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
#GTvsCUSE Postgame
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="slugboy" data-source="post: 748464" data-attributes="member: 282"><p>Yep, Pitt has a legit pass rushing D, and that’s been a mismatch for us this year. BC has one of the better offensive lines in the conference too, so while that’s a tossup on paper, unless we find a way to pressure the QB that’s another rough game. </p><p>Duke and NCST are possibly our best matchups remaining. </p><p></p><p></p><p>It’s a GT tradition. </p><p></p><p></p><p>It looks like you’re trying to use “CFR” for “Coach Ralph Friedgen” and “CGL” for “Coach George O’Leary”, but you’re probably the only one using those initials for those coaches. I can’t remember anyone using those initials for those coaches. </p><p></p><p>Friedgen didn’t “take advantage of GT student athletes” if the traditional sense of that phrase; he had some of the most athletic recruits we’ve seen on the flats both times he was here. Traditionally, that phrase means “I’m going to use a schematic advantage or outthinking you for my 280 pound player to beat your 315 pound player”; Friedgen players were comparable to the ones on the other sideline, and some were better. Also, Ralph was famously not a recruiter, and needed other people on the staff to bring players in. </p><p></p><p>College football has changed since his day. Some of the offensive tactics he introduced were ahead of his time, but they’ve been incorporated into schemes at places his coaching fraternity worked—places like UCF—and even though he would add tactical wrinkles, his scheme would not look foreign to most defensive coordinators these days. </p><p></p><p>Ralph had and relied on a big and physically powerful offensive line. It took several years under Ross to develop the team—the first couple were ugly. The 1990 team was definitely not built in a day, and the building process looked a lot like what we’re going through right now. </p><p></p><p>I find it bizarre that people use Ross, O’Leary, and Friedgen as examples of why fans shouldn’t be patient and grind through losing seasons and poor play on the way to something better—that’s exactly what Ross’s first two years were like. The stadium wasn’t full of people watching brilliant coaches and knowing they would turn the team around—you could buy a decent walk up ticket in the second quarter of a game for his first two seasons, and students and fans were grumbling that we’d never have a good team.</p><p></p><p>I’m not saying that Collins is going to achieve anything like those other coaches. I am saying that those coaches aren’t the examples for your argument—they’re the examples against your argument.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="slugboy, post: 748464, member: 282"] Yep, Pitt has a legit pass rushing D, and that’s been a mismatch for us this year. BC has one of the better offensive lines in the conference too, so while that’s a tossup on paper, unless we find a way to pressure the QB that’s another rough game. Duke and NCST are possibly our best matchups remaining. It’s a GT tradition. It looks like you’re trying to use “CFR” for “Coach Ralph Friedgen” and “CGL” for “Coach George O’Leary”, but you’re probably the only one using those initials for those coaches. I can’t remember anyone using those initials for those coaches. Friedgen didn’t “take advantage of GT student athletes” if the traditional sense of that phrase; he had some of the most athletic recruits we’ve seen on the flats both times he was here. Traditionally, that phrase means “I’m going to use a schematic advantage or outthinking you for my 280 pound player to beat your 315 pound player”; Friedgen players were comparable to the ones on the other sideline, and some were better. Also, Ralph was famously not a recruiter, and needed other people on the staff to bring players in. College football has changed since his day. Some of the offensive tactics he introduced were ahead of his time, but they’ve been incorporated into schemes at places his coaching fraternity worked—places like UCF—and even though he would add tactical wrinkles, his scheme would not look foreign to most defensive coordinators these days. Ralph had and relied on a big and physically powerful offensive line. It took several years under Ross to develop the team—the first couple were ugly. The 1990 team was definitely not built in a day, and the building process looked a lot like what we’re going through right now. I find it bizarre that people use Ross, O’Leary, and Friedgen as examples of why fans shouldn’t be patient and grind through losing seasons and poor play on the way to something better—that’s exactly what Ross’s first two years were like. The stadium wasn’t full of people watching brilliant coaches and knowing they would turn the team around—you could buy a decent walk up ticket in the second quarter of a game for his first two seasons, and students and fans were grumbling that we’d never have a good team. I’m not saying that Collins is going to achieve anything like those other coaches. I am saying that those coaches aren’t the examples for your argument—they’re the examples against your argument. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
How many points did Georgia Tech score against Cumberland in 1916?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
#GTvsCUSE Postgame
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