Time for a coaching Change

[Whiskey_Clear]

You don't even recall your own words lol!!!!

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

As for "silenced" ya you didn't say that. You said crucified and "have to bight tongue" which I characterized as you saying silenced....seems pretty close to me.

 

[up state jacket]

BS...you said 3 DCs were run out of town....WTH was that supposed to mean if not fired?

Take it how you want, you have clearly demonstrated you have an agenda here to nick pick my comments. I can play this game with you all night, but I don't believe it is going to get anything accomplished. You look through a pen hole, I look through a much bigger picture. Good luck to you.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

You can't even stand by your own words. Don't blame me for that. Good evening sir.

 

[up state jacket]

As for "silenced" ya you didn't say that. You said crucified and "have to bight tongue" which I characterized as you saying silenced....seems pretty close to me.

That little play on words may work with your friends, but I way more sophisticated than that. Silence and crucified aren't even close in definition. Bite not bight is a reference for that poster to avoid posters as your self. Try again, I'm game.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Be careful when you state facts because some members of this board will crucify you. Also, don't have a negative opinion about the head coach or you might have to take a timeout for a couple of days. You and me are in the minority here. Best thing to do is bite your tongue.

So I mischaracterized your words???? Mmhmm

Very sophisticated of you.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Guess you are so sophisticated I mischaracterized "running 3 DCs out of town" also.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

I was gonna take issue with a lot of the other cliche criticisms you put forth but you weren't able to honestly discuss the 3 DC statement. If unable to do that you dang sure wouldn't be able to back up the 70s era blocking or other drivel you spewed. I'll just ignore your "big picture" outlook going forward

 

[Skeptic]

@upstate. Weren't you just complaining a bit ago that CPJ detractors get silenced? Glad you managed to grow a thicker skin.

And no...Kelly was not run off.

Who you gonna believe? Up State Jacket or Charles Kelly's lying mouth?

 

[GTFLETCH]

Guess you are so sophisticated I mischaracterized "running 3 DCs out of town" also.

Enough about DCs....Our problem is with the OC who is our HC... That has been the problem since 2010 (2014 was an anomaly), not Tevin Washington/Vad Lee/Justin Thomas and not DC Dave Wommack/Al Groh/Charles Kelly/Ted Roof..

You can keep Blaming QBs, DCs and Asst Coaches but this mess falls on the shoulders of the OC and HC...

 

[Skeptic]

In 2006 against Notre Dame there were 56,680 people that attended that game, but capacity according to Ramblinwreck.com is 55,000. Numbers are meaningless when discussing how many people were at the game. The big picture here is the quality of coaching that is happening on the sidelines. PJ has ran off 3 DC's during his time at Tech. With such turnover how in the world does anyone expect us to have a good defense. The OC has not changed in 8 years, but he gets a pass on our terrible passing game, terrible blocking schemes, and utter confusion on who has what responsibility when the ball is snapped. Is it Erin Joe's fault that he has zero composure on the field? Is it Snoddy's fault he has a cast on and is being asked to carry the ball securely? Is it JT's fault that he was a better passer in HS than he is now at Tech, which also happened to Josh Nesbit (look at his HS stats compared to Tech stats) by the way. Is it the OL line's fault that they are being asked to block a way that might have been ok in 70's but now is deemed to be either dirty or just not effective? Supersized, Squints, Skeptic wanted me to state valid reasons behind my dislike for Paul Johnson. There they are. When a business is failing or falling short of it's goals routinely, who gets the axe? The man in charge. Don't forget this is year 8 not 3 or 4 and we can't perform one of the basics of football (forward pass). Not acceptable, sorry if my standards are too high.

Starting at the bottom of this screed, always be wary of the man who makes his arguments based on self-professed "high standards". It is unbecoming and always is the when-all-else fails fallback: I am holier than thou. Having been put in my less exalted place, along with most of the board -- we clearly and absolutely don't care if we win or lose, because Johnson needs the money -- let me try to make heads or tails of this.

If numbers are meaningless, okay. I don't care frankly, but just guessing the administration that uses football to fund every non-revenue sport on campus, cares a lot. If those numbers are correct they are actually in your favor, but why should I help? "Quality of coaching" is, well, in the eyes of the beholder, and we just disagree. It is just my opinion, my eyes, but nobody is better at "coaching up" players than Johnson, and at GT, he damned well better be, because there is no way on God's green earth he is going to get the quality of player that the likes of Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Florida and now Clemson gets routinely. (As a heads up for the ACC: better get better in a hurry because Clemson is loaded into the future and still recruiting 4-5 stars.) For the record, I'm not a Tech guy. Never went. Don't care, and have said on occasion that sometimes I think "Tech men" are too full of themselves. I have a couple lifelong Tech friends, however, who are not. What I am is a long-time, way long-time, GT football fan. That's it. It makes no difference how smart a guy is, none, and whether he can get into Tech, which as I understand it, a football player can if he meets the lower NCAA standards. I stand to be corrected, though, because I don't care enough to research it. But a class valedictorian who loathes, detests and abhors -- even fears -- anything mathematical, technical, trade training, is not going to go to Tech. Why should he? Ain't he supposed to be smart? Get a degree in something that makes him happy and see where it takes him. Doesn't have to be through Atlanta. Life can be a wonderful journey. Without the abacus.

As for the confusion we sometimes see, I think you have an entirely valid point. It is a combination of coaching and experience, but certainly a MLB running free on every option play is a coaching issue. Is that Sewak, or Johnson? Ultimately and no question, Johnson.


The DC issue has been addressed, I suppose, though I would like a defense against running the two off who got r-u-n-e-d o-f-t -- sorry, an Oh, Brother moment. As for fault? Relative to most on the board, I am surmising, I would be the house liberal. Doesn't mean I'm stupid. Was the penalty Joe's fault? Was the fumble(s) Snoddy's fault? The passing Thomas's fault? Of course it was. Their own grievous fault, particularly one of Snoddy's when he simply failed to tuck it high and tight -- if he didn't learn that in Pop Warner GT varsity is too late.

About this blocking: are you going to fall back on one of the favorite whiner complaints about cut blocking to argue it is dirty? And is out of the '70s of all things? (I could testify it went on before then.) On the playground you would get back "So's your old man." There is not, not one, college team that does not use cut blocking to some degree, and from what little I watch the NFL, a couple of teams use backside form of it sometimes on sweeps. GT uses it a lot more, if that is your argument. An X & O guy could explain why, but it's hardly dirty. If it is, give me three names of opponents in eight years who have been hurt by it? And go ahead and include Navy and now Army. That claim is even lower than a cut block. You should be above that.

You gave reasons when I think -- but I'm too lazy to go back and check -- I asked for facts as the basis. Regardless, I think in my humble low standard one of them is valid, and I wouldn't even contest it. In that vein I would add my personal unfavorite of the genre, that funky no-huddle, look to the sidelines, run down the play clock, look again, try to get the play off with pieces still moving thing that seems to me to signify much of nothing. I throw that in free for you, but I could be wrong.

I don't mean any of this personally and hope you don't take it that way. We just disagree and I'm not much for going along to get along.

 

[JorgeJonas]

Kelly was ran off. He wasn't offered the DC position at Tech. Sorry you find my analogies ridiculous, but I'm not here to get your approval. You may like the status quo of the program and that is your right, but I don't. What big time QB has Tech had recently? The one we have now sure wasn't one coming out of HS. He was an athlete in recruiting bio. Lastly, I'm not here to debate anything with you. You are making the point loud and clear that you aren't objective when it comes to discussing Paul Johnson. I'm willing to bet if you were as successful as Paul is at his job you would have a pink slip. I know I would. I live in a world of numbers if mine are good I keep my job. Mine begin to slip, I get a warning. I don't pick it up, I get fired. Simple. I had a great year last year in sales, but that means nothing for this year. You know why, last year means nothing to the success of this year. Happy travels, oh yeah I could careless what you think of me. I won't lose sleep.

Did you ever stop to consider that your skillset isn't as valuable as the head coach's at a major institution, and that's why he gets more leeway?

 

[a5ehren]

It makes no difference how smart a guy is, none, and whether he can get into Tech, which as I understand it, a football player can if he meets the lower NCAA standards. I stand to be corrected, though, because I don't care enough to research it.

Just to reply to this one point. GT S-As can get in with lower scores/grades/etc than the typical student we admit (which is a high standard at this point), but they still have to meet the Institute's bare minimums (which are no longer published) that are significantly higher than the NCAA minimums.

For example, for next year's incoming Freshmen class, the NCAA minimum to play is a 2.3 High School GPA with a 1080 on the SAT. If you manage to pull a 3.0 in High School, you're eligible with an 800 SAT. GT requires better scores and a more demanding HS course load than the NCAA.

 

[Skeptic]

Just to reply to this one point. GT S-As can get in with lower scores/grades/etc than the typical student we admit (which is a high standard at this point), but they still have to meet the Institute's bare minimums (which are no longer published) that are significantly higher than the NCAA minimums.

For example, for next year's incoming Freshmen class, the NCAA minimum to play is a 2.3 High School GPA with a 1080 on the SAT. If you manage to pull a 3.0 in High School, you're eligible with an 800 SAT. GT requires better scores and a more demanding HS course load than the NCAA.

Okay. Thanks.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

I agree, probably low to mid 40K in actual attendance. Definitely not 30K though.

The upper decks looked <~ 50% full and the gold seats (paid for) looked ~25% full. So low to mid 40's makes sense. But the TV crews at everyone's games try not to show how empty the stands are. Miami will have a lot fewer people in the stands down there I would guess....... Miami's paid attendance was ~41k against UVa.

 

[BuzzStone]

Just to reply to this one point. GT S-As can get in with lower scores/grades/etc than the typical student we admit (which is a high standard at this point), but they still have to meet the Institute's bare minimums (which are no longer published) that are significantly higher than the NCAA minimums.

For example, for next year's incoming Freshmen class, the NCAA minimum to play is a 2.3 High School GPA with a 1080 on the SAT. If you manage to pull a 3.0 in High School, you're eligible with an 800 SAT. GT requires better scores and a more demanding HS course load than the NCAA.

Any chance you know a location we can compare different schools? It would be interesting to me to check out other schools standards on this. How we fare compared to the rest of the ACC and how we compare to the SEC and BIG10.

 

[TechPhi97]

We do not need a new coach. We just are not that good. Sometimes players make bad decisions. We are young at almost all positions. Don't start jumping on the fire coach bandwagon, it makes us look like butt sniffers.

This. Coaching carousel will not help us. Man won the orange bowl last year, his scheme gives us a chance. Playing too many freshmen on O this year. Recruiting was a problem, but we have invested and are doing a better job. We will see the benefits, but wholesale change isn't going to get us anywhere.

Keep the proven high quality coach. Let him build.

 

[B Lifsey]

Any chance you know a location we can compare different schools? It would be interesting to me to check out other schools standards on this. How we fare compared to the rest of the ACC and how we compare to the SEC and BIG10.

For football SA's only or general student population? The College Navigator reports overall admissions stats for schools but not football specific.
https://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/

 

[Bogey]

One reason that a lot of our fan base has so many knee jerks is that the TO is great to watch when it works, but terribly boring when it doesn’t. As a VT fan told me in the pissery after the game, “that was the worst high school FB game I have seen all year”. Whether we like it or not, FBS college football has become an entertainment business, thanks to the NCAA and ESPN. I am not saying we should fire PJ, or keep him, but we should not be satisfied with present results. And opinions should not be based on 1 or 2 years. Looking at the last 4 years for both Gailey and PJ (not counting bowl games), Chan’s won/lost record was 61.7%, while PJ’s will be 56.0% if we win the last 2 games this year. If we lose both of them, it will be 52%. I don’t know exactly what, but something needs to change and the head coach should definitely not be exempt from a realistic review of where we are at and where we are headed.
BTW, Dodd was 72.1% overall.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Dodd was a great coach. One of the best to walk the sidelines. He was primarily successful when players played both ways. Recruiting competitively became much more difficult for Tech in the modern, two platoon, era.