Hire Geoff Collins

[MidtownJacket]

@forensicbuzz I remembered someone calling for the naked bootleg and thinking, “Yeah - let’s run that shiiiiii” but couldn’t recall who or why I though that much bourbon could fit in my veins.

 

[85Escape]

You calling it misery doesn’t make it so. I’m talking about football. You are the one putting an emotion on it. I am very unemotional. When we do good I say it. When we do bad I say it. We played 60 minutes of football and scored a total of 6 offensive points. That’s not me being miserable. Maybe we did make Clemson play horribly. They also made us play horribly. I don’t give a rip about Clemson so my mind is always about GT. GT coaches botched both times we were inside the 10. That’s 0 for 2 In a game we lost by 6. Making a comparison from last years game to this years is a fools errand because Clemson lost a lot and we lost no one except Harvin. I’m a Collins homer. I’m always a GT coach homer until they make me look like a fool for being one. Collins has sold us something about 2021 so I’m going to believe him until he makes me look like a fool to believe him. So far it’s not much different than last year no matter the rhetoric. Beat UNC and now Collins can crow by beating a ranked team.

So, if you want to be all logical and stuff answer me this. What is the basis of your 'played horribly' assertion?

It sounds like to me that 'scoring a lot of points' is how you define the 'not horribly' end of the scale. Since the score was low both sides 'played horribly.' There is no logic in that at all. That's just an opinion stated as fact and masquerading as logic. It is just as valid to say that both sides played excellent football in a defensive game that demonstrated the teams' ability to dig in, fight and grind out a win against an excellent opponent.

Seriously. You've reached an opinion that it was horrible play and have convinced yourself that it is an objective point of view.

The worst lies we tell are the ones we tell ourselves.

 

[Scubapro]

Our "goal line" shovel pass occurred at the 2 yard line.

Here are multiple shovel passes, just from the NFL, that went for TDs from the 5 yard line in:








If our OG makes that block, we are most likely talking about a different outcome today. It wasn't a bad call, just bad execution. Of course, there are things that could go wrong as well...and you see it some in the video.

All the videos are blocked but I will take your word for it that it happens more than I realize. IMO It still doesn't make it a good play for our players at the time.

 

[gtie73]

All the videos are blocked but I will take your word for it that it happens more than I realize. IMO It still doesn't make it a good play for our players at the time.

As stated above if the guard had made his block we score a td. All that is what if’s.we need to move on to UNC.

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

So, if you want to be all logical and stuff answer me this. What is the basis of your 'played horribly' assertion?

It sounds like to me that 'scoring a lot of points' is how you define the 'not horribly' end of the scale. Since the score was low both sides 'played horribly.' There is no logic in that at all. That's just an opinion stated as fact and masquerading as logic. It is just as valid to say that both sides played excellent football in a defensive game that demonstrated the teams' ability to dig in, fight and grind out a win against an excellent opponent.

Seriously. You've reached an opinion that it was horrible play and have convinced yourself that it is an objective point of view.

The worst lies we tell are the ones we tell ourselves.

You may be right. I accept that. But in year 3 of a system and we can’t score a single TD. So I guess we are already mentally prepared with not scoring a TD against UGA either. Every year we will play someone with a top defense whether it’s Clemson, UGA, or VT. I’m not willing to accept that we should just say “we’ll they are good so we should be happy we got 3 out of every red zone appearance”. Year 1 I was fine with that. Heck, we couldn’t even get 3 out of the red zone for 2 years. We should be past the point of giving our coaches passes for scoring 6 points in 60 minutes. Clemson is not a juggernaut this year. Unfortunately, UGA is. I am not looking forward to that game at all. UNC will tell me a lot regarding if we are actually getting better or if we are the same team we saw week 1.

 

[IM79]

All the videos are blocked but I will take your word for it that it happens more than I realize. IMO It still doesn't make it a good play for our players at the time.

Scubapro, please take the time to open the last video in Youtube. trust me, it's worth the time to click on the youtube link and take a look.

It is a great breakdown of how the shovel is supposed to work. It's an option off the play-side def end. The presenter does a great job.

 

[Techster]

I find very little to criticize in that game as far as play calling. Sometimes you make the right call and it just doesn’t work out.

Rewatched parts of the game tonight and was impressed all over again with how well the team played. How to use time outs still seems a little like an adventure but so many other things feel like they are firing on all cylinders.

It was a loss, but that was the best all around game I've seen in the CGC tenure. Still stuff to smooth out for the team and the staff, but I felt a LOT better about our team after the game than I've felt since the 2020 FSU win.

Even better yet, from a recruiting standpoint, CGC can point to the game and tell an elite recruit "See, if we had you there, we could have done X, and we might have won the game against one of the best teams in the country." The Clemson game was truly a game that one special play could have been the difference. Either on the offensive side or defensive side.

 

[GCdaJuiceMan]

Clemson lost a lot and we lost no one except Harvin. I’m a Collins homer.

Well that's insulting to the guy who scored the only TD against Clemson last year and others.

 

[IEEEWreck]

It was an awesome call. Exactly what was needed. One lineman didn't do his job and we were stopped on the 1 yard line. It wasn't cute, it was a great call.

Disclaimer: The proceeding was my opinion. Others may agree or disagree (depending on whether they want to be right or wrong).

I'm not the best at seeing football, but it seems to me that it wasn't like we weren't getting that block all day long, so it wasn't an unreasonable call.

Beyond that, the sweep was getting beat fairly consistently and any other run play would have imploded with that block not being there, no? Well, unless you have a crystal ball and run it to the other side anyway.

 

[Jacket05]

You may be right. I accept that. But in year 3 of a system and we can’t score a single TD. So I guess we are already mentally prepared with not scoring a TD against UGA either. Every year we will play someone with a top defense whether it’s Clemson, UGA, or VT. I’m not willing to accept that we should just say “we’ll they are good so we should be happy we got 3 out of every red zone appearance”. Year 1 I was fine with that. Heck, we couldn’t even get 3 out of the red zone for 2 years. We should be past the point of giving our coaches passes for scoring 6 points in 60 minutes. Clemson is not a juggernaut this year. Unfortunately, UGA is. I am not looking forward to that game at all. UNC will tell me a lot regarding if we are actually getting better or if we are the same team we saw week 1.

I am confused. On one hand you say that it is unacceptable for an offense to not score a TD in a game, but on the other hand you call ugag a "juggernaut" this year even though they did not score an offensive TD against Clemson (and had less yards than we did).

I also don't understand how you say ugag is a juggernaut but Clemson is not when the only difference in the game was a pick-6.

 

[TromboneJacket]

Agreed...we really need to figure out our red zone offense. P-net tries to be cute inside the 25 and it costs us points and a chance at the win. The biggest tell was right before the shuttle pass play. Patenaude called the play the player's faces and body language were all WTF.

Of course he tries to get cute in the red zone. That’s the only way we’ll be able to score at this point. Our O-line isn’t at the point where we can just run it into the teeth of the defense successfully. Not to mention our Tight Ends are still a work in progress. I’m sure Patenaude would love to just run Power O or Inside Zone to get a few yards and a TD, but that doesn’t work too well when we can’t control the Line of Scrimmage, and the defense is pinched in and condensed to the toward the LOS.

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

I am confused. On one hand you say that it is unacceptable for an offense to not score a TD in a game, but on the other hand you call ugag a "juggernaut" this year even though they did not score an offensive TD against Clemson (and had less yards than we did).

I also don't understand how you say ugag is a juggernaut but Clemson is not when the only difference in the game was a pick-6.

Because I have eyes. The Clemson/UGA game was a typical game 1 where both teams were super conservative because it was game 1. Move to game 3 and UGA is now rolling. Clemson is sputtering which is why one team is ranked 2 and the other outside the top 10. Most folks without gold glasses see it the same way as I do. By the end of the year I expect Clemson to be rolling because their coaches have a proven track record. But these things have nothing to do with GT.

GT played hard against Clemson. I give the players big props, even though I’d also say that’s kind of what they should do every week for 3 months. But the issues of the coaching side are still there. So no I don’t feel warm and fuzzy after we didn’t score an offensive TD, just like UGA didn’t feel all warm and fuzzy. Let’s see if we take it out on UNC like they did on USC.

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

Of course he tries to get cute in the red zone. That’s the only way we’ll be able to score at this point. Our O-line isn’t at the point where we can just run it into the teeth of the defense successfully. Not to mention our Tight Ends are still a work in progress. I’m sure Patenaude would love to just run Power O or Inside Zone to get a few yards and a TD, but that doesn’t work too well when we can’t control the Line of Scrimmage, and the defense is pinched in and condensed to the toward the LOS.

I agree but then why does our coach let his mouth run and build up mythical expectations? Collins himself told us what 2021 was about and so far he has not delivered. He made Cochran and Kirby sound like ply and play NFL guys. Yet the reality is we can’t run the ball when it needs to be run. Collins should have tempered expectations this off season but he did the opposite.

 

[ibeattetris]

Not to mention our Tight Ends are still a work in progress.

That's actually my only problem with the call. Why have a play that might be dependent on a TE in a "got to have it situation". I don't mind shovel passes in general.

 

[forensicbuzz]

That's actually my only problem with the call. Why have a play that might be dependent on a TE in a "got to have it situation". I don't mind shovel passes in general.

Because they’ve worked on it and Clemson would not be looking for it. Combination of practice and surprise.

 

[TromboneJacket]

That's actually my only problem with the call. Why have a play that might be dependent on a TE in a "got to have it situation". I don't mind shovel passes in general.

Funny, I feel the opposite way. I don’t mind this play because it was unexpected for Clemson and nearly got the touchdown, but I don’t generally like shovel passes. I just don’t really get the point, except as a trick play.

 

[Buzztheirazz]

Since you asked...we could have run a play action with Gibbs as a decoy....maybe a play action with a roll out RPO.
You know why you don't see shuffle passes on the goal line situations hardly EVER?
Because it's not an appropriate play for the situation.
Go find me an example of it working. You might find one.

Andy Reid does it with Kelce all the freaking time. Pretty sure McVey uses it too. It was a great play call we just ran into a 6th year senior LB who sniffed it out. AND had an OL there. Would be a good 2 pt conversion call if something else had worked on the TD

 

[ibeattetris]

Because they’ve worked on it and Clemson would not be looking for it. Combination of practice and surprise.

The reason the play did not work is because a defender was able to read it, and we were not able to execute the blocks necessary. Maybe Clemson wasn't expecting it, but their players defended it well enough to stop it. If we worked on it, we need to work harder and make sure we execute our blocks when the other team's players are ready to make a play. This is why I would prefer to have let one of our top play makers make the play. I'm not upset at the call, but I personally think we have made better goal line calls in the past.

 

[danny daniel]

Forget the triple option. Just look at how Johnson's O was so reliable to score with a first down inside the 7. Most everybody agrees was a small and below avg Oline. QB under center. B/Back/Tail/B, F/B behind the QB in 3 point ready to blast ahead (no delay) or slightly left or right. QB hands off to the back or pulls and hits the adjacent hole. If you do not get in do it again/again. Does not require multiple substitutions or so much indecision to cause you to use a valuable time out. Lower risk for turnover or penalty. Ideal for our Mason and QBs. Still have the option threat to go outside or RPO to a slant. This is not the out thinkum part of the field. Second and two is almost a gimme with three tries using this scheme . If coach P would do this with a first down inside the ten on downs 1-3 I would be happy and support whatever he play called on fourth down.

 

[Lee]

Forget the triple option. Just look at how Johnson's O was so reliable to score with a first down inside the 7. Most everybody agrees was a small and below avg Oline. QB under center. B/Back/Tail/B, F/B behind the QB in 3 point ready to blast ahead (no delay) or slightly left or right. QB hands off to the back or pulls and hits the adjacent hole. If you do not get in do it again/again. Does not require multiple substitutions or so much indecision to cause you to use a valuable time out. Lower risk for turnover or penalty. Ideal for our Mason and QBs. Still have the option threat to go outside or RPO to a slant. This is not the out thinkum part of the field. Second and two is almost a gimme with three tries using this scheme . If coach P would do this with a first down inside the ten on downs 1-3 I would be happy and support whatever he play called on fourth down.

I agree with what you said about CPJ’s offense for the majority of the time he was here.

It may be fuzzy memory, but I feel like that wasn’t the case towards the end of his tenure for whatever reason. I feel like we needed a big play to score (at least against good teams) the last few years and struggled to sustain drives.

I went and checked before finishing the post. Our redzone offense CPJ’s last 4 years were:

2015: 94
2016: 53
2017: 22
2018: 85

We did have one good tear in there, but it wasn’t great. That being said, it’s been brutal since Collins has been here. FG kicking has impacted this a good bit, but being 130 and 122 in his first 2 years if just bad.

That definitely needs to improve if we’re going to start winning games consistently. We are currently at 68 and ahead of teams like Florida, BC, and NC State. Need to be closer to top 30 to be considered to have a good offense IMO.

Edit: interestingly, we were 80th in redzone offense in 2014 if you can believe that. I guess we were just so explosive that year many of our scores came on chunk plays.