3rd and 4...

[iceeater1969]

We are playing bad football on offense. Almost horribly bad. Special teams has been bad. The D has shown me some bright spots actually. I am real big on Gray and Mitchell. Our failures on O have made the D look worse than I think they are.

I'm not sure what the answer is on O. Injuries have hurt us bad but that is not the biggest issue IMO. Our O line has really regressed and I honestly don't understand it. Seems they can not figure how to adjust to a blitz or even a line shift. That should be football 101 for this veteran line but they are failing. That's partly on coaching and partly on players.

Having said all that. The CPJ haters comments are almost laughable. Sure, CPJ owns our struggles on D and ST the past few years just as much as he owns our current struggles and past success on O. But those denigrating our offensive scheme are ridiculous. One said this O could only work back in the 1950s. Wow. How quickly they forget the Orange Bowl. How quickly they forget a historically good and efficient offense. They want to dismiss some of our biggest successes because certain D coordinators were "inexperienced". Hysterical. I will waste no further time arguing with the armchair QBs who are football clueless.

We sure could use a bye week. Hope we get this turned around. I know our guys will bust their butts to do so. Go Jackets!

Whisky , didn't mean to offend you on the DC experience numbers I presented about the three game run .

Some specifics
. I guess you did notice the ALCORN defense often had no one in middle on those long runs . We were 10th in nation after scoring 129 points in 2 games . Now that looks kind of as you say hysterical.

How did miss state adjust to the strong line right -- like there all american who is in pros was trying to make the defense shift. The DC had zero days experience and that's a fact. Game was fun and we won going away!

My son was a GA at OU when clemson DC was there- and says he will be a Great head coach when he returns to ksu.

I am saying what I say to suggest we need more creative play calling to get ahead like in the Orange bowl
Read my tag- we need to clearly out coach the good DC that has better talent.

 

[buzz_wiser©]

A lot of guys you rarely see on the board coming out of the wood works when we lose... What a shame

Im sure not many have sat their asses in a wet stadium 2 weeks in a row home and away either (yesterday was crap..just sayin)... Some of you guys need to get out of your mamas basements and quit hiding behind a computer screen.
Get off the frigging fire CPJ bus,becaus its not going anywhere. Do yall not realize he is under contract til 2020? There will be no payout for that. Some of the ones who come in here just for a loss offer nothing to this board. Its hard enough for those in here (not saying I have a lot) who have knowledge of the game to see what is happening with the team, then we have to listen to all the primadonnas who have played football forever and are the next coming of Saban!
If you cant offer some form of intelligent conversation to this forum, just leave. There are players who read this blog and Im sure they are more pissed off than anyone on here that the season is going as it is.
I am on here to read and get enlightened on things positive with the only team I pull for or have any ties to at the collegiate level. I assure you I am not looking at things thru rose colored glasses at all, I just think the Negative Nancys are just making things worse.
Perhaps some of the ones who piss and moan should do join dwag nation. IT suits them better.

Sorry, rant over

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

@iceeater1969
I agree we need to out coach good DCs that have better talent. We often face that exact scenario. See prior games vs FSU, Clemson, Uga, and others. We have a record with our staff of doing just that. It's a damn tall order though. What I get sick of is the people who pretend our staff suddenly got stupid in the offseason. I tire of those who cherry pick certain games and exclude others in trying to make points. And I give no credence at all to those who have stipulated, from day one, that our scheme on O can't be successful at this level. Recent history has proven it is. The moment we struggle, as most teams will at times, those naysayers come back out to proclaim "see I told you so" and conveniently forget our successes.

Having said all that...and getting back to our problems this season...I concur with boomer. The wheels have come off on O. The staff needs to re-evaluate, strip it down, and in some ways start from scratch...or so it seems to me anyway. May not be pretty. But in no way does that prove the scheme doesn't or can't work, popular cliches aside.

 

[awbuzz]

We aren't quit here ... yet (hope we never are).

 

[danny daniel]

When our run offense is working I am ok with the slow developing, deep drop, long pass as it sometimes works and gives us some "balance". However when our O is not working and we are in a must pass situation (like a lot lately) we need a few quick plays (shallow drop with quick release) in the form of slants, screens, or swing passes to hit one of our playmakers and give us a chance. The fake, deep drop, juke, retreat and run for your life, and throwing out of bounds is not working when we cannot get our running game going.

 

[BufordJacket]

Ive been to every Tech game rain or shine. I will always defend Tech and CPJ. I actually love our offense cause it is a different among all the other schools out there. I was in Israel couple months ago wearing my Tech hat and some guys started talking about the option with me. Same for when I was in California for work. Sure we can be like every other school and run the faced paced/spread/look over to momma and get the signal from a giant postcard on the sideline, etc. I like being who we are win or lose I am with this team. To me we are always going to have cycles due to academics but more often than not we are competitive and to me it is because of the triple option. I do also get frustrated and many times curse and wish CPJ would let me just once stand on the sideline for my input. But I regress and realized that ship has sailed and I must continue to sale software.

 

[Skeptic]

Yup and thats why we will continue to get no where unless these team can get the option going. Its pretty simple once you shut down the option you win against Tech

That's pretty simple all right. I think based on this posting and replies we need to burn all the equipment, turn Dodd Stadium into a parking lot -- maybe lease the playing field to UGA for an agricultural experiment station -- and make all the football coaches chemistry profs. Wouldn't change the whimpering and whining but at least redirect it.

 

[Sideways]

Football clueless?
I have forgotten more than most will learn.
1 year. 1 year.
And the way y'all say, with the athletes why didn't he win it all?

If the TO is so good, why don't everyone run it?
I have said, the TO is good IF executed. But it's is one deminsional.
When there are 11 players in the box and you don't check to a slant, screen, or anything else.....that's one dimensional an will not win in today's college football world.

Is what it is.

Ok, let's go to a spread or hurry up offense and try competing for players with the factories. It will be a losing proposition. Either they can't get in school or they are not interested in getting a real education. The triple option is the only way we can be competitive under the current recruiting restrictions. Why don't you go to the Board of Regents and raise hell about the uneven playing field we face with UGA? Think you will get anywhere? The only way we can change this dynamic is to go the route of Virginia Tech and become more of a university with countless worthless majors to hide football players. Is that what you want? Recruiting was such a headache for O'Leary that he left as soon as he could. Winning with a conventional offense at Tech is well nigh impossible with the current situation. I understand your concerns and frustrations but this is the hand we have been dealt.

 

[SteamWhistle]

This is the only offense we can recruit for on paper, but if we get a new head coach that people want to play for that's all turned around. Kids make better grades these days than you would think. All this technology we've implemented into our high schools has made it twice as easy to learn and maybe 4 times as easier to have fun. Kids want to come to school. At least that's how I see it, kids I've grown that always struggled and failed have changed lot with this new BYOT stuff. Maybe in a few years it will be like that all over the country and make it easier for us to snags guys like UGA does.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

If you have followed my posts you will know I'm a big fan of our scheme and hc. I believe both give us the ability to compete at the highest level possible. And the scheme may give us some advantages over others due to who and what we are. I don't think it is the only scheme that can be successful at Tech though. I actually find that sentiment to be nearly as flawed as the sentiments others espouse that the scheme can't compete vs big boy p5 football.

 

[Skeptic]

In th

This is the only offense we can recruit for on paper, but if we get a new head coach that people want to play for that's all turned around. Kids make better grades these days than you would think. All this technology we've implemented into our high schools has made it twice as easy to learn and maybe 4 times as easier to have fun. Kids want to come to school. At least that's how I see it, kids I've grown that always struggled and failed have changed lot with this new BYOT stuff. Maybe in a few years it will be like that all over the country and make it easier for us to snags guys like UGA does.

In the real world that is called rose colored glasses, in that you equate wanting to get an education to wanting to learn a trade. I knew several "hard-nosed smart kids" who wanted to go, and did go, to college. They just wanted no part of math and science and technical training. Zilch. Didn't get any, and it didn't hurt them later so it all worked out okay, which is supposed to be how it works. I am a GT football fan who never had the slightest desire to attend the place.

 

[Rock]

In th
In the real world that is called rose colored glasses, in that you equate wanting to get an education to wanting to learn a trade. I knew several "hard-nosed smart kids" who wanted to go, and did go, to college. They just wanted no part of math and science and technical training. Zilch. Didn't get any, and it didn't hurt them later so it all worked out okay, which is supposed to be how it works. I am a GT football fan who never had the slightest desire to attend the place.

and the gold colored glass wearing fans don't see that.

Sure there are some kids that wanna come here for the education. sure.
but I bet my check, the majority come b/c it is one of the few offers they got for D1 or the ACC.

IF (big if) Alabama would have offered JT at QB, he wouldn't be here.
GT is a great school, if that is what you are wanting. I bet most of the kids just want to play ball.

 

[Skeptic]

...
GT is a great school, if that is what you are wanting. I bet most of the kids just want to play ball.

That is exactly right. There's reasons that liberal arts, medical, lawyer schools and such greatly outnumber engineering schools. They are fine for the students they serve and produce excellent technical educations. (Though I never did get that lawyer thing. We seem to be producing more lawyers than can ever find employment, thus resulting in a bunch of them deciding to go over the wall and start writing.)

 

[AE 87]

and the gold colored glass wearing fans don't see that.

Sure there are some kids that wanna come here for the education. sure.
but I bet my check, the majority come b/c it is one of the few offers they got for D1 or the ACC.

IF (big if) Alabama would have offered JT at QB, he wouldn't be here.
GT is a great school, if that is what you are wanting. I bet most of the kids just want to play ball.

So, fans who want to be fans of kids that just want to play ball have lots of choices besides Tech.

 

[Skeptic]

@iceeater1969
I agree we need to out coach good DCs that have better talent. We often face that exact scenario. See prior games vs FSU, Clemson, Uga, and others. We have a record with our staff of doing just that. It's a damn tall order though. What I get sick of is the people who pretend our staff suddenly got stupid in the offseason. I tire of those who cherry pick certain games and exclude others in trying to make points. And I give no credence at all to those who have stipulated, from day one, that our scheme on O can't be successful at this level. Recent history has proven it is. The moment we struggle, as most teams will at times, those naysayers come back out to proclaim "see I told you so" and conveniently forget our successes.

Having said all that...and getting back to our problems this season...I concur with boomer. The wheels have come off on O. The staff needs to re-evaluate, strip it down, and in some ways start from scratch...or so it seems to me anyway. May not be pretty. But in no way does that prove the scheme doesn't or can't work, popular cliches aside.

Something that both frustrates and irritates me are those anti-option ravings, including such preposterous claims that the option hasn't worked since the '50s and such. I recognize their frustration and Kentucky Windage to ventilate. Okay. Hyperbole is allowed on message boards. Now, I am not an X & O guy. I run a play back half a dozen times I might begin to see the blocking scheme. Maybe. But even I know what I am looking at Clemson lines Watson up seven yards deep and has him read the end of LB before deciding to hand off to his running back, and if he keeps it, to decide to run himself or throw a quick pass. It is option football. When OSU won the NC last year, and at Florida a couple of times before that, Urban Meyer was running an option offense. When Johnson tried to help Vad Lee in 2013 by going to a funky diamond shotgun a few times, it was still option football. MSU ran the option in the Orange Bowl. Are we to assume they are also stuck in the '50s? (And I will flat out guarantee you that when Dodd ran the belly series to little effect, some GT fans ranted about an antiquated option offense that in this case probably hadn't worked since the '30s.

Almost everybody runs the option because the offense is ageless. If people can't recognize it when they see it, and even I can, they are going to look foolish claiming it doesn't work. Which is to say GT needs to get back to work to fix its many problems. Starting with the option.

 

[Rock]

Name me one successfully team year over year that run the TO. I'll wait.

 

[Rock]

If the fans enjoy Being mediocre, that's great. Sure you will have a few good seasons here and there but not year over year.

Coaches are paid to win. Period.
If they don't they will find someone who can. If you don't believe that you are foolish.

 

[bravejason]

3rd and 4, down by 23, 11 guys basically in the box and you run a dive???

Why not check out to another play?
I would rather see an incomplete pass rather than no gain.

Pitiful coaching.

The rocket toss would probably be a good play to call in that situation, but the players can't block it correctly so CPJ doesn't call it. Four or five years ago, that play was money and CPJ called it all the time, especially at the goal line. Then, the QB follow became fashionable and that's all that's been called over the last few years. Sadly, neither of those plays are reliable today, so it's a dive up the middle because the team can't pass block either.

By the way, an incomplete pass and a no gain are pretty much the same. That said, I appreciate the desire to see a pass instead of a dive. I think CPJ would call the pass if he had some confidence that the team could pass block long enough to get the pass off. Against Clemson CPJ did call a screen pass at one point. It looked pretty good at first, and then the pass fell incomplete.

 

[Boomergump]

Name me one successfully team year over year that run the TO. I'll wait.

What are you calling the TO? The triple option play, which represents maybe 15% of our offense?

 

[Skeptic]

Name me one successfully team year over year that run the TO. I'll wait.

So now it has morphed from "running the option" to "running the triple option". If I remember the OB right, we saw little of the triple, and in fact, not all that often every game. Even Johnson has made that point. But if you insist, I would argue that Florida, OSU and Clemson, run versions of a triple option: fake HO to running back, decide to run ... or pass. I think that's three. And all three teams have done pretty well with it, I think.