Temple Post Game

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
I'll give this one more shot.

Based on last year's performance of both GT and Temple, we would have been underdogs at Temple last year.

So why should we have beaten Temple this year, if the data from last year suggests last year's GT team would have been an underdog at last year's Temple?

Look at Sagarin, Football Outsiders, etc. I can't make sense of the opinions that we should auto-win at Temple, much like I couldn't make sense of the arguments that we should have auto-beaten Duke.

I’ll give this one more shot. And won’t even use a bunch of boldface to do so. Beating Temple shouldn’t have been considered a lock this year or last.

But coming off a bye...after a FCS loss....most expected to see an improved game plan. What we got were half of our O plays going for 1 yard or less, were on the wrong side of the turnover margin, and 24-2.

Our team looks like they are drowning in the middle of a lake and do not know how to swim. Dance maybe...swim no.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
I don’t think Bedford started until 2009 but I may be wrong.

Gardner was injured at some point then Brown took over.

I think Voss replaced a center that got injured and played hard as hell...performing above his talent imo. And I don’t think Voss was exactly best fit for the new scheme but his hard play made things work. I can’t recall who Voss split time with now. It does seem like Bedford replaced him in 09.
 

CuseJacket

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
19,531
After seeing how Collins, et al. coached against the Citadel, I now feel confident Tech would have beaten Temple last year, regardless of Vegas lines.
The argument breaks down in more direct transitive property arguments. Last year Temple beat USF by double digits. GT lost to USF by double digits. This, despite Temple allegedly having worse recruits than GT by ranking.

Again, GT would have been an underdog at Temple last year based on last year's performance, which I assume most would logically attribute in part due to coaching.
 

CuseJacket

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
19,531
Well what is the option , drop down to division 2 ? I think this was thought of years ago
The option is to look at the data and consider whether beating Temple should have been automatic, before assigning it as a failure on coaching. There are reasons within Saturday's to be down on coaching. Not beating Temple is near the bottom of the list, imo.

We don't need to go D2. I know you're joking. We'll get back to being favored over Temple. Unfortunately it wouldn't have been the case last year, and certainly wasn't the case this year.
 

Longestday

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
2,856
@CuseJacket I think there is some agreement. Beat and competitive... I think we can both agree GT should be competitive with Temple both years.... Only actually playing Temple last year would answer the beat question.

There is no automatic in football as on any given day one team may win. The chances should go way down on the Citadel, that the Citadel should win.

I believe more people would start coming on board if the offense had an identity they could buy into... like hey, they are trying this and here is where we need to get better. But right now it looks like mud on the wall.

I’ve even heard good things on defense from pro CPJ guys. But it’s nice to see the CPJ haters go back underground. I think they should mostly disappear until off season. A top 30 class should bring them back out. A plus 40 class will keep them away. I do make a delineation on haters versus not preferred....
 

CuseJacket

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
19,531
I’ll give this one more shot. And won’t even use a bunch of boldface to do so. Beating Temple shouldn’t have been considered a lock this year or last.

But coming off a bye...after a FCS loss....most expected to see an improved game plan. What we got were half of our O plays going for 1 yard or less, were on the wrong side of the turnover margin, and 24-2.

Our team looks like they are drowning in the middle of a lake and do not know how to swim. Dance maybe...swim no.
Bold was for those who had ignored or hadn't seen prior replies direct to them, though that wasn't the case for all I replied to.

I think your reply has some merit and I am happy to engage since you at least support your opinion with data. I do disagree with a lot of it though. While there were things to be concerned about, I actually thought the offense looked better than vs. El Cid, accounting for differences in opponent. We averaged the same yards per play as Temple (4.4 vs. 4.5). While those numbers still aren't anything to boast about, I'll take it as progress. Number of plays for 1 yard or less probably led to our issues on 3rd down, but overall we moved the ball at a similar clip to our opponent.

So what were the main contributors to the 24-2 scoring margin? Well, turnovers and lack of kicking game, imo. I've always believed regardless of who the coach is that the types of fumbles we saw on Saturday are on the player. There was no helmet on ball, no odd circumstances, just balls ripped away in the open field. The coaches put the players in position to score 7 points safely, and succeed better than past weeks otherwise. Guarantee that Tobias has been coached on ball security this year and takes 100% responsibility for those. Obviously the 2nd fumble led to 7 the other way. That closes over half the scoring gap.

On kicking, we passed on 2 reasonable field goal attempts and therefore asked our less than stellar offense to try to convert on downs that had probably less than 50% chance of success (conservatively). I posted before, I think there's something going on with Wells beyond coaching, based on what I've seen in warm-ups. I'm not talking about sailing kicks wide left, wide right or coming up short.

Re: "our team looks like we're drowning", that is not the case for D or ST. And I just provided reason for taking the O's performance in context. So I think that's wasted hyperbole about the team that is probably more directed at the O, but I won't take it too seriously.
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,093
Location
Augusta, Georgia
I believe more people would start coming on board if the offense had an identity they could buy into... like hey, they are trying this and here is where we need to get better. But right now it looks like mud on the wall.

Right now it looks like sand lot football with plays being designed in the huddle and sketched out on the ground...
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,093
Location
Augusta, Georgia
A lot of our issues on offense are personnel fit problems, plain and simple. Nothing but a couple of good recruiting cycles will fix it. While there is nothing fun or acceptable about losing, specifically in the manner in which we are losing, it was somewhat inevitable once we scrapped the TO.
 

TheFlyest

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
838
@CuseJacket I think there is some agreement. Beat and competitive... I think we can both agree GT should be competitive with Temple both years.... Only actually playing Temple last year would answer the beat question.

There is no automatic in football as on any given day one team may win. The chances should go way down on the Citadel, that the Citadel should win.

I believe more people would start coming on board if the offense had an identity they could buy into... like hey, they are trying this and here is where we need to get better. But right now it looks like mud on the wall.

I’ve even heard good things on defense from pro CPJ guys. But it’s nice to see the CPJ haters go back underground. I think they should mostly disappear until off season. A top 30 class should bring them back out. A plus 40 class will keep them away. I do make a delineation on haters versus not preferred....

Why should anyone disappear? A gimmick offense will buy you wins but as time goes by teams adjust. He had some good blips for a season but for the most part, meh.
He killed recruiting and he killed the brand. So there’s your CPJ hate.

@CuseJacket i see a team that is offensively challenged attempting to find what works. In time especially when his guys come into the fold, especially the OLine, the offense will have more of a rhythm.
 

Pointer

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,801
As much as I've disliked the offense so far, I'd have to agree pulling the plug after one season is kind of knee jerk. I think it was the wrong choice in offense to begin with, but a change after one year only does more damage then good, unless they go back to 3O which most of the players know well, but I don't see that happening. Hopefully year one is an anomaly and next year there will be a much better product on the field. As Cuse pointed out above, they did move the ball better, and turn overs do hurt. Still looks a mess, but we shall see next year.
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,093
Location
Augusta, Georgia
And a lot of that is not on P’s incompetence.

Not saying that it is. I was never a huge fan of hiring CDP but I wasn't blatantly opposed either. I'm willing to give CDP some leeway to get system fits in place before I throw him under the bus.

Watching our offense is like watching a bad horror movie.

Of note, CDP started his coaching career at my Alma Mater, so that also buys him a little extra grace from me. :D
 

TheFlyest

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
838
@Ibeeballin i hate making this request but can you post JG 1st offensive series after the half. I thought he moved the ball pretty well offensively but just needs to clean things up particularly with his timing & accuracy.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,218
I don’t think Bedford started until 2009 but I may be wrong.

Gardner was injured at some point then Brown took over.

Sean was the starter, but later in the year. I believe he rotated at first then won out halfway through the 2008 season.
 

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,025
Okay, this is what really irks me. And it's not just cuse, but a lot of people. There is this hyperbolic knee-jerk response that any criticism with how we're playing now is somehow based on an expectation that the transition would not lose a beat or whatever.

I'll give this one more shot.

Based on last year's performance of both GT and Temple, we would have been underdogs at Temple last year.

So why should we have beaten Temple this year, if the data from last year suggests last year's GT team would have been an underdog at last year's Temple?

Look at Sagarin, Football Outsiders, etc. I can't make sense of the opinions that we should auto-win at Temple, much like I couldn't make sense of the arguments that we should have auto-beaten Duke.

I know others have replied, but I also want to be clear.

NOBODY IS SAYING THAT AT TEMPLE WAS AN AUTO-WIN!!!!!

People, myself included, were saying that the Citadel should have been an auto-win. People were saying that we should have looked better against Temple.
 

Jim Prather

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,038
So, in reply, I'd also stipulate that we would have most likely last to Temple last year. The difference being that this year would have been the Triple Option under TO, with an extra year of seasoning. TO, IMO, was getting primed to explode under CPJ. We had a good set of BBs and the AB's didn't worry me. Having Kirvonte back was going to be a huge win for us. Year two under CNW should have seen improvements as well. I really like our chances against Temple this year. Once we changed HCs I immediately reversed that pick.
I have to disagree for one reason. If CPJ were still here, then CGC would still be coaching at Temple and he has already proven that he has no clue how to defend the triple option. I think we would have won in a shootout...
 

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,025
I have to disagree for one reason. If CPJ were still here, then CGC would still be coaching at Temple and he has already proven that he has no clue how to defend the triple option. I think we would have won in a shootout...

Well, maybe we wouldn't change our keys like that sneaky Citadel coach did.
 
Top