TECH OFFENSE

Messages
2,034
So to bring it back again, and I would like this on a new thread but the sysops will move it if I start one.

I have said, I loved CPJ and what he did for Tech, The most successful Tech coach I have seen since my first Tech game in 1969. I loved the offense, beating UGA, and since I know him he is a very nice guy that still loves Tech. I hope he truly retires because I don't ever want to have to play against him.

That being said, I loved O'Leary, bringing us out of the dark years with CRF. I was sad to see him go as well.

Now, I am ready for CGC. I think he is getting some players and I think he is going to surprise a lot of people in what he does on both sides of the ball. Don't be surprised to se some TO. I love the fact he has hired a bunch of ex Tech players. They know what it takes at Tech. Yes Hype can go both ways but if he makes the players believe we will win games. No I don't expect playoffs. If we ever get there it will take a magical season and a Clemson and UGA collapse. But if he can get us a coastal ever 2 out of 3 years, I call that success. Lets get to that spring game and get ready for a new era at Tech.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,220
Let what go? Did I catch something loose in the hen house? All I know for sure is that a "pro style offense" is to "new" what the Green Bay sweep was to deception, and Collins 2-year record at a mid-major was 15-10, or kind of okay. His hiring by GT indicated to me that Tech is not a glamor magnet for top coaching prospects, and please, please spare me the "they got a Tech man" defense. I like a couple of his hires, with the caveat that we don't really know if they can coach or even recruit, And am I wrong -- I can be, you know -- but was not Geoff Collins the architect of that Mississippi State Defense that Georgia Tech shredded in the 2016 Orange Bowl? (Not that I would hold bolting from Starkville against him.) I'll forgive a lot of sins if he can win. And that is the only sales job that counts.
You better watch it skeptic you’re going to get accused of not being a fan.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,499
Let what go? Did I catch something loose in the hen house? All I know for sure is that a "pro style offense" is to "new" what the Green Bay sweep was to deception, and Collins 2-year record at a mid-major was 15-10, or kind of okay. His hiring by GT indicated to me that Tech is not a glamor magnet for top coaching prospects, and please, please spare me the "they got a Tech man" defense. I like a couple of his hires, with the caveat that we don't really know if they can coach or even recruit, And am I wrong -- I can be, you know -- but was not Geoff Collins the architect of that Mississippi State Defense that Georgia Tech shredded in the 2016 Orange Bowl? (Not that I would hold bolting from Starkville against him.) I'll forgive a lot of sins if he can win. And that is the only sales job that counts.

There are reasons to be skeptical. There's reasons to be optimistic too.
Reasons for skepticism (regarding the Tech Offense topic only)
  1. Patenaude didn't light it up in efficiency or other metrics. It was a fast offense, but that doesn't mean it was a killer offense
  2. It's a more common style of offense, so we might be easier to defend and might need every bit of the recruiting bump we're seeing
  3. We may not be good at passing mechanics or pass blocking
  4. We're switching offenses, and it takes time to learn
Reasons for optimism (regarding the Tech Offense topic only)
  1. Ex-pro alumni are showing up at practice, and they like what they see.
  2. Practices are high-energy and organized. Our players are learning, and quickly.
  3. See #1 again. That's a big deal.
  4. Some of what we've learned over the past few years is transferable to the new offense. Our wide outs "still have to block to get in the game"
  5. The ATL (Above The Line) philosophy gets as many ready-to-play players on the field as possible.
  6. We have some talented players coming in.
  7. Overall, I like our coaches.
I could probably add a few more. I think we'll be OK, but #1 in skepticism is still a big deal for me.
 

Skeptic

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,372
You better watch it skeptic you’re going to get accused of not being a fan.
My retired journalist neighbor referred to the base line of skeptical reporting -- just because you said it doesn't make it true -- as "If your mama says she loves you, check it out." I think that applies in a lot of areas, but very much so here.
 

RickStromFan

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
899
to topic, I think we'll fling it a bit more than expected, esp. if one of our QBs steps up and shows he can throw (which I think is a certainty). I think we've got a better-than-expected WR corps that's itching to do some damage. Also, I think Coach Collins wants to make a statement, of sorts, to fans that he's really bringing a new approach to GT football and that, for better or worse, we won't be seeing much TO-type football this fall. I also think the transition for our OL won't be as difficult as some believe it will. Which will also result in flinging it around more than expected. I like Camp and Sanders to light it up this fall, probably from balls thrown by Graham.
 

smokey_wasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,486
to topic, I think we'll fling it a bit more than expected, esp. if one of our QBs steps up and shows he can throw (which I think is a certainty). I think we've got a better-than-expected WR corps that's itching to do some damage. Also, I think Coach Collins wants to make a statement, of sorts, to fans that he's really bringing a new approach to GT football and that, for better or worse, we won't be seeing much TO-type football this fall. I also think the transition for our OL won't be as difficult as some believe it will. Which will also result in flinging it around more than expected. I like Camp and Sanders to light it up this fall, probably from balls thrown by Graham.

It is important to future recruiting to show that QBs and WRs can get action and put up stats in this offense. We are still being negatively recruited on this point. Josh Downs alluded to the idea that he committed to UNC over us because they know how to run a spread, not just how to "try" to run a spread, in his words.

Obviously, doing what gives us the best chance to win is most important, but passing needs to be a big part of it. I expect a pretty balanced offense.
 

tmhunter52

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,449
It is important to future recruiting to show that QBs and WRs can get action and put up stats in this offense. We are still being negatively recruited on this point. Josh Downs alluded to the idea that he committed to UNC over us because they know how to run a spread, not just how to "try" to run a spread, in his words.

Obviously, doing what gives us the best chance to win is most important, but passing needs to be a big part of it. I expect a pretty balanced offense.

I hope Mr Downs keeps his head on a swivel or he might get Dingle-ized or Swilling-ized when he comes across the middle...
 

smokey_wasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,486
I hope Mr Downs keeps his head on a swivel or he might get Dingle-ized or Swilling-ized when he comes across the middle...

I am trying not to knock him too hard. Lol. We could still flip him, though it is doubtful. I probably should have just said one of our WR targets to make my point.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,237
It is important to future recruiting to show that QBs and WRs can get action and put up stats in this offense. We are still being negatively recruited on this point. Josh Downs alluded to the idea that he committed to UNC over us because they know how to run a spread, not just how to "try" to run a spread, in his words.

Obviously, doing what gives us the best chance to win is most important, but passing needs to be a big part of it. I expect a pretty balanced offense.

Interesting read on UNC's OC Longo:

https://www.redcuprebellion.com/201...arolina-offensive-coordinator-hire-phil-longo

But a more nuanced look at the numbers reveals a concerning trend: during his two year tenure, Longo racked up yards and points against overmatched opponents but routinely underwhelmed against top defenses. In 15 games against teams ranked outside the top 60 in defensive S&P+, Longo’s offense poured on eight yards per play and over 41 points per contest; in eight games against defenses inside the top 30, those numbers plummet to 4.9 yards per play and about 15 points per game.

Sure, any offense’s production will dip against top competition, but a disparity that large is significant. Huge outputs against bad defenses—like 40 points* and 546 yards vs. Texas Tech or a 70-point, 826-yard explosion against Louisiana-Monroe—provide statistical cover for struggles against better conference teams.

---

Maybe he can make it work at the FBS level without talents like Ta’amu, Brown and Metcalf. Longo prides his system on its ability to adapt to the players within it. His offense is more balanced than that of a traditional Air Raid and his ability to generate an efficient rushing attack was one of the big reasons Freeze hired him out of the FCS ranks. Indeed, the turnaround he worked with the Rebels run game (59th in rushing S&P+ the year before Longo arrived, 15th this season) is probably his most impressive accomplishment in Oxford.

But Longo was hired to augment, not overhaul, an already successful system designed by Freeze. The pair spent seven months installing these tweaks before Freeze’s dramatic resignation in July of 2017.

It becomes difficult then, to judge how much of Longo’s success in Oxford is the result of Freeze’s system and players. With no prior FBS experience from which to draw evidence, Longo is still somewhat of an unknown, and therefore more of a risk than his gaudy Ole Miss numbers suggest.

Mack Brown is hoping the risk pays off.
 
Top