Kirby Syndrome or Syracuse Envy?

[GPD]

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.

Great articulation of your ideas Longest... I agree with you on all points.

Regarding envy... do very much envy Ga’s ability to recruit ANYONE (within reason) that wants to go there and play football. I would very much approve of Tech taking measures to give Coach MUCH more flexibility in recruiting. That alone would have an immediate and stunning effect on our results.

Can you imagine being a premier Institute, in a premier city, in a premier conference...?

We should recognize the benefits of enhancing our athletic performance and make the necessary adjustments TODAY.

Syracuse, no sir, don’t envy Syracuse in any way whatsoever

 

[ATL1]

I definitely think there is Kirby syndrome, but not Syracuse envy. I like Syracuses offense and I thing eventually they may have a good team, but ultimately a good coach is a good coach whether he runs the option or "pro" style.

 

[Techster]

Answer: C. None of the above.

I have Alabama envy. GT should recruit top 3 classes every year, and play in the national championship every other year. Anything less is a failure!

 

[BobintheATL99]

I definitely think there is Kirby syndrome, but not Syracuse envy. I like Syracuses offense and I thing eventually they may have a good team, but ultimately a good coach is a good coach whether he runs the option or "pro" style.

There is something interesting about offense style. I've read elsewhere that NFL coaches are having issues with O Linemen coming in from spread teams and not knowing how to play. They are so used to quick schemes that they can't pass block. It's not a conference thing either. It's common everywhere.

 

[BobintheATL99]

Answer: C. None of the above.

I have Alabama envy. GT should recruit top 3 classes every year, and play in the national championship every other year. Anything less is a failure!

Who let this guy in here???
LOL

 

[ATL1]

There is something interesting about offense style. I've read elsewhere that NFL coaches are having issues with O Linemen coming in from spread teams and not knowing how to play. They are so used to quick schemes that they can't pass block. It's not a conference thing either. It's common everywhere.

That's the same argument that is made about GT's offense.

 

[jeffgt14]

Lol UGA isn’t having any more success under Kirby than they had under Richt. Some of y’all get caught up in the same in the same SEC hype ESPN does. SEC East is T-U-R-R-I-B-L-E.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

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. Saturday 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 Saturday...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.

FIFY

 

[Techster]

There is something interesting about offense style. I've read elsewhere that NFL coaches are having issues with O Linemen coming in from spread teams and not knowing how to play. They are so used to quick schemes that they can't pass block. It's not a conference thing either. It's common everywhere.

Look at what Andy Reid at Kansas City and now Bill O'Brien is doing at Houston. Both have implemented "college" schemes into their offense. KC is obliterating everyone, and O'Brien is making rookie DeShaun Watson a world beater with the same concepts Watson was using at Clemson. You could say the same for Belichick at New England incorporating Leach's 4 Verts passing schemes years ago.

The NFL has a problem with innovation. No one wants to try anything until someone else does it successfully first. Look at every big offensive concept that has been used in the past decade or so: Wildcat, read option, RPO, Air Raid concepts...on and on. Once one coach uses it to beat someone, no one else is willing to do it. But once it's used, everyone wants to do it.

I really wish an NFL team would take a chance on CPJ or Coach Ken at Navy. The NFL wouldn't know what to do with someone like CPJ who gets 40 full hours a week with his players, and more time to work on passing.

 

[Coloradojacket]

Here is the best way to think about this, since 2008, the arrival of CPJ, how many times has Miami, NC State, UVA,BC,Syracuse, Louisville, Pitt, and Wake Forest gone to the ACCG.....yep that's right....none. Us three times.

 

[BobintheATL99]

That's the same argument that is made about GT's offense.

The thing I find crazy about that is that we don't put many linemen in the league, but when we do, they start and win the SuperBowl...

 

[Animal02]

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)

I would add it was not an embarrassment either, as some others have claimed.

 

[JorgeJonas]

Upsets happen all the time. If they didn’t, we wouldn’t even play the games. The idea, though, that we’re somehow going to transform ourselves is nuts. We are a member of the middle class, and that’s fine. Quit looking at the rich and being jealous.

It is possible that we find a coach who could elevate the program to the rich, but there may be costs associated with that. We could go hire Art Briles tomorrow and probably win more than we are now, but does anyone really want that?

 

[jeffgt14]

I would add it was not an embarrassment either, as some others have claimed.

I would think an argument could be made that VT has one of the top offenses in the ACC. They were losing at home to Clemson 24-3 at the start of the 4th Quarter just like we were. They returned a punt to the 2 yard line to score their first TD in the 4th and scored another TD with about a minute left and lost by 14 just like us.

 

[Skeptic]

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.

Well, this is new. How do they know? They might sometimes guess based on the first movement of quick motion by an Aback, which is about a millisecond ahead of the snap. But that is a dangerous game to be playing. I am pretty sure that the snap count varies, not by much but it doesn't have to. (That -- to me -- silly fake play we use looking for a penalty instead of a kick is the exception). Are you saying we also go on the same count? Or am I missing something?

 

[Skeptic]

... Tech will never be a consistent contender for the NC. It will be when the stars align, but not year in and year out.

This will get you nowhere. Have you not learned that message boards are where logic and common sense go to die?

 

[MikeJackets1967]

Look at what Andy Reid at Kansas City and now Bill O'Brien is doing at Houston. Both have implemented "college" schemes into their offense. KC is obliterating everyone, and O'Brien is making rookie DeShaun Watson a world beater with the same concepts Watson was using at Clemson. You could say the same for Belichick at New England incorporating Leach's 4 Verts passing schemes years ago.

The NFL has a problem with innovation. No one wants to try anything until someone else does it successfully first. Look at every big offensive concept that has been used in the past decade or so: Wildcat, read option, RPO, Air Raid concepts...on and on. Once one coach uses it to beat someone, no one else is willing to do it. But once it's used, everyone wants to do it.

I really wish an NFL team would take a chance on CPJ or Coach Ken at Navy. The NFL wouldn't know what to do with someone like CPJ who gets 40 full hours a week with his players, and more time to work on passing.

The same thing Dan Reeves did with Michael Vick on the Falcons

 

[DCSS]

Answer: C. None of the above.

I have Alabama envy. GT should recruit top 3 classes every year, and play in the national championship every other year. Anything less is accepting mediocrity!

Fixed to reflect what others have actually said.

 

[Jacket prime]

Well, this is new. How do they know? They might sometimes guess based on the first movement of quick motion by an Aback, which is about a millisecond ahead of the snap. But that is a dangerous game to be playing. I am pretty sure that the snap count varies, not by much but it doesn't have to. (That -- to me -- silly fake play we use looking for a penalty instead of a kick is the exception). Are you saying we also go on the same count? Or am I missing something?

a little hyperbole never hurt anybody.

i don't think its a new issue. i recall we made some adjustments a few years back when defenses seemed to key on the count by timing the aback motion. we added some hard counts, even resetting the a back in the middle of the arc motion.

i'm just pointing out that we don't seem to leave ourselves enough time to do any of that anymore and i think it could be helpful against aggressive defenses who like to just crash our wide splits.

it could very well just be confirmation bias, but it seems like we've burned several timeouts in the last three years to avoid delay of game penalties and it seems like forever since we've gotten a defensive lineman to jump offsides.

 

[Dustman]

it could very well just be confirmation bias, but it seems like we've burned several timeouts in the last three years to avoid delay of game penalties and it seems like forever since we've gotten a defensive lineman to jump offsides.

It might seem like forever but it actually happened earlier this season. (Pitt game maybe?) And sometimes we are just looking to see if the safeties are reacting to the motion and coach calls a counter after the timeout that results in a long TD run by the QB. (Wake game)