Why we had a 7-6 record

[dressedcheeseside]

Wow. So much to disagree with 91 on this thread.
Every team redshirts. Gives the player an extra year to learn systems and physically mature. If a guy coming in can contribute to a need we DO pull his shirt and play him.
You complain about our lack of success recruiting but propose telling kids...you have a 3 year scholarship but will have to prove yourself for a 4th year. Good luck with that, it would just close the door on a very large number of potential recruits for us. (The competition certainly won't do the same but you can bet your *** they would point it out to kids we compete for.)

Redshirting also plays a very GT-specific role: it gives them time to acclimate academically. This is a non-issue at the factories where they major in "African Studies" or even at Stanford where they take "General Studies" for 4 years before declaring a major.

 

[alaguy]

And if the coaches had a crystal ball, they'd use it. Bailey was a HUGE get by the way. Also, you have to go by the needs at the time, not the needs now. Back in
'10 we had very few ships to give and had glaring needs in other areas.

I think we've changed strategy in trying not to come up short on NSD. It seemed to me we gave out waaaaay more offers early this year. It's nice to save some schollies for late bloomers and big fish who like to announce on NSD, but I think it's wiser to lock up your class early with solid players who are sure-fire commits. One thing CPJ fears over all else in recruiting is promising a kid a scholly then having to tell him on NSD "sorry, we're all full."

Spin it anyway you want-the bottom line is we didn't have enough players(Bailey being a great get(at the time to SOME) really meant little because he didn't play-for WHATEVER reason.
We have FIVE OL slots ,2 Aback slots--what position is more likely to need guys? you don't need a crystal ball to see that- hmmm

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Spin it anyway you want-the bottom line is we didn't have enough players(Bailey being a great get(at the time to SOME) really meant little because he didn't play-for WHATEVER reason.
We have FIVE OL slots ,2 Aback slots--what position is more likely to need guys? you don't need a crystal ball to see that- hmmm

Why does that matter? What matters is our depth at each position at the time. Also, Zenon was a last minute reach. Maybe we had some similar type OL's on the board but Zenon projected a better risk at the time.

Also, you can't predict injuries at a specific position. You can do your best to plan ahead and that's why coaches have target numbers at each postion group. I'm not sure if we met those OL target numbers post 2010 NSD or not. If we hadn't, then shame on the coaches. If we had, then what more do you expect?

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Spin this alaguy. We had 18 guys listed at OL on roster. For comparison...FSU listed 21...UGA listed 17. Seems pretty comparable to me.
Lots of the smaller guys that never see the field get listed at aback here whereas they'd be listed at WR or DB elsewhere.

 

[alaguy]

Why does that matter? What matters is our depth at each position at the time. Also, Zenon was a last minute reach. Maybe we had some similar type OL's on the board but Zenon projected a better risk at the time.

Also, you can't predict injuries at a specific position. You can do your best to plan ahead and that's why coaches have target numbers at each postion group. I'm not sure if we met those OL target numbers post 2010 NSD or not. If we hadn't, then shame on the coaches. If we had, then what more do you expect?

I'll tell you what I expect-that after 5 yrs of waiting to get"his players" in and especially the OL (which plays differently and the needs are different) that we would function at a HIGH level -AND have enough players to do that. So players get hurt.EVERY team has hurting players.The Ol blowing up in the VT game pretty much made sure that the season that was to be special-wasn't.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I'll tell you what I expect-that after 5 yrs of waiting to get"his players" in and especially the OL (which plays differently and the needs are different) that we would function at a HIGH level -AND have enough players to do that. So players get hurt.EVERY team has hurting players.The Ol blowing up in the VT game pretty much made sure that the season that was to be special-wasn't.

I meant what do you expect in terms of number of OL's. Do you even know how many we carried in '10?

Btw, Boomergump has already shown that the criticism of the OL last year is way overblown. Every time we get stopped for no gain doesn't mean the OL screwed up. They deserve some blame to be sure, but not the lion's share. And that's with a depleted unit. Most of it rests with the guy who said adios. Imagine what lowly Tevin would have done last year. Imagine transposing the '12 offensive stats for last year and that's basically what we would have had. We had everybody back minus Orwin and Robbie more than made up for him.

 

[91Wreck]

I meant what do you expect in terms of number of OL's. Do you even know how many we carried in '10?

Imagine what lowly Tevin would have done last year. Imagine transposing the '12 offensive stats for last year and that's basically what we would have had. We had everybody back minus Orwin and Robbie more than made up for him.

Come on cheese! You tell me what games Tevin wins in 2013 if he is the starting QB.
VT - nope. Tevin lost to them for two years. He lost last season when our D held them to 17 points.
Miami - nope. We got beat soundly even with Miami's 5 turnovers.
BYU - nope. Russel Wilson couldn't have won that game for us.
UGA - nope. The only reason we had the big lead was because we surprised them in the passing game. Tevin couldn't have made those throws.
Clemson - nope. They were out of our league.
Ole Miss - maybe. I doubt it though. Once Nkemdiche (sp?) entered the game he shut our offense down.

With Tevin, we were a 7 win team for 2.5 seasons. I just can't understand the logic that says we would have been better with him.

I know it is popular know to lay all the blame at the feet of Vad now that he is gone, but the truth is our vaunted offensive line let defenders pour through this season like a screen door on a submarine. Vad was indecisive because he generally was trying to read 2 or 3 D lineman moments after the snap - instead of just reading the one. Granted - we had injuries and they were hurt. But they would have been hurt if Tevin played as well. We would have still finished 7-6, and we would still be saying "wait till next year"!

 

[AE 87]

Come on cheese! You tell me what games Tevin wins in 2013 if he is the starting QB.
VT - nope. Tevin lost to them for two years. He lost last season when our D held them to 17 points.
Miami - nope. We got beat soundly even with Miami's 5 turnovers.
BYU - nope. Russel Wilson couldn't have won that game for us.
UGA - nope. The only reason we had the big lead was because we surprised them in the passing game. Tevin couldn't have made those throws.
Clemson - nope. They were out of our league.
Ole Miss - maybe. I doubt it though. Once Nkemdiche (sp?) entered the game he shut our offense down.

With Tevin, we were a 7 win team for 2.5 seasons. I just can't understand the logic that says we would have been better with him.

I know it is popular know to lay all the blame at the feet of Vad now that he is gone, but the truth is our vaunted offensive line let defenders pour through this season like a screen door on a submarine. Vad was indecisive because he generally was trying to read 2 or 3 D lineman moments after the snap - instead of just reading the one. Granted - we had injuries and they were hurt. But they would have been hurt if Tevin played as well. We would have still finished 7-6, and we would still be saying "wait till next year"!

No offense, but I, and maybe it's just me, feel dumber for reading this post. Cheese made a post about qb play in 2013 offense, and you respond with ref to the result of 2011 and 2012 games as if points scored and points allowed in those seasons were entirely a function of TWs qb play. I don't get it at all.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

It's kind of impossible to tell what would have happened regarding wins or losses in 13 if TW had been at the helm. I can say I feel fairly certain that TW in 11 and 12 was > than VL in 13.

 

[91Wreck]

No offense, but I, and maybe it's just me, feel dumber for reading this post. Cheese made a post about qb play in 2013 offense, and you respond with ref to the result of 2011 and 2012 games as if points scored and points allowed in those seasons were entirely a function of TWs qb play. I don't get it at all.

No, cheese opined that we would be better in 2013 with TW at QB. I simply asked which games he would have made a difference.

 

[AE 87]

No, cheese opined that we would be better in 2013 with TW at QB. I simply asked which games he would have made a difference.

I was responding to the answers and rationale you then gave to the question,

 

[91Wreck]

I was responding to the answers and rationale you then gave to the question,

No, you didn't respond to anything. You took a cheap shot.

 

[Boomergump]

What games would TW have helped us win in 2013? IMHO, I think the VT game would have had a much much better chance at being a win. I doubt TW gets the ball whacked out of his hands in the backfield in the first series (our undoing) and he probably does enough with the reads to get us to 17 or 20 points or so. I think we win the Miami game with TW guiding the offense. We tore them up in the running game before the VL fumble during the potential knockout blow drive. I'm not so sure about UGAg. We got separation on Vad's arm, but, I sure would have liked to have had TW in half 2 trying to control the clock. BYU and CLEM probably not. MISS? I dunno.

 

[91Wreck]

What games would TW have helped us win in 2013? IMHO, I think the VT game would have had a much much better chance at being a win. I doubt TW gets the ball whacked out of his hands in the backfield in the first series (our undoing) and he probably does enough with the reads to get us to 17 or 20 points or so. I think we win the Miami game with TW guiding the offense. We tore them up in the running game before the VL fumble during the potential knockout blow drive. I'm not so sure about UGAg. We got separation on Vad's arm, but, I sure would have liked to have had TW in half 2 trying to control the clock. BYU and CLEM probably not. MISS? I dunno.

I will agree that if Vad plays the first half and Tevin plays the second half against uga we win that game. But I can't see Tevin winning it on his own for four quarters.

The other games we will have to agree to disagree. Tevin had orwin and Robbie plus a healthier oline in 2012 and couldn't beat those teams. We had a better defense this year but we still gave up 45 against Miami. I just don't think his superior skills at running the option would have made a difference in that game.

 

[Techster]

I think we beat VT with Tevin. At the same time, Vad's ability to pass the ball and pose a vertical threat was one of the main reason we were able to build a cushion against UGA.

I do think, however, CPJ would have called games differently with Tevin...then we ge into the whole butterfly effect.

Tevin didn't have any eligibility in 2013 so there's no sense in re-hashing an imaginary scenario. It's not like 2012 where Vad and Tevin were really in play.

 

[gtdrew]

Spin it anyway you want-the bottom line is we didn't have enough players(Bailey being a great get(at the time to SOME) really meant little because he didn't play-for WHATEVER reason.
We have FIVE OL slots ,2 Aback slots--what position is more likely to need guys? you don't need a crystal ball to see that- hmmm

This is a flawed line of logic. While you start 5 ol and 2 abacks, there's also something called special teams. You don't want fat kids running down and trying to cover those. Ask Alabama...

 

[alaguy]

This is a flawed line of logic. While you start 5 ol and 2 abacks, there's also something called special teams. You don't want fat kids running down and trying to cover those. Ask Alabama...

oh,really
if you want to say Abacks can be on STs then ,the OLs can be on the DL,btw-LBs are prob the best of STs
logic says you need a lot of linemen ,9 obvious spots--they also seem to be the most prone to injury,signing 2 guys looked at time to be foolish and it turned out that way, DUH!

 

[GT Man]

No, cheese opined that we would be better in 2013 with TW at QB. I simply asked which games he would have made a difference.

So you don't think a QB that has a high command of the offense would have made a difference in 2013, when so many games came down to the wire? I tend to agree with Cheese on this one. Tevin would have LOVED to throw to 2013's WR group.

 

[GT Man]

I will agree that if Vad plays the first half and Tevin plays the second half against uga we win that game. But I can't see Tevin winning it on his own for four quarters.

The other games we will have to agree to disagree. Tevin had orwin and Robbie plus a healthier oline in 2012 and couldn't beat those teams. We had a better defense this year but we still gave up 45 against Miami. I just don't think his superior skills at running the option would have made a difference in that game.

You aren't giving TW his due. The dude broke records here.

 

[91Wreck]

You aren't giving TW his due. The dude broke records here.

I don't want to come off as someone who dislikes Tevin. I thought he gave us everything he had. The records you refer to prove that. He is a fine representative for Tech. I have just always maintained his skill set was somewhat limited.