches had that option.

Saying it takes 5-7 years also flies in the face of the fact that NO offensive lineman or defensive lineman gets to play for 5-7 years. This is college football, not professional football. By year 3, coaches know whether or not a player will be a contributor. Look at our starting OL this season:

Devin Cochran -RSr
Kenny Cooper - RSr
Ryan Johnson - RSr
Mike Minihan - RJr
Jordan Williams - Fr (2nd year)

Outside of Jordan Williams, you have 3 guys who have been in college for 5 years, 1 guy who was in college for 4 years, and a freshman that's been in college for 2 years. You don't get much more experienced than that. Cochran, Williams, and Johnson were recruited specifically for our offense, while Cooper and Minihan couldn't be beaten out by CGC's recruits, which means they were good enough to play at the ACC level, or CGC isn't recruiting as well in the portal and from HS ranks as he should.

The DL and DE, though not as experienced as the OL, also had multiple guys who've been in college for 3+ seasons.

We had the 5th most talented roster in the ACC. Not just the Coastal, but ALL of the ACC according to 247. We definitely did not finish 5th overall in the ACC. IMO, that's a coaching issue, not a talent issue.

How many games were those 5 healthy and playing at the same time?

 

[GoodBuzz]

The reason I always point out that every coach since Bobby Ross (it's actually further back if you do the research) has won at least 6 games (bowl eligibility) by their 3rd season (outside of Bill Lewis, but he at least won 5 games his first 2 years) is because it shows it does NOT take 5-7 years to "turn things around". Curry and Ross had a MUCH more difficult job than Collins. On top of that, Collins has the transfer portal to get experienced OLs and DLs. None of our previous coaches had that option.

Saying it takes 5-7 years also flies in the face of the fact that NO offensive lineman or defensive lineman gets to play for 5-7 years. This is college football, not professional football. By year 3, coaches know whether or not a player will be a contributor. Look at our starting OL this season:

Devin Cochran -RSr
Kenny Cooper - RSr
Ryan Johnson - RSr
Mike Minihan - RJr
Jordan Williams - Fr (2nd year)

Outside of Jordan Williams, you have 3 guys who have been in college for 5 years, 1 guy who was in college for 4 years, and a freshman that's been in college for 2 years. You don't get much more experienced than that. Cochran, Williams, and Johnson were recruited specifically for our offense, while Cooper and Minihan couldn't be beaten out by CGC's recruits, which means they were good enough to play at the ACC level, or CGC isn't recruiting as well in the portal and from HS ranks as he should.

The DL and DE, though not as experienced as the OL, also had multiple guys who've been in college for 3+ seasons.

We had the 5th most talented roster in the ACC. Not just the Coastal, but ALL of the ACC according to 247. We definitely did not finish 5th overall in the ACC. IMO, that's a coaching issue, not a talent issue.

I get that there were 3 Srs and a Jr, but doesn't time playing together make a difference for an Oline? I think I heard this week that of the 20 starting Olineman for the 4 playoff teams, only 1 was a transfer. The inference was that those lines were good because they had stayed and played together.

 

[jacket_fan]

No matter what the experience on the offensive line, the data showed from this article, the offensive line has a long way to go no matter who is in there. Glad the author did not put names next to the grades. Key needs to get his act together this off season and coach these kids up.

"Here are the season-sending PFF Grades for the 9 guys who played significant snaps on the offensive line this season: 63.7, 55.9, 37.6, 56.2, 61.4, 64.3, 46.0, 68.0, and 55.9. Either the recruiting, the development, or both are simply not in a really good spot."

 

[iceeater1969]

I dont like coaches that yell into a players helmet or makes fun of walmzrt workers. Life's too short to make enemies. I love coaches that are brilliant.

I don't like coaches that glibbly give clearly false defense of failure. I love coaches that work their *** off.


Now, I am furious at cgc after recruiting like a demon has blown easy strategic choices that have wasted time that we cant get back.

These will be discussed in off season as will " what is our goal( win 50% against duke, virginia, mia, etc).

Unless collins changes dramatically, i know he can only get us so far.

It is important the next move by gt be a great hire. He has shown me that he is so busy busy he misses important easy course corrections. Great people will not bust their *** for him.

 

[GoldZ]

Not sure at all what the first part of your post was about. I keep getting attacked for supposedly making up the idea that some people think the transition will take several years. I will not concede that point. People have said that.

Also, whenever I have politely asked people to explain why some programs seem to turn things around in 2-3 years and we are projecting anywhere from 5-7 years for a turnaround I’m told that I am a silly ninny who knows nothing about building an offensive line. You will forgive me if I get tired of being attacked simply for being skeptical rather than people offering solid data to prove their point.

As far as I can tell, you have offered opinions with fairly clear qualifiers and timelines, presented in a reasonable way. May your tribe increase. You are a distinct minority among a crowd that generally just says “Get over the 9 wins in three seasons and quit complaining.”

All you have to do is ask your attackers why so many teams have Fr, Sos, and Jrs, on their starting OL. And don't let em get away with---well they have played together a long time. They haven't.

 

[forensicbuzz]

I agree but I doubt it takes 4 - 5 years to build an OL. Our problem early on - especially in 2019 - was that we never got a solid 5 on the field at once. Everyone was hurt at one time or the other and we didn't have any continuity at all. While we heard a lot of that again this year, the depth was sufficient that performance should have been much better, imho. This is especially the case since we have had very few career ending injuries (Paul's OL curse) and transferred in experienced OLs. I put OL failings down to coaching, pure and simple, and I'm tired of hearing excuses for it.

I think a lot of our foibles this year came down to a lack of killer instinct when the game was on the line or, to be more exact, a lack of confidence in our schemes by the players. Again, coaching. It often looked like we expected to lose and our failure to keep games close compounded that. I hope this improves, but evidence on the ground that it will is pretty sparse so far.

I think if you go back and look at my posts, you see that we probably agree more than disagree. I truly think it takes 4-5 years to grow an OL organically. We knew that wasn't going to be possible, so we went to the Portal and pulled in Southers, Ryan, Cochran, Pendley, Kirby, et al. That was to bridge the gap until the OL we've recruited grew into the role. I still don't think we've grown into the role, but Williams, Vaipulu, and Franklin are all CGC recruits. They've have varying levels of PT. The guys from CPJ that were able to adapt and the who we brought in via transfer were supposed to be stop-gaps. They, for the most part, weren't. I agree that's on the coaches. The young guys not being ready are not (in my opinion).

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

I think, like Professor Harold Hill, CGC has believed in his "think system" for running a college program. Unlike the Professor, I don't think he is being intentional or disingenuous. I am convinced that he does indeed want to be a successful head coach at GT.

I hope he is a "successful head coach at GT"...otherwise there will be "trouble in River City" and it won't be "swell". Do I get bonus points for the Music Man references?