Spring Position Battle - QB

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,487
I hope you intended that "when" to be a temporal conditional, i.e. meaning "if" rather than belief that JT will get hurt, and it's just a matter of time.

It's a matter of when, not if. Every QB gets dinged up from time to time. True for Tebow, Nesbitt, Joe Hamilton, Ben Rothlesbergur, etc. Luck will determine the severity of injuries for the most part. Here's to hoping JT doesn't miss a single snap though.
 

daBuzz

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
965
It's a matter of when, not if. Every QB gets dinged up from time to time. True for Tebow, Nesbitt, Joe Hamilton, Ben Rothlesbergur, etc. Luck will determine the severity of injuries for the most part. Here's to hoping JT doesn't miss a single snap though.

Let's don't forget that he'll have to play when JT's helmet comes off.....still one of the stupidest rules in all of college football IMO.
 
Messages
2,077
Every single person I talked to (while I was usually defending TW) said VL was the Man. Said he would be the best QB CPJ had ever had - Anywhere. He could run, pass, do it all. Everyone said that. And it was his third year in the program.

Now we will be starting, in year 7, another new QB. I wonder if this is the biggest problem we have in our program?

The teams winning are not having this changeover with, I would assume , the most important position on the field.






Love the Speed JT brings, but we still have to throw at least a little.

Time will tell.
The "Biggest problem"? We have several biggest problems in our program, quarterback being one of them. The coronation of Vad Lee is a good example to all of us that message board posters are not as talented in the field of player evaluation as we think we are. I wish Vad well at JMU, but there is a reason most programs passed over him as a quarterback. Now we have an inkling about what caused that. There is also a reason Justin Thomas wasn't going to play quarterback at Alabama--hopefully that had more to do with the measurables of the athletes Bama has at that position than with Justin's lack of ability. We have to get to a point where quarterback . and several other key positions, has quality depth and is managed better year to year. I see hope with guys coming in that can be groomed slowly and don't have to be rushed into service. But we are a long way off from having two or three potential starters on the squad at all times. I realize practice reps are in short supply due to NCAA constraints on time, etc. But other programs seem to be able to do it, why can't we?
 
Messages
2,077
Had he stayed, I'm not convinced he'd be the starter come football season. That being said, both parties are better off

Vad Lee was not like Danny Wuerffel, i.e., he apparently was not very coachable. He wanted to play like he wanted to play. And ultimately the kid made a decision that to play like he wanted to play meant he would have to change schools (and coaches). So he did.
 

OldJacketFan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,348
Location
Nashville, TN
The "Biggest problem"? We have several biggest problems in our program, quarterback being one of them. The coronation of Vad Lee is a good example to all of us that message board posters are not as talented in the field of player evaluation as we think we are. I wish Vad well at JMU, but there is a reason most programs passed over him as a quarterback. Now we have an inkling about what caused that. There is also a reason Justin Thomas wasn't going to play quarterback at Alabama--hopefully that had more to do with the measurables of the athletes Bama has at that position than with Justin's lack of ability. We have to get to a point where quarterback . and several other key positions, has quality depth and is managed better year to year. I see hope with guys coming in that can be groomed slowly and don't have to be rushed into service. But we are a long way off from having two or three potential starters on the squad at all times. I realize practice reps are in short supply due to NCAA constraints on time, etc. But other programs seem to be able to do it, why can't we?

This appears to be a recurrent theme in your posts. I'll ask again, please enlighten us as to the several biggest problems. Is this anything like your but there is a reason most programs passed over him as a quarterback or the physical limitations CPJ places on his athletes comments? I see a lot of accusations from you without any factual support. Are you sure you're a Tech fan?
 

OldJacketFan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,348
Location
Nashville, TN
Vad Lee was not like Danny Wuerffel, i.e., he apparently was not very coachable. He wanted to play like he wanted to play. And ultimately the kid made a decision that to play like he wanted to play meant he would have to change schools (and coaches). So he did.
he apparently was not very coachable. So now you're sitting in the coaches meetings, doing game planing and sitting with the QBs in film study?
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,660
Taking J-B at his word, I'd say this:

Vad actually had a pretty good year. I don't think the coaches underrated his ability at all. In his best games (Duke, Syracuse, Ugag) he showed what everybody was expecting of him and he did ok in all the others. I don't think he had much in the way of a true stinker of a performance. The main reason so many people – J-B included, apparently – were so disappointed is that they were expecting too much. If he had stayed at Tech I would have expected him to be much better this coming year; indeed, I was looking forward to a whole year of Ugag performances.

But he decided otherwise. I can't speak to that decision, though Coach was obviously disappointed (he doesn't seem to think Vad wasn't coachable, iow). JT will probably do just fine at QB for us; he's more suited to the O then Vad and much quicker then anyone else we've ever had back there. But if he doesn't win the job this spring we'll still be ok. There are several good candidates at QB. I've said before and I'll say again: I don't think the actual results will be much different if Byerly wins the job, though he won't be near as much fun to watch. The guy knows how to win. Period.

So bottom line: I don't see that we have an unsurmountable problem at QB. Unfortunately, we're in the same boat with almost everybody in the conference except FSU, something I looked on as an advantage going forward. But the schedule is favorable and the athletes we have lined up can do the job. And I'll end by once more wondering just why Tech fans obsess over the offense when it is plain as a pike staff that the D is the source of our problems.
 

Ggee87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,046
Location
Douglasville, Georgia
Taking J-B at his word, I'd say this:

Vad actually had a pretty good year. I don't think the coaches underrated his ability at all. In his best games (Duke, Syracuse, Ugag) he showed what everybody was expecting of him and he did ok in all the others. I don't think he had much in the way of a true stinker of a performance. The main reason so many people – J-B included, apparently – were so disappointed is that they were expecting too much. If he had stayed at Tech I would have expected him to be much better this coming year; indeed, I was looking forward to a whole year of Ugag performances.

But he decided otherwise. I can't speak to that decision, though Coach was obviously disappointed (he doesn't seem to think Vad wasn't coachable, iow). JT will probably do just fine at QB for us; he's more suited to the O then Vad and much quicker then anyone else we've ever had back there. But if he doesn't win the job this spring we'll still be ok. There are several good candidates at QB. I've said before and I'll say again: I don't think the actual results will be much different if Byerly wins the job, though he won't be near as much fun to watch. The guy knows how to win. Period.

So bottom line: I don't see that we have an unsurmountable problem at QB. Unfortunately, we're in the same boat with almost everybody in the conference except FSU, something I looked on as an advantage going forward. But the schedule is favorable and the athletes we have lined up can do the job. And I'll end by once more wondering just why Tech fans obsess over the offense when it is plain as a pike staff that the D is the source of our problems.
The D is most definitely the problem and has been.for a while now. But in their defense. The offense sputtered alot in big games and left them in bad spots with field position and 3 and outs. But the D has glaring weaknesses that need to be addressed, maybe even more focus on that than the O.
 
Messages
2,077
This appears to be a recurrent theme in your posts. I'll ask again, please enlighten us as to the several biggest problems. Is this anything like your but there is a reason most programs passed over him as a quarterback or the physical limitations CPJ places on his athletes comments? I see a lot of accusations from you without any factual support. Are you sure you're a Tech fan?


Okay, but I am not trying to irritate anyone . If you have been paying attention, then you already know we are a .500 program since the Orange Bowl appearance. And that is in a conference that until this year had no powerhouse programs. Quarterback recruiting, and development is a BIG issue. Offensive line recruiting and development and performance is a big problem. Special teams are improved but for half a dozen years they have been, and continue to be mediocre or below. We are on our third DC in six, now heading into seven years, not counting Charles Kelly. I like how the defense is playing, but we are stocked with 3-4 athletes and need to recruit 4-3 players. That will take time and in the meantime I don't think anyone would call us a shut-down defensive team capable of winning games with the defense. Running backs, both A & B have been a patchwork quilt since Anthony Allen left. We have not scouted, courted & signed a single game-breaking talent in four years for an offense that relies on rushing yards to be successful. We have a system that supposedly devalues the 1000 yard rusher because we run 90 % of the time and our scheme creates big yardage for the ball carrier, who ever he might be. Yet we haven't had a outstanding ball carrier in years. So, yes, we are a program with lots of big problems. The biggest is we don't win any games against good football teams.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,660
Running backs, both A & B have been a patchwork quilt since Anthony Allen left. We have not scouted, courted & signed a single game-breaking talent in four years for an offense that relies on rushing yards to be successful. We have a system that supposedly devalues the 1000 yard rusher because we run 90 % of the time and our scheme creates big yardage for the ball carrier, who ever he might be. Yet we haven't had a outstanding ball carrier in years. So, yes, we are a program with lots of big problems. The biggest is we don't win any games against good football teams.
First, this neglects to mention that without "… a single game breaking talent in four years" we have somehow contrived to rank in the top 5 in the country in rushing until last year where we were .5 ypg from being 5th. So I can't say that not having Dwyer back there has made much difference; we rushed for 1529 yards at BB in 2009 and 1512 in 2013. An insignificant difference, imho. (Not, mind, that I wouldn't be right pleased to have another Dwyer back there.)

Second, yes, we have had trouble beating good football teams. And, of course, so does everyone else. We've been in most of the games against the better teams until late and, when we've failed to win, it has been because our D can't hold on. Witness the Ugag game last year; when you are up 10 points with 10 (I think) minutes to go, you should win the game. Period. But that looks like it's getting addressed, though we'll have to see.

So, yes, we have problems. And they're on D.
 

OldJacketFan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,348
Location
Nashville, TN
Okay, but I am not trying to irritate anyone . If you have been paying attention, then you already know we are a .500 program since the Orange Bowl appearance. And that is in a conference that until this year had no powerhouse programs. Quarterback recruiting, and development is a BIG issue. Offensive line recruiting and development and performance is a big problem. Special teams are improved but for half a dozen years they have been, and continue to be mediocre or below. We are on our third DC in six, now heading into seven years, not counting Charles Kelly. I like how the defense is playing, but we are stocked with 3-4 athletes and need to recruit 4-3 players. That will take time and in the meantime I don't think anyone would call us a shut-down defensive team capable of winning games with the defense. Running backs, both A & B have been a patchwork quilt since Anthony Allen left. We have not scouted, courted & signed a single game-breaking talent in four years for an offense that relies on rushing yards to be successful. We have a system that supposedly devalues the 1000 yard rusher because we run 90 % of the time and our scheme creates big yardage for the ball carrier, who ever he might be. Yet we haven't had a outstanding ball carrier in years. So, yes, we are a program with lots of big problems. The biggest is we don't win any games against good football teams.

1.) QB recruiting? Let’s see Josh Nesbitt, Tevin Washington, Vad Lee, Justin Thomas and Matthew Jordan. All of these QBs had/have the skill sets that fit with Tech offense. The numbers but up over the careers of Nesbitt and Washington and Lee contradict your position. Thomas and Jordan have yet to show what they can do but their high school stats argue that they will be successful at Tech.

2.) O line problems? Health wise, yes. Production wise. No, again the production and stats belie your position.

3.) DC? Past issues, no doubt. That issue appears to be moot with the hiring of CTR and the improvement shown by the D last year. I anticipate the D will continue to improve with players’ time in the system and continuing improvement in recruiting.

4.) Running backs? Production out of both the B back and A back positions, yet again, belie your assertions. I’m not going to regurgitate the stats that have been posted on the board already. Has Tech had the Dwyer or Allen in the past couple of years, no, but the production has been there. Adding Custis and Wilson in the B back mix bodes well, in my opinion, for the next couple of years.

5.) Special teams? Full time coach in place, excellent young kicker, no long snapper issues and returners in place.

6.) And last but not least, the easiest gripe to address. “we don't win any games against good football teams”. I supposed that depends on your definition of good football teams. Has Tech been less than successful in winning against ranked teams? Yes, but so has the rest of the football world. With rare exception Tech wins the games they should win and is competitive in games where they are underdogs. Is that good enough? Not in my estimation but it could be a helluva lot worse. Tech has yet to have a season under CPJ where every facet of the program was clicked in the same year. Why? I can list a number of reasons but suffice to say that each of those have been addressed in the last few years and, to me, that breeds optimism in the future of Tech football.

You say you don't want to irritate anyone yet I've yet to see a post from you that has contained anything positive about Tech football with the exception of a token comments here and there about a subject that you can't find something negative to say.
 

Boomergump

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,260
Okay, but I am not trying to irritate anyone . If you have been paying attention, then you already know we are a .500 program since the Orange Bowl appearance. And that is in a conference that until this year had no powerhouse programs. Quarterback recruiting, and development is a BIG issue. Offensive line recruiting and development and performance is a big problem. Special teams are improved but for half a dozen years they have been, and continue to be mediocre or below. We are on our third DC in six, now heading into seven years, not counting Charles Kelly. I like how the defense is playing, but we are stocked with 3-4 athletes and need to recruit 4-3 players. That will take time and in the meantime I don't think anyone would call us a shut-down defensive team capable of winning games with the defense. Running backs, both A & B have been a patchwork quilt since Anthony Allen left. We have not scouted, courted & signed a single game-breaking talent in four years for an offense that relies on rushing yards to be successful. We have a system that supposedly devalues the 1000 yard rusher because we run 90 % of the time and our scheme creates big yardage for the ball carrier, who ever he might be. Yet we haven't had a outstanding ball carrier in years. So, yes, we are a program with lots of big problems. The biggest is we don't win any games against good football teams.
JBR you make some very good points, but I would characterize both Orwin Smith and Robbie Godhigh as outstanding ball carriers. I mean, both of those guys were at the top of the nation in YPC.
 

daBuzz

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
965
Okay, but I am not trying to irritate anyone . If you have been paying attention, then you already know we are a .500 program since the Orange Bowl appearance. And that is in a conference that until this year had no powerhouse programs. Quarterback recruiting, and development is a BIG issue. Offensive line recruiting and development and performance is a big problem. Special teams are improved but for half a dozen years they have been, and continue to be mediocre or below. We are on our third DC in six, now heading into seven years, not counting Charles Kelly. I like how the defense is playing, but we are stocked with 3-4 athletes and need to recruit 4-3 players. That will take time and in the meantime I don't think anyone would call us a shut-down defensive team capable of winning games with the defense. Running backs, both A & B have been a patchwork quilt since Anthony Allen left. We have not scouted, courted & signed a single game-breaking talent in four years for an offense that relies on rushing yards to be successful. We have a system that supposedly devalues the 1000 yard rusher because we run 90 % of the time and our scheme creates big yardage for the ball carrier, who ever he might be. Yet we haven't had a outstanding ball carrier in years. So, yes, we are a program with lots of big problems. The biggest is we don't win any games against good football teams.

Actually, I thought your post was pretty spot on JBR.

I thought his point about RB's was fairly accurate as well. Boomer, you point out Orwin and Robbie Godhigh...yet his statement was that we haven't been able to recruit & sign a game breaker in the past 4 years. Both of those were here 5 years ago IIRC. Now, from all the accounts of the coaches, Custis may well be that guy. But he's yet to take a snap with the offense so I wouldn't put too much stock in him coming in and being the day 1/game 1 starter.

And finally, his last and best point...we don't win games against the good football teams...sums up my chief complaint at the moment. Just win baby! ;)
 

Dustman

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,163
Byerly may be forced to play more depending on how JT holds up. TB played more than most 3rd stringers last year and that was with Vad and JT ahead of him.
I mostly agree with that, but he came into 2 of those games after JT took it to the house from mid-field. The other game he saw action was Miami.

TB is a capable backup but I don't see CPJ giving him the 3rd series like we've seen the past 2 years. I think we see him when the game is already decided or if/when JT gets hurt, and I think we will see good things from him when he plays.

Tevin made some questionable pitches in 2010 IIRC. I think that's a lot easier to correct than Vad's issues.

I'm optimistic about the QB position this year because we have 2 guys that can do what we do best and one of them has shown he can be a game breaker.
 

Jerry the Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,478
Location
Chapin, SC
I'm real disappointed that we are at this place at the QB position going into 2014. Like a lot of others, I really thought Vad was going to be a real good player for us and be the guy to finally elevated us over our standard 7 win 5 loss type of performance. I even made the statement that, I had seen the future of Georgia Tech football and his name was Vad Lee after seeing his first spring session. I don't know what went wrong but I guess it just was not meant to be. I think Vad was never able to get comfortable in the offense or the overall program and I think the coaching staff never got what they wanted out of Vad.

So I think we are back to square one. Hoping that JT is the answer but not having any real conviction that things will turn out that way. To me the rank order going in should be:

Thomas
Byerly
Griffin
Jordan

Thomas and Byerly have the experience advantage but limited experience. This means that the spring and off season competition will be more open than at any other time under Coach Johnson for the QB position. I really don't know what to expect and will not make any predictions. I just hope we find someone that can run this offense or that CPJ relents and changes his offense to suit the talent of the players we have at hand.

It will be an interesting off season.

Go Jackets!
 
Top