ACC Media Days

[g0lftime]

Th

Outside of coaching, GT's issues have gone back many generations. It's not a surprise to anyone...and it's mentioned often when hiring coaches.

My issue with CGC is coaching. Pure and simple. I actually like everything he did to raise GT's profile, and I love that he doesn't back down on the recruiting trail. We just had a 4 star RB re-commit to us. I'm not sure I've ever seen a 4 star decommit then recommit to GT. Usually once those level of players decommit, they're gone for good. CGC and staff kept working the recruit and got him to recommit. To me, that's a sign of a good recruiter. I think if CGC were here back in the Stephon Tuitt days, GT would not have lost him to ND.

That said, CGC has me worried about the on the field product. His calling card, defense, has been one of the worst defensive units in all of college football. You can't blame that on "historical transition" or getting "his guys" in. Our defense has been the most talented (according to recruiting sites) side of the football team since we got here, and there was no "triple option personnel" issues. Most of our 4 stars are signed to that side of the ball. After 3 years, CGC should have something to show for it. We didn't...in fact, I believe CGC's year 3 defense will go down as one of the worst defensive units GT has fielded in a long time.

That's like hiring CPJ for his triple option, then the offense sputtering rushing the ball. I can overlook the offense, as there was some serious personnel issues, but when your offensive FEI (#78 in 2021) outranks your defense (#112 in 2021) in year 3, that's a BIG issue in my book. Both sides were bad, but the side CGC made his reputation on was historically bad.

That's why I don't understand keeping Thacker. It makes no sense. If anything he should be the linebackers coach and that's it. He is still learning and needs more experience from different programs.

 

[Techster]

I could be wrong but mst of our highly rated D recruits over the last 4-6 years have all been DB's. Our D line and LB recruiting has not been up to similar standards although I do know we have some very young DT's that were 4 stars. Our DL and LB play has been abysmal now for 7-8 (10?) years. So I thinking recruiting rankings are skewed if all the highest rated recruits are all S's and CB's. Of course I am too lazy to look up the data so I am hoping someone else will to prove me wrong.

We've had higher rated LBs and DLs under CGC. Doesn't matter if they're not 4 stars (some of them have been). No way our defense should be in the 100's in the third year. As bad as some of CPJ's defenses were, none were that bad. None of CPJ's DCs had CGC's defensive credentials.

 

[4shotB]

We've had higher rated LBs and DLs under CGC. Doesn't matter if they're not 4 stars (some of them have been). No way our defense should be in the 100's in the third year. As bad as some of CPJ's defenses were, none were that bad. None of CPJ's DCs had CGC's defensive credentials.

I apologize if you think I was defending our recent D play. That was not my intent. OTOH, trying to rank the different D's under our last 5-6 DC's is a nuanced intellectual exercise in futility. I haven't seen a D on Grant Field that has been impressive since Tenuta left although we may have had 1 or 2 years were we masked the issue with a positive turnover margin.

 

[Techster]

I apologize if you think I was defending our recent D play. That was not my intent. OTOH, trying to rank the different D's under our last 5-6 DC's is a nuanced intellectual exercise in futility. I haven't seen a D on Grant Field that has been impressive since Tenuta left although we may have had 1 or 2 years were we masked the issue with a positive turnover margin.

I think when a defense is rated in the lowest 10th percentile, there's really no defense for it...regardless of how bad past GT defenses have been. There's no nuance needed.

 

[cthenrys]

I think when a defense is rated in the lowest 10th percentile, there's really no defense for it...regardless of how bad past GT defenses have been. There's no nuance needed.

Nope. Its like your golf score. There were some bad breaks that hurt it, but you got some good bounces too. You shot what your scorecard says you shot....

 

[Pointer]

I apologize if you think I was defending our recent D play. That was not my intent. OTOH, trying to rank the different D's under our last 5-6 DC's is a nuanced intellectual exercise in futility. I haven't seen a D on Grant Field that has been impressive since Tenuta left although we may have had 1 or 2 years were we masked the issue with a positive turnover margin.

The thing I have been most impressed with were the two DT's CGC brought in. That's what it takes now a days. Back when tenuta was here, the spread offenses weren't so prominent so you could make up for a lack of abundance with respect to highly rated defensive tackles by blitzing often (living and dying by it). Now that everyone spreads it out and QB's are often mobile, it's not such a wise strategy. I believe Nate Woody's defenses were built upon a strong secondary and quick/long linebackers and defensive ends, which diminished the need to go after the few DT's everyone wants. This may explain why the players CGC inherited were talent heavy in the secondary (defensively).

 

[stech81]

Anyone know if Darryl Richard is still at Clemson as assistant Director of Business Operations ?

 

[4shotB]

Anyone know if Darryl Richard is still at Clemson as assistant Director of Business Operations ?

I just googled and found him on LinkedIn. He has moved on to other things and apparently was at Clemson for a short time (<1 year).

 

[slugboy]

The thing I have been most impressed with were the two DT's CGC brought in. That's what it takes now a days. Back when tenuta was here, the spread offenses weren't so prominent so you could make up for a lack of abundance with respect to highly rated defensive tackles by blitzing often (living and dying by it). Now that everyone spreads it out and QB's are often mobile, it's not such a wise strategy. I believe Nate Woody's defenses were built upon a strong secondary and quick/long linebackers and defensive ends, which diminished the need to go after the few DT's everyone wants. This may explain why the players CGC inherited were talent heavy in the secondary (defensively).

Nate Woody basically had zero recruiting classes here—he was only here for one season.
Roof ran a 4-2-5 the next to last season before Collins.

 

[Pointer]

Nate Woody basically had zero recruiting classes here—he was only here for one season.
Roof ran a 4-2-5 the next to last season before Collins.

True, but the idea was the same in a sense. He went away from 3LB's to better deal with the spread as well.

 

[Ibeeballin]

Anyone know if Darryl Richard is still at Clemson as assistant Director of Business Operations ?

No

 

[stech81]

No

Ibeeballin you knew him would he make someone Tech could use ? Not as a coach but maybe something in the athletic Dept

 

[Techwood Relict]

Its like your golf score. There were some bad breaks that hurt it, but you got some good bounces too. You shot what your scorecard says you shot....

Damn right it does. Hopefully our defense finds a home beyond the <10%.....

 

[Ibeeballin]

Ibeeballin you knew him would he make someone Tech could use ? Not as a coach but maybe something in the athletic Dept

He would have my vote to be the next AD if we’re honest

 

[stech81]

He would have my vote to be the next AD if we’re honest

That's what I wanted to know thanks

 

[cthenrys]

He would have my vote to be the next AD if we’re honest

Had one class with him in business school. I’m down. Really good guy

 

[JacketFan137]

I hear you, but I don't think it's about that. As discussed above, I think last year there was enough money to fire CGC, but not enough to hire a new staff.

This year the buyout goes way down, which changes everything.

Hear me out and I'm not trying to be obtuse. The main thing CGC had going for him initially was a recruiting uptick. That seems to have gone away. That, I think initially bought him some leeway.

If you don't have that and the best product you can put on the field after 4 years is 6 wins, pairing it with a disgruntled fan base and major boosters clamoring last year, it's tough to see a scenario where you keep CGC for going to a low level bowl game.

Now I think he's actually hired a decent offensive coordinator and he has a punchers chance of hitting a 7 (competitive 7) win or 8 win season. It would be hard to fire the guy if he finally gets something going on offense. Given that CGC has the coaching chops defensively, there will be hope he can turn things around on that side as well in future seasons (again he must show some life first this season).

And I admit to disliking CGC. He grates me on just adout every level. At the same time I know he's been a good position coach/coordinator in the past and he can recruit. I would love it if he were successful because that would be great for Tech. I'm just looking at this season realistically. I don't think anyone outside is the program would say we didn't give him a fair shake if he were let go at the end of this season though.


The summary here is, it's do or die for this staff and the margin for error is tiny.

the recruiting is still head and shoulders above what we dealt with the last decade. the classes have had lower rankings because we took on small classes and more transfers. it made little sense to fire him last year with zero money to hire a new coach

Big money donors, aka not you, have said fairly similar things to what Pointer is saying. The money was already made available to fire Collins last season, there is no reason to retain a coach who's best season in 4 years is 6 wins, particularly when the other three seasons were all 3 wins.

Again with trashing our former players? Yates was a 4 star qb out of high school amd played/started in numerous ACC games. That makes him a P5 player. The offense was a chore to watch no matter who was at qb.

we we’re jordan yates only power 5 offer. he is now playing fcs football. at no point was he power 5 talent. it is not trashing him to state objective truths. for some reason you can say whatever you want about anyone or anything associated with the program but for some reason when people point something out about yates you rush to defend him. really weird lol

and no literally 1 guy has said anything even remotely similar. the 8 win or out sentiment is held by literally one booster who will not be able to do this himself, and one user on this forum. i would be more than willing to believe that idea is even on the table if anyone can even present one remotely credible source with that opinion.

to say that there is no reason to retain a coach after 6 wins in his fourth year is yet another horrendous take. there’s way more nuance to that scenario than a simple black and white answer. 6 or 7 wins will make retaining him a conversation at the bare minimum.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

blows my mind we still have people that get mad for collins giving the same answers as every college football coach but because its collins we have people crying lol

Sorry to burst your bubble but nobody else talks like that.

 

[JacketFan137]

Sorry to burst your bubble but nobody else talks like that.

i mean they do and if you kept up with football at the college or pro level you would probably agree.

most coaching press conferences boil down to the most generic football platitudes you could imagine. we played tough, really rallied together at the end, they battled for 60 minutes and got a hard earned win etc.

you always sell the other team whether they’re better than you or worse. there was a clip of saban praising a charleston southern qb as one of the best in their conference for example and saying they couldn’t take a game off.

and ultimately you guys that do nothing but cry and complain over his press conferences would probably be doing the same if he acted any different. you can’t be as negative as you guys when you’re the head coach.

i do think a lot of it is on our media cause frankly i think they’re soft and don’t ask collins hard questions, but ultimately every football press conference is pretty similar and rarely do you see anything close to real x’s and o’s. the term “coachspeak” is definitely real and has been in gambling and fantasy sports circles for decades because the vast majority of things coaches say in press conferences are fluff

 

[yeti92]

there was a clip of saban praising a charleston southern qb as one of the best in their conference for example and saying they couldn’t take a game off.

There is a vast difference between this and what Collins does. You think Saban would ever lose a game to Temple 2-28 and immediately say "Really proud of how our guys fought"? Not a chance in hell.

And the few times Geoff has been asked anything more than a total softball of a question, he got his panties in a wad.