Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Quick poll on the pulse of the fanbase....
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="GTpdm" data-source="post: 76930" data-attributes="member: 1451"><p>I basically agree, when you put it that way (other than the whole "no fault on either party" / "both of them were at fault" paradox <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" />). I'd just rather characterize the event without the use of the word "fault" at all. I think it was an issue of them both having a conversation, and both sides thinking <em>in all honesty</em> that an agreement had been reached, when each side actually had a different internalization of what had been agreed to.</p><p></p><p>I can see Coach talking about opening up the passing game, meaning "we will establish the option and then take advantage of your skills to amp up the passing game and turn the offense into a quadruple-option"—while Vad interpreted Coach's remarks to mean "we'll run more pro-style plays to make passing a bigger part of the offensive game plan, and run the option less." They both assumed they were on the same page, but in fact they were not. That kind of miscommunication is something that happens, no matter how much you try to prevent it. Consequently, attaching fault to either side may not be the best way to describe what happened; neither side really did anything <em>wrong</em>, other than to assume their view of things was shared by the other party.</p><p></p><p>Accurate communication is always a tricky business, and requires careful attention to detail; even small nuances can get blown out of proportion, if one is not careful. I know from recent experience.</p><p></p><p>([USER=56]@daBuzz[/USER] See? I <u>do</u> have good reading comprehension skills—writing skills to, I hope. I just need to learn not to post late at night after having a couple beers too many. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite10" alt=":oops:" title="Oops! :oops:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":oops:" /> My jump-to-conclusions inhibitor was, shall we say, a bit inhibited last night, and I probably read your remarks to be a heavy-handed cheap shot that was not actually your intent. That's on me.)</p><p></p><p>I also agree that the separation was best for both parties, and I sincerely hope that Vad finds success in his career. I will always be thankful for the 100% effort he gave to our program.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="GTpdm, post: 76930, member: 1451"] I basically agree, when you put it that way (other than the whole "no fault on either party" / "both of them were at fault" paradox ;)). I'd just rather characterize the event without the use of the word "fault" at all. I think it was an issue of them both having a conversation, and both sides thinking [I]in all honesty[/I] that an agreement had been reached, when each side actually had a different internalization of what had been agreed to. I can see Coach talking about opening up the passing game, meaning "we will establish the option and then take advantage of your skills to amp up the passing game and turn the offense into a quadruple-option"—while Vad interpreted Coach's remarks to mean "we'll run more pro-style plays to make passing a bigger part of the offensive game plan, and run the option less." They both assumed they were on the same page, but in fact they were not. That kind of miscommunication is something that happens, no matter how much you try to prevent it. Consequently, attaching fault to either side may not be the best way to describe what happened; neither side really did anything [I]wrong[/I], other than to assume their view of things was shared by the other party. Accurate communication is always a tricky business, and requires careful attention to detail; even small nuances can get blown out of proportion, if one is not careful. I know from recent experience. ([USER=56]@daBuzz[/USER] See? I [U]do[/U] have good reading comprehension skills—writing skills to, I hope. I just need to learn not to post late at night after having a couple beers too many. :oops: My jump-to-conclusions inhibitor was, shall we say, a bit inhibited last night, and I probably read your remarks to be a heavy-handed cheap shot that was not actually your intent. That's on me.) I also agree that the separation was best for both parties, and I sincerely hope that Vad finds success in his career. I will always be thankful for the 100% effort he gave to our program. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What is the name of Georgia Tech's mascot?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Quick poll on the pulse of the fanbase....
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top