2nd year in a row Tech starts 1-3.

SteamWhistle

SteamWhistle

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,435
Location
Rome, GA
Back to Back years we start 1-3 and have an identity crisis at QB. Last year we wanted Tobias, this year we don’t. Last year we were supposed to give Nate Woody time this year we panic after 4 games. What’s changed with how we approach transition other then our fans opinions? Why do we have to win right away? Over the last 4 seasons Tech has a .500 record. Why are we holding Collins to such a high standard in year 1 of the biggest transition in the history of football? Where has those same expectations been? Why were we ok starting 1-3 last year? Did any of you pay attention to any preseason coverage of Tech? This was supposed to happen, all those polls that picked us at the bottom of everything were right. EVERYONE saw this coming, yet here we are for the 2nd year in a row melting down.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
SteamWhistle said:
Back to Back years we start 1-3 and have an identity crisis at QB. Last year we wanted Tobias, this year we don’t. Last year we were supposed to give Nate Woody time this year we panic after 4 games. What’s changed with how we approach transition other then our fans opinions? Why do we have to win right away? Over the last 4 seasons Tech has a .500 record. Why are we holding Collins to such a high standard in year 1 of the biggest transition in the history of football? Where has those same expectations been? Why were we ok starting 1-3 last year? Did any of you pay attention to any preseason coverage of Tech? This was supposed to happen, all those polls that picked us at the bottom of everything were right. EVERYONE saw this coming, yet here we are for the 2nd year in a row melting down.
Click to expand...

I would prefer TO if we ran our old offense. The only reason I wouldn’t want him at QB is if they’re going to ask him to do things that he’s not good at. And they’ve been doing that a lot, so then I’d rather someone else.

Last year we were losing, but we were competitive and in some cases losing despite blowing the other team away (like USF). We lost to the national champion and we lost to the eventual coastal champ by 1 score, while enduring some questionable calls like the 4th and 8 from our own 20 in the first quarter.

This year seems significantly different, because it feels like the staff isn’t playing to our team’s abilities on offense.
 
stech81

stech81

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,898
Location
Woodstock Georgia
I don't recall everyone being ok with a 1-3 start last year. The ones who are wanting to give CGC 4 years or more are most of the same ones than wanted us to run CPJ off last year. It's a high standard to see us beat Citadel? And this is the biggest translation in college football? I guess we are the only team in college football to leave the 3O . I want to see some improvement on offense not a CO who can't pick one QB . Yes the OL is bad but this is not the first year It's been bad. But it gives people an excuse to say why we can't win. I don't want to see CGC fall on his face. But I don't want to see us going 1-11 , I have seen that before.
 
Cam

Cam

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,591
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
Truthfully, it was after the 1-3 start last year that I first heard Geoff Collins' name come up as the rumored lead candidate to take over in 2019. I followed Temple closely soon after that. However, at the time I was pissed at those who were blowing the losses way out of proportion in hopes of getting others in on their hatred of CPJ and tear down the fanbase from the inside. I was thankful that at the time the majority of this board kept a level head, kept those being unreasonable in check, and knew that while the start was not acceptable, it also didn't do any good to hit the panic button. I'm hoping history repeats itself both in the sense of the bounce back of the team and this board's return to normalcy and intelligent discussion in the wake of adversity.
 
Supersizethatorder-mutt

Supersizethatorder-mutt

Banned
Messages
13,443
Location
Augusta, GA
bwelbo said:
I would prefer TO if we ran our old offense. The only reason I wouldn’t want him at QB is if they’re going to ask him to do things that he’s not good at. And they’ve been doing that a lot, so then I’d rather someone else.

Last year we were losing, but we were competitive and in some cases losing despite blowing the other team away (like USF). We lost to the national champion and we lost to the eventual coastal champ by 1 score, while enduring some questionable calls like the 4th and 8 from our own 20 in the first quarter.

This year seems significantly different, because it feels like the staff isn’t playing to our team’s abilities on offense.
Click to expand...
The problem is that they are asking all of our QBs to do things they're not good at. So why not for the time being design some plays that use the things they are good at?
 
Vespidae

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,326
Location
Auburn, AL
TechPreacher said:
Tech was 21-16 over the last 3 years.
Tech was 35-28 over the last 5 years.

Why not use one of these time frames?
Click to expand...

1-3 doesn't mean anything unless you were supposed to be 4-0. If Tech played Clemson, Alabama, LSU and Ohio State … we might be jumping up and down that we are 1-3.

To calibrate any kind of result, you have to compare to a benchmark and then again to a trend.
 
TechPreacher

TechPreacher

Banned
Messages
258
Vespidae said:
1-3 doesn't mean anything unless you were supposed to be 4-0. If Tech played Clemson, Alabama, LSU and Ohio State … we might be jumping up and down that we are 1-3.

To calibrate any kind of result, you have to compare to a benchmark and then again to a trend.
Click to expand...

You miss the point. The ".500 record over the last 4 years" crowd chooses 4 years to fit their narrative. Last season, it was "less than .500 record over the last 3 years."
 
GT_05

GT_05

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,370
SteamWhistle said:
Back to Back years we start 1-3 and have an identity crisis at QB. Last year we wanted Tobias, this year we don’t. Last year we were supposed to give Nate Woody time this year we panic after 4 games. What’s changed with how we approach transition other then our fans opinions? Why do we have to win right away? Over the last 4 seasons Tech has a .500 record. Why are we holding Collins to such a high standard in year 1 of the biggest transition in the history of football? Where has those same expectations been? Why were we ok starting 1-3 last year? Did any of you pay attention to any preseason coverage of Tech? This was supposed to happen, all those polls that picked us at the bottom of everything were right. EVERYONE saw this coming, yet here we are for the 2nd year in a row melting down.
Click to expand...

If wanting the coaching staff to get as much production as possible out of the talent we have (and we do have talent), then I guess I’m guilty. How long should a fan wait to express displeasure with the actions of a new coach? I expected a lot of L’s this year but it almost appears like the coaching staff is treating this season as a practice season (let’s change the culture and then we will work on X’s and O’s later).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
vamosjackets

vamosjackets

GT Athlete
Featured Member
Messages
2,150
SteamWhistle said:
Back to Back years we start 1-3 and have an identity crisis at QB. Last year we wanted Tobias, this year we don’t. Last year we were supposed to give Nate Woody time this year we panic after 4 games. What’s changed with how we approach transition other then our fans opinions? Why do we have to win right away? Over the last 4 seasons Tech has a .500 record. Why are we holding Collins to such a high standard in year 1 of the biggest transition in the history of football? Where has those same expectations been? Why were we ok starting 1-3 last year? Did any of you pay attention to any preseason coverage of Tech? This was supposed to happen, all those polls that picked us at the bottom of everything were right. EVERYONE saw this coming, yet here we are for the 2nd year in a row melting down.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with the best part of your philosophy which underlies this post. The most rational thing to do in this situation is to give leadership time to transition a program to their vision and then make the evaluation after a reasonable amount of time for that transition to actually occur and post results. But, you have to see that it seems that this has just become a divided fanbase with two irrational sides. It seems that you are on one side calling out the irrationality of the other side without recognizing/admitting the irrationality of your own side. It's emotion and preference. People who like the option, X's and O's, substance over style, etc naturally give CPJ the benefit of the doubt while not giving that benefit to CGC; and vice versa, people on your side who value style, brand, recruiting-stars, etc naturally give CGC the benefit o f the doubt while not giving it to CPJ. The same things are going on. Some are grumbling, some are defending, but mostly the roles have just reversed, based on nothing but who "likes/dislikes" who.

Case-in-point: If CGC's transition from option to "pro-style" is the "biggest transition in the history of football", then wouldn't CPJ's transition from an actual pro-style (which is what CCG actually did run) to the option be tied for "biggest transition in the history of football"? If not, why not?
 
4shotB

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
4,935
GT_05 said:
How long should a fan wait to express displeasure with the actions of a new coach?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I don't have any trouble whatsoever with complaints or criticism. those guys are making serious $ and they probably expect it to a certain degree.

WTBS,by far my biggest complaint are the 6-10 posters who generate a large percentage of the traffic here who repeat themselves over and over in almost every thread. It is OK to criticize CGC or CDP or whoever but there should be a cap of some sort on duplicate posts. Typing the same repetitive thoughts over and over again in almost every thread has really drug the quality of this site to a new low. I often thought it was the standard of excellence for the discussion of GT FB but it's sinking to the lowest common denominator.
 
Top