So far, so good ??

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,727
But many are our best players--best LBs,best DE/rusher, best WRS-all, best QB?, --very hard to replace that talent
Here’s our UGA depth chart: https://ramblinwreck.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/gt-depth-uga.pdf

On defense, we return just about everyone except at linebacker. Before last year, there was multiple years of complaints about linebacker play. Our LB coach seems to be dang good. We have a bunch of young LBs, and a bunch of recruits and transfers. As of now, I expect our defense to be better. It could be a lot better.

On offense, we return just about everyone on our oh-my-god-they’re-young offensive line. We return the running back that many people think was our best back, and we have a good transfer. We do have transfers out on offense, but many of the outgoing transfers had either lost their starting spots or saw someone lock in the starting spot they wanted. Nate McCollum is the one player who stands out as a player I don’t want to lose. I expect the offense to be significantly better next year, and have hope that it might actually be good.

The issues I have are that our OL wasn’t that productive last season and that our defensive front 6 didn’t “get home” much for sacks or other disruptive plays. I hope that we fix that in the off-season

@Ibeeballin I’m not sure it was a compliment, but I lean towards the Pitt “these guys will be older and better next year” view
 

JacketFan137

Banned
Messages
2,536
My only quibble here is running concepts of an offense does not equate to running the same offense.

TCU runs read option concepts as well as Air Raid concepts. The offensive philosophy for Garrett Riley is similar to his brother Lincoln Riley. Run the ball to open up the pass. It's different from Mike Leach. The offenses have similar strands of DNA, but they are different creatures. TCU was one of only 3 offenses to rank in top 25 in total passing and total rushing. The Rileys seek balance their offense. You're kinda getting close to the holy grail of option and Air Raid.
i think my issue with that user’s statement is he is one that constantly moans and complains about how we “can’t do what everyone else does!!” (not true) and complains all the time unless the offense has some gimmick.

to completely dismiss faulkner and what he will do here as “standard rpo offense”, which frankly we don’t even know yet one way or the other, is just defeatist attitude and giving up before we get started. i would be pretty surprised if we don’t run something similar to riley’s offense considering key seems to want to be a physical running team first and foremost.

would also fit our personnel better as of right now as i think we have a better RB room than pass catching weapons for sure
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,398
i think my issue with that user’s statement is he is one that constantly moans and complains about how we “can’t do what everyone else does!!” (not true) and complains all the time unless the offense has some gimmick.

to completely dismiss faulkner and what he will do here as “standard rpo offense”, which frankly we don’t even know yet one way or the other, is just defeatist attitude and giving up before we get started. i would be pretty surprised if we don’t run something similar to riley’s offense considering key seems to want to be a physical running team first and foremost.

would also fit our personnel better as of right now as i think we have a better RB room than pass catching weapons for sure

Gotcha. I was doing a "deep dive" into what what we might get with Faulkner/Weinke/Armstrong on the offensive side. I'm actually more positive about it than I was initially (maybe I'm putting my gold tinted glasses on). Hopefully I'll have the bandwith to do some kind of write up. I'm really fascinated by Faulkner's time at UGA under Monken+ Armstrong's time at WKU and the hybrid Air Raid/West Coast system they ran. I'm VERY surprised that no one has mentioned Armstrong's Co-Offensive coordinator title and his role at WKU. WKU did some REALLY cool stuff there.
 

Ibeeballin

Im a 3*
Messages
6,082
But many are our best players--best LBs,best DE/rusher, best WRS-all, best QB?, --very hard to replace that talent

If you believe the recruiting services and the development of Key’s staff then:

McCollum is still a question mark whether he leaves

5.7 Nate ——> 5.7 Rutherford going into 3rd yr

Keion White ——>>> 5.7 Josh Robinson

LBs ——> 4* Tatum in 3rd yr, 2 productive transfers, 4* Edwards, & 5.7 Meiguez finally healthy
 

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,795
If you believe the recruiting services and the development of Key’s staff then:

McCollum is still a question mark whether he leaves

5.7 Nate ——> 5.7 Rutherford going into 3rd yr

Keion White ——>>> 5.7 Josh Robinson

LBs ——> 4* Tatum in 3rd yr, 2 productive transfers, 4* Edwards, & 5.7 Meiguez finally healthy
Looking foward to K white having an effective replacment. The guy is freakish athlete.

The offense could improve from horrible to take some of the pressure off the defense.
 

alagold

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,802
Location
Huntsville,Al
If you believe the recruiting services and the development of Key’s staff then:

McCollum is still a question mark whether he leaves

5.7 Nate ——> 5.7 Rutherford going into 3rd yr

Keion White ——>>> 5.7 Josh Robinson

LBs ——> 4* Tatum in 3rd yr, 2 productive transfers, 4* Edwards, & 5.7 Meiguez finally healthy
Mc Collum is gone it looks like
I would love to have Rutherford somehow EQUALLY replace Nate, same with Robinson , as well as have Tatum even start over either of the 2 new LBs much less equal CT and Eley
I put all those under -possible but "unlikely" - at this point
 

awbuzz

Helluva Manager
Staff member
Messages
12,301
Location
Marietta, GA
If you believe the recruiting services and the development of Key’s staff then:

McCollum is still a question mark whether he leaves

5.7 Nate ——> 5.7 Rutherford going into 3rd yr

Keion White ——>>> 5.7 Josh Robinson

LBs ——> 4* Tatum in 3rd yr, 2 productive transfers, 4* Edwards, & 5.7 Meiguez finally healthy
Nate appears to be going to UNC.
 

CuseJacket

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
19,627
I would have said the same thing before 2014. You never know when the lightening will strike.

Like you, I think we have too many issues on O to be a big winner next year. I'd say our ceiling there is about 5 - 7 games. The schedule is more addressable. We'll just have to see. As to recruiting, it's about where it was with Paul. We'll have to see whether we end up with the same kind of performance from Key's recruits that he was able to get. If Key was recruiting for a system, then so much the better.
This may be worth its own thread, but a thought experiment.

First, if Key succeeds the next 2-3 years, it will not be because of his ability to recruit to his system. Just as CGC coached almost the entirety of his tenure with CPJ's upperclassmen, so will Key with CGC's upperclassmen for the next 2-3 years. This means Key's performance on the field will be judged with primarily "CGC recruits" taking the majority of snaps (not accounting for transfers + the fact that Key was part of the prior regime and responsible in some part for today's roster).

Second, along those same line I hope Key has the same success finding a Jahmyr Gibbs (3*), Nate McCollum (3*), Akelo Stone, Clayton Powell-Lee, etc (examples where CGC was not star chasing) and those players can see the field and be productive earlier than average. But underclassmen contributors will likely continue to be the exception rather than the rule. Thankfully under CGC's leadership*, we built a starting OL for Key that is returning next year (*depends on one's position as to Key's influence over OL recruiting). That will be huge for Year 1 performance.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,153
This may be worth its own thread, but a thought experiment.

First, if Key succeeds the next 2-3 years, it will not be because of his ability to recruit to his system. Just as CGC coached almost the entirety of his tenure with CPJ's upperclassmen, so will Key with CGC's upperclassmen for the next 2-3 years. This means Key's performance on the field will be judged with primarily "CGC recruits" taking the majority of snaps (not accounting for transfers + the fact that Key was part of the prior regime and responsible in some part for today's roster).

Second, along those same line I hope Key has the same success finding a Jahmyr Gibbs (3*), Nate McCollum (3*), Akelo Stone, Clayton Powell-Lee, etc (examples where CGC was not star chasing) and those players can see the field and be productive earlier than average. But underclassmen contributors will likely continue to be the exception rather than the rule. Thankfully under CGC's leadership*, we built a starting OL for Key that is returning next year (*depends on one's position as to Key's influence over OL recruiting). That will be huge for Year 1 performance.
1. Saying that TFG "coached" is, imho, a stretch. We saw the difference pretty directly when Key took over; suddenly Tech was playing even-steven ball and beat two ranked teams with the same assistants. Other then that, the point is well-taken. You go to war with the team you have, not the one you want. But your recruiting had better be aimed at the team you want or the whole shooting match will have trouble going forward. I do hope that Key will use the players he inherited more wisely then TFG did.

2. Gibbs was a 4*, but the rest weren't. I thought the problem with TFG's recruiting was not that we didn't get decent athletes - he did about as well as Paul there, after a lights out first year. The problem was that he didn't have a clear idea of what to do with them once he got them. I think Key has a plan for the athletes, though whether they can execute it is another story. But that will come with time. And, yes, having the OL come back is handy. I also liked the way Key moved the OL around; putting Williams at guard was good thinking and better suited his talents. How "huge" that will be for first year performance is a "We'll see." Tech needs more improvement here in the worst way.

3. I said somewhere around here that I thought - hoped, really - that Key would turn out to be Tech's Rich Brooks. Brooks took over at Oregon in roughly the same situation and, after a few rough years, brought the Ducks into a grove they haven't left since. (True, Brooks also holds the Oregon record for losses …) I think he can pull Tech back from the brink if we give him schedules - like 2023 - that aren't crippling and adequate funding for the program. I also think it will be a longer haul than people believe. The returning squad has more question marks than you'd like and a new O coaching staff always makes ironing out the creases harder. We'll just have to see.
 

CuseJacket

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
19,627
1. Saying that TFG "coached" is, imho, a stretch. We saw the difference pretty directly when Key took over; suddenly Tech was playing even-steven ball and beat two ranked teams with the same assistants. Other then that, the point is well-taken. You go to war with the team you have, not the one you want. But your recruiting had better be aimed at the team you want or the whole shooting match will have trouble going forward. I do hope that Key will use the players he inherited more wisely then TFG did.

2. Gibbs was a 4*, but the rest weren't. I thought the problem with TFG's recruiting was not that we didn't get decent athletes - he did about as well as Paul there, after a lights out first year. The problem was that he didn't have a clear idea of what to do with them once he got them. I think Key has a plan for the athletes, though whether they can execute it is another story. But that will come with time. And, yes, having the OL come back is handy. I also liked the way Key moved the OL around; putting Williams at guard was good thinking and better suited his talents. How "huge" that will be for first year performance is a "We'll see." Tech needs more improvement here in the worst way.

3. I said somewhere around here that I thought - hoped, really - that Key would turn out to be Tech's Rich Brooks. Brooks took over at Oregon in roughly the same situation and, after a few rough years, brought the Ducks into a grove they haven't left since. (True, Brooks also holds the Oregon record for losses …) I think he can pull Tech back from the brink if we give him schedules - like 2023 - that aren't crippling and adequate funding for the program. I also think it will be a longer haul than people believe. The returning squad has more question marks than you'd like and a new O coaching staff always makes ironing out the creases harder. We'll just have to see.
I think we're talking about two different things. I agree, CGC did not make best use of his talent.

Gibbs committed to GT and CGC early in the cycle as a 3*, then became a 4* during his senior season. His recruitment is nearly the antithesis of CGC "star-chasing" (not saying CGC didn't do it generally, but it's not true in this particular case).

My main point, if I communicated it well, is that Key will be playing "Collins' players" for the most part. If Key's teams perform well the next two years, it'll be on the backs of players brought in by CGC (exceptions noted in prior post). The results the next 2-3 years, good or bad, will not be due to Key's HS recruiting.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,153
I think we're talking about two different things. I agree, CGC did not make best use of his talent.

Gibbs committed to GT and CGC early in the cycle as a 3*, then became a 4* during his senior season. His recruitment is nearly the antithesis of CGC "star-chasing" (not saying CGC didn't do it generally, but it's not true in this particular case).

My main point, if I communicated it well, is that Key will be playing "Collins' players" for the most part. If Key's teams perform well the next two years, it'll be on the backs of players brought in by CGC (exceptions noted in prior post). The results the next 2-3 years, good or bad, will not be due to Key's HS recruiting.
I understood you. As I said, Tech has done ok in recruiting after a really good start over the last three years. Most of the players recruited have been roughly the same that we brought in under Paul and Gailey; i.e. high to middle three stars with a 4 star or two and a reach or two. And we will be winning (or losing) with those players. Key has already shown that he knows how to motivate and use those players better than TFG. The key (no pun intended) for the next 2 - 3 years is player development. We'll just have to see how that works out. I hope we get a good haul each year, of course, and that some of them turn out to be difference makers. My guess is that most will need a redshirt year and a slow work into the lineup. Sort of like Wake does it, iow. We should be patient next year and await events.
 

JacketFan137

Banned
Messages
2,536
I understood you. As I said, Tech has done ok in recruiting after a really good start over the last three years. Most of the players recruited have been roughly the same that we brought in under Paul and Gailey; i.e. high to middle three stars with a 4 star or two and a reach or two. And we will be winning (or losing) with those players. Key has already shown that he knows how to motivate and use those players better than TFG. The key (no pun intended) for the next 2 - 3 years is player development. We'll just have to see how that works out. I hope we get a good haul each year, of course, and that some of them turn out to be difference makers. My guess is that most will need a redshirt year and a slow work into the lineup. Sort of like Wake does it, iow. We should be patient next year and await events.
i think there’s a chance our recruiting sees a major uptick next year if we show some promise. it was kind of a bad situation to be in when we were recruiting without a head coach and we still had a salvageable class. i don’t think we’re gonna out compete uga or anything but top 30 should be the goal
 


Write your reply...
Top