Biggest need for 2016 (offense edition)

[dressedcheeseside]

My apologies DCS. You are one of the few on the site that do know X's and O's. I just get a little frustrated seeing the nonsense about MM being the reason JT struggled passing and MM being the reason the running game between the tackles suffered.

Didn't mean to call you out, even though I did. Cheers mate.

Calling MM out for needing to improve is definitely ok, but to say he's the reason JT didn't have time to throw and to say he doesn't know how to explode through a hole is just ignorant.

I'd love to be an offensive lineman this year, given our fan base. Hell, they're like a weatherman, never get blamed for anything...when it was pretty obvious that they were the reason the O was a train wreck this year. Just my opinion.

No worries. I overreacted in my reply and I apologize as well. It's hard to get a bead on where the bulk of the blame lies because coach keeps those cards very close to his vest. The OL definitely took a step back and it wasn't just the departure of Shaq.

I think Marcus will be a special back at some point. I just hope it's sooner rather than later.

 

[GaTech4ever]

There is some merit to this post, however I would like to challenge a few points. First of all, knowing that somebody is out before a season starts, before making our predictions, is kind of irrelevent when quantifying the impact of an injury. For instance, having Quaide and Legett out made a difference, I feel sure. I mean, knowing what we know now, wouldn't you like to have seen them get a chance on the field? We didn't get what we were hoping for out of Skov. Marshall ran well but had some growing pains and Allen couldn't stay on the field. Also, in the same line of reasoning, having Griffin out at OT was a pretty big factor, especially considering Joe was just a shell of himself after gaining all that weight.

Also, saying that we were already done so the injuries that happened late don't really matter, doesn't hold a lot of water with me. Even if the majority of the season was over, there were still some games on the table to win. We were 0'fer with Gotsis off the field and, I believe, 3 and 5 with him. Losses like his still impacted the record. To me, every game matters.

With all this said, I acknowledge your overall point that, for the most part, the OL was healthy and yet still a major disappointment.

I do acknowledge that the healthy freshman BBs (Leggett/Quaide) would have helped. My point is more looking at the root cause though. Why would those guys have helped is what I'm looking for. And I don't think the answer is because the BBs we were expecting to play got injured.

Griffin over Joe would have helped. But again, the root cause is why. Not because Joe, who was the starter when we were at our best last year, got injured.

As for Gotsis' injury, I don't think it's fair to use the team's record to quantify his impact, specifically because 2 of those 3 wins would have been wins regardless of whether he played or not. I personally don't think that is debatable. He was the best player on our team this year, I also don't think that's debatable. However, there was nothing I saw after the Alcorn State and Tulane wins that showed me he would single-handily change outcomes of games for us against the teams left on our schedule. In my opinion, Tech going 1-5 against Power 5 teams leading up to his injury supports that.

 

[Lee]

Well … except for making our 2 minute drill pretty predictable. But maybe we'll do that next year.

The secret we've had most year's in Coach's tenure is that we didn't need a two minute drill; we needed a 7 - 9 minute drill where we got up a bit, then sat on the ball like a slug until time ran out for the other side. Me for that drill and more of it.

Are you trying to say that most, if not all 2 minute offenses aren't predictable? Are you also saying that we have to be one dimensional because our lineman are in a 2 point stance with a little tighter splits?

I love when our O can just drain the last 8 minutes off the clock and completely demoralize the other team. That's not always the case, even in good years. On the flip side, we've also shown that we can be very effective driving the field through the air quickly. I just think that making some tweaks to how we protect in those times will make us more consistent in doing so or at least give us a better shot at success.

And there hasn't been one season where we haven't needed the 2 minute drill since PJ has been here. Even last year we needed it more than a couple times. GSU, Duke, and FSU just off the top of my head. I'm sure we used it more than that including end of half drives. All with the best offense PJ's ever had. All teams have always and will always need to have an effective 2 minute drill at some point during a season.

 

[Dottie1145]

I want a more composed JeT.

 

[takethepoints]

Are you trying to say that most, if not all 2 minute offenses aren't predictable? Are you also saying that we have to be one dimensional because our lineman are in a 2 point stance with a little tighter splits?

Well, yes, that is what I'm saying. In our O if you want to either run or pass, the OLs have to be in a 3 point stance. Bringing them up to 2 points automatically telegraphs what you are going to do and limits the kind of blocking you can do on runs. And, since in normal years (unlike this one) we usually lead the country or close on running plays over 20 yards, we need to keep the run threat. Provided we're on the opponents side of the field, that is.

But I'm really not disagreeing one bit here. After the fail that was Tech pass blocking this year, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Coach decided to put in a shotgun on "obvious" passing downs. We've done it before. But if our run game returns to norm next year, I doubt he'll do it much.

 

[Lee]

Well, yes, that is what I'm saying. In our O if you want to either run or pass, the OLs have to be in a 3 point stance. Bringing them up to 2 points automatically telegraphs what you are going to do and limits the kind of blocking you can do on runs. And, since in normal years (unlike this one) we usually lead the country or close on running plays over 20 yards, we need to keep the run threat. Provided we're on the opponents side of the field, that is.

But I'm really not disagreeing one bit here. After the fail that was Tech pass blocking this year, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Coach decided to put in a shotgun on "obvious" passing downs. We've done it before. But if our run game returns to norm next year, I doubt he'll do it much.

Many teams run the ball with their OL in a 2 pt stance. Putting our line in a 2 pt stance for the 2 minute drill it would not confine us to only passing. In the same way our passing game is much better when other teams think we are going to run, when teams think we are going to pass, it will be a lot easier to run if we want to out of the gun.

Again this isn't an overall scheme change. I just think this will give us a better chance to protect Justin on those obvious passing downs. I think it will make our draw game better as well.

 

[AE 87]

Many teams run the ball with their OL in a 2 pt stance. Putting our line in a 2 pt stance for the 2 minute drill it would not confine us to only passing. In the same way our passing game is much better when other teams think we are going to run, when teams think we are going to pass, it will be a lot easier to run if we want to out of the gun.

Again this isn't an overall scheme change. I just think this will give us a better chance to protect Justin on those obvious passing downs. I think it will make our draw game better as well.

I think this is the point. Going to 2pt is going to what DL is used to seeing.

 

[takethepoints]

Many teams run the ball with their OL in a 2 pt stance. Putting our line in a 2 pt stance for the 2 minute drill it would not confine us to only passing. In the same way our passing game is much better when other teams think we are going to run, when teams think we are going to pass, it will be a lot easier to run if we want to out of the gun.

Again this isn't an overall scheme change. I just think this will give us a better chance to protect Justin on those obvious passing downs. I think it will make our draw game better as well.

Well, yeah, but we don't. It would make a lot of the standard blocks more difficult.

But that'll be up to Coach. I will say that I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for this change.

 

[Lee]

I think this is the point. Going to 2pt is going to what DL is used to seeing.

I don't think that was his point. If it was, it is not the point I thought he was trying to make. I understood his point to be that making said changed would make us one dimensional and predictable which is why I made the point about still being able to run the ball.

To your point of it being what the DL is used to seeing, who cares? I'm guessing you mean from other teams, because it definitely wouldn't be what they are used to seeing playing a GT team. Also, what does this have to do with anything? Do you not think our guys are capable of blocking from a 2 pt stance because the DL is used to seeing other guys in a similar position?

I would be willing to bet that if you asked any DL if he would rather rush the passer against a lineman with his hand in the dirt vs one in a 2 pt stance they would chose the guy with his hand in the dirt every time. Wide splits and hand in the ground on 3rd and 15 is a recipe for disaster.

Again, I'm not calling for a complete overhaul of the scheme (even though I wouldn't mind us incoportating some zone techniques) I'm mainly talking about how we protect the passer in obvious passing situations.

 

[Lee]

Well, yeah, but we don't. It would make a lot of the standard blocks more difficult.

But that'll be up to Coach. I will say that I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for this change.

Oh I definitely won't be holding my breath. We all know what we're gunna get with PJ. He does what he does and if you don't like it, well, get over it. This is his biggest weakness to me.

I don't want to hear, he tried new things with Vad and it didn't work. First, that offense looked a lot better than the one this year (6 ppg and 50 ypg better). Second, I've heard many good coaches and leaders along the way, when talking about making changes or transitions say that sometimes it gets worse before it gets better.

Do I want a complete overhaul of the offense? No. Would I like to be more multiple so that when we can't get something going we have other "options" to turn to? Yes. I'd also love to see us simplify the offense so that it doesn't take a team full of 4th and 5th years guys to run like it's supposed to. We have talked repeatedly over the past few years about having to simplify the defense so they can play fast. Why does this not apply to the offense?

 

[takethepoints]

I agree about Vad. I thought he actually did pretty well for a first year QB and saw our game against Ugag as a prototype of how we would look for the next two years; i.e. sorta like Hawaii when Coach was there. But it was not to be and, with JT and successors, I doubt we'll see it again. But I gave up trying to predict what Coach might get up to awhile ago. You never know.

 

[Lee]

I agree about Vad. I thought he actually did pretty well for a first year QB and saw our game against Ugag as a prototype of how we would look for the next two years; i.e. sorta like Hawaii when Coach was there. But it was not to be and, with JT and successors, I doubt we'll see it again. But I gave up trying to predict what Coach might get up to awhile ago. You never know.

That offense mixed with what we do now would've been exciting to watch. I would love to see JT run some zone read with the backs we have now. I'd also love to see some of those jet sweeps with the speed and athleticism we have at aback now, but like you said, we most likely won't.

We have an explosive offense as is. I like the idea of being multiple though and think it would help with recruiting on that side of the ball.

 

[iceeater1969]

After looking at reddit, I was wondering if ol is lined up differently 14 verses 15. In reddit it was mentioned that ol line up is ideal with og and dt having ear hole lined up with centers hip.
I made quick review using gt bob on late 14 & 15 games - no giant trend BUT
In 15 Seemed to be occasionally Much closer to line .
Not sure if has any real impact but food for thought for x. o types

 

[dressedcheeseside]

That offense mixed with what we do now would've been exciting to watch. I would love to see JT run some zone read with the backs we have now. I'd also love to see some of those jet sweeps with the speed and athleticism we have at aback now, but like you said, we most likely won't.

We have an explosive offense as is. I like the idea of being multiple though and think it would help with recruiting on that side of the ball.

There's a limit to the number of hours allowed for practicing. There's barely enough time to adequately rep what we do now.

 

[Lee]

There's a limit to the number of hours allowed for practicing. There's barely enough time to adequately rep what we do now.

Another reason why we need to simplify some of what we do like I mentioned in another post. Our success or failure shouldn't be predicated on us having a Senior laden team. I fully understand that having a bunch of guys that have been around for 3-5 years is going to make any team better. I just don't think it should be as difficult for young players to come in and contribute without it looking like a complete train wreck like it did this year.

 

[takethepoints]

Another reason why we need to simplify some of what we do like I mentioned in another post. Our success or failure shouldn't be predicated on us having a Senior laden team. I fully understand that having a bunch of guys that have been around for 3-5 years is going to make any team better. I just don't think it should be as difficult for young players to come in and contribute without it looking like a complete train wreck like it did this year.

Well … I can't think of any team, no matter what their O, that wouldn't benefit by having a largely senior/junior starting lineup. It is difficult for any frosh to come in and contribute unless it is at a position and in an offense where pure physical talent will tell the tale. With Hershel and Lavette, you play them right away if you have an O based on a true TB. Both would have played as sophs in our system because they would have had to learn to block first. Who plays depends on what the players have to learn to do. It is almost always the case that frosh players look they don't know what they are doing. They usually don't.

Btw, we did simplify the O last year; remember what Coach said about that? The problem this year was that the people who benefited from all the practices in the spring and fall with a simplified O were sitting on the bench and we were training a changing cast of characters on the field. No wonder that looked like a train wreck.

 

[croberts]

Please tell me when we have had good pass protection in PJ's tenure here. Especially when we need to protect and not when we have the D on their heels because we are gashing them in the run game.

Even last year when we had the best offense ever, and I'm not saying that sarcastically, a lot of our success in the passing game predicated on JT buying time with his feet and Smelter coming back to the ball. Was the protection better last year? Yes. Was it good? I would say no.

If you think our protection scemes put our offensive lineman in the best position to succeed than you and PJ must know something every NFL and 95% of college coaches don't.

Look, I'm not calling for an overhaul of PJ's system. It's a thing of beauty when run properly. To act like it couldn't use some tweaks to improve it is a bit ridiculous to me. Changing how we protect on 3rd and 15 or in the 2 minute drill is not going change what we do the other 90% of the time.

The thing about this offense is you should never/ever be in third and 15. Run sets up the pass . every play should give 3 or 4 yards . As others have stated, last year was special because JT was able to keep plays alive and release the ball to a 4th round draft pick coming back to the ball with hands the size of King Kong. We were special because even the 3rd and 8 to 3rd and 15 became first and 10.

 

[B Lifsey]

The thing about this offense is you should never/ever be in third and 15.

Is there an offense designed where a team should get in 3rd and 15?

 

[dubjacket]

Is there an offense designed where a team should get in 3rd and 15?

The misconception about our offense is we aren't designed for 3rd and long. The reality is nobody is designed for 3rd and long. Our struggles on 3rd and Long probably aren't that different than most other teams.

 

[croberts]

The misconception about our offense is we aren't designed for 3rd and long. The reality is nobody is designed for 3rd and long. Our struggles on 3rd and Long probably aren't that different than most other teams.

So really we were like everyone else in 2014, except we completed our 3rd down passes at a higher rate than everyone else. It is true that no one is designed to end up in 3rd and long, but (perception) is that we have fewer high risk / high reward plays and fewer negative yard plays. Well, until 2015.