Temple Post Game

[Ibeeballin]

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...

This is why i hate these boards sometimes. Y’all just say stuff for the sake of it.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/game?gameId=401019508

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

This is why i hate these boards sometimes. Y’all just say stuff for the sake of it.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/game?gameId=401019508
View attachment 6824

In fairness, that was a 3-10 Navy team that still had a chance at the end of that game. I remember watching it, it was close throughout. With about 2-3 minutes left Temple had a chance to go up by 14 but Navy intercepted them in the end zone. Couldn't drive the field though. I still think last years Temple Team would have given us fits though.

 

[Ibeeballin]

In fairness, that was a 3-10 Navy team that still had a chance at the end of that game. I remember watching it, it was close throughout. With about 2-3 minutes left Temple had a chance to go up by 14 but Navy intercepted them in the end zone. Couldn't drive the field though. I still think last years Temple Team would have given us fits though.

Fairness was out the window with the original post assertion

 

[GTJake]

We may be staring down 1-11, this is going to take some time and is mostly NOT on CGC ...

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Fairness was out the window with the original post assertion

True.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

We may be staring down 1-11, this is going to take some time and is mostly NOT on CGC ...

I still think we have a legit shot at VT. Initially I thought this might be the season it clicked for them, but I think they'll now be coach shopping this winter.

 

[GTJake]

I still think we have a legit shot at VT. Initially I thought this might be the season it clicked for them, but I think they'll now be coach shopping this winter.

I agree with you on VT from watching the Duke game on Friday they look like a mess.
Thinking about us, I wish the UGAG game was away this year, the thought of the scene at BDS that day makes my stomach churn ...

 

[Gtbowhunter90]

Prepare your bodies for another L vs the Dookie heads

 

[g0lftime]

With Foster retiring and the mess at VPI this would be the year to make a HC change if they can afford it.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

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.

You lost me at “transitive.” Smh

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Swarm glitchy for me today. Another double post.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

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.

Someone needs to give CGC some gimmicks...nothing else is working for him and we appear headed for a position as the #1 laughingstock in P5.

 

[TheFlyest]

Perhaps consulting a dictionary before posting would help temper some of the reaction around here. Say what you will about the aesthetics of the triple option or the prior staff's recruiting, but using a term like "laughingstock" makes it sound like you have limited exposure to the CFB world. GT was almost universally respected as well-coached and consistently punching above its weight class for the past decade. Teams with a consistent lack of success like Kansas or Rutgers or teams with off-the-field issues like Baylor or UAB may be worth labeling as a "laughingstock" but it really undercuts your position when you try to apply it to GT.

Regardless, if you have have the connections you say you have, we are glad you decided to join a couple of weeks ago. Welcome aboard and we look forward to some good insight from you!

“Laughstock” is relative and it fits with where coaches and players feel the program should be to the reality of where it actually is.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Sprewing (sic) and literate in the same sentence....

 

[CuseJacket]

@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....

We are struggling on O, no doubt. More than I think we could be struggling, based on coaching decisions.

That said, per my last post, I think we were more competitive with Temple than most are giving credit for and what the final score shows. Within the context I provided, my position based on what I observed is that we aren't 22 points worse than Temple on average. In some ways, our game with Miami at home where we had 2 fumble-6's comes to mind - sometimes fortune not only doesn't break your way, but it slaps you in the face. Hopefully that normalizes and we catch a break too.

I'll say this. Everyone agrees we should have beaten The Citadel. No one is saying otherwise. But what I am interpreting now with "we're losing to Temple, can you believe it!?" is either 1) an extension of losing to The Citadel i.e., some are conflating the prior game with the last one and/or 2) an emotional reaction based on prior held beliefs. We should be competitive with Temple like we should be competitive with Duke. Sometimes we'll win, sometimes the final score isn't what we'd expect it to be, on average.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

That said, per my last post, I think we were more competitive with Temple than most are giving credit for and what the final score shows

Wait, you're expecting nuance on a message board?

Seriously, though, you're absolutely right. There are some improvements that didn't show up on the scoreboard, and we're likely to see that a lot this season.

My biggest gripe right now is that I'd rather us go all out and attempt to play the O we want to run whether we're any good at it or not. This season was always going to be a wash, so we might as well use it to get reps in the O the coaches want to run down the road.

 

[CuseJacket]

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 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.

You are correct that no one said "auto-win". Instead they said:

"[With CPJ]... I'm positive we'd be 3-1 right now"
"Citadel and Temple should be wins. Instead we were a hustle play against USF from being winless right now."

Prior posts from some of those posters suggested that with prior coaches, i.e., without our transition, we'd have been in an advantageous position @ Temple... even if not "auto-win". Data suggests we'd have been in a disadvantageous/underdog position.

I've not seen anyone suggest that losing to El Cid is ok. Not sure if I missed something there.

 

[CuseJacket]

You lost me at “transitive.” Smh

That was the point. Transitive isn't a good argument, but if one wants to go there, there's a more direct "transitive" that refutes the point I responded to.

 

[CuseJacket]

Wait, you're expecting nuance on a message board?

Seriously, though, you're absolutely right. There are some improvements that didn't show up on the scoreboard, and we're likely to see that a lot this season.

My biggest gripe right now is that I'd rather us go all out and attempt to play the O we want to run whether we're any good at it or not. This season was always going to be a wash, so we might as well use it to get reps in the O the coaches want to run down the road.

I think it'll show up on the scoreboard. I don't think Tobias fumbles those balls again if given the same opportunities. He's proven himself tough and reliable in that way.

You last comment is one I spoke to somewhere else yesterday. The "rip the bandaid off" mentality vs. "slow transition". While I'd have probably chosen "slow transition", and certainly done so to avoid a loss to El Cid, I think we're seeing something closer to "rip the bandaid off", even though coaches have communicated a "fit the players" approach. But maybe CGC/CDP's definition of the "fit the players" is less flexible than many of us interpreted it to mean. I wonder if that was part of the problem at Temple too, that ultimately led to an improvement in year 2. Aside from also not having a single QB right out the gate.

 

[BiGTime22]

There’s not much evidence he can recruit.

I think it is obvious he can recruit. Look at the 2007 class. Ahmarean Brown, Jamious Griffin are two names from the brief time he had before signing day.

I have no doubt in his or his staff’s recruiting abilities. The jury is still out concerning their x’s and o’s