Ken’s Halfway Point Breakdown

[Ash]

They should just keep running the offense that GC wants to install at this point... No reason to adjust significantly. Just keep improving on it and working with it. We will likely see some good glimpses.

That's likely what we are doing. This season is one long Spring Game. Hopefully things will click at some point and 2 out of 3 phases will be in sync.

 

[Jim Prather]

They should just keep running the offense that GC wants to install at this point... No reason to adjust significantly. Just keep improving on it and working with it. We will likely see some good glimpses.

It is a valid point of view. I am curious about your rationale though? Do you think we already have the players to be a competitive team and just have not performed? Do you feel that our offensive line is going to become good pass blockers later in the season? Or is it as simple as "Let's take the hit this year and shoot for next year?"
I am legitimately curious?

 

[ibeattetris]

Last year, an awful lot of our linemen were in the 260’s, 270’s, and 280’s.

Is this inside information? I have looked at depth charts and our official roster and no OL on our team was listed in the 260's. I picked an early game, middle and bowl game depth chart

USF depth chart had
276
280
287
285
282

Louisville depth chart
276
280
287
310
282

Minnesota depth chart
276
280
305
310
282

I am sure that this isn't considered large, but it seems like a stretch to include 260's and 270's when only one player was in the 270 range and came in at 276.

 

[year_of_the_swarm]

It is a valid point of view. I am curious about your rationale though? Do you think we already have the players to be a competitive team and just have not performed? Do you feel that our offensive line is going to become good pass blockers later in the season? Or is it as simple as "Let's take the hit this year and shoot for next year?"
I am legitimately curious?

I think its the latter.... take the hit this year and shoot for next year. Get the schemes down, make enough plays with "our" scheme to show recruits about what it will look like, etc.

Doing this will also give the coaches what they need to evaluate in terms of positions... Run your scheme.... who gets it? Who got better? Who doesn't fit at all? Go identify recruits that can execute these plays, etc.

 

[Sidewalking]

So what offense should they run is the question? You suggested 2 back with a lead blocker. Cool, but are you going to block the correct person and push the pile?!? Should we go back to the TO and have non TO coaches call a TO game? Good luck with that.

Story time:

I transitioned in 2008 from an aggressive zone blitz Tenuta scheme to a read n react Cov 4 based Wommack scheme. The coaching staff thought it would be good idea to keep half of Tenuta blitzes to merge Wommack scheme. What happened miscommunication galore. Ex. Tenuta blitzes were designated with bird names that began with the blitzer who going. So let’s use Wren which is WLB blitz. Under Wommack, he thought it was bright to change the names of the linebackers. So the SLB became the Wolf & the WLB became the Stinger. So imagine the thinking that went on when those blitzes were called. Also, when you are calling a game with something you are not comfortable with, when do you call that Tenuta blitz vs. your particular scheme?
Changing schemes creates doubt and will have you losing players quicker than most realize.

I always thought Womack's renaming of the LB positions was cheesy and stupid. Now I know it also hurt us in games. SMH Why do so many coaches insist on bringing their particular brands of cheese everywhere they go? I thought it was smart of Collins to retain as much language as possible as he came in to reduce this kind of confusion. Coaches should use what they want but in a transition a slow roll out of brand new seems much smarter.

 

[Ibeeballin]

I always thought Womack's renaming of the LB positions was cheesy and stupid. Now I know it also hurt us in games. SMH Why do so many coaches insist on bringing their particular brands of cheese everywhere they go. I thought it was smart of Collins to retain as much language as possible as he came in to reduce this kind of confusion. Coaches should use what they want but in a transition a slow roll out of brand new seems much smarter.

What hurt us in games is when don’t have your own picked coaching staff and you have 3 different voices and get 3 different answers on how the play should be ran

 

[slugboy]

Is this inside information? I have looked at depth charts and our official roster and no OL on our team was listed in the 260's. I picked an early game, middle and bowl game depth chart

USF depth chart had
276
280
287
285
282

Louisville depth chart
276
280
287
310
282

Minnesota depth chart
276
280
305
310
282

I am sure that this isn't considered large, but it seems like a stretch to include 260's and 270's when only one player was in the 270 range and came in at 276.

Here's a screenshot from last year (see https://www.foxsports.com/college-football/georgia-tech-yellow-jackets-team-roster?season=2018). I couldn't fit everyone in for 2018. Go to the Fox website for this stuff--it's easy to sort by position.
We did have some over 300.

Here's this year:

For comparison, here's NCST for this year:

 

[Ibeeballin]

@Jim Prather it could create confusion. We run power already so doing it from another formation shouldn’t be an issue we just need to execute it when it’s called upon

 

[ibeattetris]

Here's a screenshot from last year (see https://www.foxsports.com/college-football/georgia-tech-yellow-jackets-team-roster?season=2018). I couldn't fit everyone in for 2018. Go to the Fox website for this stuff--it's easy to sort by position.
We did have some over 300.
View attachment 6977
Here's this year:
View attachment 6978
For comparison, here's NCST for this year:
View attachment 6979

Ok that makes sense. I was looking only at two deep depth charts https://ramblinwreck.com/2018-football-game-notes-depth-charts/ example USf:

Example Minnesota:

I also wonder about the fox sports data with regards to freshman as it doesn't match the roster information:
https://ramblinwreck.com/sports/m-footbl/roster/season/2018-19/

 

[gtg391z]

Usually that weights listed on depth charts are on the heavier side too.

 

[ibeattetris]

Usually that weights listed on depth charts are on the heavier side too.

Right, but if every team’s depth chart is on the heavier side, then it should even out.

 

[BleedGoldNWhite21]

I’m not a 100% convinced there wasn’t a way to make the transition on offense a little more gradual that may have made us a bit more competitive, but at this point, that’s moot. We’re halfway through the season and we are what we are(1-5). We might as well continue to rip the bandaid off and get these guys as much reps as possible and try and impress recruits with our new playbook.

 

[Sidewalking]

What hurt us in games is when don’t have your own picked coaching staff and you have 3 different voices and get 3 different answers on how the play should be ran

Nothing beats being on the same page! lol

 

[takethepoints]

Right, but if every team’s depth chart is on the heavier side, then it should even out.

Actually, I think Tech reported pretty sccurate weights, largely because we didn't have an incentive to push the weights up given the way the spread option works. The OL was always a lean, mean fighting machine. Now, I don't know. One encouraging sign: Hansen was listed at 325 last year and 314 now. If we had a weight fetish I don't think that would happen.