AJC give bad GT media

[tech_wreck47]

The one making us look bad is CPJ (and his boss) for the most part.

Ken did not reduce our recruiting pool by using this system. Ken did not make bad DC hires time after time. Ken is not the one responsible for the lack of focus, speed and motivation of the team. And CPJ's boss shares a great bit of the blame as well.

We have so many other problems than what a newspaper reports it is laughable.

Your still missing my point..... I never said anything about recruiting, I just think it gives GT a bad name when you put junk like that out there, I mean do you see the point in the article? It just seems like its taking shots at GT and I see no reason for that. That's all I'm trying to get at.

 

[awbuzz]

If this quote is not correct, then give KS Sh!t...

"Tech had a matchup problem covering Duke’s tight ends. The Jackets’ nickel back is Lawrence Austin, who at 5-foot-9 and 185 pounds has a tough time covering tight ends who line up in the slot and can have six inches and 50 pounds or more on him. Tech also tried linebacker Brant Mitchell, but he was not able to keep up with the tight ends, either."

Other teams are just like GT... find the mismatch and take advantage of it.

 

[18in32]

It's not just GT that has trouble covering TE's – it's everyone in all of football. A good tight end combines size, mobility and soft hands, and plays in a position where he could be blocking or popping out for a reception on any play. The best way to defend TE's is to play against slow or ham-fisted ones. There's a reason that great TE's are highly coveted in the NFL and are paid millions for their efforts.

 

[Jmonty71]

Then please, for the love of God, go tell them over and over and over how much you dislike Roof. We get it. You're on record, you don't have to keep repeating it. For 3 weeks now, in multiple threads, all you've done is tell everyone how Roof needs to be fired. WE GET IT.

Obviously, not.... I still see people talking about how great Roof is. Roof can recruit, he just can't coach. Tell ya what. I'll stop reminding people, when people stop bragging about how great he is. Deal? Tired of seeing people blame players, when the players get set up for failure.

 

[Techster]

It's not the fact that he stated a fact, it's the fact that it makes GT look bad. GT is constantly getting bashed by media and fans of other schools. I mean what's the point in even doing an article like this? Honestly, what's the point? I could understand if there was a write up about the game in its entirety and then stated the fact, but why an article strictly about how bad GT was at something?

Sorry man...but you're just being sensitive to facts, and ANYTHING that isn't remotely positive about GT. The fact is, our D struggled against Duke's TE's and Ken just explained some of our struggles. Oh, BTW, he also wrote a lot of positives that came out of the game as well....I don't see you freaking out about it as well.

If you think what he wrote about our defense against Duke's TEs is bad, imagine how our most hated rival who GT fans think is the darling of the AJC feels about these kinds of articles;

https://www.dawgnation.com/football...ability-to-be-in-sync-and-the-larger-takeaway

Georgia is in a conundrum: It wants to be a physical, pro-style offense, and it has two great tailbacks. But its just not a physical offense, and its quarterback prefers the shot-gun. This game was another example of the warring philosophies.

But this play was too cute on both ends: Either give the ball to Chubb or get him off the field. If you need a lead blocker on one play, use fullback Christian Payne or at least someone more used to lead blocking. And while McKenzie gives you speed to the edge, giving the ball to Chubb or Michel would mean somebody better suited to shed the initial tackler and perhaps get the extra yard.

That’s a product of running too much on first down, and when doing so, not running it well. On the other hand, Georgia’s lone touchdown was on a first-down pass. The play before it was a 28-yard pass – on first down.

 

[steebu]

I think Ken got his feelings hurt in CPJs post game press conference.

He asked the same question that someone else asked. I'm sure PJ is still not happy with Ken and has earned his "outside the circle" status.

 

[tech_wreck47]

Sorry man...but you're just being sensitive to facts, and ANYTHING that isn't remotely positive about GT. The fact is, our D struggled against Duke's TE's and Ken just explained some of our struggles. Oh, BTW, he also wrote a lot of positives that came out of the game as well....I don't see you freaking out about it as well.

If you think what he wrote about our defense against Duke's TEs is bad, imagine how our most hated rival who GT fans think is the darling of the AJC feels about these kinds of articles;

https://www.dawgnation.com/football...ability-to-be-in-sync-and-the-larger-takeaway

Georgia is in a conundrum: It wants to be a physical, pro-style offense, and it has two great tailbacks. But its just not a physical offense, and its quarterback prefers the shot-gun. This game was another example of the warring philosophies.

But this play was too cute on both ends: Either give the ball to Chubb or get him off the field. If you need a lead blocker on one play, use fullback Christian Payne or at least someone more used to lead blocking. And while McKenzie gives you speed to the edge, giving the ball to Chubb or Michel would mean somebody better suited to shed the initial tackler and perhaps get the extra yard.

That’s a product of running too much on first down, and when doing so, not running it well. On the other hand, Georgia’s lone touchdown was on a first-down pass. The play before it was a 28-yard pass – on first down.

Ok and I guess your being ultra sensitive to my opinion. It's really not a big deal I have an opinion that I don't see the point in it and you have an opinion that it's ok, it's really nothing to argue about. I do find it funny though that when an outsider does something like this people are always freaking out just like the ESPN article about our record when teams have a bye the week before playing us, people were complaing saying she's a joke, not one time did I even do that, and to be honest I didn't even pay attention to who wrote the article. I wonder if you would be saying anything to me if it was a uga fan who wrote the article? I really don't see how my opinion is me being sensitive lol, I'm not even mad about it, I just don't see the point in it, but if that's being sensitive then ok...... BTW the UGA article you posted came after a loss, we won the game, so there more to be positive about, like idk maybe a win. Compare apples to apples. And I'm not saying UGA guys don't complain after a sloppy win and you probably can find an article after a win like we had but you tried to make a point about a team with a win and a team with a loss.

 

[Skeptic]

I think Ken got his feelings hurt in CPJs post game press conference.

What did I miss? Other than a usual laconic quip about just not covering them?

 

[Skeptic]

He asked the same question that someone else asked. I'm sure PJ is still not happy with Ken and has earned his "outside the circle" status.

I'm not sure what his refers to as I don't follow GT in the AJC very much, but off the cuff I would think that a journalist being "ouside the circle" is a good thing, not bad. The craft doesn't need incest between writers and coaches, or politicians and reporters. It's the kind of thing that has destroyed -- well, to me -- any reputation either MSNBC or Fox ever had. Was it LBJ or Truman who said something about "the hit dog barks"? The writer and coach are grown men and will get over it.

 

[Vespidae]

It's an ok article. I've read worse.

I'd rather see Ken write about how to improve than a "flaw". At least if he wants more readers.

 

[LibertyTurns]

It's an ok article. I've read worse.

I'd rather see Ken write about how to improve than a "flaw". At least if he wants more readers.

If it had been the mutts playing Duke it would have been an article about how the DC made a critical adjustment and stopped Duke's offense when the game was on the line. You know it, I know it and so does the small percentage of mutt fans that can read and think simultaneously. The article was 100% correct as is the assertion that it's a dig on the program.

 

[Skeptic]

It's an ok article. I've read worse.

I'd rather see Ken write about how to improve than a "flaw". At least if he wants more readers.

You do know he is a writer, right? Not a coach. Just guessing that he has not seen anything the coaching staff did not see and is trying to fix. I am not a coach so i don't know how. And pretty sure he doesn't.

 

[Vespidae]

You do know he is a writer, right? Not a coach. Just guessing that he has not seen anything the coaching staff did not see and is trying to fix. I am not a coach so i don't know how. And pretty sure he doesn't.

Yes, he's a writer. Having worked with some newspapers in the past, there are published guidelines on how to present a story that informs, educates and entertains.

He can easily take the same article and reframe it.

"Tech overcomes TE challenge" ...

It's all about style.

 

[Skeptic]

Yes, he's a writer. Having worked with some newspapers in the past, there are published guidelines on how to present a story that informs, educates and entertains.

He can easily take the same article and reframe it.

"Tech overcomes TE challenge" ...

It's all about style.

Isn't that kind of like saying that the first A bomb created thousands of acres of new farmland?

 

[Vespidae]

Isn't that kind of like saying that the first A bomb created thousands of acres of new farmland?

Yes and no. The objective of the bomb was to end the war. How? 1) Kill Japanese or 2) Save American lives. Many, including Truman, positioned it as saving lives.

The objective of football is to win games. How? 1) executing one's game plan or 2) overcoming challenges.

It's not, to use your analogy, to improve the turf quality of the field.

To be fair, had we lost ... he could have legitimately hit us on flaws.

 

[RamblinWreck92]

Well how does anyone else practice to defend A backs and B backs when they don't have them either?

Teams have Running Backs and Full Backs. They just don't assign letters to them...well, besides RB and FB.

And if you're right, then why the outrage at teams having BYE weeks before us?

 

[Skeptic]

Yes and no. The objective of the bomb was to end the war. How? 1) Kill Japanese or 2) Save American lives. Many, including Truman, positioned it as saving lives.

The objective of football is to win games. How? 1) executing one's game plan or 2) overcoming challenges.

It's not, to use your analogy, to improve the turf quality of the field.

To be fair, had we lost ... he could have legitimately hit us on flaws.

Okay, you lost me. The analogy actually was exactly what you say, but then to brush past the 70,000 or so dead by noting that now they had great urban renewal.... oh, well. And no, that is not a political statement. In familiar terms, say the play was actually very good, Mrs. Lincoln. ..

 

[MGTfan]

Tech struggled to cover Duke's tight ends.

Ken reports that Tech struggled to cover Duke's tight ends.

How is anyone possibly bothered by Ken reporting facts? Blows my mind.

 

[Vespidae]

I'm lost on what you are talking about.

Every paper has a style book or a copy style guide. It's generally acknowledged that positive copy circulates more widely and is more popular than negative copy.

You can write whatever you want .. How that improves your connection to your reader base ... that's another question.

 

[Vespidae]

How is anyone possibly bothered by Ken reporting facts? Blows my mind.

I think I said it was an ok article.