Tech vs Clemson, it's actually very easy to explain

Messages
1,403
1st time posting and enjoy reading all of the posts. Got a question though..

Didn’t we hire PJ to offset this talent gap? Isn’t his innovative offense supposed to neutralize the superior talent? If not, why are we still running this offense? Kids w talent don’t want to play in this offense nor practice against it. I’m disappointed that we didn’t compete. It seems that we were running the same plays even though it wasn’t working (granted nothing was working..).
Great post.
 

bke1984

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,607
Yes, some need to realize that CPJ is a solid coach working with limited resources.

Many others need to realize that it is possible to criticize a coach without wanting him gone. His most glaring weakness is that he gets stubborn in games when players aren’t or can’t execute a given play. He’s shown time and time again (and even admitted) that he will try for too long to fix issues in-game rather than adjust.
 

Animal02

Banned
Messages
6,269
Location
Southeastern Michigan
Yes, some need to realize that CPJ is a solid coach working with limited resources.

Many others need to realize that it is possible to criticize a coach without wanting him gone. His most glaring weakness is that he gets stubborn in games when players aren’t or can’t execute a given play. He’s shown time and time again (and even admitted) that he will try for too long to fix issues in-game rather than adjust.
You are in a foxhole in the middle of a fire fight......you gun jambs.......do you try to fix it on the spot or expose yourself, crawl out of your foxhole in search of another weapon? How long do you try and fix it? You pick a path and stick with it, not just because you are stubborn, but because it is the best option at the time.......hindsight is always 20/20, not so in the middle of the battle,
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
It has nothing to do with weather, nothing to do with scheme, nothing to do with but one, single solitary thing!

TALENT! Its just that simple.

When your entire D line, LBs and DBs are nationally ranked 4 and 5* players you are going to win 95% of the time. At Tech's best, when everything is clicking they can compete but otherwise Clemson is going to win much more often than not.

We beat the snot out of Mississippi State in the Orange Bowl and georgia and other big teams from time to time who also have 4* and 5* talent. To me, Clemson's DLine has not only high talent, not only guys who will play in the NFL, but I think they will be future All-Pro guys. I firmly believe they have 3-4 guys on the DL right now who are better than many NFL guys right now. That makes our particular offense, of which 90% of the plays come within 5 feet of the line, very difficult to run.

Now it is disconcerting that after a few years of the same type of thing we haven't been able to figure out something that works better. But still. If you ever expect your team from Georgia Tech to be able to beat an NFL team, I wouldn't hold your breath. Besides, we are now undefeated against the spread for 10 straight games. Look up and down Clemson's schedule. Auburn is a very highly ranked team, and we played Clemson pretty similarly. Only maybe 2 teams all year have played Clemson better than we just did.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
I tried right. At least I didn't quit and accept the the *** beatin without trying to change the outcome.

You tried it just wasn't much of a try. CPJ did not run the same play over and over again. We ran multiple plays including..*gasp*...some pass plays. The only success we really had at all was running up the middle. So if you want to argue anything...you should argue we should have stuck to that 99%. The problem is they would have adjusted to that.

Your analogy and logic are lacking.
 

tmhunter52

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,467
There are only two ways to avoid the annual pounding from Clemson: (1) invest the money and make all the changes necessary to compete with them or (2) remove them as our permanent crossover team.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
Yes, some need to realize that CPJ is a solid coach working with limited resources.

Many others need to realize that it is possible to criticize a coach without wanting him gone. His most glaring weakness is that he gets stubborn in games when players aren’t or can’t execute a given play. He’s shown time and time again (and even admitted) that he will try for too long to fix issues in-game rather than adjust.

Very reasonable take. I just take issue with similar opinions that he should definitely make play call change xyz and if he did positive results would certainly follow. That's a leap of faith too far. I trust him to call the plays that have the best chance to succeed. The positives of his play calling far exceed his negatives from what I have witnessed.

There are some reasons to stick with certain calls even when we don't get the results we want in game. For instance, running a bread and butter play (for us) that we prepped for that week to be an important component of our game plan. If the OT gets blown up the first time you correct and call it again. Fix that and the OG blows a blocking assignment. Should we now abandon that play? Now get the OG corrected and the QB blows a read on the same play call. I can see why he'd try to stick to the play and try to get it working. Is that frustrating for fans to endure? Sure. Hell its probably even more frustrating for a coach to endure it. But if you get the wrinkles worked out and start executing it properly, that important component of your game plan becomes viable instead of abandoned for a different play that wasn't repped as much in game prep.
 

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
It has nothing to do with weather, nothing to do with scheme, nothing to do with but one, single solitary thing!

TALENT! Its just that simple.

When your entire D line, LBs and DBs are nationally ranked 4 and 5* players you are going to win 95% of the time. At Tech's best, when everything is clicking they can compete but otherwise Clemson is going to win much more often than not.

I respectfully disagree. I think talent definitely plays apart, but I feel scheme also plays a huge part. GT is one dimensional by in large on offense. Really good at the one thing but once that one thing shut down that thing it's a wrap.

All of the above comes down to coaching.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,392
2008 we beat Clem, Miami, and UGa
2014 losses to Duke, UNC, and FSU only.

Very few teams are going to beat those 3 in a single season more than sporadically. O'Leary couldn't with a multiple/option look, Gailey couldn't with a prostyle O.

Good catch with 2008. Could argue that the League is better at defending it now. With Richt now at Miami, who rarely lost to us at UGA, our issues with Miami are a little more compounded. Should havve beaten then this year though. Anyhow...that's my point. Few teams will beat those 3 consistently...and that's why we need to not fly off the handle when we lose to them. Disappointed? Yes...but we also need perspective. Like I said, GT can still win 9 games a season even with losses against our "Big 4".

The ACC is now one of the best P5 leagues for football. That means it's a lot harder now than it was in 2008 or even in 2014 when we went to the OB. I still think CPJ can give us special seasons. The trend for our defense both on the field and recruiting is better. Without knowing what we know, if you told me we would hold Clemson to 24 points before the game, I would have taken that all day. Unfortunately, our offense had its worst day this season against them.
 

okiemon

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,794
Yes, some need to realize that CPJ is a solid coach working with limited resources.

Many others need to realize that it is possible to criticize a coach without wanting him gone. His most glaring weakness is that he gets stubborn in games when players aren’t or can’t execute a given play. He’s shown time and time again (and even admitted) that he will try for too long to fix issues in-game rather than adjust.

Well-stated. I also think he is sometimes stubborn on the recruiting, and wants to prove to the world he can win with lower-ranked recruits. I don't want him gone, either, I just want us to find a way to get more talented players.
 

jayparr

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,441
Location
newnan
That's a cop out. Getting beat by a faster, more athletic DL happens, but we completely whiffed on many of our blocks. I have witnessed us outplay faster, more athletic DLs before.
Some of that is that our lineman are in a 4 pt stance and that means leaning more forward on a wet field would make part of the whifs. An ol in a 3 pt stance is more on the back which you have more balance getting out of the stance. Make sense?
 

jayparr

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,441
Location
newnan
Well-stated. I also think he is sometimes stubborn on the recruiting, and wants to prove to the world he can win with lower-ranked recruits. I don't want him gone, either, I just want us to find a way to get more talented players.
Ain't gone be Ala, Clem, or Ga getting the number of top 300 recruits in the nation! That is why our scheme fits the academic burden so well. Although the recruiting the last 2 or 3 years is getting a LOT BETTER!!!
 

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
5,138
There are only two ways to avoid the annual pounding from Clemson: (1) invest the money and make all the changes necessary to compete with them or (2) remove them as our permanent crossover team.

One of your options is the way that we were taught to think at GT. The other way is the path of least resistance. I am shocked that whenever we have an obstacle (albeit a rather large one), some choose the latter.
 

Sideways

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,589
1st time posting and enjoy reading all of the posts. Got a question though..

Didn’t we hire PJ to offset this talent gap? Isn’t his innovative offense supposed to neutralize the superior talent? If not, why are we still running this offense? Kids w talent don’t want to play in this offense nor practice against it. I’m disappointed that we didn’t compete. It seems that we were running the same plays even though it wasn’t working (granted nothing was working..).

Good question. The problem is that the option will not work against teams with really outstanding tackles and big fast linebackers who are well versed in what we do. Clemson's tackles were shooting the gap on the backside and nailing poor old Taquon before he could take more than two or three steps. Our guards could not block them because they were that good. Without the threat of the dive, the linebackers and safeties were flowing to the pitch and taking it away. Basically no amount of scheming will compensate for that. The only thing that would have made a difference would have been a Smelter and Waller type combo on the outside that could consistently beat the single coverage and the threat of ensuing big plays would have created some breathing room but I am convinced that we were getting manhandled so badly that the quarterback would not have had time to throw the ball.

To answer your second question: It is true that the 4 and 5 stars do not want to play in this offense but are these prima donnas worth the trouble? Florida and FSU are loaded with these type players. Do you really want the Institute to go down that path? We can and need to do a better job of recruiting especially on defense and possibly the offensive line but on our terms not theirs. The inmates are not going to be running this asylum you can pretty much bet the house on that.
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,125
Location
Augusta, Georgia
Some of that is that our lineman are in a 4 pt stance and that means leaning more forward on a wet field would make part of the whifs. An ol in a 3 pt stance is more on the back which you have more balance getting out of the stance. Make sense?

Yes. It does, but that's what I was saying, getting beaten on the OL wasn't entirely being out-athlete by Clemson.
 

jayparr

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,441
Location
newnan
Good question. The problem is that the option will not work against teams with really outstanding tackles and big fast linebackers who are well versed in what we do. Clemson's tackles were shooting the gap on the backside and nailing poor old Taquon before he could take more than two or three steps. Our guards could not block them because they were that good. Without the threat of the dive, the linebackers and safeties were flowing to the pitch and taking it away. Basically no amount of scheming will compensate for that. The only thing that would have made a difference would have been a Smelter and Waller type combo on the outside that could consistently beat the single coverage and the threat of ensuing big plays would have created some breathing room but I am convinced that we were getting manhandled so badly that the quarterback would not have had time to throw the ball.

To answer your second question: It is true that the 4 and 5 stars do not want to play in this offense but are these prima donnas worth the trouble? Florida and FSU are loaded with these type players. Do you really want the Institute to go down that path? We can and need to do a better job of recruiting especially on defense and possibly the offensive line but on our terms not theirs. The inmates are not going to be running this asylum you can pretty much bet the house on that.
Agree to a point: however we beaten the pups 2 of the last 3!!
 
Top