A GT Football Fan expectation

[Skeptic]

. ...So if we are going to have an offense that absolutely needs a defense who can hold teams to under 28 every game, then why are we running an offense that has such a negative effect on the defense? Johnson should have a raging fire under his seat. Instead he has an AD making excuses for him and a fanbase eating that up. I swear he is going to have to gregory this program before some of y'all open your eyes.

I don't quite grasp this point. Why is it negative to the defense?

 

[Wrecked]

The offense that was supposed to be a Great Equalizer for us is clearly no longer doing so. As he's not going anywhere anytime soon, I'd just like to see CPJ do something - ANYTHING - different. For example, add a shotgun formation in for the Graham kid playing QB (since that's what he ran in HS where he put up huge #s). Throw 10 more passes/game. Etc. Evolve to keep up with the UVA and Duke defenses that have noticeably started shutting us down (See Second half, Puke 2017). When we're down 21+ pts, stop running QB Option Keeper plays (See 2nd half, mutts 2017). Etc.

I don't think you will ever see anything different on offense. CPJ has proven he is not going to change (see the inability to use Vad Lee). Honestly, I don't think he can coach a passing game. Our route trees are Pop Warneresque. 37% completion percentage is embarrassing. This offense, like all offenses, will go when it has talent. CPJ proved that in his first two years. And I believe it does help us level the playing field. However, CPJ simply cannot consistently recruit the personnel needed to really make the offense go. When you add the inability to lure defensive recruits because of the system, the leveling effect of the offense is almost gone. We are entering year 11 of the CPJ era and our expectations are the same as when he took over. When Tstan did the extension and fired Roof, I said in my mind CPJ has two years. I expect 16 regular season wins combined in those years.

 

[MikeJackets1967]

I don't think you will ever see anything different on offense. CPJ has proven he is not going to change (see the inability to use Vad Lee). Honestly, I don't think he can coach a passing game. Our route trees are Pop Warneresque. 37% completion percentage is embarrassing. This offense, like all offenses, will go when it has talent. CPJ proved that in his first two years. And I believe it does help us level the playing field. However, CPJ simply cannot consistently recruit the personnel needed to really make the offense go. When you add the inability to lure defensive recruits because of the system, the leveling effect of the offense is almost gone. We are entering year 11 of the CPJ era and our expectations are the same as when he took over. When Tstan did the extension and fired Roof, I said in my mind CPJ has two years. I expect 16 regular season wins combined in those years.

CPJ is an adapt the player to the offense head coach and not an adapt the offense to the player head coach

 

[RamblinWreck92]

They need to begin sending out the media guides again so that people can look at past scores quickly before they post drivel.

Gailey's low scores
2002 - 7 against uga
2003 - 3 against Clemson
2003 - 7 against Maryland
2004 - 3 against Miami
2005 - 7 against VT
2005 - 7 against uga
2006 - 7 against Clem
2006 - 7 against UNC
2006 - 6 against WF
2007 - 3 against Clemson

By all means, let's go back to that offense. Luckily we had Calvin and Choice in '05 and '06 to help put up such gaudy numbers. We scored 7 or less in roughly a quarter of the games those two years.

O'Leary's numbers looked similar until Ralph arrived, and then dropped again when he left. I would put Ralph in a league all by himself, even ahead of CPJ.

Why is that every single time CPJ and/or his scheme is the topic, those who support it assume that those who don't desire a return to Chan Gailey? Every Single Time.

I know of literally no Tech fan that wants Gailey back. Forget the Gailey comparisons. No one wants him back.

 

[Gold1]

Why is that every single time CPJ and/or his scheme is the topic, those who support it assume that those who don't desire a return to Chan Gailey? Every Single Time.

I know of literally no Tech fan that wants Gailey back. Forget the Gailey comparisons. No one wants him back.

Some act like we can only have Gailey or CPJ as our coach. What if i told you we could actually do better ?

 

[RamblinWreck92]

CPJ is an adapt the player to the offense head coach and not an adapt the offense to the player head coach

Spot on. He tries to hammer round peg players into square holes rather than buying one of these

 

[RamblinWreck92]

Some act like we can only have Gailey or CPJ as our coach. What if i told you we could actually do better ?

Agreed. There are other offensive schemes than Gailey's and CPJ's Tech Scheme. CPJ's Hawaii scheme, for example.

 

[MikeJackets1967]

Some act like we can only have Gailey or CPJ as our coach. What if i told you we could actually do better ?

Whoever replaces Paul Johnson will probably be an Up and Coming Assistant Coach or a Up and Coming Mid-Major Head Coach.

 

[awbuzz]

Some act like we can only have Gailey or CPJ as our coach. What if i told you we could actually do better ?

Sure we can. Can also do worse.

Who do you have in mind that will come to GT and guarantee that we'll do better?

 

[Skeptic]

I don't think you will ever see anything different on offense. CPJ has proven he is not going to change (see the inability to use Vad Lee). Honestly, I don't think he can coach a passing game. Our route trees are Pop Warneresque. 37% completion percentage is embarrassing. ....

I know that Lee had a good career at James Madison, and I was pleased for him. He was the exception to transfer students, many of whom turn out to be not terribly good football players anywhere. That scouting business is a powder keg waiting to go off. But: I don't think Vad Lee could have been successful at any P5 program. Johnson kept his word and installed a shotgun for him. He was not particularly good in it. (It remains one of my why-did-we-do-this memories.) He found his level and played well at it. But about those completion percentages, and I am not going to defend 37%. I'll bet that privately Johnson won't. But the deeper you throw the fewer you will complete. It is just much harder, and when you see a stat that a QB completes say 65% of his passes, I promise you he feasted on dump and run stuff, 10-12 yard routes, and was under 50% when the range began to exceed 25 or 30 yards. Johnson's route trees are simple as they are out of the run-and-shoot, and his purpose is to get huge chunks of yardage downfield with one-on-one coverage. He has said that if he needs four or five yards -- I misremember his exact quote -- he can run for that so why pass? Now, if Marshall can run the option and get his completion stats to 45-47%, we should be in business. If he can't he just becomes another Johnson QB who couldn't throw downfield.

 

[lv20gt]

By all means, let's go back to that offense. Luckily we had Calvin and Choice in '05 and '06 to help put up such gaudy numbers. We scored 7 or less in roughly a quarter of the games those two years.

Fortunately the only two options aren't Paul Johnson and Chan Gailey. Gailey was fired and deservedly so. Gailey also had a better defense. Offense isn't the only thing that matters.

I don't quite grasp this point. Why is it negative to the defense?

Because we don't do things even close to what a lot of other teams do. The argument always comes back to the idea of practice squads. The problem is who do we recruit that can even pretend to be a pro style QB? Who do we recruit that comes close to replicating pass heavy offensive lines? Tight ends? And who is actually coaching them to play like up? We can barely coach our own OL and we expect a practice squad to get us ready to get through? It's been 10 years and 3 DCs. It's time to get the heads out of the sand. The offense, and having a HC who is his own OC hurts the defense. That would be fine if the offense was good enough to cover it, but as I showed. It's not. Sorry, but we're 10 years in. We've seen what we will have with Johnson's defenses. A new DC is just pushing food around the plate.

Sure we can. Can also do worse.

And we could have done worse after Gailey. Didn't stop that decision. We also could have done worse after Hewitt. And we did do worse. Didn't stop that decision. If you aren't moving forward, you're moving backwards, and we've not been going forward under Johnson for a long time now.

 

[Skeptic]

Some act like we can only have Gailey or CPJ as our coach. What if i told you we could actually do better ?

I would say we have a good one, and could do a lot worse. And have. But, coaching aside: A couple of posters have noted an opposition-recruiting technique of dropping a physics or calculus textbook in the lap of a recruit GT is after. To talk about winning more games, start there.

 

[tech_wreck47]

In the last 6 years, Paul Johnson is 25-23 in conference.
In Gailey's 6 years here, Chan Gailey was 28-20 in conference.

Ignore those facts. In fact, Johnson has a worse conference winning % than Gailey overall. Hiring Johnson was a great move in 2008. Unfortunately the ACC adapted, evolved, and improved. Johnson refuses to do so. When Johnson was hired we heard opposing fans and pundits make claims about how the offense would hurt the defense, and we waved it off. But 10 years in and it looks like they were spot on. Except now we have desperate fans clinging to any scrap of hope that it isn't true. We have fans blaming weather, resources, and acting like we can't compete with factories on offense despite that being a huge argument for . But surely, now that we have the resources, our 4th DC is the answer. Of course went and opened up the checkbook, and attracted a high profile DC that has experience against ACC competition. But, that didn't happen. We got Woody at the same price we got Roof, and he has no experience in either the ACC or even the P5.

We have a program completely defined by our offense yet we have an offense that can't win shootouts. We are 1-13 in the last 3 years in games where the other team scores more than 28 and that one game the opposing team only scored over 28 because of turnovers by our offense. Even going back further, the past 6 years we are 4-25 in such games. To put that in perspective in 2009 alone we were 4-2 in such games. In the same time period, 6 years, we've lost 10 games in which the opposing team has scored less than 28. So to recap, we have a a program entirely built around our offensive system, but that system can no longer be relied on to win shootouts, and even when it's not a shootout doesn't guarantee a victory anyways. So if we are going to have an offense that absolutely needs a defense who can hold teams to under 28 every game, then why are we running an offense that has such a negative effect on the defense? Johnson should have a raging fire under his seat. Instead he has an AD making excuses for him and a fanbase eating that up. I swear he is going to have to gregory this program before some of y'all open your eyes.

Your comment is just a little contradicting. You compare Gailey and CPJ but then go on to say the ACC has evolved and is better. That right there shows you why Gailey could succeed better is that facet. You made a comment and then proved why that comment is so. To say CPJ has not tried to evolve would be something you need to show proof of, otherwise that comment holds no weight at all. Fact of the matter is it boils down to recruiting, not evolving the offense, if it was the offense then you wouldnt have 2014 type of years and be in the top 25 in offense efficiency 7 of 10 years with 2 top 3. Another poster just explained how T Stan came out and said CPJ has not been given help, if you don’t believe that then fine, but show proof if you are going to say it’s just talk, otherwise that comment holds no weight as well. It’s easy for us fans to say this works or this doesn’t but unless we are involved we really don’t know anything accept what we hear from the program directly. So show me proff of CPJ not trying to evolve? Let me put it into perspective, Russell, locker room from early 2000’s, bottom half of power 5 schools in funding, 3-5 extra staff memebers compared to UGA’s 35 plus. Please explain how to evolve in recruiting when you have these issue? What school would you pick if you weren’t a GT fan? I get it, I want GT to be better and more consistent, I understand the D has not performed well under CPJ and this for me is the last chance unless we go out and hire the top guy in the country (doubt that will ever happen). I want all the same things you want, but I’m not going to ignore the other factors that get us to the numbers your provided. Go look at almost all non factories and show me how many have had better success that GT the last 10 years under CPJ. You are looking at GT and the numbers as if it’s just GT and not other schools, when in reality it’s most non factories and even some factories that have the same issue. That right there should show you it’s not as simple as you might think. GT has overachieved imo for what our recruiting is and I can show you many teams with “bigger” names that have underachieved. I think we are also more on the same page than you think, we both want the same thing. I just think it’s built through better recruiting which takes resources we are just now getting. JMO.

 

[takethepoints]

you are tilting against some serious windmills! I think it's obvious from the past few years that any advantage this scheme gave us in 2008-09 is long gone. Back then, the scheme could still score 20+ on Clemson but no longer. Hell, even in mighty 2014 (when we still couldn't beat Puke), it took 2 pick-6s to beat QB-less Clemson. I know, I know - "NFL talent OMG!!" but those who tout CPJ as an offensive genius claim he gives us the best chance to occasionally hang with the big boys when it's clear that that's no longer the case.

Eventually, they'll shrug their shoulders and tell you "It Is What It Is", an attitude of resignation that didn't exist on the Flats prior to 2008.

Hmmmmmm. Let's look at Tech v. Ugag recently.

2014: 30 24


2015: 7 13


2016: 28 27


2017: 7 38

(Mods: Why won't the site let us format a table correctly?)

Sooooooooo … 2 and 2 over the last four years and only one lopsided game - against a team that played for the MNC - in the bunch. Shoot, we even came close to winning in 2015 during the most disastrous year for injuries in the last 50 years. I might also add that we are also 2 and 2 against VT during the same period.

Next question: what does anyone here think that Gailey could have done so well? (Crickets chirping … fading train whistle in the twilight)

Now, it is true that we had some outrageous bad luck against da U for the last two years and that Clemson has become a tougher out (for everybody, I might add). But I don't see any reason for gloom and doom here. We're doing ok against our biggest rivals and, except for Clemson and - last year - Ugag I haven't seen much in the talent differences on the field. Once, that is, we take the O into account and remember that it allows us to parlay players few other P5 programs are after into prime players for our scheme.

 

[RamblinWreck92]

I know that Lee had a good career at James Madison, and I was pleased for him. He was the exception to transfer students, many of whom turn out to be not terribly good football players anywhere. That scouting business is a powder keg waiting to go off. But: I don't think Vad Lee could have been successful at any P5 program. Johnson kept his word and installed a shotgun for him. He was not particularly good in it. (It remains one of my why-did-we-do-this memories.) He found his level and played well at it. But about those completion percentages, and I am not going to defend 37%. I'll bet that privately Johnson won't. But the deeper you throw the fewer you will complete. It is just much harder, and when you see a stat that a QB completes say 65% of his passes, I promise you he feasted on dump and run stuff, 10-12 yard routes, and was under 50% when the range began to exceed 25 or 30 yards. Johnson's route trees are simple as they are out of the run-and-shoot, and his purpose is to get huge chunks of yardage downfield with one-on-one coverage. He has said that if he needs four or five yards -- I misremember his exact quote -- he can run for that so why pass? Now, if Marshall can run the option and get his completion stats to 45-47%, we should be in business. If he can't he just becomes another Johnson QB who couldn't throw downfield.

But we've clearly seen that this is bad logic - that relying on bomb patterns just isn't sustainable. You need both a good QB and a good WR. All the more reason to diversify the offense a bit.

Our percentage at getting 4-5 yards running it isn't anything amazing nor is it as guaranteed as CPJ claims (2017 OT vs UT leaps to mind).

Refusing to adjust to defenses that are adjusting to us (Puke, Cadavers) isn't offensive genius - it's just stubborn. CPJ seems determined to make his 2008 playbook work today - damn the W/L record.

 

[RamblinWreck92]

I would say we have a good one, and could do a lot worse. And have. But, coaching aside: A couple of posters have noted an opposition-recruiting technique of dropping a physics or calculus textbook in the lap of a recruit GT is after. To talk about winning more games, start there.

Agreed and I am fully in favor of making things easier for us to get recruits in. My diploma won't be hurt by this - nor will yours. No Stanford grad has been hurt by their program's scholastic recruiting options.

 

[MWBATL]

This thread started with a question about our long term expectations. Here are mine:

1. I expect that under whatever coach we have, GT will never be able to recruit with the "big boys" (aka the football factories) until and unless Administration decides to make the changes necessary to compete on a level playing field.
2. I do not expect Administration to ever change their attitude
3. Ergo, the best we are likely to see is occasional flashes of brilliance competing with the power teams, but if we can even average 0.500 record against the better teams on our schedule, I'll be surprised.
4. All of that will lead to 7 wins on average (4 gimmes and 3-5 against the good teams). Hard to predict the peaks and valleys but I will be shocked if we ever make it to a national championship game the way the game is set up these days.
5. I think this approach will continue to feed the slow agonizing death of interest in GT football. We are already are at a huge disadvantage because the school itself is so much smaller than most we play against, leaving us with far fewer alumni to populate our stadium. The only way to really compete therefore is to try to develop a huge sidewalk fan base. For that to happen, see #1 above. No amount of uniform changes or innovative marketing can put lipstick on a pig.
6. Having said all of that, I will continue to respect those athletes who choose the road less traveled and come to play for GT. Most of them recognize the value of education to go along with their athletic dreams. More power to them. I hope I never complain about a GT athlete or their performance ever. (Coaches are fair game, however).

 

[RamblinWreck92]

Hmmmmmm. Let's look at Tech v. Ugag recently.

2014: 30 24


2015: 7 13


2016: 28 27


2017: 7 38

(Mods: Why won't the site let us format a table correctly?)

Sooooooooo … 2 and 2 over the last four years and only one lopsided game - against a team that played for the MNC - in the bunch. Shoot, we even came close to winning in 2015 during the most disastrous year for injuries in the last 50 years. I might also add that we are also 2 and 2 against VT during the same period.

Next question: what does anyone here think that Gailey could have done so well? (Crickets chirping … fading train whistle in the twilight)

Now, it is true that we had some outrageous bad luck against da U for the last two years and that Clemson has become a tougher out (for everybody, I might add). But I don't see any reason for gloom and doom here. We're doing ok against our biggest rivals and, except for Clemson and - last year - Ugag I haven't seen much in the talent differences on the field. Once, that is, we take the O into account and remember that it allows us to parlay players few other P5 programs are after into prime players for our scheme.

The "Team that played for the MNC" boat-raced us at home 38-7. While 2014 was awesome, it took a disastrously-stupid squib-kick decision by CMR to pull that one out. 2016 was great too - thanks to passing the ball!

Meanwhile, we're 1-3 vs Puke over this same period and all 3 losses (to PUKE) involved being down at least 3 TDs in each game. Crickets chirping on that one.

Again - NO ONE HERE THINKS GAILEY COULD HAVE DONE SO WELL. I ask again why those in favor of the status quo keep holding CPJ to the low standard of "Well, he's better than Gailey!!" when no one else wants Gailey back. Again, "Crickets Chirping" will be my response.

And sorry but the argument that "Our scheme allows us to go after small-college players that bigtime programs don't want! Hell yes!!" is a terrible one. That we beat out GA Southern and other non-P5 programs for players isn't something I'm hanging my hat on. It's embarrassing, actually.

 

[RonJohn]

This thread started with a question about our long term expectations. Here are mine:

1. I expect that under whatever coach we have, GT will never be able to recruit with the "big boys" (aka the football factories) until and unless Administration decides to make the changes necessary to compete on a level playing field.
2. I do not expect Administration to ever change their attitude.

In administration are you referring to the school administration or the athletic association administration? If you are referring to the school, what specific actions do you believe they should take? I have seen complaints about the school administration constantly, but I have only seen one specific item that is actually in their power listed as something they should do. I am just interested to know what you believe they could/should do.

 

[iceeater1969]

In administration are you referring to the school administration or the athletic association administration? If you are referring to the school, what specific actions do you believe they should take? I have seen complaints about the school administration constantly, but I have only seen one specific item that is actually in their power listed as something they should do. I am just interested to know what you believe they could/should do.

What is the item u have seen? Please comment on your opinion of its effect?