Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Virginia Postgame
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="takethepoints" data-source="post: 656009" data-attributes="member: 265"><p>I had three observations about the game. Some of them probably mentioned above, but I don't have the time to look. Apologies for repetitious material.</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Graham looked a lot better this week. Some of that is his being a freshman QB in this O. It has been mentioned here that he looks kinda like Joe Hamilton when he was a freshman. To some extent that's true. Joe used to really bother me when he first started; you never knew which Joe would show up. When the Good Joe turned up all was well, but that sure didn't happen regularly. Same with Graham. He was under as much pressure against Pitt as he was yesterday and he couldn't hit the board side of a barn. And his WRs did their bit by dropping the ball right and left when, remarkably, he did. Yesterday, it was all skittles and beer; no one could do any wrong. I think we can expect that to continue to happen. There's no question that he has the talent, however.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Last week: Mason 15 carries, 61 yards, 3.7 ypc. Yesterday: Mason 19 carries, 94 yards, 4.9 ypc. This is so, <em>so</em> simple: give him 20 carries and he'll give you 100 yards or better (his gross yesterday was 103). Why, why, oh, Football Gods above, are we not doing this? I know some will say that it's a matter of watching film and if we are getting stuffed early. Horse pucky. It's a matter of planning to run and doing it. Shoot, if we gave Mason 30 carries, he'd probably give us north of 150 yards. Btw, it is no coincidence that the O works better when Mason gets established. Well, <em>maybe</em> the O staff will come around.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">All of a sudden, the OL is doing ok. (Not great, mind, but ok.) I think the answer here is simple as well: we've got most of our injured scholarship OLs back. And now they have had a couple of games to play together and get some communication going. As they get more game experience, we should continue to see improvement. Next year, everybody but Southers will be back and we'll have a couple of frosh coming in who look like they could play. But I think we can look for further improvement <em>now</em> as our present guys get more experience. Btw, this is not meant as a diss to our walk-on OLs who have contributed; some of them will do just fine in the future, given the chance.</li> </ul><p>Well, that's it. An encouraging performance. Nice to see Collins disappointed too; I was getting real tired of all that upbeat talk after every loss. He's right: losing sucks.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="takethepoints, post: 656009, member: 265"] I had three observations about the game. Some of them probably mentioned above, but I don't have the time to look. Apologies for repetitious material. [LIST] [*]Graham looked a lot better this week. Some of that is his being a freshman QB in this O. It has been mentioned here that he looks kinda like Joe Hamilton when he was a freshman. To some extent that's true. Joe used to really bother me when he first started; you never knew which Joe would show up. When the Good Joe turned up all was well, but that sure didn't happen regularly. Same with Graham. He was under as much pressure against Pitt as he was yesterday and he couldn't hit the board side of a barn. And his WRs did their bit by dropping the ball right and left when, remarkably, he did. Yesterday, it was all skittles and beer; no one could do any wrong. I think we can expect that to continue to happen. There's no question that he has the talent, however. [*]Last week: Mason 15 carries, 61 yards, 3.7 ypc. Yesterday: Mason 19 carries, 94 yards, 4.9 ypc. This is so, [I]so[/I] simple: give him 20 carries and he'll give you 100 yards or better (his gross yesterday was 103). Why, why, oh, Football Gods above, are we not doing this? I know some will say that it's a matter of watching film and if we are getting stuffed early. Horse pucky. It's a matter of planning to run and doing it. Shoot, if we gave Mason 30 carries, he'd probably give us north of 150 yards. Btw, it is no coincidence that the O works better when Mason gets established. Well, [I]maybe[/I] the O staff will come around. [*]All of a sudden, the OL is doing ok. (Not great, mind, but ok.) I think the answer here is simple as well: we've got most of our injured scholarship OLs back. And now they have had a couple of games to play together and get some communication going. As they get more game experience, we should continue to see improvement. Next year, everybody but Southers will be back and we'll have a couple of frosh coming in who look like they could play. But I think we can look for further improvement [I]now[/I] as our present guys get more experience. Btw, this is not meant as a diss to our walk-on OLs who have contributed; some of them will do just fine in the future, given the chance. [/LIST] Well, that's it. An encouraging performance. Nice to see Collins disappointed too; I was getting real tired of all that upbeat talk after every loss. He's right: losing sucks. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who won the ACC Coach of the Year Award in 2014?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Virginia Postgame
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top