Linebaker Situation

[danny daniel]

Undersized but he sure could hit. Played hurt but didn't seem to slow him down. Pure effort and desire. Seemed to sense where the play was going.

I believe PJ Davis was low rated (or not rated) and recruited on signing day by CPJ. The Swarm word was to "cover kicks".

 

[Techster]

Daryl Smith, Key Fox, Philip Wheeler, Gerris Wilkinson, Nick Rogers, Gary Guyton all in a short window. From that group, Charlie can hang with all but Smith, probably. They all brought something different to the game. Charlie's got all the tools. It's going to depend on his ability to read and react. He's a heat-seeking missile when he plays fast.

You want best...Sanford, Swilling, Brooking. From a different era: Morris, Baughan, Matthews Sr.

GT had a GOOD run of LBs in the 90's and early 2000's. We also had a good run of safeties.

 

[nod]

Remember going to Georgia game in Athens one year, UGA was loaded with talent, one of those preseason top 3 ranked teams. But even the UGA fans I was by agreed, LB Phillip Wheeler was best single player on the field.

 

[takethepoints]

i feel like we’re doing the thing everyone did with graham and yates where we pretend like they’re much better players than they really were. when in reality they probably just aren’t great players

knight was definitely a good athlete and probably would have been better on a non collins team, but i’m not sure i would feel good about our linebackers if he was the one starting.

1. Both Yates and, especially, Graham would have been great players in the offense they were recruited to run. In the unorganized smash-up the TFG and company put on the field … well, not so much. Players can be great when they fit what you're doing. Otherwise they have trouble; especially if the OL truly sucks.

2. Since the thread is about the thinness off the present LB room and the difficulties in replacing last year's crew, I'd feel better with a big, fast, experienced player back there. But that's just me.

 

[forensicbuzz]

GT had a GOOD run of LBs in the 90's and early 2000's. We also had a good run of safeties.

You're absolutely right, but that first list was 2002 to 2008. Chan absolutely did a fantastic job identifying and securing serious defensive fire power. If only he would have turned the offense loose...

 

[JacketFan137]

1. Both Yates and, especially, Graham would have been great players in the offense they were recruited to run. In the unorganized smash-up the TFG and company put on the field … well, not so much. Players can be great when they fit what you're doing. Otherwise they have trouble; especially if the OL truly sucks.

2. Since the thread is about the thinness off the present LB room and the difficulties in replacing last year's crew, I'd feel better with a big, fast, experienced player back there. But that's just me.

to your first point, i don’t mean to continue to rag on these players but look at what they’ve done since leaving us. not every player that comes through here and leaves is some great player and the vast majority of our guys that have left have done next to nothing.

i don’t think knight was even that experienced as far as actual on field time and he ended up at charlotte. with all due respect to that program we should have our sights set on higher level athletes. hopefully we can address the depth with someone from the portal that looks a little more promising.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

to your first point, i don’t mean to continue to rag on these players but look at what they’ve done since leaving us. not every player that comes through here and leaves is some great player and the vast majority of our guys that have left have done next to nothing.

To your reply, neither of them ever played in the offense they were recruited to, so

It's best to say that their talent was never utilized the way it was envisioned it would be when they were initially recruited.

 

[JacketFan137]

To your reply, neither of them ever played in the offense they were recruited to, so

It's best to say that their talent was never utilized the way it was envisioned it would be when they were initially recruited.

they both got to pick where to go after and yates played worse and graham got changed positions before quitting. maybe they should have stayed in our offense. both of them at a lower level of football too

i’ve just never understood why some players get so. many. excuses. but knight, and even more so graham and yates are this place’s darlings.

frankly none of them are very good and their position groups have likely been addition by their subtraction

 

[takethepoints]

i’ve just never understood why some players get so. many. excuses. but knight, and even more so graham and yates are this place’s darlings.

Well, in all cases it is a matter of what could have been. Let's take Graham, for instance. Here's his junior year highlight reel:

https://www.fromtherumbleseat.com/2...ruiting-georgia-tech-flips-an-signs-4-star-qb

That is just about the most impressive highlight reel I've seen for a QB in my entire life. He was held back by Paul in his frosh year and then … the TFG. Now, if I was a coach and had that kind of talent available I would have changed my entire O to suit him. We saw what might have happened if we had done that from the first in the 2019 NCST game.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

they both got to pick where to go after and yates played worse and graham got changed positions before quitting. maybe they should have stayed in our offense. both of them at a lower level of football too

i’ve just never understood why some players get so. many. excuses. but knight, and even more so graham and yates are this place’s darlings.

frankly none of them are very good and their position groups have likely been addition by their subtraction

None of what you just said changes the facts as stated. As for staying in our offense, in case you didn't remember, Collins didn't run CPJs offense so that's an argument that doesn't fly either.

What I've never understood is why so many people seem to love trashing our players.

 

[JacketFan137]

None of what you just said changes the facts as stated. As for staying in our offense, in case you didn't remember, Collins didn't run CPJs offense so that's an argument that doesn't fly either.

What I've never understood is why so many people seem to love trashing our players.

you seem to have misunderstood my argument. they should have probably stayed here because somehow they both ended up worse off when they transferred. yates ended up getting benched for playing so poorly and graham quit football. if anything they may have had more opportunity at georgia tech to perform.

also these aren’t even our players so i’m not sure who is trashing our players right now.

 

[UgaBlows]

I believe Graham had issues off the field both at Tech and GSU, so really no telling if he would have been on the field enough to be an impact player under CPJ anyway. I do believe that both he and Yates would have been good option QB’s for Johnson, Graham‘s innate ability to hit the deep ball would have been especially deadly after lulling the DB’s to sleep with the run game. There’s a reason that no other FCS teams offered either of them as QB’s though and we saw it play out.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

you seem to have misunderstood my argument. they should have probably stayed here because somehow they both ended up worse off when they transferred. yates ended up getting benched for playing so poorly and graham quit football. if anything they may have had more opportunity at georgia tech to perform.

also these aren’t even our players so i’m not sure who is trashing our players right now.

Go back and read our exchange. Someone pointed out that Graham and Yates never got to play in the offense they were recruited for, which is absolutely true, then you trashed said players and said they were worse when they transferred out, to which I pointed out that even when they transferred they never got to play in the offense they were recruited for, which is still true. You trashed said players again in a reply which ignored the point I and the other font was making to continue proving your point.

 

[jgtengineer]

Go back and read our exchange. Someone pointed out that Graham and Yates never got to play in the offense they were recruited for, which is absolutely true, then you trashed said players and said they were worse when they transferred out, to which I pointed out that even when they transferred they never got to play in the offense they were recruited for, which is still true. You trashed said players again in a reply which ignored the point I and the other font was making to continue proving your point.

Yates Really needed a run and shoot offense to shine. He went to SMU which promptly changed their scheme to not be this.

Graham would have been amazing in Lundsford's and the modified option GA southern was running... if he had not had other issues that kept him off the field. Southern really suffered because they thought with the transfer QB they had shored up the gap left by Elison and Shaw graduating. Now Helton has shown it doesn't take a monumental transition to go from an option offense to an Air Raid.

 

[JacketFan137]

Go back and read our exchange. Someone pointed out that Graham and Yates never got to play in the offense they were recruited for, which is absolutely true, then you trashed said players and said they were worse when they transferred out, to which I pointed out that even when they transferred they never got to play in the offense they were recruited for, which is still true. You trashed said players again in a reply which ignored the point I and the other font was making to continue proving your point.

and you have ignored what i have said entirely too my man. yates and graham got to pick where they went after tech. if they were so good they should have had no problem finding a spot in an offense that they were recruited for.

yates was recruited to play at a lower classification and got benched cause he was worse there than with us. he was definitely recruited to play for that offense at sam houston so wonder what the excuse is for why he’s unable to start at the fcs level? cause honestly if you can’t start there that’s not a scheme issue you just aren’t a p5 athlete.

also the revisionist history is kinda funny cause i am old enough to remember when people were excited for yates cause he played in a spread uptempo offense at milton. graham actually played in a more similar offense to johnson so i can tip the cap there. i wish we got to see him more cause he was a great athlete but clearly wasn’t the football player we had hoped him to be

also the sob story about “trashing players” is hilarious. keep it up since clearly that only applies to certain players

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

also the sob story about “trashing players” is hilarious. keep it up since clearly that only applies to certain players

Correct. GT players. I don't trash our players at all, even when they leave.

But you do you and keep trashing kids who play a game...

 

[JacketFan137]

Correct. GT players. I don't trash our players at all, even when they leave.

But you do you and keep trashing kids who play a game...

it’s getting hard to hear you up there on your high horse. i’ll have to wait until you get off it to have a conversation

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

it’s getting hard to hear you up there on your high horse. i’ll have to wait until you get off it to have a conversation

You can call it a high horse all you want, but if having a conversation means tacit approval of the denigration of student athletes, either past, present or future, then that's a conversation I'm not interested in having.

I'll also point you to the rules, particularly rule number 2.

2. No verbal attacks on student athletes. It is acceptable to critique their play, but to call them out as lazy, talentless, etc., will not be tolerated.

 

[JacketFan137]

You can call it a high horse all you want, but if having a conversation means tacit approval of the denigration of student athletes, either past, present or future, then that's a conversation I'm not interested in having.

I'll also point you to the rules, particularly rule number 2.

2. No verbal attacks on student athletes. It is acceptable to critique their play, but to call them out as lazy, talentless, etc., will not be tolerated.

all i did was critique play and point out what happened once i left the school. i know they are johnson guys so they carry an extra bit of privilege around here. so i guess i will keep my mouth shut

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

all i did was critique play and point out what happened once i left the school. i know they are johnson guys so they carry an extra bit of privilege around here. so i guess i will keep my mouth shut

frankly none of them are very good

Try again and be better.