A Player's Perspective on Clemson game

smokey_wasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,486
The game day O was a shocker to just about everyone. This thread is in response to a former GT SA who expressed the same dismay. I wonder how other former players feel because a big part of the culture change was getting them on board. Time to put your money where your mouth is if you want to keep those guys around the program.

I'm sure we will. But do you really expect to go from 80-90 percent run to 50-50 in the span of one offseason and 1 game against the best team in the country? You don't. You just take it as an opportunity to criticize. You were all ready to jump on the coaching staff for not playing to our strengths. You talked about it all offseason. Then, they threw you a curveball and ran the ball.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,046
I'm sure we will. But do you really expect to go from 80-90 percent run to 50-50 in the span of one offseason and 1 game against the best team in the country? You don't. You just take it as an opportunity to criticize. You were all ready to jump on the coaching staff for not playing to our strengths. You talked about it all offseason. Then, they threw you a curveball and ran the ball.
Tom Covington and by extension, his co-host Ken Swilling. Tell those guys.
 

GTRX7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,520
Location
Atlanta
...I’m not naive to believe this will all happen without winning games, but to expect the winning to just magically happen after we've combined for a 24-25 record over the last 4 seasons is not realistic...

I mean, we were also 21-16 over the last three years and 35-28 over the last five years (finishing .500 or better in the ACC 23 of the last 24 years). A heck of a lot of new coaches would love to step into that ; )
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,046
Another thing, why all the coach speak in the press about how all our qb’s can pass? All messaging in the media pointed to a new O on game day. Was it all a smoke screen?
 

smokey_wasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,486
So Zach is pissed, too? Great! I recall the O in ‘08, a full transformation from the get go.

Lol. I don't wanna get back into it. He deleted the tweet. It was a heat of the moment thing. Just basically told him to be patient and he "liked" it. I'd tell Covington to be patient, too.
 

smokey_wasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,486
Another thing, why all the coach speak in the press about how all our qb’s can pass? All messaging in the media pointed to a new O on game day. Was it all a smoke screen?

Could we see if they can pass against the likes of USF, Citadel, Temple and maybe Pitt, Duke, etc. before we assume it was a smoke screen? (and see if our OL can protect against those fronts vs Clemson's)

You are on an absolute roll today! Lol. May our gameday offense match the prowess of your troll game.
 
Last edited:

Lee

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
841
I mean, we were also 21-16 over the last three years and 35-28 over the last five years (finishing .500 or better in the ACC 23 of the last 24 years). A heck of a lot of new coaches would love to step into that ; )

It’s never as good or as bad as it seems. I’m not one saying the cupboard was completely bare. I think we have some guys that can play. I also know it will take time.

CGC is not walking into the same talent pool that CPJ did. I don’t know if it’s harder to transition into an option based offense like CPJ ran or to transition out of it. I would imagine both are difficult. I sure wish we had a dline of D. Morgan, V. Walker, M. Johnson, and D. Richard going into this transition. Wouldn’t hate having Dwyer or Bebe either. I’d love Nesbitt and M. Burnette too, but I think we’ve got some young talented safeties that may not be at his level but are legit and I think Nesbitt was more of a fit for what CPJ ran anyways. I’d love to have him and put him at safety though!
 

Lee

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
841
Not disagreeing with you entirely, but I’m not sure you should be holding up the Nike/Oregon partnership as an example of what branding can accomplish. Over the past four years, they are 18-18 in their conference, and 21-21 overall against P5 competition. That is a huge drop-off from the preceding six years, when they were collectively 50-6 (89%) in conference and 59-10 (85%) vs P5. Basically, since their appearance in the first CFP, they’ve been a non-issue in college football.

Examined in that context, their flashy (I’d actually say gaudy) ‘bling’ uniforms come off as empty hype, not substantive branding.

I agree it takes more than just branding. My point was that the hype brought attention which lead to better players going there that most likely wouldn’t have prior to the brand rebuild.

It takes a good coach to win games, but as we’ve seen, it can’t happen consistently without recruiting at a high level. If CPJ could’ve recruited well, he would still be here and we’d be winning a lot of games.

We’ve also seen from Tennessee that recruiting itself isn’t the only answer. They consistently recruit well, but consistently suck. I personally think CGC can coach and recruit. I really like Thacker, Key, and TC (don’t know much about his coaching or recruiting, but love his passion). Jury is out on Coach P and some others that I haven’t taken time to dig into.

If we can build our brand and get some higher end players to come to GT, I feel like we will have a much better chance to consistently win. Assuming we keep the coaches that can coach. Which means we meed money. Which means building our brand is even more important because it’s obvious our alumni base doesn’t like to contribute to our efforts at a high rate.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,993
I'm sure we will. But do you really expect to go from 80-90 percent run to 50-50 in the span of one offseason and 1 game against the best team in the country? You don't. You just take it as an opportunity to criticize. You were all ready to jump on the coaching staff for not playing to our strengths. You talked about it all offseason. Then, they threw you a curveball and ran the ball.
I didn't expect a 50-50 split but I also didn't expect our starting QB to run 15 QB keepers in the first half of the game nor did I expect him to have twice as many rushing attempts as pass attempts. We weren't going to win this game anyways so I'm not sure why we didn't put more effort into running the offense we eventually want to get to.
 

ncjacket79

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,237
I didn't expect a 50-50 split but I also didn't expect our starting QB to run 15 QB keepers in the first half of the game nor did I expect him to have twice as many rushing attempts as pass attempts. We weren't going to win this game anyways so I'm not sure why we didn't put more effort into running the offense we eventually want to get to.
Were they keepers or did he make that read? Plus I believe what they were trying to run gave us our best shot. You can certainly make the that once we were behind we could have tried to open it up more but without the turnovers we could have made it more interesting
 

Animal02

Banned
Messages
6,269
Location
Southeastern Michigan
I didn't expect a 50-50 split but I also didn't expect our starting QB to run 15 QB keepers in the first half of the game nor did I expect him to have twice as many rushing attempts as pass attempts. We weren't going to win this game anyways so I'm not sure why we didn't put more effort into running the offense we eventually want to get to.
It begs the question........was the team not ready to run the new offense even after spring and summer camps? Or did they know this new offense had no chance of winning...and if so, why bother with that offense?
Can the new staff , after watching the players practice through spring and summer, not determine who the best qb is to give the team a shot at a win?
Did they have so little confidence in the team that they had to resort to consecutive gimmick plays on the first and goal?
 

wvGT11

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,198
It begs the question........was the team not ready to run the new offense even after spring and summer camps? Or did they know this new offense had no chance of winning...and if so, why bother with that offense?
Can the new staff , after watching the players practice through spring and summer, not determine who the best qb is to give the team a shot at a win?
Did they have so little confidence in the team that they had to resort to consecutive gimmick plays on the first and goal?
Take a watch a Coach Ps presser yesterday. He said part of it is that they expected Clemson to think we were going to come up heavy on the throwing so he leaned on the guys that knew he could trust with the run game. He was an option guy too in the 90s.

Part of it is that we have 3 QBs, one is better at throwing than they others but hasn't had a lot of game time yet especially this big of a game. Oliver had previous experience but is more run heavy and his throwing needs work. He also said they had a game plan for all 3 QBs but again noticed Clemson hadn't prepped as much for the run game
Estaishing a new offense isn't as easy as it may see , again we got lucky with cpj on his transition.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
 

Animal02

Banned
Messages
6,269
Location
Southeastern Michigan
Take a watch a Coach Ps presser yesterday. He said part of it is that they expected Clemson to think we were going to come up heavy on the throwing so he leaned on the guys that knew he could trust with the run game. He was an option guy too in the 90s.

Part of it is that we have 3 QBs, one is better at throwing than they others but hasn't had a lot of game time yet especially this big of a game. Oliver had previous experience but is more run heavy and his throwing needs work. He also said they had a game plan for all 3 QBs but again noticed Clemson hadn't prepped as much for the run game
Estaishing a new offense isn't as easy as it may see , again we got lucky with cpj on his transition.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Except Clemson dared us to throw and stopped the run game.....so then their expectations were wrong and they could not make in in game adjustments.....

With limitations on practice time set by the NCAA, IMO, it is foolish prepping with 3 QBs. You will simply not get enough reps in with any one qb. It also leaves the O devoid of a leader, which the qb is naturally.
 

smokey_wasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,486
I didn't expect a 50-50 split but I also didn't expect our starting QB to run 15 QB keepers in the first half of the game nor did I expect him to have twice as many rushing attempts as pass attempts. We weren't going to win this game anyways so I'm not sure why we didn't put more effort into running the offense we eventually want to get to.

Game got away from us early. Having our guys drop back to get sacked a dozen times and throw a bunch of picks probably wouldn't have helped develop our passing game, nor would have it been attractive to recruits. You did see what happened when we did throw in the first half, right? You wanted more of that? If anything, it would have set us back. Let's see if we can give whoever starts some easy throws early to get them in a rhythm against USF.

I wanted to see more passing, too, but stubbornly trying to make something happen that clearly wasn't going to happen wouldn't have been smart.
 
Last edited:
Top