Post Camp thoughts

slugboy

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,514
33jacket said:
Imo there is no excuse for a highly recruited starting lb core of vic Mitchell and lewis to not be good. Either then your talent development is eh or you are not hitting at recruiting. Lb should not be the issue it has been. I am sorry but this position has been more disappointing than the dl where we know it can be tough to recruit to at tech. Especially in a scheme that is lb friendly.

I think that we do have ? On the dl. Imo, i think it will be just ok. Part is scheme. Other part is freeman is a backup rotation talent that starts, or maybe has been injured too much. We will see. I think our best dl is simmons adams hendersen and st armour. I would like to see that combo. Imo with that lineup on 1st and 2nd downs our only challenge may be what we ask them to do. But with that lineup i think we can do it better. I say this based on fits. Adams fits a roof scheme. So does henderson. I think branch can be good but for space downs. He was an ideal tenuta 3tech. I actually like the dts. My worry is ends....and a bit of a dancing bear style at dl

In a more passing O branch can rotate in more with adams etc
Click to expand...
There have been some writeups on Freeman being injured (http://www.ajc.com/sports/college/f...hat-needs-improvement/6BOYhtbunbekQApoFX5NcJ/) and the work he's been putting in (http://georgiatech.blog.ajc.com/2015/07/15/busy-productive-summer-for-keshun-freeman/).
Somewhere, there was an article about him getting tight after his freshman year, and lacking flexibility--and that was hampering his moves and rush. Can't find that one, though.
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,653
Location
Georgia
alentrekin said:
But Adams hasn't been first team since he's been here. I have been on team WillieBeamen, so I understand wanting a guy to be ready when injuries and development aren't there. But Adams was running with 2s in spring, has not been listed as a starter so is likely situational-to-rotational.

And I could definitely be wrong, but don't Adams and Henderson play the same 1tech spot? I think Glanton is Branch's backup now.
Click to expand...

I think you a missing my point, but while missing it making my point. I like the idea of our DL, because they are asked to occupy alot, having adams at the 1tech and cerge at the 3 at the same time. Then in rush sliding cerge to the 1 and sliding branch in at the 3 for rush downs. In other words, I am not sure we are trotting out our best first down unit with the current depth chart. The branch cerge combo fits well in rush downs. Imo

You are getting hung up with published depth charts. I am saying what I think would be a nice lineup too and would love to see on some downs
 
MountPGT1990

MountPGT1990

Banned
Messages
289
Move Matthew Jordan to Bback!!!!!


CPJ loves to go with experience, and MJ is starting his 4th year on the flats and knows the playbook inside and out, this is HUGE in running CPJ's system with success. CPJ also knows MJ has missed tons of time since the spring, and is not getting the reps he needs. Most here have repeatedly said MJ is limited in the passing game (of the 4 QB's probably ranks #4 in passing ability), and even has issues pitching the ball.

I believe CPJ does put a premium on a QB getting reps and being healthy during camp, which is why MJ is no longer the slam dunk starter for Labor Day that CPJ had planned on. MJ has been injured almost of spring and fall camp which leads to being rusty and I think a loss in some confidence, evidenced by CPJ yelling "pitch the damn ball" numerous times in the only scrimmage that MJ participated in this camp. There have not been too many glowing reviews of MJ's performance so far in camp, I think most who still think MJ will start are basing their hopes on him having the most in game experience of the four.

Yes, MJ helped get us a huge win in Blacksburg last year, but if we honestly go back and look at that game it was more VT handing us that game on a silver platter with 5 turnovers rather than stellar play from MJ guiding the offense. He did have some good runs, but passing was sub par and he ran a very limited playbook by design.

I believe MJ has the lowest ceiling and highest floor of the group. He has the experience, knows the play book and how to run the system and prob will not lose a game for us. He is the safest bet in game one and CPJ knows he prob will not lose the game for us. I still think there's a very small chance if MJ can return to practice this week that he could start on Labor Day, but I think his ship has more than likely sailed as a a full time QB for GT. Which leads me to suggesting a hybrid /position change for MJ.

I think most agree MJ's biggest weakness is passing, he's adequate at best (some have said down right turrible), he has issues pitching the ball, and has lost his confidence a bit as QB from rust or whatever the reason, but he knows the system, it's his fourth year on the flats, and he's a beast running the ball.

We just lost the best player on our team two weeks before the opener. We have a ton of unproven talent at Bback right now. No one knows the system better than MJ, why not move MJ to Bback and get him on the field? He's an absolute beast running the ball, he knows the plays and can quickly adapt, plus we eliminate his glaring weakness of passing the ball. I can easily see him being the next Synjyn for us and being a leader at the position. Our remaining corps of Bbacks are freshman and sophomores, we can add an upper classmen to the group who everybody already respects and looks upto. He could be a serious leader for the Bbacks.

CPJ has said numerous times " Nothing really bothers Matt", I think he would adapt well to the change and it wouldn't bother him, he's a team player and could really develop into a successful Bback.

We could also still use MJ as a QB in goal line and short yardage situations, kind of like a wildcat package.
 
Milwaukee

Milwaukee

Banned
Messages
7,277
Location
Milwaukee, WI
MountPGT1990 said:
Move Matthew Jordan to Bback!!!!!


CPJ loves to go with experience, and MJ is starting his 4th year on the flats and knows the playbook inside and out, this is HUGE in running CPJ's system with success. CPJ also knows MJ has missed tons of time since the spring, and is not getting the reps he needs. Most here have repeatedly said MJ is limited in the passing game (of the 4 QB's probably ranks #4 in passing ability), and even has issues pitching the ball.

I believe CPJ does put a premium on a QB getting reps and being healthy during camp, which is why MJ is no longer the slam dunk starter for Labor Day that CPJ had planned on. MJ has been injured almost of spring and fall camp which leads to being rusty and I think a loss in some confidence, evidenced by CPJ yelling "pitch the damn ball" numerous times in the only scrimmage that MJ participated in this camp. There have not been too many glowing reviews of MJ's performance so far in camp, I think most who still think MJ will start are basing their hopes on him having the most in game experience of the four.

Yes, MJ helped get us a huge win in Blacksburg last year, but if we honestly go back and look at that game it was more VT handing us that game on a silver platter with 5 turnovers rather than stellar play from MJ guiding the offense. He did have some good runs, but passing was sub par and he ran a very limited playbook by design.

I believe MJ has the lowest ceiling and highest floor of the group. He has the experience, knows the play book and how to run the system and prob will not lose a game for us. He is the safest bet in game one and CPJ knows he prob will not lose the game for us. I still think there's a very small chance if MJ can return to practice this week that he could start on Labor Day, but I think his ship has more than likely sailed as a a full time QB for GT. Which leads me to suggesting a hybrid /position change for MJ.

I think most agree MJ's biggest weakness is passing, he's adequate at best (some have said down right turrible), he has issues pitching the ball, and has lost his confidence a bit as QB from rust or whatever the reason, but he knows the system, it's his fourth year on the flats, and he's a beast running the ball.

We just lost the best player on our team two weeks before the opener. We have a ton of unproven talent at Bback right now. No one knows the system better than MJ, why not move MJ to Bback and get him on the field? He's an absolute beast running the ball, he knows the plays and can quickly adapt, plus we eliminate his glaring weakness of passing the ball. I can easily see him being the next Synjyn for us and being a leader at the position. Our remaining corps of Bbacks are freshman and sophomores, we can add an upper classmen to the group who everybody already respects and looks upto. He could be a serious leader for the Bbacks.

CPJ has said numerous times " Nothing really bothers Matt", I think he would adapt well to the change and it wouldn't bother him, he's a team player and could really develop into a successful Bback.

We could also still use MJ as a QB in goal line and short yardage situations, kind of like a wildcat package.
Click to expand...

giphy (17).gif
 
tech_wreck47

tech_wreck47

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,670
Techster said:
If Ted Roof plays Lewis, Vicious, and Mitchell at the same time, I'm actually confident they'll be a good group. If it's Roof is going to play a 2 LB set, we're f'd. Nothing against Mitchell, and I've said this multiple times, but he doesn't have the range to cover that much space. Lewis and Vicious can both cover a lot of ground, and if you let Mitchell patrol the areas between the tackles he's going to be a monster for us. He's very good diagnosing and getting to the ball, but he's a liability if he has to cover out wide.

From what I understand, Vicious is in the mold of PJ Davis...a guy who can rack up tackles, but he's a liability in pass coverage. We'll need to pay attention to that against UT because they spread the field and attack coverage weaknesses.

I'm still baffled why Lewis hasn't played more in his time at GT. This guy can cover a LOT of ground. The one game he started he played very well even when you factored in some of the mental errors he made.

I think the guys we signed in the 2017 class brings the size, range, length, and speed Lewis has, but they're freshmen. That group is going to be ballers.
Click to expand...
Brant has the ability to play sideline to sideline, of course he's not the fastest but he can do it to an extent. He actually did against Duke and had a pretty good game. There was something up with the LB's last year though, maybe he was confused at times, he just didn't play fast and I don't think it was his speed. I will agree thought if he can stay inside and we play with three LB's that will be good for his game.
 
alentrekin

alentrekin

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
876
Location
California
33jacket said:
I think you a missing my point, but while missing it making my point. I like the idea of our DL, because they are asked to occupy alot, having adams at the 1tech and cerge at the 3 at the same time. Then in rush sliding cerge to the 1 and sliding branch in at the 3 for rush downs. In other words, I am not sure we are trotting out our best first down unit with the current depth chart. The branch cerge combo fits well in rush downs. Imo

You are getting hung up with published depth charts. I am saying what I think would be a nice lineup too and would love to see on some downs
Click to expand...
I understand your point, but I think I am hung up on depth charts + what I saw in spring + who coaches said have been repping where. If we are to feel good about a position group, shouldn't it be the position group that's repping?

Put another way, as of today, Adams won't start, Cerge has never repped 3 and Branch is currently a 3 down 3 tech. That's our DL. I don't wake up wanting to be the dude correcting inaccuracies on the internet, but I thought I'd point it out bc I respect your opinion.

Also, iiuc UT will be in 11 personnel pretty much the whole game, right?
 
tech_wreck47

tech_wreck47

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,670
alentrekin said:
I understand your point, but I think I am hung up on depth charts + what I saw in spring + who coaches said have been repping where. If we are to feel good about a position group, shouldn't it be the position group that's repping?

Put another way, as of today, Adams won't start, Cerge has never repped 3 and Branch is currently a 3 down 3 tech. That's our DL. I don't wake up wanting to be the dude correcting inaccuracies on the internet, but I thought I'd point it out bc I respect your opinion.

Also, iiuc UT will be in 11 personnel pretty much the whole game, right?
Click to expand...
I think @33jacket is saying he's not so sure the guys getting the reps are actually the best together. Almost as if we are to concerned with only letting Cerge-Henderson play the 1 when he's capable of playing the 3 because he's technically a 1 for us. He's saying if you slide Cerge-Henderson to the 3 then you can bring Adams into the 1. Put it this way, if Adams and Cerge-Henderson are the best two on the DL you put them both out there, even if that means you slide one to the 3 when that's not their normal spot. But I think 33 isn't confident the staff is doing this even if it's true because they are to concerned with keeping them in their position.
 
alentrekin

alentrekin

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
876
Location
California
tech_wreck47 said:
I think @33jacket is saying he's not so sure the guys getting the reps are actually the best together. Almost as if we are to concerned with only letting Cerge-Henderson play the 1 when he's capable of playing the 3 because he's technically a 1 for us. He's saying if you slide Cerge-Henderson to the 3 then you can bring Adams into the 1. Put it this way, if Adams and Cerge-Henderson are the best two on the DL you put them both out there, even if that means you slide one to the 3 when that's not their normal spot.
Click to expand...
Gotcha.
Makes sense.
 

Lavoisier

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
847
It's great to hear that Freeman is healthy and has been working on his weaknesses, but I'm still going to be skeptical (or pessimistic depending on how you see it) about him producing. He's a 4 year starter and I'm of the opinion that by your 4th year you are what you are. I can't think of a lot of guys who go from bad to good after starting that long. I hope he proves me wrong, but if we can't get pressure from the weakside once again then we are screwed on defense. I'm also worried about CPJ's comments about how nobody is pushing for the SAM backup spot with Curry being out. I feel like as poorly as the DL played we still had backups we could rotate in without too much drop-off. If there is really that big of a drop-off from some of the starting LBs (who aren't that great) then we are an injury away in that group from another catastrophic season on defense.
 

alagold

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,736
Location
Huntsville,Al
To me,the best aspect of the DL at this point is that we have a small but decent DE corps with ST.A as first sub.I believe the DTs are a mis-mash of size/ ability that MIGHT get it done but unlikely to start off well..
The LBs are a hope and prayer.Mitchell is ok but has range issues.Vic A is a hitter but unproven and a step slow.Lewis is athletic but doesn't seem to able to make the play---over-run,missed tackle,mis-alignment etc.Losing Curry doesn't help. I would love for one of the FR to step up and play adding speed/quickness.
The DBs would be fine if the front 7 did their job-so they could get exposed.
Do we have any reason to think that this Roof edition is better?Not til it is shown.
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,653
Location
Georgia
alentrekin said:
I understand your point, but I think I am hung up on depth charts + what I saw in spring + who coaches said have been repping where. If we are to feel good about a position group, shouldn't it be the position group that's repping?

Put another way, as of today, Adams won't start, Cerge has never repped 3 and Branch is currently a 3 down 3 tech. That's our DL. I don't wake up wanting to be the dude correcting inaccuracies on the internet, but I thought I'd point it out bc I respect your opinion.

Also, iiuc UT will be in 11 personnel pretty much the whole game, right?
Click to expand...

Yes. So rather than post my true feelings why some guys are at positions they are, and why some no matter how bad the performance still start, i will just say; i watch a ton of tape on adams. He simply is our best option at 1tech. Problem is stamina. But. That doesnt mean he shouldn't start in all base sets, maybe first downs etc

Now. Who is the best 3 tech? Well. Cerge played in the 3 alot early here at tech. And on some fronts last year. He is our next best dl. So i slide him to the 3 in base.

On passing downs, or with spread teams. You start cerge and branch. And. My guess is roof knows we defend spread and the pass 70percent of the snaps we are in spread. So this justifies his starting lineup. But i am saying in base i dont think its the best dl we have.

Then what i think two is adams will force a double more than the other 2 dts. So. It opens alot up. I see him as our Poe....and cerge as our jarrett.

Anyway. Its a front i hope we see alot this year
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,239
tech_wreck47 said:
Brant has the ability to play sideline to sideline, of course he's not the fastest but he can do it to an extent. He actually did against Duke and had a pretty good game. There was something up with the LB's last year though, maybe he was confused at times, he just didn't play fast and I don't think it was his speed. I will agree thought if he can stay inside and we play with three LB's that will be good for his game.
Click to expand...

I disagree with Brant's ability to go sideline to sideline. He's a classic 2-down MLB that's limited in today's spread game. Saw it over and over last year when he was eaten alive by RBs and WRs crossing his area. Against the run he's an absolute beast, but you have to be able to play in a lot of space as a LB in a 2 LB set. I've said it over and over, put him in the middle of 3 LB set, and he'll probably be one of our best defenders and most improved players.

I'll be ecstatic to see him improve over the summer and prove me wrong this season. I'm a big fan of Brant Mitchell the person and SA, but his limitations on the field are pretty apparent to anyone who watches the game.
 
tech_wreck47

tech_wreck47

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,670
Techster said:
I disagree with Brant's ability to go sideline to sideline. He's a classic 2-down MLB that's limited in today's spread game. Saw it over and over last year when he was eaten alive by RBs and WRs crossing his area. Against the run he's an absolute beast, but you have to be able to play in a lot of space as a LB in a 2 LB set. I've said it over and over, put him in the middle of 3 LB set, and he'll probably be one of our best defenders and most improved players.

I'll be ecstatic to see him improve over the summer and prove me wrong this season. I'm a big fan of Brant Mitchell the person and SA, but his limitations on the field are pretty apparent to anyone who watches the game.
Click to expand...
That's why I said to an extent. Of course he's not your dream guy in doing that. But he has shown flashes of being able to do it to an extent. His issue imo in playing sideline to sideline is when he has the 1 on 1's. If he's able to just pursue on runs that stretch out wide he does ok. I'm not saying I want him doing this at all times, but I don't think it's accurate to say he can't play sideline to sideline at all.
 
Top