Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Exciting times just around the corner!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="33jacket" data-source="post: 49367" data-attributes="member: 628"><p>No what I am saying is Hill has such a HUGE learning curve coming purely from our O with no proset basis it is hard for him to learn it in time (mornigwheg runs a reallly complex O) to make a splash on the NFL timetable</p><p></p><p>The NFL timetable for a player is 2 to 3 years at the most. This fact, is that hill can't seem to learn it in the very quick and unforgiving NFL timeframe. This isn't a topic of intelligence. Its a topic of the fact Hill has had no similar WR playbook or baseline to build off of or at least relate to comparing his Jets playbook to his prior schoolings....making his learning timetable much longer, harder etc. Baybay had the benefit of 2 full years running a more similar proset O. It gave him some baseline to relate too...it really did. He ran slot stuff outside stuff etc etc...the comparisons aren't the same or fair.</p><p></p><p>Look guys you can't have it both ways. You can't say how creative our run game is and it runs 80% of the time, then state it doesn't hurt WR, WR development, the passing game maturation etc. It does in my opinion. Can GT have an effective pass game. TOTALLY. I want us to be like auburn. Not run 80/20, but run 65/35 with a more effective and a tad more complex passing offense. True 3 and 4 wr sets, bigger bodies working the middle zone (how many times have you seen Waller work the middle and squat in the zone??? ZERO, this a classic NFL route...we dont' do it ....at all...its a read LB/S covg zone squat and we don't do it. How many times you see julio jones, CJ etc do it over the middle?? A ton....Now you have to learn to read the D covg pre and post snap, adjust your route and squat in the proper spot in 2.3 seconds. You have to do this with multiple sets, d alignments etc etc...a ton to learn in the NFL when you never did it.)</p><p></p><p>But my point is back to what I was trying to convey from the get go. GT will never have a pass game we can consistently rely on for production. It will always be a luxury, a big play shot here and there etc. Its the way the system is designed. Does that mean its wrong? Does it mean its bad? Nope. It just means what it means. Its designed that way. Its not passer friendly. Its hard to pass out of and hard to block using some of our schemes and so it hurts QBs IMO</p><p></p><p>Personally its wrong for me because I think we do need more balance (auburn levels) and variety in the pass complexity. But for many of you it may be just fine and thats fine.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="33jacket, post: 49367, member: 628"] No what I am saying is Hill has such a HUGE learning curve coming purely from our O with no proset basis it is hard for him to learn it in time (mornigwheg runs a reallly complex O) to make a splash on the NFL timetable The NFL timetable for a player is 2 to 3 years at the most. This fact, is that hill can't seem to learn it in the very quick and unforgiving NFL timeframe. This isn't a topic of intelligence. Its a topic of the fact Hill has had no similar WR playbook or baseline to build off of or at least relate to comparing his Jets playbook to his prior schoolings....making his learning timetable much longer, harder etc. Baybay had the benefit of 2 full years running a more similar proset O. It gave him some baseline to relate too...it really did. He ran slot stuff outside stuff etc etc...the comparisons aren't the same or fair. Look guys you can't have it both ways. You can't say how creative our run game is and it runs 80% of the time, then state it doesn't hurt WR, WR development, the passing game maturation etc. It does in my opinion. Can GT have an effective pass game. TOTALLY. I want us to be like auburn. Not run 80/20, but run 65/35 with a more effective and a tad more complex passing offense. True 3 and 4 wr sets, bigger bodies working the middle zone (how many times have you seen Waller work the middle and squat in the zone??? ZERO, this a classic NFL route...we dont' do it ....at all...its a read LB/S covg zone squat and we don't do it. How many times you see julio jones, CJ etc do it over the middle?? A ton....Now you have to learn to read the D covg pre and post snap, adjust your route and squat in the proper spot in 2.3 seconds. You have to do this with multiple sets, d alignments etc etc...a ton to learn in the NFL when you never did it.) But my point is back to what I was trying to convey from the get go. GT will never have a pass game we can consistently rely on for production. It will always be a luxury, a big play shot here and there etc. Its the way the system is designed. Does that mean its wrong? Does it mean its bad? Nope. It just means what it means. Its designed that way. Its not passer friendly. Its hard to pass out of and hard to block using some of our schemes and so it hurts QBs IMO Personally its wrong for me because I think we do need more balance (auburn levels) and variety in the pass complexity. But for many of you it may be just fine and thats fine. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What jersey number did Joshua Nesbitt wear?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Exciting times just around the corner!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top