Justin Thomas

[upwgdrb]

We had such a storied history of recruiting Heisman QBs for the life of me I can't figure out why we went away from that model. Probably the same reason we went away from recruiting defensive lineman.

First typically we have been a solid two deep and some years three deep at qb since CPJ has been here.
Josh Jaybo
Josh Tevin
Tevin Vad
Vad JT Byerly
JT Byerly

The best qb ever in CPJ's offense was Tracy Ham. Disregarding academics, I don't think he comes to Tech in today's world. He was a true dual threat qb. Today's really good dual threat QB is good with being based in a running offense but they also want to be in an offense that gives them a true chance to throw and be successful. We don't have that right now.

If we ever want to even get a sniff at a title run we are going to have a player like that. To me it means we need to modify our passing offense and embrace the run and shoot concepts it is based around. We typically are going to throw the ball 10 to 15 times a game. That's 20% of the plays. Let's be as good at that as we are running the option.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

This wouldn't surprise me. JT is not durable enough to take the punishment he got this year. Not his fault but his parents for not making him bigger / beefier. (Tic)

JT was awful passing this year. And apparently couldn't run the mid-line well. I hope there is robust QB competition coming up. One of my biggest concerns will be his psyche after losing 9 games.

If we can't have two serviceable QBs, at some point we have to admit that this offense doesn't work for GT.

Guess you had better go ahead and write this scheme off then. We actually had what you are calling for last year. Had it set this year before Byerly was injured. Does every scheme need two starting capable QBs in your book or just our current one?

 

[Leonard Larramore]

JT has two injured shoulders, a bum ankle, and may have to have offseason surgery to repair damage.

The more we know, the less of a knucklehead we all sound like.

I family member confirmed what you're stating

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Surgery at the end of the season could mean he won't be available in the spring, or fall camp even. Prayers for all our guys injuries and healing.

 

[Leonard Larramore]

I family member confirmed what you're stating

Oops A family member

 

[kg01]

JT has two injured shoulders, a bum ankle, and may have to have offseason surgery to repair damage.

The more we know, the less of a knucklehead we all sound like.

Mainly replied in hopes more folks would read this. Kid doesn't deserve all the vitriol he's receiving from GT "fans".

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Doesn't deserve a lot of that carp even if he wasn't hurt.

 

[upwgdrb]

Guess you had better go ahead and write this scheme off then. We actually had what you are calling for last year. Had it set this year before Byerly was injured. Does every scheme need two starting capable QBs in your book or just our current one?

We ask an awful lot of our QB's physically. They take a pounding. Almost every year we have seen QB performance erode as the season goes on. We hear the same thing, he is banged up. So based on that, I do think it is more critical to have a more than capable backup and probably a third guy that you would not hesitate to put in.
We need two guys that do play. Like I said one or two series a game in relief.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Guess you had better go ahead and write this scheme off then. We actually had what you are calling for last year. Had it set this year before Byerly was injured. Does every scheme need two starting capable QBs in your book or just our current one?

In my "book" (admittedly not a best seller), I think heavy running schemes should have two QBs who are used regularly. I agree it is nice for any scheme though. As we have discussed on other threads, passing QBs get hurt too. It seems they take fewer hits but the ones they do take can be more catastrophic. Running QBs just get plain beat up. And it reduces their effectiveness since they are people too.

I know people on this board don't like to hear this, but maybe the "conventional" NFL wisdom is correct about running schemes being too dangerous for their QBs. I think as you go up from HS to D2 college to D1/P5 college to NFL, the amount of damage done to running QBs increases. So the career of the running QBs will be much more limited by injury compared to pro style QBs.

I think we have a few good QB candidates in the system. Others know a lot more about their potential than they do. If we get to the place where we can play two QBs regularly, maybe we will do as well as last year again (as long as the other 10 players on O do their job).

 

[bke1984]

JT was a warrior this year. I've already stated that he probably shouldn't have played on Saturday given his physical state. Losing Byerly this year was bad...might have been the worst injury of the year outside of Gotsis. With him I think we punch the ball in from the one against UNC and go on to win, and he would have gotten the nod last Saturday...we might even win that game.

 

[danny daniel]

If thats the case then, I want to know why or how they regressed so much. CPJ kept talking about the number of freshman on the line not helping JT. Maybe I mis understood

Freshmen on the line because the seniors played so poorly they got replaced by the Freshmen later in the season.

 

[GTRX7]

JT was a warrior this year. I've already stated that he probably shouldn't have played on Saturday given his physical state. Losing Byerly this year was bad...might have been the worst injury of the year outside of Gotsis. With him I think we punch the ball in from the one against UNC and go on to win, and he would have gotten the nod last Saturday...we might even win that game.

I agree. Losing Byerly hurt a ton! I think he would have played meaningful snaps in probably 35-40% of the games. (Also removed Jordan from the A-Back competition, which turned out more costly once we lost Cottrell, Qua, Taquon, Snoddy, etc.)

As others have mentioned, JT is a stud, but is also a bit limited in what he excels at due to his size. He is not the best on 3rd & 4th and short, does not run the midline the best, and is not a great passer over rushing lineman. What he does do, is excel on plays in space. Last year, we had lots of reverses and interesting scheme plays to take advantage of that. This year, without Shaq, our line just couldn't execute those same plays. CPJ has said many times that he had to stop running certain plays because certain guys on the line just weren't capable of blocking them. We also were largely ineffective at getting to the middle linebacker. I think JT's skill set and the o-line skill set just didn't match up this year and I think Byerly would have been able to bridge that gap in certain games/situations. Jordan was just not ready.

 

[GTRX7]

Also, the difference in turnover margin this year compared to last year cannot be over-emphasized. We can chalk up a few of our losses this year to turnovers (and special teams in at least the Duke game). The other biggest area was our ability to put pressure on opposing QBs. That is the one that worries me the most, as I don't see how we get that fixed next year. I wish we would play as aggressive as we played last year every year. That said, next year our secondary will be a lot younger and less experienced, so it is a double edge sword.

 

[yellojello]

In my "book" (admittedly not a best seller), I think heavy running schemes should have two QBs who are used regularly. I agree it is nice for any scheme though. As we have discussed on other threads, passing QBs get hurt too. It seems they take fewer hits but the ones they do take can be more catastrophic. Running QBs just get plain beat up. And it reduces their effectiveness since they are people too.

I know people on this board don't like to hear this, but maybe the "conventional" NFL wisdom is correct about running schemes being too dangerous for their QBs. I think as you go up from HS to D2 college to D1/P5 college to NFL, the amount of damage done to running QBs increases. So the career of the running QBs will be much more limited by injury compared to pro style QBs.

I think we have a few good QB candidates in the system. Others know a lot more about their potential than they do. If we get to the place where we can play two QBs regularly, maybe we will do as well as last year again (as long as the other 10 players on O do their job).

Maybe. But JN was pretty durable, though he would be totally spent at the end of games. For that matter, so was TW.

 

[upwgdrb]

Also, the difference in turnover margin this year compared to last year cannot be over-emphasized. We can chalk up a few of our losses this year to turnovers (and special teams in at least the Duke game). The other biggest area was our ability to put pressure on opposing QBs. That is the one that worries me the most, as I don't see how we get that fixed next year. I wish we would play as aggressive as we played last year every year. That said, next year our secondary will be a lot younger and less experienced, so it is a double edge sword.

Just some stats to consider

2015 14 fumbles lost 10 interceptions
2014 11 fumbles lost. 6 interceptions
2008 20 fumbles lost. 7 interceptions

Just wondering in my mind if this years turnover margin was really as critical as we think it is.

 

[GTL]

Just some stats to consider

2015 14 fumbles lost 10 interceptions
2014 11 fumbles lost. 6 interceptions
2008 20 fumbles lost. 7 interceptions

Just wondering in my mind if this years turnover margin was really as critical as we think it is.

Probably is, but your stats only show the number of turnovers, not the TO margin.

 

[Jacket prime]

Just some stats to consider

2015 14 fumbles lost 10 interceptions
2014 11 fumbles lost. 6 interceptions
2008 20 fumbles lost. 7 interceptions

Just wondering in my mind if this years turnover margin was really as critical as we think it is.

Interesting. Anyone with a bit more time than me want to see what our turnover margin was for those years?

Our turnover numbers look similar to last year, but our defense last year was also really good at generating turnovers as well, which i think evened things out.

 

[Jacket prime]

Probably is, but your stats only show the number of turnovers, not the TO margin.

Yeah, what he said...

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Interesting. Anyone with a bit more time than me want to see what our turnover margin was for those years?

Our turnover numbers look similar to last year, but our defense last year was also really good at generating turnovers as well, which i think evened things out.

This link has the turnover stats for this year. At the top you can look at every year back to 2008.
http://www.cfbstats.com/2015/team/255/turnovermargin/split.html

You'll like the site since it shows how many the O lost and how many the D gained.

And yes turnovers are one of the most important factors in determining who scores the most points. (At least according to Football Outsiders among others.) This year we were +2 in our 3 wins and -9 in our 9 losses.

 

[GTRX7]

Just some stats to consider

2015 14 fumbles lost 10 interceptions
2014 11 fumbles lost. 6 interceptions
2008 20 fumbles lost. 7 interceptions

Just wondering in my mind if this years turnover margin was really as critical as we think it is.

The linked stats just show that this year was our worst year under CPJ in turnover margin (-0.58), while last year was our best (+0.79). Yup, I would say that is a huge difference.

On just the turning it over side, your stats show that we increased our turnovers by 41% from 2014 to 2015 (17 vs. 24). That is a big difference. And we all know that the story on gaining turnovers was even worse. We were exceptional at that last year.