Stats Program Strength

[Rock]

Way to cherry pick a stat. Other posts by you prove that you have no credibility.

Using the stat of points per game, GT has only had one offense in the last 5 years ranked in the top 25, and that was obviously 2014 at number 12. The average ranking over the past 5 years is 43rd (with the benefit of rounding). Other offensive stats such as total offense are similar. FBS only.

As you acknowledge, the won loss record has not been pretty. If you look at all the stats, and not just cherry pick, you understand the symptoms. The disease is something else entirely.

Total defense has had a higher ranking 2 of the past 3 years than total offense. I use 3 years because that is the time Roof has been here, even though he is just now getting his recruits in.

I agree.
We can cherry pick whatever stat we want all day long. avg yards this, total O that, what matters at the end of the day is W's & L's.
At what point do we stop the optimism and the "this year is the year!" stuff and start taking a hard look at where the ultimate responsibility lands.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I agree.
We can cherry pick whatever stat we want all day long. avg yards this, total O that, what matters at the end of the day is W's & L's.
At what point do we stop the optimism and the "this year is the year!" stuff and start taking a hard look at where the ultimate responsibility lands.

You do realize we're two years removed from the Orange Bowl right?

 

[Rock]

You do realize we're two years removed from the Orange Bowl right?

AU was 3 years removed from a NC.....and??

 

[Rock]

AU was 3 years removed from a NC.....and??

Oh wait.. you guys don't like anyone to compare GT to anyone unless it fits your agenda right... I forgot. my bad.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Smh at all the misperceptions about CPJ. Not enthusiastic about recruiting? If you think this it's almost certainly one of those "feelings" one gets rather than based on first hand knowledge. Please tell me if I'm wrong...ill be anticipating crickets though. Crickets and "well our recruiting results indicate it!" mularky.

I've seen him interact with recruits, albeit from a distance or on media coverage. He doesn't appear unenthused to me. I've seen him sitting next to big time recruits at basketball games while on visits....seemed like he cared.

Same for the D. Yeah I'm sure he'd like to be less involved. It would be ideal if he could focus solely on O. He has changed things up on D in lots of ways. Has changed approach on STs also. But haters gonna hate....facts be damned..."feelings" matter as much. So carry on.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

AU was 3 years removed from a NC.....and??

It should take more than one down year to fire the coach who took us to two OB's and 3 ACCCG's.

 

[AE 87]

I agree.
We can cherry pick whatever stat we want all day long. avg yards this, total O that, what matters at the end of the day is W's & L's.
At what point do we stop the optimism and the "this year is the year!" stuff and start taking a hard look at where the ultimate responsibility lands.

I appreciate you friend, but what do you mean by a hard look?

If it's looking only at Ws and Ls and comparing them to Bama's, then that seems like the easiest possible look.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Oh wait.. you guys don't like anyone to compare GT to anyone unless it fits your agenda right... I forgot. my bad.

Compare away. But doing something just because someone else has is madness. I think there are probably just as many bad terminations / changes as good ones. Tennessee was recently removed from a natty when they fired Fulmer. How'd that work out for them?

 

[Boomergump]

It should take more than one down year to fire the coach who took us to two OB's and 3 ACCCG's.

Over 8 seasons CPJ has had us play in two Orange Bowls, winning one, and three ACCCGs, winning one. How many other coaches in our conference have done that well? For being so bad, there seem to be a ton of coaches who are a heck of a lot worse. Pick any conference and ask yourself the same question. We are not perfect. Nor is CPJ, but he compares pretty darn well by any metric.

 

[Sideways]

My observation on PJ coaching style is that he is not particularly enthusiastic about recruiting, is not excited coaching defense or special teams, and just loves to coach offense. He seems to want to hire an experienced defensive coordinator that he can turn the defense over to and that lets him concentrate on offense. He finally got it that a kicker actualy puts points on the board, can make kick-offs out of the end zone, and maybe he should offer a scholly to a top kicker rather than using walk-ons. He better keep innovating his offense because it appears the better defenses are starting to figure this thing out. Something is just not quite right if the offensive line struggles year after year with the same problems, is it coaching, athletic ability, or scheme?

Personally, I think it is a combination of recruiting misfires, bad luck, and injuries. I had a coach tell me once that offensive line is the absolute hardest to project from high school to college. This scheme is really tough to learn and execute at a high level. Nevertheless, going all the way back to 2008 we gave generally had really good centers and guards but have struggled getting tackles. It is hard to recruit linemen that are both big and fast with the ability to make quick decisions on who to block in space that is required for tackles in this offense. Others may think it is harder to recruit guards or centers but in my opinion we have had more trouble getting tackles than the other two positions. In 2008 and 2009 we were using former tight ends. It was that hard.

 

[33jacket]

Personally, I think it is a combination of recruiting misfires, bad luck, and injuries. I had a coach tell me once that offensive line is the absolute hardest to project from high school to college. This scheme is really tough to learn and execute at a high level. Nevertheless, going all the way back to 2008 we gave generally had really good centers and guards but have struggled getting tackles. It is hard to recruit linemen that are both big and fast with the ability to make quick decisions on who to block in space that is required for tackles in this offense. Others may think it is harder to recruit guards or centers but in my opinion we have had more trouble getting tackles than the other two positions. In 2008 and 2009 we were using former tight ends. It was that hard.

IMO we have trouble finding good fits at tackles and we used TE's because of what we ask our tackles to do. This is a scheme dictated a certain need at tackle; we can't execute our scoops using a big pillow fighter at tackle. For instance. A guy like Devine, if he lost a tad of weight, is a tackle everywhere but GT. To me, we struggle with the OL more than just recruiting. I think we can tweak our scheme we use on the lines, to be more line friendly, and recruiting friendly...and it would help the tackles. We haven't...9 years in, it appears we wont'. Which is fine, its pauls' call...so now we just live with this OL system and appearance...its been a decade folks...

Despite this; we continually have OL issues; every year it seems. But our O is very productive. One reason why is the option is a half the field play...the reality is, the backside OL and WR can totally screw up and we can still successfully execute the option on the playside. Another is the scheme relies a ton on ball fakes and not blocking certain individuals anyway. So the OL is neutralized a bit. Which is why perimeter, AB And WR execution in the run game is so critical. They are an extension of the OL. Its true. Where you really see the OL deficiencies, both in scheme and fit, is pass pro....

 

[AE 87]

IMO we have trouble finding good fits at tackles and we used TE's because of what we ask our tackles to do. This is a scheme dictated a certain need at tackle; we can't execute our scoops using a big pillow fighter at tackle. For instance. A guy like Devine, if he lost a tad of weight, is a tackle everywhere but GT. To me, we struggle with the OL more than just recruiting. I think we can tweak our scheme we use on the lines, to be more line friendly, and recruiting friendly...and it would help the tackles. We haven't...9 years in, it appears we wont'. Which is fine, its pauls' call...so now we just live with this OL system and appearance...its been a decade folks...

Despite this; we continually have OL issues; every year it seems. But our O is very productive. One reason why is the option is a half the field play...the reality is, the backside OL and WR can totally screw up and we can still successfully execute the option on the playside. Another is the scheme relies a ton on ball fakes and not blocking certain individuals anyway. So the OL is neutralized a bit. Which is why perimeter, AB And WR execution in the run game is so critical. They are an extension of the OL. Its true. Where you really see the OL deficiencies, both in scheme and fit, is pass pro....

Fwiw, I disagree with your take on our need to tweek OL technique. Our OL attacks the the DL more than in zone blocking. Our aggressiveness limits how aggressive opp DL can be. You don't need as much brute strength to scoop or veer to the LB.

That's why getting the assignment right is so important. Moving fast to the wrong place opens frees defenders fast too.

That's why Navy's O can be effective, even with lesser OL.

Again, how much more efficient than 6th over the last 8 yrs do you think your tweeks will get us?

 

[IronJacket7]

MAKE TECH GREAT AGAIN!!!

Bump!

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Shall I repeat the obvious? Linemen are the single hardest position to recruit. There aren't many good ones in high school and those that are good in high school may not be good in college. It is a supply and demand problem, not just for Tech, but perhaps for as many as half the teams in the country.

 

[Techster]

Shall I repeat the obvious? Linemen are the single hardest position to recruit. There aren't many good ones in high school and those that are good in high school may not be good in college. It is a supply and demand problem, not just for Tech, but perhaps for as many as half the teams in the country.

OL and DL are the hardest positions to project to the college level...or so I've read from coaches. More often than not, they're the biggest guys on the field playing against guys who are half their size. That's why coaches these days like to see OL and DL at camps. Gives them a chance to test kids against their peers.

When I watch highlights of OL/DL recruits, it gives me pause if they're not physically dominating their opposites. If they can't whip the guys they're playing against in HS, it's gonna be tough for them to compete on this level when everyone is just as big and as strong as them.

 

[33jacket]

Fwiw, I disagree with your take on our need to tweek OL technique. Our OL attacks the the DL more than in zone blocking. Our aggressiveness limits how aggressive opp DL can be. You don't need as much brute strength to scoop or veer to the LB.

That's why getting the assignment right is so important. Moving fast to the wrong place opens frees defenders fast too.

That's why Navy's O can be effective, even with lesser OL.

Again, how much more efficient than 6th over the last 8 yrs do you think your tweeks will get us?

if my opinion isn't strong enough. Let me remind you. Of the head man's opinion. Therefore, and I have been stating it for years, I will stick with my opinion we need to change the scheme to help the OL; this in turn will help some guys at tackle, help our pass pro, and in certain cases that will filter into the run game so that our OL techniques don't show pass vs run by alignment alone. Again, I will stick by this. Now, you have every right to disagree we don't need scheme changes....ok...cool...

#1 - I didn't say we needed to overhaul our system. Hence why I use the work tweak
#2 - I readily state the scheme will primarily show up in pass sets vs run sets
#3 - Since you can't give away the play, run sets will inherit some tweaks as well

CPJ:
“My number one priority going into spring is . . . we’ve got to do a better job protecting our quarterback,” Johnson said. “[Pass protection] wasn’t very good. We’ve got to look at all of it. Look at the scheme, the way we’re teaching it, everything about it.

“Like I said, it’s unfair to blame it all on the offensive line. Certainly, they have their part it in but so did the slots, the A-backs and the B-backs. It’s kind of a combination: scheme, coaching, all of it.”

FYI, I will also stick by my assertion that our D will continue to struggle until Roof does some different things. What are those things? Allow the D to penetrate more before locking on the block; make the DL less LB friendly and more DL friendly. Attack the OL protection tendencies team to team more and scheme vs just call your standard playsets and blitz packages which always seem to get picked up. More complex LB to S disguise presnap. More half field zone man combos (we do none of)

 

[AE 87]

if my opinion isn't strong enough. Let me remind you. Of the head man's opinion. Therefore, and I have been stating it for years, I will stick with my opinion we need to change the scheme to help the OL; this in turn will help some guys at tackle, help our pass pro, and in certain cases that will filter into the run game so that our OL techniques don't show pass vs run by alignment alone. Again, I will stick by this. Now, you have every right to disagree we don't need scheme changes....ok...cool...

#1 - I didn't say we needed to overhaul our system. Hence why I use the work tweak
#2 - I readily state the scheme will primarily show up in pass sets vs run sets
#3 - Since you can't give away the play, run sets will inherit some tweaks as well

CPJ:
“My number one priority going into spring is . . . we’ve got to do a better job protecting our quarterback,” Johnson said. “[Pass protection] wasn’t very good. We’ve got to look at all of it. Look at the scheme, the way we’re teaching it, everything about it.

“Like I said, it’s unfair to blame it all on the offensive line. Certainly, they have their part it in but so did the slots, the A-backs and the B-backs. It’s kind of a combination: scheme, coaching, all of it.”

FYI, I will also stick by my assertion that our D will continue to struggle until Roof does some different things. What are those things? Allow the D to penetrate more before locking on the block. Attack the OL protection tendencies team to team more and scheme vs just call your standard playsets and blitz packages which always seem to get picked up. More complex LB to S disguise presnap. More half field zone man combos (we do none of)

Fair enough.

I agree that looking at scheme could include looking at OL blocking strategy. However, for the reasons I stated, I find a change in that area less likely. Last year, we had trouble getting linebackers blocked. In the Spring game, we ran some plays with the WR lined up fairly tight where he then went up and blocked the LB. That's another way of addressing scheme.

Will you use color next time, smh?

 

[33jacket]

Fair enough.

I agree that looking at scheme could include looking at OL blocking strategy. However, for the reasons I stated, I find a change in that area less likely. Last year, we had trouble getting linebackers blocked. In the Spring game, we ran some plays with the WR lined up fairly tight where he then went up and blocked the LB. That's another way of addressing scheme.

Will you use color next time, smh?

Not sure what u mean by color. But imo despite what paul said not one thing will change on that end. And if something is tweaked it will be so minor and inconsequential no one will care and it wont affect play. To do what he needs to do we would see it on tape imo. But he wont do it. He is old man stuck in his O. Btw it can and does work. But like ken did at navy. He tweaked it and its better now than under paul imo

 

[AE 87]

Not sure what u mean by color. But imo despite what paul said not one thing will change on that end. And if something is tweaked it will be so minor and inconsequential no one will care and it wont affect play. To do what he needs to do we would see it on tape imo. But he wont do it. He is old man stuck in his O. Btw it can and does work. But like ken did at navy. He tweaked it and its better now than under paul imo

It's possible. Still, in the Spring Game, we saw the WR line up closer to the line of scrimmage and then block a linebacker trying to flow to the outside. It's possible that we will use this sort of change in scheme when defenses make it tough for our OL to get up and block the second level.

 

[ATL1]

Over 8 seasons CPJ has had us play in two Orange Bowls, winning one, and three ACCCGs, winning one. How many other coaches in our conference have done that well? For being so bad, there seem to be a ton of coaches who are a heck of a lot worse. Pick any conference and ask yourself the same question. We are not perfect. Nor is CPJ, but he compares pretty darn well by any metric.

Can he win GT a National Championship?