Temple Post Game

[TheFlyest]

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

I think the defense clearly speaks to x & o coaching.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

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.

Maybe so. I can see the wisdom in both sides, I just prefer dealing with the agony up front and getting better faster.

 

[LongforDodd]

.... A lot of what troubles us in this transition is not having Senior Class leadership like that.

Borrowed from your quote. Thank you.

 

[Southpawmac]

I don't think firing CDP in year one is the right solution. Offensive transitions are tough, especially from philosophies that couldn't be more opposite. Even in Kyle Shanahan's first year, the Falcons struggled mightily even though they were loaded with offensive talent. We all know what they did in year two. I thought the offense was an improvement compared to USF and Citadel. We moved the ball better and had guys open but missed throws.Turning the ball over at really bad times killed the game. If we get done with year two and the offensive coaching isn't much improved, then we should seriously consider a change.

 

[alagold]

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

duh, on x/os---When your team can not score ONE,not ONE, TD in a college game (only a 8pt dog, not 25), you have something SERIOUSLY wrong --esp with an extra week to prepare. Sad,just sad.

 

[TheFlyest]

I don't think firing CDP in year one is the right solution. Offensive transitions are tough, especially from philosophies that couldn't be more opposite. Even in Kyle Shanahan's first year, the Falcons struggled mightily even though they were loaded with offensive talent. We all know what they did in year two. I thought the offense was an improvement compared to USF and Citadel. We moved the ball better and had guys open but missed throws.Turning the ball over at really bad times killed the game. If we get done with year two and the offensive coaching isn't much improved, then we should seriously consider a change.

Turnovers are costing the team the most imo. Cost the team at min 14pts against Temple. Totally different game if TO scored instead of fumbling at the end one.

 

[BiGTime22]

I should’ve been more specific. I meant the offensive side of the ball.

I think the defense clearly speaks to x & o coaching.

 

[JorgeJonas]

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

To be clear, we’re assigning credit for the 2007 class to Collins? That is not a leap I’d be comfortable making.

Brown was three star who decommitted from Maryland, so it’s not entirely clear to me why he’d be a benchmark. Griffin was a nice get, but he’s just one. The larger issue is we have an entire class pending that doesn’t represent a clear overhaul. It’s currently rated 23rd on Rivals, but we have 21 commitments, of which two are four stars. That’s almost certainly not enough of a critical mass to yield favorable results over the long term, and sure as hell doesn’t prove he’s a good recruiter.

 

[GTjunkie]

To be clear, we’re assigning credit for the 2007 class to Collins? That is not a leap I’d be comfortable making.

Brown was three star who decommitted from Maryland, so it’s not entirely clear to me why he’d be a benchmark. Griffin was a nice get, but he’s just one. The larger issue is we have an entire class pending that doesn’t represent a clear overhaul. It’s currently rated 23rd on Rivals, but we have 21 commitments, of which two are four stars. That’s almost certainly not enough of a critical mass to yield favorable results over the long term, and sure as hell doesn’t prove he’s a good recruiter.

Me either. Giff Smith was Recruiting Coordinator for that class.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

To be clear, we’re assigning credit for the 2007 class to Collins? That is not a leap I’d be comfortable making.

Brown was three star who decommitted from Maryland, so it’s not entirely clear to me why he’d be a benchmark. Griffin was a nice get, but he’s just one. The larger issue is we have an entire class pending that doesn’t represent a clear overhaul. It’s currently rated 23rd on Rivals, but we have 21 commitments, of which two are four stars. That’s almost certainly not enough of a critical mass to yield favorable results over the long term, and sure as hell doesn’t prove he’s a good recruiter.

Me either. Giff Smith was Recruiting Coordinator for that class.

This has been something I've posted here before. Prior to CGC being hired it was general consensus that Giff Smith was responsible for the 2007 class, and yet now CGC was somehow the miracle worker.

 

[gtg391z]

Well, Roddy and other players have pointed to him as being a great recruiter.

 

[ibeattetris]

Well, Roddy and other players have pointed to him as being a great recruiter.

I think CGC will be a good recruiter for us, but do you expect Roddy to come out and publicly say CGC was a bad recruiter if he was?

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

Serious question? Has there been a QB, post Godsey, that would succeed in this offense? Not a flame, but serious question. I can’t think of one myself.

 

[AE 87]

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.

Right. This is what frustrates me so much about this forum sometimes. There seems to be this need to turn every single thread into an off vs on debate. When someone posts any frustration with poor performance then that seems to be justification to putting words in people's mouths.

According to the poll: https://gtswarm.com/threads/georgia-tech-vs-temple-predictions-gtvstem.19611/
45.7% believed we should beat Temple. Saying that we should beat Temple is not the same as saying it's an auto-win.

Saying that we should be able to beat Citadel and Temple is an expression of a defensible opinion. Saying that we were a hustle play against USF from being winless is simply a fact. Somebody being "positive we'd be 3-1 right now" with CPJ is also a defensible opinion.

If you disagree with the opinion, then bring up reasons why you disagree with the opinion that's stated. That's a healthy conversation. Don't create a straw-man that people are saying it's an auto-win and then attack that. Imo, that's like either like a personal attack or trolling.

Finally, we lost looking worse than everyone expected. Would people have reacted the same way if we lost by 7 after giving up two turnovers? Probably not, imo.

 

[gtg391z]

I think CGC will be a good recruiter for us, but do you expect Roddy to come out and publicly say CGC was a bad recruiter if he was?

No, but I would assume he wouldn't say anything about it if that was the case. I don't think he would just lie about it.

 

[BiGTime22]

Gerris Wilkerson (O’Leary year’s)
Derrick Morgan
Morgan Burnett (brother played at uga)
Josh Nesbit
DJ Donley
Roddy Jones
Jonathon Dwyer

Those are a few that I KNOW CGC helped reel in. I was very close to people in the football Dept at the time. Yes, Gif was the coordinator in title...if you ask anyone that was close to the situation they would all tell you that Collins is the reason.

Am I happy with how this season is going? Heck no! I think we will have several 3 Stars get the extra star and maybe one of the two stars get bumped to a three.

 

[TheTechGuy]

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.

How does your transitive property argument, which is one of the worst lines of reasoning used to compare college teams, hold up against Temple's loss to Villanova, which Tech certainly would have beaten?

Now that we're into this weird line of reasoning, of Temple and Georgia Tech last year, Temple had the worst loss of the year. Not surprising considering that they were coached by the same man that coached the worst lost in Tech's history.

 

[CuseJacket]

Right. This is what frustrates me so much about this forum sometimes. There seems to be this need to turn every single thread into an off vs on debate. When someone posts any frustration with poor performance then that seems to be justification to putting words in people's mouths.

According to the poll: https://gtswarm.com/threads/georgia-tech-vs-temple-predictions-gtvstem.19611/
45.7% believed we should beat Temple. Saying that we should beat Temple is not the same as saying it's an auto-win.

Saying that we should be able to beat Citadel and Temple is an expression of a defensible opinion. Saying that we were a hustle play against USF from being winless is simply a fact. Somebody being "positive we'd be 3-1 right now" with CPJ is also a defensible opinion.

If you disagree with the opinion, then bring up reasons why you disagree with the opinion that's stated. That's a healthy conversation. Don't create a straw-man that people are saying it's an auto-win and then attack that. Imo, that's like either like a personal attack or trolling.

Finally, we lost looking worse than everyone expected. Would people have reacted the same way if we lost by 7 after giving up two turnovers? Probably not, imo.

The irony is you're presenting false premises, straw men and chose a patronizing tone as a response, then pontificate on what constitutes healthy conversation. It could be because you haven't demonstrated an understanding of the posters' prior posts as a pretext to the exchange. For those reasons, I'll bow out from here.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

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.

I agree with most of your point here. Especially that the game could have been much closer except for turnovers. But that’s why turnovers are critical.

What troubles me a bit about the Temple game is I expected better play and execution after a bye week. Still think we can beat UNC. Not expecting to but we should be competitive.

If we are competitive but lose the griping will quiet down a good bit. If we get blown out the CGC defense team is gonna get frazzled playing bend but don’t break defense.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

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.

So. If things weren’t as bad as they looked on the scoreboard last week. And we weren’t going through the most monumental transition in the history of college football but rather still had CPJ and scheme. You still think we lose to Temple?