Starting QB speculation

[billga99]

We have also recruited the type of OL personnel we are looking for in terms of size and length. I would think next year should be fine for the OL. The biggest problem in the future remains up the middle on the DL and Linebackers. I think we have recruited Defensive Ends and outside style linebackers well. But up the middle for stopping the run and generating pocket pressure up the middle is what separates the top tier teams from GT. To be better there next year is probably going to take some transfers. Anyone we recruit in this cycle is probably at least a year out (2022).

 

[Lee]

You might do better just saying we expect to be competing for Division and Conference championships by year 4. Im not sure many would have an issue with that. By calling every game until then a scrimmage game, it implies that we aren't really trying to win, and that we don't care whether we win or lose. There is plenty of value in a 7 or 8 win season even if we don't win the division or conference.

I also don't really agree on the OL. For some reason it didn't take Shaq Mason 4 years to learn how to play professional football. For some reason it didn't take Parker Braun 4 years to learn how to play at Texas. We have already made great strides from year one to year two. We have what many have described here as one of the best OL coaches in the country. It shouldn't take 4-5 years to get them playing well.

Not sure I would use Braun as your example. He went from being projected as high as the 3rd round to undrafted. I would guess largely due to the fact that he did not transition well to a pro-style offense. I admit I don’t know because I didn’t follow him after he left.

As for Mason, he was a freak and continues to be a freak. Also, transitioning to the NFL is different than transitioning to college. When guys move on to the NFL, their body is fully developed. They may tweak a few things, but they’re gown men. Coming out of HS as a 17 or 18 yea competing against grown men is a lot different.

What I find funny is that most of the people complaining when others bring up that this will take time are old men. The same old men that likely blast millennials for needing instant gratification. Now they want it with GT football seemingly without seriously considering what they’re asking.

This tells me one of two things. They are big time PJ fans and are mad because he’s gone or the coach they wanted (most likely from the PJ coaching tree) wasn’t hired.

Anyone objectively looking at GT football can see it’s going to take time. They can also see that we’ve made big strides (honestly more than I expected by this point). While I hate losing, I understand that to get where we are going, more losses than I would like to see are going to happen.

 

[lv20gt]

You might do better just saying we expect to be competing for Division and Conference championships by year 4. Im not sure many would have an issue with that. By calling every game until then a scrimmage game, it implies that we aren't really trying to win, and that we don't care whether we win or lose. There is plenty of value in a 7 or 8 win season even if we don't win the division or conference.

I'm not the one that called anything a scrimmage game. I'm saying people are getting too hung up on the word choices instead of the actual point. This year we weren't going to compete for a title. We almost certainly won't next year. In some people's eyes that makes this a rebuilding year/scrimmage season/playing for the future/ whatever you want to call it. That type of season, whatever you call it, was likely going to be the case for several years when we decided to make the change that we did.

I also don't really agree on the OL. For some reason it didn't take Shaq Mason 4 years to learn how to play professional football. For some reason it didn't take Parker Braun 4 years to learn how to play at Texas. We have already made great strides from year one to year two. We have what many have described here as one of the best OL coaches in the country. It shouldn't take 4-5 years to get them playing well.

For some reason? Yeah. The reason is they were outliers. They were also outliers while they played here as well. There's no reason to believe their ability to transition is any more standard than their play while here was. And Braun certainly had issues transitioning offenses. And some of our OL will transition better than others. The problem is, the OL as a whole is what matters. Having 3 good OLmen and 2 bad means you have a bad OL. There is also a level of consistency that is needed. If the OL is fine 75% of the plays, and bad the other 25% you have a bad OL.

And yeah, we've made strides. We were horrible last year. We'd have to make big strides just to get back to normal bad. The problem is that when players graduate the strides they made are no longer being built upon. It's why when you inherit a junior with two years of eligibility, he might start playing well right in time to graduate. Now, maybe we'll get lucky and everyone will utilize the extra year of eligibility which will be an unexpected benefit. My guess is many will move on anyways.

 

[WreckinGT]

Not sure I would use Braun as your example. He went from being projected as high as the 3rd round to undrafted. I would guess largely due to the fact that he did not transition well to a pro-style offense. I admit I don’t know because I didn’t follow him after he left.

As for Mason, he was a freak and continues to be a freak. Also, transitioning to the NFL is different than transitioning to college. When guys move on to the NFL, their body is fully developed. They may tweak a few things, but they’re gown men. Coming out of HS as a 17 or 18 yea competing against grown men is a lot different.

What I find funny is that most of the people complaining when others bring up that this will take time are old men. The same old men that likely blast millennials for needing instant gratification. Now they want it with GT football seemingly without seriously considering what they’re asking.

This tells me one of two things. They are big time PJ fans and are mad because he’s gone or the coach they wanted (most likely from the PJ coaching tree) wasn’t hired.

Anyone objectively looking at GT football can see it’s going to take time. They can also see that we’ve made big strides (honestly more than I expected by this point). While I hate losing, I understand that to get where we are going, more losses than I would like to see are going to happen.

Braun started every game he played at Texas. If the transition from an option offense is so terribly bad and long as you guys claim it is then that seems like it never should have happened. The same for Mason. The truth is, these guys are talented and not all of their experience in an option offense is useless or wasted. If you want to argue that the guys we had left weren't talented then fine, but lets not go with the nonsense that it takes 3-4 years to teach someone who played in an option based offense how to play in a traditional offense.

And give me a break on instant gratification. Wanting us to be competitive in less than 5 years isn't instant gratification. I would like to see us win some games before Gibbs, Griffin, and Brown are gone. Maybe im asking for too much.

 

[TechPhi97]

This crowd would have never let Joe Hamilton back on the field after about the 4th or 5th game of his R-FR season.

Sims is making rookie mistakes, just like #14 did. In all likelihood, Sims won't approach #14's accomplishments, but you can't learn carrying a clipboard. I'd rather him learn now in this whack-o season than a few years down the road.

I made this post on the other board; it's applicable here:

Just want to remind everyone of our best QB ever, and his career stats, including his first-year as a starter:

Year School Conf Class Pos G Cmp Att Pct Yds Y/A AY/A TD Int Rate Team W/L
1996 Georgia Tech ACC QB 10 108 188 57.4 1342 7.1 4.8 7 13 115.9 5-6
1997 Georgia Tech ACC QB 11 173 268 64.6 2314 8.6 8.4 12 7 146.6 7-5
1998 Georgia Tech ACC QB 11 145 259 56.0 2166 8.4 8.3 17 8 141.7 10-2
1999 Georgia Tech ACC QB 11 203 305 66.6 3060 10.0 10.3 29 11 175.0 8-4

I'm not saying Sims is Joe Hamilton, I'm just saying that when you start a young quarterback you've got to realize that he's going to make mistakes. Hamilton's first year was his RS FR year; the team went 6-5 the year before. Hist first two years, our record was virtually the same. The big thing in 1997 was we went to a bowl game and won; I still remember that. I thought Joe Hamilton was a hero taking us to that game and winning, and we were mediocre! I also remember the stories in the AJC after his 1997 season, talking about the work he was putting in during the off-season to get stronger (medicine balls galore) and work with his receivers. It took Joe 3 years to get be ready to lead us to 10-2 during his RS-Jr year.

I think it pays to keep context in mind; we're building for the future, and Sims is 3 games into a (hopefully) 48 - 50 game career. He's demonstrated this physical skills; I have no doubt that he will get better with experience.

For the sake of making sure my gold-colored glasses aren't too blurry, I will post Reggie Ball's career stats as well. Reggie never made the leap from a decision making standpoint; I think he played through injuries in his last two years, as well. What's the difference between Joe's "light bulb on" and Reggie's stagnation? Perhaps it comes down to the intangibles?

Year School Conf Class Pos G Cmp Att Pct Yds Y/A AY/A TD Int Rate Team W/L
*2003 Georgia Tech ACC FR QB 13 181 350 51.7 1996 5.7 4.9 10 11 102.8 7-6
*2004 Georgia Tech ACC SO QB 12 164 330 49.7 2147 6.5 5.0 16 18 109.4 7-5
*2005 Georgia Tech ACC JR QB 11 182 379 48.0 2165 5.7 4.9 11 12 99.3 7-5
*2006 Georgia Tech ACC SR QB 13 135 304 44.4 1820 6.0 5.2 20 14 107.2 9-5

 

[WreckinGT]

I made this post on the other board; it's applicable here:

Just want to remind everyone of our best QB ever, and his career stats, including his first-year as a starter:

Year School Conf Class Pos G Cmp Att Pct Yds Y/A AY/A TD Int Rate Team W/L
1996 Georgia Tech ACC QB 10 108 188 57.4 1342 7.1 4.8 7 13 115.9 5-6
1997 Georgia Tech ACC QB 11 173 268 64.6 2314 8.6 8.4 12 7 146.6 7-5
1998 Georgia Tech ACC QB 11 145 259 56.0 2166 8.4 8.3 17 8 141.7 10-2
1999 Georgia Tech ACC QB 11 203 305 66.6 3060 10.0 10.3 29 11 175.0 8-4

I'm not saying Sims is Joe Hamilton, I'm just saying that when you start a young quarterback you've got to realize that he's going to make mistakes. Hamilton's first year was his RS FR year; the team went 6-5 the year before. Hist first two years, our record was virtually the same. The big thing in 1997 was we went to a bowl game and won; I still remember that. I thought Joe Hamilton was a hero taking us to that game and winning, and we were mediocre! I also remember the stories in the AJC after his 1997 season, talking about the work he was putting in during the off-season to get stronger (medicine balls galore) and work with his receivers. It took Joe 3 years to get be ready to lead us to 10-2 during his RS-Jr year.

I think it pays to keep context in mind; we're building for the future, and Sims is 3 games into a (hopefully) 48 - 50 game career. He's demonstrated this physical skills; I have no doubt that he will get better with experience.

For the sake of making sure my gold-colored glasses aren't too blurry, I will post Reggie Ball's career stats as well. Reggie never made the leap from a decision making standpoint; I think he played through injuries in his last two years, as well. What's the difference between Joe's "light bulb on" and Reggie's stagnation? Perhaps it comes down to the intangibles?

Year School Conf Class Pos G Cmp Att Pct Yds Y/A AY/A TD Int Rate Team W/L
*2003 Georgia Tech ACC FR QB 13 181 350 51.7 1996 5.7 4.9 10 11 102.8 7-6
*2004 Georgia Tech ACC SO QB 12 164 330 49.7 2147 6.5 5.0 16 18 109.4 7-5
*2005 Georgia Tech ACC JR QB 11 182 379 48.0 2165 5.7 4.9 11 12 99.3 7-5
*2006 Georgia Tech ACC SR QB 13 135 304 44.4 1820 6.0 5.2 20 14 107.2 9-5

It probably had something to do with Ralph Friedgen vs Pat Nix.

 

[lv20gt]

If you want to argue that the guys we had left weren't talented then fine, but lets not go with the nonsense that it takes 3-4 years to teach someone who played in an option based offense how to play in a traditional offense.

It takes most OL 3-4 years to get to a level where coaches feel comfortable to start them normally. That's the standard. It's why most OLmen redshirt and why most starting OLmen are upperclassmen. It's probably the position that is hardest to make an impact early, even more so than QB, because the need for muscle memory and the reps to develop it. There are obvious exceptions but they are just that, exceptions, and you seem to be thinking that the exceptions are the norm. The truth is the previous offense did not get the OL many reps for what the new offense is asking for them so it shouldn't be much of a surprise that it will take 3-4 years for the OL to get the reps they would normally take 3 or 4 years to get.

 

[slugboy]

It probably had something to do with Ralph Friedgen vs Pat Nix.

I saw Fridge actively coaching QBs on the sideline, and have heard about him coaching throwing mechanics extensively (even though Godsey had a baseball background, Fridge said his mechanics were horrible his first year, and worked on them as long as he coached Godsey).
Maybe Nix also did that, but I didn't see it happen--especially not to the degree I did with Fridge.

 

[kalld12]

How so? How does throwing deep and it being a incomplete pass, as you said, get the defense to back up? That just tells them, "Oh hey this guy can't hit squat deep, we don't have to worry about that as much." and then they creep forward. They would focus more on the short/intermediate passes and the run game.

People around here don't like to hear the truth, thats what. Its common sense, but thats too difficult for most

 

[Lee]

Braun started every game he played at Texas. If the transition from an option offense is so terribly bad and long as you guys claim it is then that seems like it never should have happened. The same for Mason. The truth is, these guys are talented and not all of their experience in an option offense is useless or wasted. If you want to argue that the guys we had left weren't talented then fine, but lets not go with the nonsense that it takes 3-4 years to teach someone who played in an option based offense how to play in a traditional offense.

And give me a break on instant gratification. Wanting us to be competitive in less than 5 years isn't instant gratification. I would like to see us win some games before Gibbs, Griffin, and Brown are gone. Maybe im asking for too much.

Braun would’ve started every game for us as well. His draft stock took a big plunge from what it was in our previous offense. Take that for what you will. Did he all of a sudden become a worse player? Highly doubtful. Most likely, he was thinking more than he should’ve been while playing. In the old offense he knew where he was supposed to go and got to attack. My guess (and purely a guess bc I’m not an Oline guru) is there are/were a lot more responsibilities he had, footwork and how to use his hands in a pro style offense, that impacted his ability to just play.

Heck go back and read what the coaches have said was being taught going into this fall versus what they were teaching last year.

As InsideLB has said as well, both Braun and Mason are outliers. They were clearly the best OL on every GT team they played on. Braun transferred so that left GT without their best OL who clearly struggled to transition into the new offense. Again what did you expect OL that weren’t close to being on his level?

As for instant gratification, I stand by it. If you want us to be competitive then watch the games. We’ve been competitive in every game we’ve played in this year. We’ve been within one score in the 4th quarter every game. Lack of depth, penalties (which is coaching but also youth), and turnovers (lot of youth) have been too much for us to finish the drill in two of those games. If what you say is true and you want competitive, we’ve been that this year. I don’t think that’s the case though.

If you want us to come out and dominate people, that’s going to take the time we are talking about. This is what I think you and others are expecting.

We have an elite RB (along with some other above average guys), a potentially elite qb, potentially elite RT. All of which are true freshman. Recruiting and transfer portal has brought more high end talent in the past two years than we’ve had in a long time. Be patient, wins will come.

 

[Pointer]

I'm not the one that called anything a scrimmage game. I'm saying people are getting too hung up on the word choices instead of the actual point. This year we weren't going to compete for a title. We almost certainly won't next year. In some people's eyes that makes this a rebuilding year/scrimmage season/playing for the future/ whatever you want to call it. That type of season, whatever you call it, was likely going to be the case for several years when we decided to make the change that we did.



For some reason? Yeah. The reason is they were outliers. They were also outliers while they played here as well. There's no reason to believe their ability to transition is any more standard than their play while here was. And Braun certainly had issues transitioning offenses. And some of our OL will transition better than others. The problem is, the OL as a whole is what matters. Having 3 good OLmen and 2 bad means you have a bad OL. There is also a level of consistency that is needed. If the OL is fine 75% of the plays, and bad the other 25% you have a bad OL.

And yeah, we've made strides. We were horrible last year. We'd have to make big strides just to get back to normal bad. The problem is that when players graduate the strides they made are no longer being built upon. It's why when you inherit a junior with two years of eligibility, he might start playing well right in time to graduate. Now, maybe we'll get lucky and everyone will utilize the extra year of eligibility which will be an unexpected benefit. My guess is many will move on anyways.

I think everyone is forgetting that many of the O-line from last year got injured throughout the course of the season. The line at one point relied heavily on walk-on(s). But then people simply brushed over this and still blamed poor recruiting/option offense O-linemen for the poor O-line play last year.

I agree with WreckinGT's sentiments heartily. We don't need to put up with bad football on the pretense that what was inherited was a bad program because that is untrue.

I also do see improvements over last year in addition to the struggles so its not all bad, but I, like many others, will not be willing to wait 7 years for a competitive team and certainly will not be happy with 4 scrimmage seasons before we start grading coach (this last part is directed at others, not you specifically lv20gt). That is ridiculous.

 

[Milwaukee]

but I, like many others

there’s literally just 3 or 4 of you. And you guys hijack every thread with the same nonsense until you get steamrolled, like you have here, and then one of you will just start another thread with the hopes of “Maybe this time I can convince the board, they just weren’t ready for us last time”

You guys are adorable.

 

[Pointer]

Next year should see more O-line recruited by CGC and developed by CBK, which is one of the big reasons why I see next year as a good judgement year and a fairly accurate indicator of the future direction of the program. We shall see!

 

[lv20gt]

I think everyone is forgetting that many of the O-line from last year got injured throughout the course of the season. The line at one point relied heavily on walk-on(s). But then people simply brushed over this and still blamed poor recruiting/option offense O-linemen for the poor O-line play last year.

Both can be true. We did have injuries last year, and they compounded an already bad situation and made it worse.

I agree with WreckinGT's sentiments heartily. We don't need to put up with bad football on the pretense that what was inherited was a bad program because that is untrue.

We also don't need to pretend that things were fine just to appease your phobia of any statements that could possibly be taken as a slight to the previous staff. Saying the OL that was inherited wasn't a good fit for the new offense shouldn't be a controversial statement. It should be an obvious, no duh statement. The previous staff recruited for and coached for a very different offense. The qualities they looked for and the things they stressed in practice were for a very different system. As they should have. But that also meant that the OL wasn't prepared to run a very different system that focused heavily on the things that the system they were recruited to and coached for largely ignored. Another example of that is the QB spot. Oliver/Graham/Yates/Jordan would make for a very good QB situation in the option. It didn't not make for a good QB situation in the offense we are trying to run now. It wasn't Johnson's responsibility to recruit for an entirely different system that he didn't know we would switch to, but that doesn't make that situation good for when we did switch to the new system.

All of this was known to be likely and talked about online when we made the decision to hire Johnson. Hell, it was constantly used as a point in favor of keeping Johnson because the transition would be so bad.

 

[orientalnc]

The 2018 OL was not great, but they were recruited for a very different offense. The skills and technique required in the CPJ offense were unique and not easily transferred to the more pro style in 2019. Also, if Braun had stayed, some of the problems might have been masked a bit.

We are getting there. Earlier in the thread someone correctly pointed out that OLmen need to be around for a while. You cannot expect an 18 yo to have the same muscle mass he will have (if he works at it) at 22. Hopefully he will also have mastered the footwork that enables him use his weight and strength more effectively.

 

[WreckinGT]

For everyone on the we can't be good until 2023 train, what enjoyment do you get out of watching games now? If winning isn't important and the vast majority of the guys you are watching will be gone by the time we can win, what exactly is the point?

 

[Pointer]

Both can be true. We did have injuries last year, and they compounded an already bad situation and made it worse.



We also don't need to pretend that things were fine just to appease your phobia of any statements that could possibly be taken as a slight to the previous staff. Saying the OL that was inherited wasn't a good fit for the new offense shouldn't be a controversial statement. It should be an obvious, no duh statement. The previous staff recruited for and coached for a very different offense. The qualities they looked for and the things they stressed in practice were for a very different system. As they should have. But that also meant that the OL wasn't prepared to run a very different system that focused heavily on the things that the system they were recruited to and coached for largely ignored. Another example of that is the QB spot. Oliver/Graham/Yates/Jordan would make for a very good QB situation in the option. It didn't not make for a good QB situation in the offense we are trying to run now. It wasn't Johnson's responsibility to recruit for an entirely different system that he didn't know we would switch to, but that doesn't make that situation good for when we did switch to the new system.

All of this was known to be likely and talked about online when we made the decision to hire Johnson. Hell, it was constantly used as a point in favor of keeping Johnson because the transition would be so bad.

Obviously there is a difference in skill-set between offense's requirements. My other point, which I think you agree with, is that injuries compounded this issue. To say we were 3 wins bad was because of previous recruiting and it will take 4 years to get to a respectable point is laughable. I think many on here agree with me on this.

 

[lv20gt]

For everyone on the we can't be good until 2023 train, what enjoyment do you get out of watching games now? If winning isn't important and the vast majority of the guys you are watching will be gone by the time we can win, what exactly is the point?

At this point you're just making a blatant straw man as it's been explained to you several times.

 

[Boaty1]

Braun started every game he played at Texas. If the transition from an option offense is so terribly bad and long as you guys claim it is then that seems like it never should have happened. The same for Mason. The truth is, these guys are talented and not all of their experience in an option offense is useless or wasted. If you want to argue that the guys we had left weren't talented then fine, but lets not go with the nonsense that it takes 3-4 years to teach someone who played in an option based offense how to play in a traditional offense.

And give me a break on instant gratification. Wanting us to be competitive in less than 5 years isn't instant gratification. I would like to see us win some games before Gibbs, Griffin, and Brown are gone. Maybe im asking for too much.

It's a talent issue my friend.

 

[Boaty1]

For everyone on the we can't be good until 2023 train, what enjoyment do you get out of watching games now? If winning isn't important and the vast majority of the guys you are watching will be gone by the time we can win, what exactly is the point?

I asked this question consistently under the previous regime.