Has the hype been humbled?

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
You know what's finna be humbled?

All ya'll foo's that choose not to get on the wagon now.

Future's bright and when we start winnin', some-a y'all are gonna have tight faces. Knowin' you wanted us to fail ..

andy_freaking_out.gif

U R projecting again
 

Billygoat91

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
484
Post of the month.
Dont be a stranger!!

I have in my past been a littke haughty about being a TECH MAN, but have figured out it leads to no where. The best thing cgc has done is make gt a welcoming place for all.

Thank you iceeater. I have been a long-time lurker and just joined up over the summer before the season started. This truly is a great community despite all the in-fighting.
 

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,674
Thank you iceeater. I have been a long-time lurker and just joined up over the summer before the season started. This truly is a great community despite all the in-fighting.

If we can get content like your post it is.


I love the start of whose the best qb /bb discussion- like the old days.

Keep posting !!
 

gtpi

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,642
Location
BFE , south carolina
havent we just gotten a number of 4 star players from the portal? that wouldnt have happened before due to the limitation of the to.

AND before you start comparing stars... lets compare stars after some of these sa's graduate. that would be the fair thing to do. no?
 

RickStromFan

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
899
Sad. #Sad I had to parse this out so much for you to actually comprehend it....I hope.

You need to work on your editing skillz and usage of the
this tag, Whisky
feature.

I have no "narratives" (one of your favorite labelings here) other than a desire for GT to win football games. But the following statement wasn't wrong last night, when a few fans were supporting Laskey's now-deleted-because-it-was-embarrassing Tweet. Laskey himself clearly saw he was out of line.

me said:
Tolerance and even tacit support of former players trashing current ones is a true narrative and one even Laskey appears embarrassed enough to have deleted.

I'm done with this topic, Whisky. We both want the same things for GT football so let's just leave it at that. :beercheers:
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,222
CGC lovers need to calm down a little. Folks that think we are awful need to calm down a little. It was a bad loss. But there is some good along with the bad to take away.

Don’t condemn the D. Clemson probably has the best O in the nation this year. The D did some good things at times against an O that will make all but the most elite Ds look putrid.

We lack a pass rush from the edge still. And I’m worried a little about being able to set the edge consistently.

Secondary looked good imo. We will not face a QB anywhere near as good the rest the season. We won’t face a better group of receivers the rest of the way. Ditto OL, ditto RB. Clemson O is that good imo. Our D will be improved. We badly need a pass rush from the edge and stronger LB play. I’d be tempted to go 5-2-4 with DTs across the front and our fastest LBs behind them. That’s a huge digression.

Stop hating on the QBs. Y’all are so quick to condemn the team and starting QB. Clem D isn’t as good this year but they are good. Venables is very good and his guys were ready. Their secondary blanketed our receivers most of the night. Our OL looked terrible in pass pro. Worse than last year. The run blocking was better than pass pro but it wasn’t very good. Our backs earned tough yardage tonight. That Clemson LB is nasty nasty. No easy sledding running the ball.

Our weakest link is OL. I figured it would be with personnel changes.

The scheme on O. Omg it was not pretty...it was not exciting...it didn’t look like anything any prospect would ever want to play in. Start with first and goal at the 3.....and get embarrassed. That single set of downs was damning. Running those crap run plays from the gun. Just damn. That BS direct snap was completely telegraphed and the whole world saw it coming. Patanaude gets a game 1 grade of F.

I wonder if Tech is doomed to always be bad on one side of the ball. Get a good D the O will suck. Get a good O the D will suck.

Special teams was also mostly ugly. If only we had a special teams coach.......

Against Clemson everything seemed to suck. It’s just one game though. We have a good chance of winning the next 3 and washing this from our memories a little.
The secondary looked good at times. They looked horrid at times as well. And they're less than half the entire D, anyway. What, 4 guys out of 11? You can't make a D out out of 4 guys on the back end.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
The secondary looked good at times. They looked horrid at times as well. And they're less than half the entire D, anyway. What, 4 guys out of 11? You can't make a D out out of 4 guys on the back end.

My main take away on our secondary stems from the Clemson WR group. There may not be a better group in the nation. Our guys hung with them for the most part and didn’t give them many freebies. All with zero pass rush. Let me say that again....zero pass rush.

I think our secondary is a strength and will give most teams tough sledding.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
This thread is wild but I gotta say this.

I can't believe some of y'all turned off the game when we got down! First game of the season and a couple rough quarters is all it took for you to bail on the team?!? No interest in seeing how the team finished the game?!?

Standard operating procedure for a large portion of the fan base.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,222
My main take away on our secondary stems from the Clemson WR group. There may not be a better group in the nation. Our guys hung with them for the most part and didn’t give them many freebies. All with zero pass rush. Let me say that again....zero pass rush.

I think our secondary is a strength and will give most teams tough sledding.
I agree completely, but you aren’t gonna win many game with 4 players on D.
 

pbrown520

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
586
That’s maybe 3 or 4 players out of 85. Plus there are spread teams that go almost entirely with wide receivers. Plus half the teams are G5/non-P5.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It depends on how they did it. A lot of teams will have 6-7 TEs on the roster. Either way, sheer mass across the roster is meaningless. Do you think we have the 115th best talent?
 

smokey_wasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,486
It depends on how they did it. A lot of teams will have 6-7 TEs on the roster. Either way, sheer mass across the roster is meaningless. Do you think we have the 115th best talent?

It's not everything, but it certainly isn't meaningless, especially in the trenches.
 
Top