Georgia Postgame

[LibertyTurns]

I'm tired of our fans ****** all over our wins against big schools as if the only way we could have won is by fluke.

GT never has bad luck, injuries, etc. It just happens to the opposition. We only win a lot when everybody we plays completely sucks. Sad, but that’s our fanbase.

 

[GT05]

The Hill doesn’t care about competing against factory football schools. It’s not even on their radar.

If I knew this as fact I’d just stop rooting for them, what’s the point?

 

[pbrown520]

Overall the game sucked, but I like the aggressive playcalls on ST from Collins. I'm pleasantly surprised also that he doesn't seem to clamp down on the offense. IF he gets it rolling we could be tough and aggressive, which is fun to watch.

 

[lv20gt]

GT never has bad luck, injuries, etc. It just happens to the opposition. We only win a lot when everybody we plays completely sucks. Sad, but that’s our fanbase.

The hell are you talking about? People point out our injuries all the time from season wide problems, like in 2015 and this year, to it was certainly mentioned just about every game when Nesbitt went down in 2010.

 

[Lee]

7-8 games? Watson started the next game against USC east and then 3-4 weeks later Stoudt started in the bowl game. Also, the "cold back up" is a bad argument as well. If a coaching staff hangs all its hats on the starting QB they have failed. The best coaches have the backups ready to play any time, just like Saban had a cold QB play in, and win, the national title game. We held Clemson to less than 200 yards and obliterated their passing game. Our defense held one of Watson's redzone forays and forced the FG. We won that game, and we did it with better play, better coaching, and better preparation. I'm tired of our fans ****** all over our wins against big schools as if the only way we could have won is by fluke.

Haha okay. Having a potential first round qb ready to play in a national championship game after having all of halftime to put a gameplan in place for said qb is the same as having a relative unknown ready to come in the first quarter in the middle of a series when their best player goes down is exactly the same. Quit reaching.

I’m not crapping on our team or our wins. You of all people who love to bring up FACTS should be able to realize that not having Watson for more the 75% of the game greatly increased our chances of winning that game. How anyone could argue that is beyond me.

Our guys still had to make plays and did so. I enjoyed every minute of that game. That doesn’t change the fact that Watson getting hurt was a huge break for us in that game. Do you disagree?

To put it another way, do you think the Bama Auburn game would’ve looked different with a healthy Tua? Did Auburn benefit from him not playing? What if Fields went out on the 3rd drive against UM last week when they were trading scores. Do you think that game would’ve turned out differently? Would OSU still have the same chances of getting in the playoff? I’d bet Vegas would change the odds in a heartbeat if that was the case.

FYI our offense scored 1 td in that Clemson game. I find it hard to believe that would’ve been enough to beat Watson. Even harder to believe he would’ve throw. 2 pick 6’s. If you think Watson going out didn’t increase our chances of winning that game, then you’ve got some ulterior motive behind your argument.

 

[pbrown520]

The hell are you talking about? People point out our injuries all the time from season wide problems, like in 2015 and this year, to it was certainly mentioned just about every game when Nesbitt went down in 2010.

Pretty sure his post was sarcasm...

 

[Vespidae]

If I knew this as fact I’d just stop rooting for them, what’s the point?

This is a surprise? President Petit tried to end the program, but was cornered by some very powerful alumni. Other than providing tuition waivers, the Hill doesn’t really provide much of anything to GT athletics. That’s the GTAA role.

 

[LibertyTurns]

The hell are you talking about? People point out our injuries all the time from season wide problems, like in 2015 and this year, to it was certainly mentioned just about every game when Nesbitt went down in 2010.

Just read the posts on here- GT wouldn’t have won except for .......... (fill in the blanks).

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Haha okay. Having a potential first round qb ready to play in a national championship game after having all of halftime to put a gameplan in place for said qb is the same as having a relative unknown ready to come in the first quarter in the middle of a series when their best player goes down is exactly the same. Quit reaching.

I’m not crapping on our team or our wins. You of all people who love to bring up FACTS should be able to realize that not having Watson for more the 75% of the game greatly increased our chances of winning that game. How anyone could argue that is beyond me.

Our guys still had to make plays and did so. I enjoyed every minute of that game. That doesn’t change the fact that Watson getting hurt was a huge break for us in that game. Do you disagree?

To put it another way, do you think the Bama Auburn game would’ve looked different with a healthy Tua? Did Auburn benefit from him not playing? What if Fields went out on the 3rd drive against UM last week when they were trading scores. Do you think that game would’ve turned out differently? Would OSU still have the same chances of getting in the playoff? I’d bet Vegas would change the odds in a heartbeat if that was the case.

FYI our offense scored 1 td in that Clemson game. I find it hard to believe that would’ve been enough to beat Watson. Even harder to believe he would’ve throw. 2 pick 6’s. If you think Watson going out didn’t increase our chances of winning that game, then you’ve got some ulterior motive behind your argument.

Sure it increased our chances, but I am pretty sure we would have won that game anyways. At that point in the season, our team had hit its stride and was a hairs breath away from winning the ACCCG.

Also, Saban put in an untested freshman back-up QB. He wasn't a "potential first round QB" at that point...

 

[Lee]

GT never has bad luck, injuries, etc. It just happens to the opposition. We only win a lot when everybody we plays completely sucks. Sad, but that’s our fanbase.

You must not have followed the whole conversation so I’ll catch you up. Another poster brought up Minnesota being 5-1 in one score games and how they’ve been lucky. Someone else brought the 2014 season into the conversation and the original poster said we didn’t get lucky.

That is where I brought up GSU, Clemson and dwags. I was reminded of how we were screwed royally in the dwag game but also reminded how we easily could’ve lost the VT game.

Nobody is saying what you’re insinuating. Augusta just can’t understand how one of the best QBs in Clemson history getting hurt and missing more than 75% of the game increased our likelihood of winning said game.

I am if the personal opinion that we get screwed way more than we get lucky. Especially when it comes to playing the leghumpers. I’m bordeline tinfoil hat when it comes to officiating the COFH game. I think the refs screw us any chance they get. Several BS PI calls in this past game extended drives for them. Not that the outcome would’ve changed, but it wouldn’t have been as ugly.

 

[LibertyTurns]

Pretty sure his post was sarcasm...

No there’s guys on here that try to diminish victories we’ve had all the time. They apparently think that if prior wins are not as significant it makes the current situation better..

 

[pbrown520]

No there’s guys on here that try to diminish victories we’ve had all the time. They apparently think that if prior wins are not as significant it makes the current situation better..

That's exactly what I thought you were saying; the fanbase in general tends toward this one sided view of all GT games. I am one that happens to view everything GT in a more pessimistic light. I guess what I am trying to say is I didn't think you were being literal.

 

[Lee]

Sure it increased our chances, but I am pretty sure we would have won that game anyways. At that point in the season, our team had hit its stride and was a hairs breath away from winning the ACCCG.

Also, Saban put in an untested freshman back-up QB. He wasn't a "potential first round QB" at that point...

You’re “pretty sure” we would’ve won. No way to know. I’m 100% sure having Watson play a full game would have made it much more difficult to win that game. I’m not arguing if our team was good enough to win with or without him in the game. My original point is that we were lucky he got hurt and did not play more than 75% of the game. That is not debatable. Go ask any defensive coordinator you can find who they would rather face. A healthy Watson or a cold off the bench Stoudt. I guarantee you 100% will say Stoudt. It’s okay to be wrong. I am all the time. You are this time.

As for Tua, he threw for almost as many yards as our qb did that year. Not quite untested. He also was and elite talent and clearly the better passer which is why Saban put him in. It would’ve been like having Kelly Bryant return as a starter who took your team to the playoff the year before and having a freshman by the name of Lawrence. The separation between hurts and Tua was not quite the same, but Tua was a lot closer to Lawrence as a freshman than Stoudt. Comparing Tua to Stoudt is asinine.

 

[Lotta Booze]

It was historic because it was UGAs largest margin of victory ever over us. It was also the most punts we have ever had in a game against anyone. Those are historic facts that can’t really be disputed. If you are going to argue raw offensive stats compared to last years game then you should also probably mention that we had 5 less possessions to get 5 more first downs, 14 more points, and more yards.

I agree though. 2018 was an awful game and we need to do better. Unfortunately in 2019 we did far far worse. Here’s hoping we have reached the bottom of the barrel.

Of course those are historic facts that can't be disputed. But the point I'm trying to make is that in year 11 with our Hall of Fame Head Coach and Offensive Coordinator with a Senior QB he recruited specifically for his system we did....marginally better on offense compared to a coach in year 1 of a rebuild with a RS Freshman QB who doesn't even have his first full recruiting class on campus yet. And part of the reason they did marginally better on offense is because the game was completely out of hand by halftime.

We were in the game at half and one decent kicker away from being within a score. Would anyone really be feeling better about the loss if we were completely blown out in the first half but then scored some garbage points to avoid the "historic margin of victory"? I wouldn't. We were in the game with the no. 4 team in the country at half. That exceeded my expectations. And then it got ugly.

 

[GT05]

This is a surprise? President Petit tried to end the program, but was cornered by some very powerful alumni. Other than providing tuition waivers, the Hill doesn’t really provide much of anything to GT athletics. That’s the GTAA role.

Then what’s the complaining about? If the school doesn’t want to play with the big boys then why back them and expect a different outcome? IIWII

 

[Vespidae]

Then what’s the complaining about? If the school doesn’t want to play with the big boys then why back them and expect a different outcome? IIWII

I’m not sure I know what you are talking about. The Georgia Institute of Technology (the school) is not involved in athletics. The Georgia Tech Athletic Association is.

That’s one of the reasons Tech is not an attractive coaching position compared to a factory. But ... there is no reason Tech can not compete and win in the Coastal. The ACC in general, is a far weaker conference than say, the SEC.

 

[WreckinGT]

Of course those are historic facts that can't be disputed. But the point I'm trying to make is that in year 11 with our Hall of Fame Head Coach and Offensive Coordinator with a Senior QB he recruited specifically for his system we did....marginally better on offense compared to a coach in year 1 of a rebuild with a RS Freshman QB who doesn't even have his first full recruiting class on campus yet. And part of the reason they did marginally better on offense is because the game was completely out of hand by halftime.

We were in the game at half and one decent kicker away from being within a score. Would anyone really be feeling better about the loss if we were completely blown out in the first half but then scored some garbage points to avoid the "historic margin of victory"? I wouldn't. We were in the game with the no. 4 team in the country at half. That exceeded my expectations. And then it got ugly.

The game was out of hand by halftime last year because UGA had a much better set of receivers, their QB wasn't throwing the ball like he was drunk, and we weren't gifted two turnovers and an onside kick recovery. You don't get brownie points because the other team kept getting in their way for one half of football. A 21 point difference on the road isn't marginally better and we had plenty of chances to score garbage points yesterday. We just weren't good enough to move the ball against their 2nd and 3rd stringers after they started taking their starters out in the 3rd quarter.

 

[Lotta Booze]

The game was out of hand by halftime last year because UGA had a much better set of receivers, their QB wasn't throwing the ball like he was drunk, and we weren't gifted two turnovers and an onside kick recovery. You don't get brownie points because the other team kept getting in their way for one half of football. A 21 point difference on the road isn't marginally better and we had plenty of chances to score garbage points yesterday. We just weren't good enough to move the ball against their 2nd and 3rd stringers after they started taking their starters out in the 3rd quarter.

I'll give our guys credit for having a hand in the turnovers, onside kick, and keeping the mutts in check for the first half. But agree to disagree

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

You’re “pretty sure” we would’ve won. No way to know. I’m 100% sure having Watson play a full game would have made it much more difficult to win that game. I’m not arguing if our team was good enough to win with or without him in the game. My original point is that we were lucky he got hurt and did not play more than 75% of the game. That is not debatable. Go ask any defensive coordinator you can find who they would rather face. A healthy Watson or a cold off the bench Stoudt. I guarantee you 100% will say Stoudt. It’s okay to be wrong. I am all the time. You are this time.

As for Tua, he threw for almost as many yards as our qb did that year. Not quite untested. He also was and elite talent and clearly the better passer which is why Saban put him in. It would’ve been like having Kelly Bryant return as a starter who took your team to the playoff the year before and having a freshman by the name of Lawrence. The separation between hurts and Tua was not quite the same, but Tua was a lot closer to Lawrence as a freshman than Stoudt. Comparing Tua to Stoudt is asinine.

You can't be 100% sure Watson would have made the game more difficult to win. He could have played a stinker. ALl things are debatable. What isn't debatable is the outcome. We won. Period. And not a bit of this we were lucky crap matters. For all the fortunate breaks we had in 2014, we'd have needed a mountain more this year just to break .500 for the season. Crapping on the 2014 teams wins is a bad look. THAT is what is wrong...

 

[Lee]

You can't be 100% sure Watson would have made the game more difficult to win. He could have played a stinker. ALl things are debatable. What isn't debatable is the outcome. We won. Period. And not a bit of this we were lucky crap matters. For all the fortunate breaks we had in 2014, we'd have needed a mountain more this year just to break .500 for the season. Crapping on the 2014 teams wins is a bad look. THAT is what is wrong...

False. I can say with absolute certainty that Watson would've made the game more difficult to win. He got half of their first downs in back to back drives before he got hurt. Was he going to forget how to play football? Watson could have played the worst game of his career and he would still give them a better chance to win than a cold Stoudt. It's obvious you don't know how to admit you're wrong. That's fine. You win. If Watson played the whole game we would have won by a larger margin because Paul would have called a better game and we would've scored more than one offensive TD because he's the best coach in the whole world and anyone who even hints at maybe mentioning something that could potentially be perceived as negative about him is just a big meanie...

On another note, work on your reading comprehension. Nobody is craping on the 2014. I swear you love mr Paul Johnson and will defend them man even when he's not being challenged. Go back and read my comments about the season. I think we could've played with anybody in the country at the end of the year. Our d may not have held up, but the way we were rolling, I wouldn't have bet against us. Don't understand why people like you can't see that it's possible to say we had an awesome team and also say that we caught some breaks.

Heck, look at Clemson this year against UNC. They very well might be the best team in the country, but if they lost that game, they most likely would've been on the outside looking in. It's possible to be really good and catch breaks. The freaking dwags do it every year.