New regime goal posts

[Dustman]

Didn’t the championship game feature two true Freshman QBs last year. Isn’t Clemp’s Lawrence a freshman? Why the hell can’t any GT player excel in his first year? Certainly after a year riding the pine you should have gotten smarter, stronger, etc. Didn’t Lil’ Joe play as a freshman. We act like some of this stuff is impossible. We ran what man to consider a limited offense. Now we’re running something different it should not only be new but better. Why would you trade new for worse? Woody regressed the D. Certainly we should expect a better D, correct? Everything lines up for the winnable games we should win. We’ll lose Clemp, etc. The toss up games are still toss ups. With better conditioning, etc we should be able to win one of the 50-50 games that didn’t go out way.

I can’t believe we’re talking about losing to Citadel and Temple. Crazy. Do some of you think we hired a moron and a staff of idiots?

Reggie started as a true freshman. Lil Joe was a redshirt FR. If Geoff can bring in a QB on the level of Tua or Trevor, I'm pretty sure they would start for us. Yates could come in and win the job next fall. It's a new day.

 

[deeznats]

We have Temple, Citadel, and USF next year.

Citadel should be a win, but we lost to USF and Temple would certainly not have been an expected win this year (they actually beat USF).

I don't really understand the motivation (other than agenda) to imply we have some incredibly achieving team returning next year and to set up parameters so one can call CGC a failure if he doesn't meet them. We'll know in sur time if we made the right hire or not.

The cupboard is neither bare nor full. We could have a decent or rough year next year, both are possible. But the narrative that we'd be great next year had Johnson not retired is built on thoughts and prayers. We return a horrid defense and nobody knows if anyone would actually step up and be a quality starting QB.

 

[ibeattetris]

don't really understand the motivation (other than agenda) to imply we have some incredibly achieving team returning next year and to set up parameters so one can call CGC a failure if he doesn't meet them. We'll know in sur time if we made the right hire or not.

I said I expect 6-6 with a bowl win. That is not incredibly achieving...

We return a horrid defense and nobody knows if anyone would actually step up and be a quality starting QB.

These are things I actually think CGC is suited to alleviate. I expect defense to improve and offense to regress. Unlike more negative leaning posters, I expect the improvement and regression to be about the same.

 

[gtstinger776]

Honestly, After what I watched in that bowl game: crap effort and sloppy technique (tackling, pursuit / gap filling, blocking), it doesn’t matter what scheme, the culture has to change.

The leadership and pride in performance has been porous at too many points in the last 2 years for me to think a simple scheme change or key player will make the difference. In terms of the players, There’s been something off since Justin Thomas graduated. I think we’ve seen weaker senior leadership and a lack of quality control. Same guys repeatedly making the same mistakes, and a lack of depth to hold them accountable

Collins is for sure the right guy to build a better culture. But, I could see this taking a year or two because of who is currently on the roster.

 

[Animal02]

I'm asking what aspects of the team are we not rebuilding?

And I am asking if you think that every aspect is so bad that sub .500 seasons is acceptable.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

I think a sub .500 season would be acceptable next year. 2nd season better be a winning one. If not we made a bad choice.

 

[bke1984]

We underachieved this year. Should have been 9-3 regular season, probably a loss in the ACCCG and a bowl win to finish 10-4. 9-5 would have been reasonable too.

Next year I’m setting the bar at 7-5 with another crap bowl destination. 7-6 or 8-5 seems about right. The only conference game I can say for sure that we should win is UNC.

That said, I’m not sure we are as low on talent as many here believe. On offense we are stacked at RB and Carter looks to be the real deal at WR. QB is a question mark given the scheme change, and our OT’s scare me a bit.

The defense will be learning a new scheme, but there’s a ton of young talent over there that should start to produce a better unit at some point...especially in the secondary.

Tech could surprise some of you guys next year and compete for the division. Hell, CPJ did it in year one after a 7-6 season...no one expected that did they?

 

[bke1984]

I think a sub .500 season would be acceptable next year. 2nd season better be a winning one. If not we made a bad choice.

That would be very disappointing. It’s a transition, but we have enough talent that this shouldn’t happen.

 

[Dustman]

What level of mediocrity will the rest of y’all put up with? The negative nancies probably won’t have the courage to stipulate any. A couple refused to in other threads. They must not want to box themselves in.

Negative nancies, by nature, will move their goal posts so that they always have something to complain about.

 

[gtstinger776]

We underachieved this year. Should have been 9-3 regular season, probably a loss in the ACCCG and a bowl win to finish 10-4. 9-5 would have been reasonable too.

Next year I’m setting the bar at 7-5 with another crap bowl destination. 7-6 or 8-5 seems about right. The only conference game I can say for sure that we should win is UNC.

That said, I’m not sure we are as low on talent as many here believe. On offense we are stacked at RB and Carter looks to be the real deal at WR. QB is a question mark given the scheme change, and our OT’s scare me a bit.

The defense will be learning a new scheme, but there’s a ton of young talent over there that should start to produce a better unit at some point...especially in the secondary.

Tech could surprise some of you guys next year and compete for the division. Hell, CPJ did it in year one after a 7-6 season...no one expected that did they?

I wouldn’t disagree. A better leadership nucleus would’ve driven 8-3 last year and 9-2 this year. Two acc championship appearances. There’s been something off with the coaching staff for a while and essentially no player-led accountability since JT5.

When Johnson first arrived, he demonstrated some initial hands-on leadership that reduced some of the performance variance from the gailey era (e.g. beating Miami or Clemson one week and losing to Maryland or NC State the next). That quality has all but diminished partly because the conference is better, but mostly because the leadership and culture is not what it was.

 

[AnAmericanNerd]

I think the next four years are gonna be a lot of fun—mostly cus I’m definitely riding the Jordan Yates hype train. But CGC is gonna have a good defense, it might have flaws some where for the first year or two but I’m sure he’s no stranger to masking defensive issues. With the great RBs that can be fielded there is no reason tech can’t control the pace of the game.
1st year I think tech goes 6-6 with a bunch of hard, close games. 2nd year I think the team will just miss winning the coastal and 3rd year I think tech will win the coastal. I know it’s optimistic—but because the coastal isn’t overly tough and CGC is known as a great recruiter I think it’s certainly achievable. Also—I think Yates and the RBs are gonna help bridge this offense to the new era.
On the flip side, I could see the team only winning four games the first year due to the switch of play style for the Oline. But if that’s an issue I’d expect CGC to recruit that problem away rather quickly. This guy is looked at as a top recruiter so I agree with the top 35 recruiting class expectations—and wouldn’t be surprised to see him crack 20 once or twice if he can put together winning products on the field.

 

[Animal02]

I think a sub .500 season would be acceptable next year. 2nd season better be a winning one. If not we made a bad choice.

I don't think any sub .500 us acceptable, barring a massive amount of injuries.

 

[knoxjacket]

I don't think any sub .500 us acceptable, barring a massive amount of injuries.

It was acceptable in two of the last four seasons for a veteran coach why wouldn’t it be acceptable for a first year one?

 

[Vespidae]

I’m making a comparison to UT under Pruitt. They came close to going 6-6 with the same players ... but they were coached better on fundamentals and they played a full 60 min.

I think CGC will coach and teach more ... and the results will be better than we think.

 

[LibertyTurns]

Citadel should be a win, but we lost to USF and Temple would certainly not have been an expected win this year (they actually beat USF).

I don't really understand the motivation (other than agenda) to imply we have some incredibly achieving team returning next year and to set up parameters so one can call CGC a failure if he doesn't meet them. We'll know in sur time if we made the right hire or not.

The cupboard is neither bare nor full. We could have a decent or rough year next year, both are possible. But the narrative that we'd be great next year had Johnson not retired is built on thoughts and prayers. We return a horrid defense and nobody knows if anyone would actually step up and be a quality starting QB.

Unlike some others I thought the USF loss was a bad one on the coach. We were the better team, but poor coaching- bringing back in an injured TQM was not smart. That along with a senior not exercising good ball security when we’re driving for a game winning score basically cost us the game. You can lump in there Woody trying to get the defense organized and we took what was essentially a “mark it down as a win” game to one that was basically a toss up.

I think we saw what Temple was all about. They will not be better with their coaching staff decimated.

I’m not afraid to make a prediction. I thought we’d win 8 games this year, but came up 1 short. I thought with another year of Woody’s D plus an upgrade at QB we’d win 9 next year. I think we lose a game off that with the changeovers, so I stand with an 8 win prediction. 7 is also likely but I’d like to think with new energy we win one of the 50-50 games. 6 wins to me would be disappointing but not shocking & as long as there was progress the next year it would be ok. 5 wins would be nearly a dumpster fire. 4 wins & the microscopes about what we hired would come out. Anything south of that and we’ve got a freaking full blown disaster on our hands. You think there’s a schism between CPJ & anti-CPJ, just wait until the handwringing after a 3 win season would look like unless it was a 2015 injury-fest.

 

[LongforDodd]

I want to see a top 30 defense regularly, and top 35 recruiting classes fairly regularly. After the first 2 years we need to win 7-8 games regularly with the occasional 10 win season. Say once every 4 years. I'd consider that successful at GT.

I think it's going to be easy for GC to get our D back to a respectable level...much sooner than the O.

 

[bke1984]

Not sure why everyone is so scared the offense is going to implode. We are kind of well suited for an RPO aren’t we? I mean you don’t really have to throw down field to get the receivers involved, and a lot of that RPO stuff isn’t that much different than what we do if you watch it...they just utilize the wideout rather than a pitch.

If we transition correctly we could be ok. My guess is that what we run next year won’t be what we run three years from now.

Edit: not to mention our WRs are probably the best blocking WRs in the conference...which should help with bubble screen type plays.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

I don't think any sub .500 us acceptable, barring a massive amount of injuries.

I tend to agree but I’m accounting for unknown contingencies like injuries.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

It was acceptable in two of the last four seasons for a veteran coach why wouldn’t it be acceptable for a first year one?

‘15 was understandable if not acceptable due to mass injuries. ‘17 wasn’t acceptable but also wasn’t a firing offense because of trips to Charlotte, the Orange Bowl, and prior wins over the mutts.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Not sure why everyone is so scared the offense is going to implode. We are kind of well suited for an RPO aren’t we? I mean you don’t really have to throw down field to get the receivers involved, and a lot of that RPO stuff isn’t that much different than what we do if you watch it...they just utilize the wideout rather than a pitch.

If we transition correctly we could be ok. My guess is that what we run next year won’t be what we run three years from now.

Edit: not to mention our WRs are probably the best blocking WRs in the conference...which should help with bubble screen type plays.

It oddly was going to be a super easy transition before CPJ left. Now that he’s gone it seems as if some who claimed it would be simple have now changed their tunes.