A question for ex players or serious fans

[GTFLETCH]

We really didn't run the triple option very much this year.
This tells me that Paul Johnson knew that Marshall could not do it.
I think the QB position is wide open in the spring. We have to have someone that can make the reads. We are playing with half of a playbook until that gets fixed.

If what you say is true then the QB to watch out for in the spring will be Tobias Oliver! He can make the reads as he ran the Veer option in High School!

Why Georgia Tech will love Tobias Oliver
Feb 01, 2017
Northside offensive coordinator Chad Alligood can only rave about Tobias Oliver the player, the quarterback and kid.

Link
http://www.macon.com/sports/high-school/article130157049.html

 

[Sebastian GT]

please do not respond if you have ever used the phrase "accept mediocrity" in a serious fashion and/or are a teenager. The question, and it's sincere one, when you evaluate our play, do you see signs that this team is well-coached? Or is it the opposite? I am extremely curious on this. I can spot the obvious mistakes - turnovers, penalties, etc. and I imagine most of us who watch/post regularly can do the same. If you say, yes or no, can you elaborate? (and I don't mean by pointing to the scoreboard. There was a glaring and obvious talent gap between the two that accounts for some of that.) Was our plan and schemes good? Did we adjust? Where there things available to us that we did not take advantage of? Or was it "iiwii" due to Jimmy and Joe's?

Again, if you are an idiot, please do not respond. I don't need one more in this thread.I am looking for the ex-GT FB players (or others who have played at this level), guys who have coached at above middle school levels, or even a guy like longestday who just enjoys breaking down the film and studying the game at a deeper level than most. I appreciate any sincere replies.

What I see is a defense that is poorly coached from both a fundamental/technique standpoint and strategic standpoint. We are a very poor tackling team. There are two parts to tackling. One is technique. The other part is desire. We have very little of either. Our coaching is not getting the most out of our players. Strategically it has been beaten to death on this board but in a nutshell playing way off on the outside in short yardage or two minute situations is a killer. Very few stunts. Our blitzes are poorly disguised. Our coverages are poorly disguised. Our slot corners play too far off with poor leverage usually to the inside so we give up easy slants. We give up easy throws just due to alignment. It's frustrating to watch. It's seems at times we have no concept of down and distance. When we've had success on defense it's usually when we've gotten aggressive with press coverage. Starting the game in nickel yesterday was just stupid. I could go on and on. The lack of pass rush is a killer. #42 is not a defensive end. We don't always play the best players on defense and we definitely don't substitute enough to keep people fresh. This was never more evident than the Ugag game a few years ago when we went up 20-0 and blew it primarily because the defense flat ran out of gas. Roof doesn't trust his depth at all and never has.

Offensively I see a coach who obviously knows the option and has mastered the calling of the handful of base plays we run. What kills me is Johnson is too stubborn to expand on the base concepts. This shows up most in the passing game. No short passing game. We run more chuck and duck than anything. 3rd and long and we never put our QB in the shotgun to give him a better chance to survey the field. Our QB's have typically been short and can't see over the line so why not try something different? Hell half the time we're dropping back our right handed QB facing left when his read is to the right so he turns to throw right and if his one read is not there immediately we're toast. As a former QB this is tough to do. We're not giving our QB's a fair chance to succeed in the passing game. Pass blocking over the years has been atrocious. Wide splits and 3 point stances in obvious passing downs put our lineman at a huge disadvantage. We seem to have done some 2 point stances this year on 3rd and forever and I will say at times Marshall had decent time to throw but should it take 9 years to figure this stuff out?

We could totally screw a defense if for example on 1st down we lined up in our base formation and then shifted into a 4 wide shotgun with the A-backs in the slot and the B back next to the QB. Every team we play loads the box. If they choose to stay in their base defense we force them to play linebackers and safeties covering slot receivers. I like our chances with Qua Searcy matched up on a linebacker. If we just had the threat of walking out into this formation on any given down it could change the way some teams play us. At the very least it probably forces the other team to call timeout. Paul did this years ago against UGA 1 time. Richt burned a timeout. We never did it again. That is just one example of being more creative on offense.

Compare Johnson to Ralph Friedgen. Ralph would steal any good idea and implement it in our offense. We ran so many different formations it would make your head spin. We even ran some triple option similar to what we do now because Ralph stole it from Johnson after 1996 when Navy came here and ran up and down the field on us. Go re-watch the '99 Uga game and you'll be shocked at what you see our offense doing. Ralph would do anything to win. Paul only cares to do it his way to win and if it doesn't work oh well. Maybe he's not confident enough in his abilities as a coach to venture outside his comfort zone. Who knows? Statistically big picture we've had overall success on offense but let's face it. When we play the better teams on our schedule now that they've seen what we do year after year we struggle on offense. Look at our record against the big 4. Clemson, UGA, Miami, and V-Tech. We've struggled over the years although we seem to have V Tech's number right now with their transition away from Beamer.

In summary I don't dislike Johnson. I kinda like his swagger and the fact he somewhat relishes being the underdog. Tech is seemingly a perpetual underdog so it's a good fit. However when we do decide to make a change I would like to see us get away from strict triple option and transition to more of an offense like what Oregon has had success with. I think the athletes we have on hand could easily transition to that type of offense and a QB like Lucas Johnson who is tall and athletic with a great arm could flourish in an offense like that. Opening things up will help us in recruiting as well from just a pure football perspective. Kids like a more balanced offense. I'm not getting into the debate on the academics and all the excuses there. If you don't like the academic restrictions then do something about it. The Institute needs to get serious about big time football but regardless we've won big in the past and can do it again and the idea that the only way we can compete is to run the triple option is wrong. It's a bull**** excuse and defeatist. Tech people should be better than that.

 

[GTFLETCH]

We are a very poor tackling team.
Pass blocking over the years has been atrocious. Wide splits and 3 point stances in obvious passing downs put our lineman at a huge disadvantage. We seem to have done some 2 point stances this year on 3rd and forever and I will say at times Marshall had decent time to throw but should it take 9 years to figure this stuff out?

Agree 100%

 

[4shotB]

What I see is a defense that is poorly coached from both a fundamental/technique standpoint and strategic standpoint. We are a very poor tackling team.

one of the most well thought out posts ever on this topic. Thank you for taking the time to write that. The kind of insight I was hoping for when I started this thread.

 

[Sideways]

please do not respond if you have ever used the phrase "accept mediocrity" in a serious fashion and/or are a teenager. The question, and it's sincere one, when you evaluate our play, do you see signs that this team is well-coached? Or is it the opposite? I am extremely curious on this. I can spot the obvious mistakes - turnovers, penalties, etc. and I imagine most of us who watch/post regularly can do the same. If you say, yes or no, can you elaborate? (and I don't mean by pointing to the scoreboard. There was a glaring and obvious talent gap between the two that accounts for some of that.) Was our plan and schemes good? Did we adjust? Where there things available to us that we did not take advantage of? Or was it "iiwii" due to Jimmy and Joe's?

Again, if you are an idiot, please do not respond. I don't need one more in this thread.I am looking for the ex-GT FB players (or others who have played at this level), guys who have coached at above middle school levels, or even a guy like longestday who just enjoys breaking down the film and studying the game at a deeper level than most. I appreciate any sincere replies.

I don't pretend to be an expert, but to me it all goes back to recruiting. We cannot recruit consistently enough to be successful in a power conference. We have a serious talent deficiency at wide receiver, defensive line, linebacker and corners. What we saw Saturday is a harbinger of what is to come if changes are not made in recruiting both in curriculum and resources devoted to recruiting. IMHO this completely overrides the coaching issue.

 

[Sideways]

Well I think when Derrick Mills was dismissed everyone predicted like 4 or 5 wins....

Not sure if the lack of leadership is due to D. MILLS being dismissed or what...

I also wonder if the Coaching staff lost the locker room this year as it seemed as the year went on, Tech's play and effort were worse, I mean the Duke and UGA games were poor player efforts towards the end of the season, it was as if they did not care...horrible

You are correct, they did not care much one way or the other because they know or believe there will be no consequences for their attitude or behavior. Some people need to be encouraged, like right now, to consider other shall we say future opportunities in collegiate athletics at the institution of their choice. I know that Coach Saban at Alabama would not tolerate this nonsense for a moment.

 

[ATL1]

What I see is a defense that is poorly coached from both a fundamental/technique standpoint and strategic standpoint. We are a very poor tackling team. There are two parts to tackling. One is technique. The other part is desire. We have very little of either. Our coaching is not getting the most out of our players. Strategically it has been beaten to death on this board but in a nutshell playing way off on the outside in short yardage or two minute situations is a killer. Very few stunts. Our blitzes are poorly disguised. Our coverages are poorly disguised. Our slot corners play too far off with poor leverage usually to the inside so we give up easy slants. We give up easy throws just due to alignment. It's frustrating to watch. It's seems at times we have no concept of down and distance. When we've had success on defense it's usually when we've gotten aggressive with press coverage. Starting the game in nickel yesterday was just stupid. I could go on and on. The lack of pass rush is a killer. #42 is not a defensive end. We don't always play the best players on defense and we definitely don't substitute enough to keep people fresh. This was never more evident than the Ugag game a few years ago when we went up 20-0 and blew it primarily because the defense flat ran out of gas. Roof doesn't trust his depth at all and never has.

Offensively I see a coach who obviously knows the option and has mastered the calling of the handful of base plays we run. What kills me is Johnson is too stubborn to expand on the base concepts. This shows up most in the passing game. No short passing game. We run more chuck and duck than anything. 3rd and long and we never put our QB in the shotgun to give him a better chance to survey the field. Our QB's have typically been short and can't see over the line so why not try something different? Hell half the time we're dropping back our right handed QB facing left when his read is to the right so he turns to throw right and if his one read is not there immediately we're toast. As a former QB this is tough to do. We're not giving our QB's a fair chance to succeed in the passing game. Pass blocking over the years has been atrocious. Wide splits and 3 point stances in obvious passing downs put our lineman at a huge disadvantage. We seem to have done some 2 point stances this year on 3rd and forever and I will say at times Marshall had decent time to throw but should it take 9 years to figure this stuff out?

We could totally screw a defense if for example on 1st down we lined up in our base formation and then shifted into a 4 wide shotgun with the A-backs in the slot and the B back next to the QB. Every team we play loads the box. If they choose to stay in their base defense we force them to play linebackers and safeties covering slot receivers. I like our chances with Qua Searcy matched up on a linebacker. If we just had the threat of walking out into this formation on any given down it could change the way some teams play us. At the very least it probably forces the other team to call timeout. Paul did this years ago against UGA 1 time. Richt burned a timeout. We never did it again. That is just one example of being more creative on offense.

Compare Johnson to Ralph Friedgen. Ralph would steal any good idea and implement it in our offense. We ran so many different formations it would make your head spin. We even ran some triple option similar to what we do now because Ralph stole it from Johnson after 1996 when Navy came here and ran up and down the field on us. Go re-watch the '99 Uga game and you'll be shocked at what you see our offense doing. Ralph would do anything to win. Paul only cares to do it his way to win and if it doesn't work oh well. Maybe he's not confident enough in his abilities as a coach to venture outside his comfort zone. Who knows? Statistically big picture we've had overall success on offense but let's face it. When we play the better teams on our schedule now that they've seen what we do year after year we struggle on offense. Look at our record against the big 4. Clemson, UGA, Miami, and V-Tech. We've struggled over the years although we seem to have V Tech's number right now with their transition away from Beamer.

In summary I don't dislike Johnson. I kinda like his swagger and the fact he somewhat relishes being the underdog. Tech is seemingly a perpetual underdog so it's a good fit. However when we do decide to make a change I would like to see us get away from strict triple option and transition to more of an offense like what Oregon has had success with. I think the athletes we have on hand could easily transition to that type of offense and a QB like Lucas Johnson who is tall and athletic with a great arm could flourish in an offense like that. Opening things up will help us in recruiting as well from just a pure football perspective. Kids like a more balanced offense. I'm not getting into the debate on the academics and all the excuses there. If you don't like the academic restrictions then do something about it. The Institute needs to get serious about big time football but regardless we've won big in the past and can do it again and the idea that the only way we can compete is to run the triple option is wrong. It's a bull**** excuse and defeatist. Tech people should be better than that.

Pretty much what I've consistently said for about five years now.

 

[takethepoints]

I have a few things to say about this.

In terms of our QB play, 2017 = 2008 without Dwyer. I gave up counting the number of times Nesbitt missed reads and threw bad passes that year. Having Dwyer around made everybody look good. I was confirmed in this by the Birddog, the chief Navy blogger of those days. He broke down several of our games and said more then once. "If this was Kaipo, it's a touchdown." TM showed the same traits as Nesbitt did his first year: a reluctance to make the pitch in time, loads of missed reads, and poor passing mechanics. Did this matter, you ask? Not much. Dwyer was there and ran us to victory more then once. If Mills was still on the team, I'm betting he would have done the same. Benson has performed better then anyone had a right to expect this year, but Mills was what we needed in the second half against Miami and UVA. I do think that TM will have competition at QB next spring and, while he has the inside track, he should remember what happened to Jordan and be on his toes.

I might add that the AB blocking in '08 wasn't all that hot either, except when Lucas Cox led the play. Perhaps Pnchez-Mason can provide that next year. Cottrell is pretty good out there, but we need a Cox or Allen to make it work at top level.

For the D: I read this thread and my first reaction was, "Make up your mind!" When we ran more complex schemes, everybody here complained about it because it "… makes it hard for the players to react and play football!" Now, Roof has simplified everything and we complain about how "pure vanilla" the D schemes are. As I said in another thread, I think our main problem is in our DL. This goes back to losing four DLs to transfer before 2014. We were ok that year, but those guys would be redshirt seniors this year. (True, we are better off without at least one, but I digress.) When we had Gotsis things were better; we have to hope that another player of that caliber is in the works. As his example shows, a lot of DL recruiting is sheer bum luck.

On coaching in general: I agree that the team got disheartened this year, probably by our two early one-point losses. That was ok for awhile, but you could tell that if things went badly in a game we thought we should win (Duke, iow) or we looked overmatched (Ugag) we stopped playing with the necessary level of intensity. Some here have blamed the coaches for this and think they should have been able to counteract the feeling. I've played on a team like that and I can tell you that my coaches knew what was going on, tried to stop it, and it didn't do one lick of good.

Finally, I don't think the talent gap is as great as people make out. The rankings for recruiting classes are mostly bushwah beyond the top 10 - 15, imho. We have the athletes to make the system work, but, remember, this was a very young team, especially on offense, and we lost several prime athletes to injury or dismissal before the season started. That didn't help.

 

[GTFLETCH]

I have a few things to say about this.

In terms of our QB play, 2017 = 2008 without Dwyer. I gave up counting the number of times Nesbitt missed reads and threw bad passes that year. Having Dwyer around made everybody look good. I was confirmed in this by the Birddog, the chief Navy blogger of those days. He broke down several of our games and said more then once. "If this was Kaipo, it's a touchdown." TM showed the same traits as Nesbitt did his first year: a reluctance to make the pitch in time, loads of missed reads, and poor passing mechanics. Did this matter, you ask? Not much. Dwyer was there and ran us to victory more then once. If Mills was still on the team, I'm betting he would have done the same. Benson has performed better then anyone had a right to expect this year, but Mills was what we needed in the second half against Miami and UVA. I do think that TM will have competition at QB next spring and, while he has the inside track, he should remember what happened to Jordan and be on his toes.

I might add that the AB blocking in '08 wasn't all that hot either, except when Lucas Cox led the play. Perhaps Pnchez-Mason can provide that next year. Cottrell is pretty good out there, but we need a Cox or Allen to make it work at top level.

For the D: I read this thread and my first reaction was, "Make up your mind!" When we ran more complex schemes, everybody here complained about it because it "… makes it hard for the players to react and play football!" Now, Roof has simplified everything and we complain about how "pure vanilla" the D schemes are. As I said in another thread, I think our main problem is in our DL. This goes back to losing four DLs to transfer before 2014. We were ok that year, but those guys would be redshirt seniors this year. (True, we are better off without at least one, but I digress.) When we had Gotsis things were better; we have to hope that another player of that caliber is in the works. As his example shows, a lot of DL recruiting is sheer bum luck.

On coaching in general: I agree that the team got disheartened this year, probably by our two early one-point losses. That was ok for awhile, but you could tell that if things went badly in a game we thought we should win (Duke, iow) or we looked overmatched (Ugag) we stopped playing with the necessary level of intensity. Some here have blamed the coaches for this and think they should have been able to counteract the feeling. I've played on a team like that and I can tell you that my coaches knew what was going on, tried to stop it, and it didn't do one lick of good.

Finally, I don't think the talent gap is as great as people make out. The rankings for recruiting classes are mostly bushwah beyond the top 10 - 15, imho. We have the athletes to make the system work, but, remember, this was a very young team, especially on offense, and we lost several prime athletes to injury or dismissal before the season started. That didn't help.

I do agree with your point on the DL transfers from 2014, and with your point on D.Mills. I think Mills would have carried us to a few victories. (TENN/MIAMI/UVA)

 

[GTFLETCH]

We have a serious talent deficiency at wide receiver, defensive line, linebacker and corners.

I will disagree with your point on "serious talent" at linebacker, corners and Wide Reciever.

I think what you are trying to say is that the teams performance in the Duke and UGA game was so horrible on effort and execution that we should possibly benched our starting Corners, DL, and LB and WR (BS) for younger players even if it meant burning redshirts...

How about putting Jarrett Cole, Tre Swilling out there if the Secondary was struggling. How about Bruce Swilling at Linebacker and how about Steve Dolphus and Jalen Camp at WR?

I think the answer is never that easy. So we had a ton of kids transfer in 2014 who would have been Red Shirt Seniors and true seniors this year, we also had a ton of transfers last year.

Along with the team not giving 100% effort in games this season (or lack of mental toughness) there were issues.

The biggest issue not being discussed is the Marcus Marshall transfer ( who seemed to be a High character kid who was offfended that D.Mills took his starting spot and transfered)

The question I have is, were Dedrick Mills flaws (character/behavior/academic) known by the coaches, but overlooked and that is why MM and family left? Then the coaches were snake biten in the arse only when D.Mills issues became to much to overcome and we not only lost leadership in the Marcus Marshall transfer they lost the team??

I am still dumbfounded by this team and the lack of leadership and effort...even in 2015 the kids fought to the end, the Last two games this year, I am not sure what happened. Whatever the cause of the cancer, it has to Go!

 

[a5ehren]

Finally, I don't think the talent gap is as great as people make out. The rankings for recruiting classes are mostly bushwah beyond the top 10 - 15, imho. We have the athletes to make the system work, but, remember, this was a very young team, especially on offense, and we lost several prime athletes to injury or dismissal before the season started. That didn't help.

People here like to say this, but there have been several studies over the last decade that show that recruiting rankings are a reasonably good predictor of success on both the individual talent and team results levels.

As of our Orange Bowl year, Wisconsin (top 30 classes that play like top 15) and GT (top 50 classes that play in the mid-30s) were the only P5 schools that really outperformed their rankings on a consistent basis. This year (and 2015) we played more in line with/worse than our rankings, which is a concern. I'd like to see a lot more investment in recruiting resources to try to get us consistently in the 25-30 range.

 

[travgt01]

People here like to say this, but there have been several studies over the last decade that show that recruiting rankings are a reasonably good predictor of success on both the individual talent and team results levels.

As of our Orange Bowl year, Wisconsin (top 30 classes that play like top 15) and GT (top 50 classes that play in the mid-30s) were the only P5 schools that really outperformed their rankings on a consistent basis. This year (and 2015) we played more in line with/worse than our rankings, which is a concern. I'd like to see a lot more investment in recruiting resources to try to get us consistently in the 25-30 range.

We'd be fantastic if we were consistently in the top 30 with this O. 8-4 would be our floor. No more of the duke,uva,kansas,mtsu L's. Record vs clem,um,uga,vt would improve dramatically.

 

[1BearJACKET]

No I'm not aware. Being fit is great, but being able to move 300# bodies requires some serious strength training. Bottom line, if our guys are at their peak (best) at the 280# range, we need to recruit different kids. I know there's not many of them walking around that can play at this level. We need to get 1 or 2 every couple of years.

Defensively, how was Tenuta so successful here. Did Gailey make an effort to recruit Defensive guys? Was it just his scheme? I know he liked to blitz and play man coverage a lot. Before anyone says how great he was, I was at the Boston College game when Matt Ryan picked us a part.

You mean future NFL MVP Matt Ryan. He has picked apart better teams than ours. That is no consolation I know. BC's OL got away with a lot of holding that night too.

 

[takethepoints]

People here like to say this, but there have been several studies over the last decade that show that recruiting rankings are a reasonably good predictor of success on both the individual talent and team results levels.

And, if I thought that recruiting was the only reason winning programs win, I'd agree with those studies. But I don't, except for the top 10 - 15 classes.

I don't doubt that a successful recruiting effort like Clemson has put on over the last 10 years has had positive results in terms of wins. There really is a difference between a class made up almost entirely of 4 and 5 star players and one like everyone else usually gets. But what about the difference between overall rankings for schools that recruit like we do? There I have my doubts. This comes from two sources. First, the services don't put a herculean effort into ranking players below the top ranks. Usually, the way a player is ranked can depend as much on who has made offers then on any serious evaluation. An associated problem is the "grading" system used. We have three recruits this year that are right at the cusp of being four star players. Is there any real difference between a player 247 rates at .8808 and another at .9203? My guess is there may be, but these made up scores sure don't pinpoint it, even in the aggregate. The second is the way that a small class can influence rankings; the services simply add up the stars and rank accordingly. One reason Bammer is usually at the top of the list is that they fill up every year by chasing off players who don't measure up. This is so simpleminded that I find it unbelievable. I think these concerns are bourn out by the retrospective rankings done occasionally. Here the success of the players and their teams four years up the road are taken into account and compared to the original overall rankings. Tech always gets a substantial jump in its ranking when this is done.

But, of course, I'd like to see us recruit better in the sense that we can find better athletes who can stick at Tech and are suited to our program needs. More cash thrown at that problem right away, say I. I'm not sure that would get us into the "top 30's", but we should make the effort.

 

[Sideways]

People here like to say this, but there have been several studies over the last decade that show that recruiting rankings are a reasonably good predictor of success on both the individual talent and team results levels.

As of our Orange Bowl year, Wisconsin (top 30 classes that play like top 15) and GT (top 50 classes that play in the mid-30s) were the only P5 schools that really outperformed their rankings on a consistent basis. This year (and 2015) we played more in line with/worse than our rankings, which is a concern. I'd like to see a lot more investment in recruiting resources to try to get us consistently in the 25-30 range.

The talent gap is larger at some positions i.e. defensive line less so at others such as B back but it exists and there is a significant talent gap across the board between us and our major rivals: UGA, Miami, Virginia Tech, and Clemson not so much with the rest of the ACC. IMHO

 

[GTFLETCH]

The talent gap is larger at some positions i.e. defensive line less so at others such as B back but it exists and there is a significant talent gap across the board between us and our major rivals: UGA, Miami, Virginia Tech, and Clemson not so much with the rest of the ACC. IMHO

Agree

 

[first&ten]

What I see is a defense that is poorly coached from both a fundamental/technique standpoint and strategic standpoint. We are a very poor tackling team. There are two parts to tackling. One is technique. The other part is desire. We have very little of either. Our coaching is not getting the most out of our players. Strategically it has been beaten to death on this board but in a nutshell playing way off on the outside in short yardage or two minute situations is a killer. Very few stunts. Our blitzes are poorly disguised. Our coverages are poorly disguised. Our slot corners play too far off with poor leverage usually to the inside so we give up easy slants. We give up easy throws just due to alignment. It's frustrating to watch. It's seems at times we have no concept of down and distance. When we've had success on defense it's usually when we've gotten aggressive with press coverage. Starting the game in nickel yesterday was just stupid. I could go on and on. The lack of pass rush is a killer. #42 is not a defensive end. We don't always play the best players on defense and we definitely don't substitute enough to keep people fresh. This was never more evident than the Ugag game a few years ago when we went up 20-0 and blew it primarily because the defense flat ran out of gas. Roof doesn't trust his depth at all and never has.

Offensively I see a coach who obviously knows the option and has mastered the calling of the handful of base plays we run. What kills me is Johnson is too stubborn to expand on the base concepts. This shows up most in the passing game. No short passing game. We run more chuck and duck than anything. 3rd and long and we never put our QB in the shotgun to give him a better chance to survey the field. Our QB's have typically been short and can't see over the line so why not try something different? Hell half the time we're dropping back our right handed QB facing left when his read is to the right so he turns to throw right and if his one read is not there immediately we're toast. As a former QB this is tough to do. We're not giving our QB's a fair chance to succeed in the passing game. Pass blocking over the years has been atrocious. Wide splits and 3 point stances in obvious passing downs put our lineman at a huge disadvantage. We seem to have done some 2 point stances this year on 3rd and forever and I will say at times Marshall had decent time to throw but should it take 9 years to figure this stuff out?

We could totally screw a defense if for example on 1st down we lined up in our base formation and then shifted into a 4 wide shotgun with the A-backs in the slot and the B back next to the QB. Every team we play loads the box. If they choose to stay in their base defense we force them to play linebackers and safeties covering slot receivers. I like our chances with Qua Searcy matched up on a linebacker. If we just had the threat of walking out into this formation on any given down it could change the way some teams play us. At the very least it probably forces the other team to call timeout. Paul did this years ago against UGA 1 time. Richt burned a timeout. We never did it again. That is just one example of being more creative on offense.

Compare Johnson to Ralph Friedgen. Ralph would steal any good idea and implement it in our offense. We ran so many different formations it would make your head spin. We even ran some triple option similar to what we do now because Ralph stole it from Johnson after 1996 when Navy came here and ran up and down the field on us. Go re-watch the '99 Uga game and you'll be shocked at what you see our offense doing. Ralph would do anything to win. Paul only cares to do it his way to win and if it doesn't work oh well. Maybe he's not confident enough in his abilities as a coach to venture outside his comfort zone. Who knows? Statistically big picture we've had overall success on offense but let's face it. When we play the better teams on our schedule now that they've seen what we do year after year we struggle on offense. Look at our record against the big 4. Clemson, UGA, Miami, and V-Tech. We've struggled over the years although we seem to have V Tech's number right now with their transition away from Beamer.

In summary I don't dislike Johnson. I kinda like his swagger and the fact he somewhat relishes being the underdog. Tech is seemingly a perpetual underdog so it's a good fit. However when we do decide to make a change I would like to see us get away from strict triple option and transition to more of an offense like what Oregon has had success with. I think the athletes we have on hand could easily transition to that type of offense and a QB like Lucas Johnson who is tall and athletic with a great arm could flourish in an offense like that. Opening things up will help us in recruiting as well from just a pure football perspective. Kids like a more balanced offense. I'm not getting into the debate on the academics and all the excuses there. If you don't like the academic restrictions then do something about it. The Institute needs to get serious about big time football but regardless we've won big in the past and can do it again and the idea that the only way we can compete is to run the triple option is wrong. It's a bull**** excuse and defeatist. Tech people should be better than that.

The PJ and TO lovers will stick with him at all cost. They all say, he's the best Tech can get,who would do any better, hejust needs more money , yada,yada. He'sbeen through 4 DC during his 10 years here, about to be 5 plus mutiple assistants. The one constant: their hero PJ.The bottom line here folks, good highschool football players do not want to play for Johnson or his TO.

 

[travgt01]

Pivoting to a new topic for ex players/coaches.....or super stats guys.

Why not adopt the no punting/KO's 100% onside strategy?

https://www.footballstudyhall.com/2013/11/15/5105958/fourth-down-pulaski-academy-kevin-kelley

The HS coach doing it in AR has won 4 straight state titles, and 7 out of 14. Of course this is a private school that resembles buford/st thomas aquanias. Great athletes that can be recruited, and strong academics.

I mean if any major college program is going to do this, shouldn't we?

I get that it probably is going to work better in hs, where kickers/punters are more unreliable.....but that's what GT had this season...especially the kicking part.

 

[bravejason]

Pivoting to a new topic for ex players/coaches.....or super stats guys.

Why not adopt the no punting/KO's 100% onside strategy?

https://www.footballstudyhall.com/2013/11/15/5105958/fourth-down-pulaski-academy-kevin-kelley

The HS coach doing it in AR has won 4 straight state titles, and 7 out of 14. Of course this is a private school that resembles buford/st thomas aquanias. Great athletes that can be recruited, and strong academics.

I mean if any major college program is going to do this, shouldn't we?

I get that it probably is going to work better in hs, where kickers/punters are more unreliable.....but that's what GT had this season...especially the kicking part.

That requires a very good offense. The conversion percentage has to be high enough to make it worthwhile and the defense needs some ability to defend a short field. In some years, the GT offense can do it. This past year was not one of them. Certainly, the GT defense struggled mightily in short field scenarios this year.

Also, given that the GT defense surrendered points on all but one instance this season when the opponents were in the red zone, the expected value of giving the opponents the ball in a short field would be quite large, at least 3 points I'd guess. So every missed conversion in a short field would surrender 3+ points and the GT offense wasn't good enough to overcome that.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

If what you say is true then the QB to watch out for in the spring will be Tobias Oliver! He can make the reads as he ran the Veer option in High School!

Why Georgia Tech will love Tobias Oliver
Feb 01, 2017
Northside offensive coordinator Chad Alligood can only rave about Tobias Oliver the player, the quarterback and kid.

Link
http://www.macon.com/sports/high-school/article130157049.html

I remember that interview. Sounds like TO's forte is exactly TM's weakness, reads, both pre and postsnap.

"We ran the veer 36 times and he made the right read 33 out of 36."

"But his biggest thing is getting us in the right play, calling the right play at the line of scrimmage just by counting numbers and he can do that real quick. He has free reign to get us in a pass, he can get us into any play in the playbook at anytime if he likes it. Thats how much trust we have in him."

Sounds like passing is his weakness. Hope he can get that up to speed with a lot of work and coaching.