remaining wins....

Gtswifty81

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
435
I wouldn’t judge our remaining year on this game. Even if we played a great game, we probably would have lost by 3+ TDs. We aren’t ready to compete with Clemson yet. I’ve said this before, but Sims should be learning from the sidelines this year. Unfortunately, we don’t have anyone better to play so he’s going to take his lumps along with the rest of the offense. A team like Clemson should exploit our youth.
 

billga99

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
628
I agree we are throwing Sims into the fire. My big concern is he becomes so shell shocked, he gets tentative and declines. Yes I am old enough to remember the expansion Atlanta Falcons and watch them ruin a rookie QB (Randy Johnson). Giving QBs time to get acclimated and grow into the position certainly helps. We are playing teams that are clearly not in Clemson's league but do have good defensive. Hopefully we can put Sims in positions where his reads are not too complex and he has time to get passes off.
 

FightWinDrink

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,268
I still would have said 0-1 before this game. Our opening slate was the easiest part of our schedule

our easiest game left is probably Duke who smoked Cuse and put up a good fight against VT. Wouldn't even consider us favored in the game right now despite their record
 

dmel25

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
473
CDP called the plays you wanted him to call. They didn't work, just like the rest. You still hold that against him?
Why are you defending Patenaude so much? Yeah he called those plays... when it was too late, but where were the aggressive calls when we got the turnovers? No where to be seen. He got scared and went conservative. We went deep TWICE, once for a touchdown and the other was just overthrown (and I don't know if this is true, but I saw someone say the wind carried the second one which is why it went far, otherwise it would have been another long TD that tied the game). Why didn't we go deep again?
 

D-man44

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,798
I still would have said 0-1 before this game. Our opening slate was the easiest part of our schedule

our easiest game left is probably Duke who smoked Cuse and put up a good fight against VT. Wouldn't even consider us favored in the game right now despite their record
Okay I can do that too. Notre dame could only muster 6 points vs Louisville in the first half. Louisville also only lost by 6 at Pitt so no reason we can’t compete there too right?
 

FightWinDrink

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,268
Okay I can do that too. Notre dame could only muster 6 points vs Louisville in the first half. Louisville also only lost by 6 at Pitt so no reason we can’t compete there too right?
Didn't say we wouldnt compete but I wouldnt consider us favored in any games
 

CuseJacket

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
18,898
Why are you defending Patenaude so much? Yeah he called those plays... when it was too late, but where were the aggressive calls when we got the turnovers? No where to be seen. He got scared and went conservative. We went deep TWICE, once for a touchdown and the other was just overthrown (and I don't know if this is true, but I saw someone say the wind carried the second one which is why it went far, otherwise it would have been another long TD that tied the game). Why didn't we go deep again?
I'm defending Patenaude against unwarranted, over-the-top, or uninformed opinions. I think your posts are some of those and are disproven by facts. I do not think CDP is flawless.

Going deep requires a clean pocket and therefore blocking their DL longer. We tried longer developing plays many times. I'm sure you saw how effective we were at that throughout the game. Just because Sims didn't or couldn't fling it deep does not mean we didn't try those plays more than you're stating.
 

JacketOff

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,818
Why are you defending Patenaude so much? Yeah he called those plays... when it was too late, but where were the aggressive calls when we got the turnovers? No where to be seen. He got scared and went conservative. We went deep TWICE, once for a touchdown and the other was just overthrown (and I don't know if this is true, but I saw someone say the wind carried the second one which is why it went far, otherwise it would have been another long TD that tied the game). Why didn't we go deep again?
You realize the QB needs time to recognize open receivers and throw deep balls, right? You can’t just take the snap and chuck it deep. CDP did everything that everyone wanted him to do. PA’s, designed rollouts, outside runs, inside runs, designed QB runs, RPOs, read options, designed home run balls. The #1 team in the country dominated the LOS and severely limited what the OC was able to call. Some of his calls weren’t executed. It happens. To act like CDP called a terrible game and continually say you want him fired proves your football knowledge is severely limited, or your gold colored glasses are tinted so strongly you think it’s impossible that Tech should ever lose a game. You were on numerous threads talking about how Tech was going to win this game. The possibility of that happening was so slim that it shouldn’t have been a realistic thought that a fan would have. You had convinced yourself that Tech would be successful, when that had no basis in reality, only in your mind. Say what you want about the defense or offensive execution, but the offensive play calling is not worth of as much criticism that you’re spewing.
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,546
I agree we are throwing Sims into the fire. My big concern is he becomes so shell shocked, he gets tentative and declines. Yes I am old enough to remember the expansion Atlanta Falcons and watch them ruin a rookie QB (Randy Johnson). Giving QBs time to get acclimated and grow into the position certainly helps. We are playing teams that are clearly not in Clemson's league but do have good defensive. Hopefully we can put Sims in positions where his reads are not too complex and he has time to get passes off.

I don't think we have to worry about that. He's made plenty of mistakes this year and bounced back to perform well despite them. It's also not like he has taken a ton of huge hits either.

As far as the other teams go, it isn't always a smooth curve in terms of how teams play. What I mean by that is we could have a lot more success against Pitt than against Clemson without their being a huge difference in their defenses. Clemson could pretty much dare us to beat them deep, sit on the short and midrange stuff and clamp down on the run. One of the reasons they could do that is that it didn't really matter if we hit a couple deep shots. Even if we hit Brown on that deep shot and get another one, we'd score 21 and it wouldn't come close to mattering. Against Pitt for example, maybe Pitt believes they will only score ~28 or so. They can't afford to treat the deep ball the same way, have to play a little off and that opens up the short passing game some. They then have to adjust to that and that opens the running game up some more. Now I'm not predicting 500 yards or anything, but you can see the difference in the Miami game's against both.
 

dmel25

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
473
The possibility of that happening was so slim that it shouldn’t have been a realistic thought that a fan would have. You had convinced yourself that Tech would be successful, when that had no basis in reality, only in your mind. Say what you want about the defense or offensive execution, but the offensive play calling is not worth of as much criticism that you’re spewing.
Okay, but you have to give me some leeway because...

A) I am a Falcons fan who watched the them lose when they had a 99.9% to win TWO games in a row and then lose.. so I assumed GT had a chance against Clemson
and
B) I am constantly drunk watching GT play football
 

Lee

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
841
Why are you defending Patenaude so much? Yeah he called those plays... when it was too late, but where were the aggressive calls when we got the turnovers? No where to be seen. He got scared and went conservative. We went deep TWICE, once for a touchdown and the other was just overthrown (and I don't know if this is true, but I saw someone say the wind carried the second one which is why it went far, otherwise it would have been another long TD that tied the game). Why didn't we go deep again?

Aren’t you the person who predicted on here (based on a dream I believe) that we were going to win?

Man how quickly you jumped ship.

As to why we didn’t throw deep more, it’s been answered but did you see how much Clemson’s DL dominated the LOS?

When you have the best D coordinator in the country scheming against a true freshman QB playing behind an average OL, you’re in for a long day.

I think if you had been more realistic going into the game, you wouldn’t be so upset right now.

Don’t take this as me defending the overall gameplan, but this isn’t the first time Venebles has shut someone down (see last week) and it won’t be the last.
 
Top