Apples and Oranges

[Alcain4]

When we had warm up weights on the sideline in the opener vs Clemson I knew we were in for a long season.

 

[kg01]

I'm all on board with the fact that this is a rebuild. I'm not measuring CGC by wins and losses (mostly). The only thing I really want to see from CGC is week-to-week improvement. If I see that, I am content. But there is enough out there about how he runs this program that drives me crazy, and the more he loses, the harder it is to tolerate, such as:

1. Elimination of bone-headed coaching decisions
2. His propensity to stretch the truth
3. Inability to provide any substantive discussion of our team other than speaking in platitudes
4. The gimmicks (although in fairness, he has toned down the "Money down" stuff)

I think all that is fair. Thanks for actually bringing some salient arguments to the table. Other folks' responses have been woefully lacking.

 

[lv20gt]

Totally disagree. Both Oliver and Johnson are much much better QBs for this system than Booker was for that system. More importantly, Oliver and Johnson had been sharing first string snaps and the coaches have specifically been putting packages in place for each since the spring. For CPJ, we had been playing Nesbitt all meaningful snaps. Then he got hurt, so we played Shaw all meaningful snaps. Then he got hurt and we had to go to Booker for the first meaningful snaps of his Tech career with no time for preparation. Totally different situation. (Also, Oliver had already shown the ability to be a winning, difference making QB at this level if a proper package is run for his skill set.)

BS on the better fit. Neither would be recruited as QB to any P5 team that ran any other offense other than the option. Oliver probably wouldn't be recruited at QB for any other offense regardless of level. The sharing first string snaps thing is largely irrelevant because the problem with Booker wasn't snaps. It was fit. Just like it was with Oliver and Johnson. Had Booker gotten all the first string snaps we still would have sucked on offense. Maybe slightly better, but then again, our offense against Citadel was better than our offense against Gardner Webb.

Also, Oliver had shown to be able to be a difference maker at QB in the option. Not in any other offense. So are you suggesting we should have just stuck with the option because of that?

But you are right. They are totally different situations. One coach was bailed out by a defense anchored by 4 future NFL Dlinemen.

 

[JorgeJonas]

what evidence?

This evidence.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/game/_/gameId/401112452

And this evidence. http://theacc.com/standings.aspx?standings=35

 

[JorgeJonas]

Also, Oliver had shown to be able to be a difference maker at QB in the option. Not in any other offense. So are you suggesting we should have just stuck with the option because of that?

"The players that we have, we will fit the scheme based on the talents we have on our roster.” I dunno, maybe ask the guy who said this.

https://929thegame.radio.com/articl...down-what-georgia-techs-new-offense-will-look

 

[Ibeeballin]

This evidence.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/game/_/gameId/401112452

And this evidence. http://theacc.com/standings.aspx?standings=35

This does equate to incompetence but thanks for playing

 

[gtg391z]

"The players that we have, we will fit the scheme based on the talents we have on our roster.” I dunno, maybe ask the guy who said this.

https://929thegame.radio.com/articl...down-what-georgia-techs-new-offense-will-look

2015 ACC football standings

Coastal Division
No. 15 North Carolina x 8 – 0 11 – 3
Pittsburgh 6 – 2 8 – 5
Miami 5 – 3 8 – 5
Duke 4 – 4 8 – 5
Virginia Tech 4 – 4 7 – 6
Virginia 3 – 5 4 – 8
Georgia Tech 1 – 7 3 – 9
Championship: Clemson 45, North Carolina 37
I guess this shows incompetence too. lmao

 

[lv20gt]

"The players that we have, we will fit the scheme based on the talents we have on our roster.” I dunno, maybe ask the guy who said this.

How do you equate "fit the scheme" to "running an entirely different scheme" ?

 

[ElCidBUZZingFAN]

2015 ACC football standings

Coastal Division
No. 15 North Carolina x 8 – 0 11 – 3
Pittsburgh 6 – 2 8 – 5
Miami 5 – 3 8 – 5
Duke 4 – 4 8 – 5
Virginia Tech 4 – 4 7 – 6
Virginia 3 – 5 4 – 8
Georgia Tech 1 – 7 3 – 9
Championship: Clemson 45, North Carolina 37
I guess this shows incompetence too. lmao

Yes. It does.

Your turn.

 

[JorgeJonas]

How do you equate "fit the scheme" to "running an entirely different scheme" ?

I don’t. That’s the point.

 

[gtg391z]

Ok, well every coach would be incompetent at some point then and that was not Jorge point. This coaching staff inherited this season and gets a pass from most knowledgeable fans.

 

[JorgeJonas]

2015 ACC football standings

Coastal Division
No. 15 North Carolina x 8 – 0 11 – 3
Pittsburgh 6 – 2 8 – 5
Miami 5 – 3 8 – 5
Duke 4 – 4 8 – 5
Virginia Tech 4 – 4 7 – 6
Virginia 3 – 5 4 – 8
Georgia Tech 1 – 7 3 – 9
Championship: Clemson 45, North Carolina 37
I guess this shows incompetence too. lmao

This is a whole mess of logical fallacies. Think we’ve got tu quoque, moving the goal posts, maybe more. If you thought that was, and presumably you do, then it’s not clear why you wouldn’t think Collins was. You also find it awfully easy to ignore other available information.

 

[JorgeJonas]

This does equate to incompetence but thanks for playing

Okay.

 

[lv20gt]

I don’t. That’s the point.

What? You're the one who pointed to that statement in response to a question about wanting us to continue to run the option. If you don't equate the two then it makes no sense to bring it up.

 

[RickStromFan]

Those fans that are TO or nothing love it bc it allows them to continue to feel elite. The sense of we are doing something that no one is doing and we can doing it marginal recruit. Somehow the only way to win is we run something totally unorthodox and unconventional. The constant “We will never outrecruit Bama or Clemson” considering neither resides in the Coastal where am annual Top 25 classes will make us perennial Coastal contenders.

It just appears those who are on that side believe our ceiling is very low to begin with and we can win in the same scheme the other 100 schools are running.

It's a new attitude though. I don't remember this sort of elitism pre-PJ.

 

[JorgeJonas]

What? You're the one who pointed to that statement in response to a question about wanting us to continue to run the option. If you don't equate the two then it makes no sense to bring it up.

JFC. I didn’t say a word about the option. I simply quoted our coach saying he’d run an offense befitting the skills of our players. If all they can do is the option, then he should run that, or he should not have said what he said. Period.

 

[gtg391z]

This is a whole mess of logical fallacies. Think we’ve got tu quoque, moving the goal posts, maybe more. If you thought that was, and presumably you do, then it’s not clear why you wouldn’t think Collins was. You also find it awfully easy to ignore other available information.

lol, its the same thing you did. You're basing your opinion on 5 games in a transition year. BTW, I was using that to show the stupidity of your argument. I think CPJ was a good football coach but he just would not adapt.

 

[gtg391z]

JFC. I didn’t say a word about the option. I simply quoted our coach saying he’d run an offense befitting the skills of our players. If all they can do is the option, then he should run that, or he should not have said what he said. Period.

Yeah, its a stupid statement that all coaches say. You have to run your offense and unfortunately we don't have some of the pieces to do that yet.

 

[GTRX7]

BS on the better fit. Neither would be recruited as QB to any P5 team that ran any other offense other than the option. Oliver probably wouldn't be recruited at QB for any other offense regardless of level. The sharing first string snaps thing is largely irrelevant because the problem with Booker wasn't snaps. It was fit. Just like it was with Oliver and Johnson. Had Booker gotten all the first string snaps we still would have sucked on offense. Maybe slightly better, but then again, our offense against Citadel was better than our offense against Gardner Webb.

Also, Oliver had shown to be able to be a difference maker at QB in the option. Not in any other offense. So are you suggesting we should have just stuck with the option because of that?

But you are right. They are totally different situations. One coach was bailed out by a defense anchored by 4 future NFL Dlinemen.

Silly, but seems we have reached an impasse. This coaching staff had the same QB available against the Citadel they started against Clemson, the same QB they started against USF, and both of those QBs were in the system and getting first team snaps since the spring. One of those QBs beat Virginia Tech on the road last year in Blacksburg. If you can't see the difference between that and losing the starting QB to injury and backup QB to injury in back-to-back games before playing GW, we are just not going to agree. I also think your opinion does seriously disrespect the players we do have. We can just agree to disagree though.

 

[Lee]

I think you lost your credibility with the "please don't bring up Citadel." Even less talented teams can look disciplined while we have not looked that way much of the time both on the field & bench.
We can agree that our only alternative is to cheer for our team instead of favorably or unfavorably comparing coaching regimes.
I hope our current coach is very successful & wins many league championships in the future . I still fly my Tech flag in the front yard on gamedays & wear Tech clothing.
Remember as Al used to say," If you can't play a sport, be one!"

It’s like y’all can’t read once you see that. Something in all of your brains turns off and you can’t think outside of that one sentence.

The VERY NEXT LINE SAID IT WAS INEXCUSABLE!!! Bringing it up continuously does no good. It happened. It was terrible. It was also ONE game. I agree we looked undisciplined in that game, but if you’ve paid attention to the rest if the season, we are not a highly penalized team. So which one better illustrates our team? One crappy game against a bad team? Or the rest of the season? Also, we had 6 penalties for 50 yards against GW versus 8 for 80 against Citadel. Not the same, but in the same ballpark.

The rest of the post clearly lays out why I believe even as poorly as we played on offense against the Citadel, if we had the 2008 defense we would’ve won. If the 2008 team had the 2019 defense, they would have lost. Simple as that.

If Paul had lost that game I would’ve been pissed like everyone else. It wouldn’t have changed how good of a coach he was though. Same can be said for CGC.

Our offense in the GW game put up 199 yards and 10 points. Take the screen pass where Dwyer was just better than everyone in the field and we put up 120 yards and 3 points. That’s in the whole game, not a quarter or a half.

In the Citadel game we had 301 yards if total O and 24 points. 183 yards on the ground.

So what was the difference? One team was loaded with NFL talent at key spots. The other devoid of NFL talent save potentially a few skill guys.

2008 defense: 227 yards given up and one forced turnover. Fairly even TOP. This is with the offense turning the ball over 3 times.

2019 defense: 350 yards and one forced turnover. Our offense didn’t turn the ball over, but the defense couldn’t get off the field.

None of what I posted excuses the loss. The reason I said to to bring it up is because one game doesn’t define a coach. Paul easily could’ve lost that game and still would’ve been a great coach for us.

So if you want to continue to walk around believing that this wouldn’t/couldn’t happen to a good coach, that’s fine. The rest of us will be disappointed in the loss, but enjoy watching the team progress and make strides towards becoming an all around team. We also understand it will take time and are willing to experience some pain now for where we feel we are headed. Delayed gratification.