Coaching Acumen of the Previous Staff...

[ScGold]

As a long time Tech observer, Georgia always has had a psychological advantage over Tech. They tend to play their best games against Tech and almost always assume they are going to win. Their winning percentage against Tech is "proof" to them that they are always the better team.

Tech, on the other hand, is always trying to get the monkey off its back against Georgia. I have watched Tech lose games against Georgia that they should have won by every coach going back to Dodd. Can't say the same about Georgia coaches during that time span playing against Tech. The monkey on their back was usually against Florida or Alabama.

They seem to always get the break in the game whether it be a turnover, bad call, or miss extra point by us every freaking game. We have to beat more than just the bitches on the field more times than not.

 

[ScGold]

I could point out a ton, but here are a few more. Turning the option inside in 14 vs Clemson when we were getting beat up front. The pass vs NCST (I think) in 08 that was drawn up on the sideline. The Vad Lee show vs UNC where we had to score 70 to win, the stop n go route vs Duke that he called because of how they warmed up.... My point in a nutshell is that CPJ understood his offense top to bottom and had an answer for whatever the defense brought... with the exception of superior talent. His scheme could equalize one or two superior players, but not 10. I just don’t think Dave P can do that, and the new scheme relies a lot on having better talent than your opponent. This is why Clemson is so successful with it and Temple wasn’t. We just don’t have the talent now to dominate with this scheme, but maybe we will in the future.

Cash from Duke says hello!

 

[awbuzz]

I guess the beauty of a death march lies in who succumbs from it.

Duke, up by 21 in the 4th last year, loved seeing us conduct a long, time consuming death march.

Maybe Duke's Bend but don't Break Defense did what CTR taught before he left there when was the Head Coach. [emoji6]

 

[awbuzz]

I’m not so sure it is disingenuous. We could go look up who the coaches were. I’m pretty sure Pepper was one. Let’s say it turns out no one else blew more than one. Would 300% more than any other coach be considered not significant?

I'm sure you meant 200% more... 3 is only 200% greater than 1... [emoji3526]

 

[awbuzz]

Top 25 offenses every year but 2. An Orange Bowl and an ACC Championship.

Now, now... Don't go confusing trolls with facts.

 

[jojatk]

This thread is s good example of why I spend very little time on the board recently. I'm excited about the new staff but every thread is full of fonts crapping on Johnson.

I guess I'll tune back in the fall when we have actual football to talk about

I hear where you’re coming from but seriously what did you expect to see when you opened a thread about the coaching acumen of the previous staff?

I will say that, in general, as a fan of CPJ and a fan of CGC it sucks to know that I can’t say anything nice about one of them without the other coach’s fans taking it personally that I’m dissing the other because I didn’t say the same nice thing about their fave.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[stech81]

I will say that, in general, as a fan of CPJ and a fan of CGC it sucks to know that I can’t say anything nice about one of them without the other coach’s fans taking it personally that I’m dissing the other because I didn’t say the same nice thing about their fave.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree it's like you have to pick one not sure why I can't like both. But there are a few like us who like both.

 

[gtg936g]

Cash from Duke says hello!

And so does the phantom holding call where he got sucked inside due to a false key and burned by JT.

 

[ScGold]

And so does the phantom holding call where he got sucked inside due to a false key and burned by JT.

His highlight reel is the Tech game. Spin any way you wish, but that was proof positive that the league had caught up with how to confuse the flow of the offense. Roquon Smith I can understand but to let the QB whisperer cut ur nuts out is not what legends are made of.

 

[takethepoints]

His highlight reel is the Tech game. Spin any way you wish, but that was proof positive that the league had caught up with how to confuse the flow of the offense. Roquon Smith I can understand but to let the QB whisperer cut ur nuts out is not what legends are made of.

Bud Foster says hello.

 

[ScGold]

Bud Foster says hello.

Gt is 5-6 during that time against the hokies. With the wins except 1 we didn't score 30 plus with the majority being in the teens or low 20's. I guess he would say hello and good bye. When they had talent we had a tough time moving the ball. They are not any where near as talented today as they were in the mid 2000's till the last years. IMO

 

[bke1984]

I'm sure you meant 200% more... 3 is only 200% greater than 1... [emoji3526]

Damn it, I need to stop trying to make points from the beach when I’ve been drinking way too early in the morning. I meant 3 times as many, but it doesn’t really matter.

The point is we blew too many big leads in my opinion...in both games we won and games we lost. By the same token the largest deficit I recall us coming back from during the last ten years was the 2008 game in Athens down 16 at halftime (two scores, btw). I could be wrong on that one, so if someone remembers a bigger one please correct me.

I just found it odd that we blew such large leads with a system that is geared towards controlling the ball and burning the clock.

The Georgia Southern (almost) debacle was madening. Earlier I said 28 points...my mistake, it was 25. 35-10 at half. Then we literally ran seven plays or less on four straight drives to punt while they ran seven plays or less on four straight drives to scores TDs and take the lead. The last drive of ours occurred after they went ahead, which lasted four plays and gained 16 yards. Then we get a miracle fumble and find a way to win.

Where were the in game adjustments? I guess you could claim that they came after the fumble and it gave us the win...if so then that doesn’t sound like some mastermind coach who is a wizard at in game adjustments.

Back to my original point, the guy is a great coach and did a bunch of great things for Tech. Many of which we hadn’t experienced in decades. But we bled out huge leads on several occasions across different seasons with different players. The common factor was the coaching...and an in game adjustment guru doesn’t let that sort of thing happen.

So, do I think the next staff can live up to that level? Sure, why not. It would be a good asset to have if we could avoid blowing a three score lead for the next ten years to go along with it.

 

[bke1984]

I hear where you’re coming from but seriously what did you expect to see when you opened a thread about the coaching acumen of the previous staff?

I will say that, in general, as a fan of CPJ and a fan of CGC it sucks to know that I can’t say anything nice about one of them without the other coach’s fans taking it personally that I’m dissing the other because I didn’t say the same nice thing about their fave.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Or something negative about one of them with that camp wanting to crucify you for discoutning their entire ability as a coach.

 

[bke1984]

I think half his appeal to this board is that he's a grumpy, stubborn, non-PC boomer. That has zero appeal to me as a 25 year old, but whatever - I don't judge a coach on their attitude and temperament.

As someone who is a Patriots fan, the most infuriating thing to me was the amount of aggressive playcalling CPJ would do. Whereas Bill Belichick is very analytical, CPJ called a game solely through his heart and would never consult probability charts or expected value - again, very old school and stubborn. Consistently every game I would find myself muttering "we shouldn't be going for it here" or "take the points PJ, it's the first ****ing half" or "no need to go for 2 here, tons of time left, stop chasing points now - we can figure out where things stand in the 4th quarter." That kind of gambling is fine when you're playing Clemson or Alabama and you need to gamble to have a chance at winning the game, but we lost more games on raw coaching decisions than we won in my time at a GT fan.

I don't know any teams who do this but I've always felt head coaches should hire a football strategist to take any load off them when it comes to end-of-game/end-of-half time management, 2 point conversions, 4th down conversions, etc...just a dude who stands next to him with a chart of probabilities/expected values and crunches numbers. I've seen scenarios like coaches just letting opponents run the clock down and kick 19 yard GW FGs when they should be letting the opponent score so they can get the ball back with time left to win.

I agree with your sentiment that he was stubborn to a fault.

That said (as a side story) there is some literature that states that you should pretty much always go for two and always go for every fourth and short (not exactly sure what they call short, but both one and two yards are included). The method is all based on expected points that will result from your decision.

There are some high school coaches that follow the philosophy to a T and have done very well. Some of them always on side kick as well...there was a team a few years ago that got up something like 24-0 before the other team ever had the ball.

 

[AUFC]

I agree with your sentiment that he was stubborn to a fault.

That said (as a side story) there is some literature that states that you should pretty much always go for two and always go for every fourth and short (not exactly sure what they call short, but both one and two yards are included). The method is all based on expected points that will result from your decision.

There are some high school coaches that follow the philosophy to a T and have done very well. Some of them always on side kick as well...there was a team a few years ago that got up something like 24-0 before the other team ever had the ball.

I love that kind of stuff so if you have an article talking about expected value in football, I'd be interested in giving it a read. Situation and context, of course, matters when you're talking about this stuff. I know Mike Tomlin moved to only going for 2 on 1st half touchdowns a couple years ago when the NFL PAT percentage dropped to 94%...if you can convert your 2 point conversions at a higher clip than 47%, you definitely should go for it.

 

[takethepoints]

Gt is 5-6 during that time against the hokies. With the wins except 1 we didn't score 30 plus with the majority being in the teens or low 20's. I guess he would say hello and good bye. When they had talent we had a tough time moving the ball. They are not any where near as talented today as they were in the mid 2000's till the last years. IMO

Like, say, in 2009?

Come on, now. Until the last two years, the team that won our game with the Turkies won the Coastal. That we didn't score over 30 all the time is not indicative of, well, anything at all. When you play good teams, you seldom see shootouts.

 

[ScGold]

Like, say, in 2009?

Come on, now. Until the last two years, the team that won our game with the Turkies won the Coastal. That we didn't score over 30 all the time is not indicative of, well, anything at all. When you play good teams, you seldom see shootouts.

The original comment that I'm talking about is Bud Foster says hello. It was sent as if Paul somehow dominated him in head to head and that is not the case. More times than not our defense won those games not the great Paul 3o.

 

[H-Wade]

Like, say, in 2009?

Come on, now. Until the last two years, the team that won our game with the Turkies won the Coastal. That we didn't score over 30 all the time is not indicative of, well, anything at all. When you play good teams, you seldom see shootouts.

Two years?? The last 6 years every team in the Coastal has made the championship game except for UVA. Which means they'll probably make it this year to make it 7 different teams in 7 years.

 

[iceeater1969]

I thought last two years that Will had been the victim of his versatility. He could play either guard and either tackle and not every OL could do that. And we kept having injuries. Keeping Will in his hip pocket meant that Sewak could always have someone who could fill in. Also, I think he wasn't such a good drive blocker that he could clearly beat out Hansen. So keep him at the ready. Then he got a lingering injury and slipped off down the charts.

I've seen this happen before. Often it's a matter of new players that coaches helped recruit after the player involved that they think will ultimately be better. So those players get favored and former starters get set aside; that happened with Shamire when Parker beat him out. It's hard to blame anybody in situations like that. But someone has to get accused. So they do. One thing is for sure, imho; exactly the same controversies involving starting players will emerge under Coach. Take that to the bank.

Don't excuse sewak s 5 years of roster turmoil.

47 players left gt in 4 years.

Of those how many upper classmen ol left.? No kidding sewak needed some one to cover all the holes.

 

[BuzzFeitenSystem]

can it get any worse than losing badly to Minnesota in a December bowl in Detroit with CGC?

Doubt it

How about having losing seasons with no bowl two out of the three seasons preceding this

Doubt it

If CGC goes 25-24 with two bowl wins in his first four seasons it’ll be an improvement