Kirby Syndrome or Syracuse Envy?

[Longestday]

After some thought, I think some of our fans have Kirby syndrome. They see Georgia doing well and they think all GT has to do is change coaches/scheme to compete for the NC.

I also wonder if some fans have Syracuse envy. They want to be Syracuse because they beat Clemson. Do you really want their record over the last 10 years?

Please compare records and or spending to make a completely informed decision. Take the red pill please for a dose of reality. If you want to be like Syracuse, then go be a Syracuse fan (you can still root for GT). If you want to be a Georgia, go be a Georgia fan (you can still root for GT except for the Saturday after TG).

GT needs to change if GT is going to compete. This means more money. I am not sure if CPJ would go fire all his coaches if he got the green light to hire anyone he wanted. I'll cross that bridge if that bridge is ever built. But for now, CPJ gives us a better record than any school with our budget. I don't think there are many schools with our budget and GT's limitations that are outperforming GT.

Even if I was wrong, there are issues to consider. Say a top notch excellent coach comes with a traditional offense and does well at GT with all the limitations that have been put in place for the last 15 years (This is not your 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and even 90s football field). Do you think he will stay with what GT pays and the limitations on recruiting to a Stem school? GT is lucky to have a coach that performs above standard when comparing resources, but is too stubborn to leave. How many times in a row will GT pick a good coach? How much money will GT be behind as GT fires coaches and pays them their contract?

For disclosure, I am an option fan boy and may be blind. But GSU just backs up my point. You can hate the offense and want it changed for style reasons, but the data does not indicate that the NC is GT's if only they change coaches or scheme or pass more. And no, I don't want to drop a level... GT can compete at this level just fine. Seldom are we blown out and most games are within a score from winning.

 

[jayparr]

agree 100%

 

[WrexRacer]

We'll see how our record looks next year when we stop playing so many teams coming off a bye week. That rule change is probably worth an extra win each season.

 

[Madison Grant]

We'll see how our record looks next year when we stop playing so many teams coming off a bye week. That rule change is probably worth an extra win each season.

Yes, we get it ACC. You don't like the option, and wish we'd just fill the conference doormat role you envision for us so the FSUs, Clemsons and Miamis of the conference can compete in notoriety with the SEC powers. $$$$

 

[travgt01]

Don't have either of those.

Cuse won bc they played up tempo, which I guess gt is incapable of. I was hoping cpj would at least try running the no huddle especially once we fell behind.

Drunk *** Kirby is doing well bc the Sec east is garbage...and they have a team full of 5* recruits, most of which couldn't make it at GT with the best tutors and easiest classes we offer. They have one good W, by one point. Muschamp did well in his 2nd yr at UF....and we know how that turned out.

But if it takes uga doing well for gt to up it's game and compete, then go dwags.

 

[Skeptic]

After some thought, I think some of our fans have Kirby syndrome. They see Georgia doing well and they think all GT has to do is change coaches/scheme to compete for the NC.

I also wonder if some fans have Syracuse envy. They want to be Syracuse because they beat Clemson. Do you really want their record over the last 10 years?

Please compare records and or spending to make a completely informed decision. Take the red pill please for a dose of reality. If you want to be like Syracuse, then go be a Syracuse fan (you can still root for GT). If you want to be a Georgia, go be a Georgia fan (you can still root for GT except for the Saturday after TG).

GT needs to change if GT is going to compete. This means more money. I am not sure if CPJ would go fire all his coaches if he got the green light to hire anyone he wanted. I'll cross that bridge if that bridge is ever built. But for now, CPJ gives us a better record than any school with our budget. I don't think there are many schools with our budget and GT's limitations that are outperforming GT.

Even if I was wrong, there are issues to consider. Say a top notch excellent coach comes with a traditional offense and does well at GT with all the limitations that have been put in place for the last 15 years (This is not your 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and even 90s football field). Do you think he will stay with what GT pays and the limitations on recruiting to a Stem school? GT is lucky to have a coach that performs above standard when comparing resources, but is too stubborn to leave. How many times in a row will GT pick a good coach? How much money will GT be behind as GT fires coaches and pays them their contract?

For disclosure, I am an option fan boy and may be blind. But GSU just backs up my point. You can hate the offense and want it changed for style reasons, but the data does not indicate that the NC is GT's if only they change coaches or scheme or pass more. And no, I don't want to drop a level... GT can compete at this level just fine. Seldom are we blown out and most games are within a score from winning.

If Johnson renamed his backs to standard nomenclature as RB or FB, and talked more about route trees and power dive football, once in awhile ran in somebody he called a tight end, even in a WR slot, nobody would say a word. As for another offense, I think that was tried. I am not a Tech grad, just a long-time fan with no dog in the fight, other than I too like option football -- don't help pay Johnson, wouldn't help pay somebody else -- so there is that to consider. But sometimes as I weed through some spurious arguments pro and con, I am struck by what I consider curious logic: the sometimes overweening pride in the stringent academic reputation and requirements of the institution, and the often accompanying argument that they present no barrier to recruiting. Always seems odd to me.

 

[Jacket prime]

Cuse won bc they played up tempo, which I guess gt is incapable of. I was hoping cpj would at least try running the no huddle especially once we fell behind.

the primary reason i'd be interested in seeing us go no-huddle occasionally is to give us more time to change the snap count, particularly on when we're playing on the road. as it stands, we run the play into the huddle, get lined up then check the play at the line, and there seems to always be around 5 or 6 second left on the play clock. not enough time to vary the snap count, so everyone in the stadium knows when we're going, and the good DLs get a jump on the ball.

 

[Animal02]

After some thought, I think some of our fans have Kirby syndrome. They see Georgia doing well and they think all GT has to do is change coaches/scheme to compete for the NC.

I also wonder if some fans have Syracuse envy. They want to be Syracuse because they beat Clemson. Do you really want their record over the last 10 years?

Please compare records and or spending to make a completely informed decision. Take the red pill please for a dose of reality. If you want to be like Syracuse, then go be a Syracuse fan (you can still root for GT). If you want to be a Georgia, go be a Georgia fan (you can still root for GT except for the Saturday after TG).

GT needs to change if GT is going to compete. This means more money. I am not sure if CPJ would go fire all his coaches if he got the green light to hire anyone he wanted. I'll cross that bridge if that bridge is ever built. But for now, CPJ gives us a better record than any school with our budget. I don't think there are many schools with our budget and GT's limitations that are outperforming GT.

Even if I was wrong, there are issues to consider. Say a top notch excellent coach comes with a traditional offense and does well at GT with all the limitations that have been put in place for the last 15 years (This is not your 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and even 90s football field). Do you think he will stay with what GT pays and the limitations on recruiting to a Stem school? GT is lucky to have a coach that performs above standard when comparing resources, but is too stubborn to leave. How many times in a row will GT pick a good coach? How much money will GT be behind as GT fires coaches and pays them their contract?

For disclosure, I am an option fan boy and may be blind. But GSU just backs up my point. You can hate the offense and want it changed for style reasons, but the data does not indicate that the NC is GT's if only they change coaches or scheme or pass more. And no, I don't want to drop a level... GT can compete at this level just fine. Seldom are we blown out and most games are within a score from winning.

Nice logical post. There will always be a pendulum team or two riding the wave of popularity, Currently it is Alabama and Clemson, in the past it was FSU, Miami, Nebraska, U Mich, Ohio State. It is natural for kids that want the fast ride to the NFL to gravitate to those "hot" teams for the exposure. People have short memories.......remember VT and their NC aspirations just a few short years ago? Outside of 2015 (when we still beat FSU) Tech has been on the good side of the bell curve of college football. Most schools would love to have our record combined with our academic reputation. When you have season ticket holders stating that they will sell their seats to UGAG fans because, God forbid, we hung with but lost to a highly ranked team by two touchdowns, there is no way that Tech will fill a stadium consistently enough to support the higher expenditures. Tech will never be a consistent contender for the NC. It will be when the stars align, but not year in and year out. As with basketball.....how many top athletes coming out of HS are willing to ride the bench waiting for their turn while putting up with the academics when their counterparts are taking non existent classes up the road? Football and basketball are GAMES. For a select few it becomes a paycheck in the end. Until the mindset changes that every kid entering D1 has a great shot at the paycheck, Tech will continue to have the same issues. For those that think Tech should and or will water down its academics for the sake of Football or basketball.......go cheer for the team an hour down the road.

 

[wvGT11]

Agree mostly.
Most of us on here would like us to be somewhat competitive against teams like Clemson, Miami or Georgia, but the reality is that we are pretty much on par with the majority of schools in ACC. The exception is Clemson, Miami and sometimes VT or FSU. I'd wager right now that our 2014 team would not have beaten a 2016 or 2017 Clemson team either just based on how we did against FSU in the ACC championship that year. The schools above have just gotten to a point where they are out doing GT in most every area on improving the teams where we are just staying within our means. You could say a lot of the same things with the SEC, this year Its mainly Georgia and Alabama and maybe Auburn and everyone else is pretty on par below them.

I guess the real question is does this school want to put forth the changes to academics, money, recruiting etc to step this program up a notch to compete with the larger programs now?

CPJ said in one of his pressers that the team lists out goals for the year from winning coastal, beating Georgia to winning a NC. What are the schools goals and what they would like to see every year? Is it just to beat Georgia?

 

[bke1984]

I’m pretty happy with what we are for the most part. We are playing pretty damn well this year and still have a chance at the division. Thursday didn’t change that at all, and actually losing that game was part of the scenario I outlined.

I’m not disappointed we lost that game Thursday...I’m disappointed in how we looked. That’s a ton of experience on the field that laid the egg.

Yes, Clemson is good, but so are we, and no D line should ever make us look that inept. It was pretty much every single play. There were times when 7 guys were in or backfield before the play could even get off the ground. So the entire team missed their assignment on the same play and we are blaming the execution? Or even better argument...they’re just that good. Really? Clemson is good but they aren’t the ‘85 Bears. We were outmatched, but not to that extent. That starts to point to coaching a little bit don’t you think? Talent too for sure, but we can’t jaut say the coaches did a great job and it’s all on the players.

When that starts to happen we just need to start running the simplest play in the book until everyone calms down. CPJ even said that to some extent, but says he waited too long. We just can’t let games snow ball on us like that if we want to be competitive. And going in we need to anticipate being outmatched from a talent standpoint and game plan better to exploit the over aggressiveness.

At the end of the day it’s one game. Unfortunately there have been three “one games” this year already. Need to win the next three to have a shot at the division, and I don’t think that is all that far fetched.

 

[pbrown520]

From my standpoint, I will say that my posts are largely being misconstrued. I think that we can and should do better offensively against Clemson. I think part of the reason we don't is because we expect our guys to be able to counter what Clemson does without making special or larger changes to what we do schematically or systematically. I don't expect the end result to be all that different consistently, but it would be nice to at least have a shot at moving the football without miracle plays. We had what 6 or 7 3 & outs? PJ doesn't agree that we need to change anything other than execution. Fair enough, he knows the offense better than anyone. I do think that PJ has lost some of the innovation that he once had with the system. He is still a game day genius and that's good enough for what we are - 7 win average with the occasional uptick year. But we rarely if ever try anything to get the other team out of sorts, because all of that seems to be pretty much a gimmick and unnecessary to PJ. That's fine, he is most likely right - as others have said he sees practice every day.

Let me say this to be clear. I know that GT is limited in football. We will never be a powerhouse program. PJ is a great coach and is close to maximizing GT's success. I like PJ. I just wish that he could find a way to make us look not so incompetent against Clemson.

 

[BobintheATL99]

I guess I'm not a disappointed in the loss as some are. I haven't torn my clothes and committed hari-kari. My thoughts going in were that we needed to execute perfectly (we didn't), establish the middle run game (we didn't until late in the game, and then that QB got injured again), and have some things bounce our way (actually, we did get a fumble and officiating seemed pretty good outside of maybe some holding... Punting was stellar). If those things happened we stood a chance to win, but if they didn't we were going to lose and likely by a lot.

The folks looking at Kirby, he has the keys to the kingdom of a recruiting machine, and really has only one win of significance to show for it as the rest of his division is just awful. He is getting in to some deeper competition now, but really likely won't see anything resembling a real team until Auburn. Case in point, the talking heads aren't banging the SEC supremacy drum like they did all during the run of National Championships. (sidenote: the beginning of that run had Florida, Alabama, and a bunch of much lesser dwarves getting beat down much like now) Let the season play out. We pretty much always give them a game regardless of how good they are. That's why Paul is our coach.

Historically Syracuse is a great program, but @CuseJacket is right. We don't want to trade places with them.

 

[MountainBuzzMan]

I would call the gnashing of teeth the "Alabama Syndrome" Everyone in the SEC keeps firing their head coaches when they cant beat Alabama. So what do they end up with? A league that is mostly full of bad coaching. Alabama's success has made the SEC a much weaker conference due to all the coaching turnover.

Lets fire our coach because we can't beat Clemson or at least change what we do to make us look better. Even though we accounted for ourselves pretty well by comparison to other Clemson opponents. Sure we could have done a few things better, but missed reads and bad blocking was the key issue in that game. I thought the D played well for the most part.

 

[stech81]

I like CPJ hope he stays a long time. Any offense can to stopped with a good defense. IMO it would not help if Saban or any other coach was at Tech and had to follow the same rules that CPJ has to follow. I know most people on here love Tech but the fact is very few High school football players want to put in all the work it takes to study and play football at the same time. People need to by happy with what we have, ask any Nebraska fan if they would like to go back to the option.
As for uga I don't give a rats *** about them.

 

[collegeballfan]

IMO it would not help if Saban or any other coach was at Tech and had to follow the same rules that CPJ has to follow.

Yep!

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

Have never read, heard or seen one GT fan say they want to be like cuse in football.

Have read the last 2 weeks that CPJ said he would like to pass more, or WTTE.

And some think if coach really does want to do that, why keep our very low % attempt passers under center, adding 1 to 2 seconds for dropping back against a very good DL when our guys are not blocking for .25 to .50 seconds on a run play.

Being totally inflexible is not, to me, the best way to prove you are an O genius. Obviously CPJ could make this work better. Too stubborn and sometimes our young men suffer.

 

[quadf]

Good perspective @Longestday.

I'd echo similar sentiments regarding our peers in the acc. The sheer number of those that don't have our academic (or other) limitations who we at least keep up with if not beat regularly should be a reality check. FSU proved that with all of the shoes in the world you may still have bad years. UNC proved that a complete lack of classes can still lead to a decade of mediocrity. UL with the reigning heisman winner, no academic restrictions, and all of the fast-food pizza in the world just lost to wake (loss #4). You guys should really check out their wins and losses this year for some perspective.

 

[MacJacket]

Losing to Clemson is not disappointing. They are full of studs 2 deep at every position. Losing the opener to UT was disappointing. We were the better team and if we pull that game out, I'd wager all my worldly possessions that we would have beaten Miami as well. We would be 6-1 with a loss to a probable playoff team. As long as Dabo keeps that staff together, they are a very tough out for anybody. We simply cannot recruit the 5 Stars like Clemson, UGA, and Miami. We have to get old and stay old. We've done a pretty good job at doing this on defense, A-back, QB, WR, but the Oline has been our Achilles. I think if we could go 7-10 deep without drop off, we would be incredible.

I don't have a problem with our coaches or staff other than there are not enough of them. Hopefully Stansbury can add some positions and pony up more money.

 

[BobintheATL99]

I guess I'm not a disappointed in the loss as some are. I haven't torn my clothes and committed hari-kari. My thoughts going in were that we needed to execute perfectly (we didn't), establish the middle run game (we didn't until late in the game, and then that QB got injured again), and have some things bounce our way (actually, we did get a fumble and officiating seemed pretty good outside of maybe some holding... Punting was stellar). If those things happened we stood a chance to win, but if they didn't we were going to lose and likely by a lot.

The folks looking at Kirby, he has the keys to the kingdom of a recruiting machine, and really has only one win of significance to show for it as the rest of his division is just awful. He is getting in to some deeper competition now, but really likely won't see anything resembling a real team until Auburn. Case in point, the talking heads aren't banging the SEC supremacy drum like they did all during the run of National Championships. (sidenote: the beginning of that run had Florida, Alabama, and a bunch of much lesser dwarves getting beat down much like now) Let the season play out. We pretty much always give them a game regardless of how good they are. That's why Paul is our coach.

Historically Syracuse is a great program, but @CuseJacket is right. We don't want to trade places with them.

As an add on to this, I think our defense played REALLY WELL in the loss. Most teams that Clemson plays end up getting ground down and giving up a bunch of points late. We gave up:
TD on blown/bad coverage after a fumble
2 TDs on long drives (I'd expect this against any decent team)
1 FG on a stalled drive after half
NO MORE POINTS THE REST OF THE GAME

We didn't get ground down like most teams do against Clemson. I'd tender that while the game wasn't ever really in doubt, we weren't really blown out either.

I don't think we are far from where we need to be with what we have. (i.e., without some huge influx of talent, wouldn't trade our current roster as they're all good kids)

 

[BobintheATL99]

...Hopefully Stansbury can add some positions and pony up more money.

We are fortunate to have him. I'm hearing rumors that changes are coming to level the playing field.