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
Yet another CPJ vs CGC thread
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="CEB" data-source="post: 952977" data-attributes="member: 4905"><p>I think you’re referring to my speculation so I’d like to back it up with further speculation. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p>It was no secret that a lot of Tech faithful and likely some donors were done with the option. How influential were these voices? I have no idea, but that sentiment was certainly out there.</p><p></p><p>We hired an inexperienced HC whose biggest attributes were marketing and recruiting. Nothing about it felt like “gradual retooling.” It was a rebuild and rebrand from day one.</p><p></p><p>As many have said, it’s hard to believe that any coach wouldn’t assess the situation and play a little more to his personnel. It almost seemed that we made a conscious decision NOT to do that. Could’ve been:</p><p>- Collins’ inexperience?</p><p>- Collins’ hubris?</p><p>- GT / Stansbury direction?</p><p>- All of the above (my money is here)</p><p></p><p>Heck, we all watched (and noted after the fact) Patenaude come here and run a different style of O from his previous stops, then after leaving GT, revert back to things he had done prior to GT. Odd? (Fully conscious of likely bias here. Maybe I just wanted him to run the plays that worked other places a little more often. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite8" alt=":D" title="Big Grin :D" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":D" />)</p><p></p><p>They say the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I firmly believe that everyone involved thought our best long term interests were served by a quick and total transition. Everything surrounding the program was a conscious effort to distance ourselves from the previous decade. To me, it felt like the team motto for a couple of years was, “we may fail, but we won’t fail by running the option!” They all stuck to it to their demise.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CEB, post: 952977, member: 4905"] I think you’re referring to my speculation so I’d like to back it up with further speculation. ;) It was no secret that a lot of Tech faithful and likely some donors were done with the option. How influential were these voices? I have no idea, but that sentiment was certainly out there. We hired an inexperienced HC whose biggest attributes were marketing and recruiting. Nothing about it felt like “gradual retooling.” It was a rebuild and rebrand from day one. As many have said, it’s hard to believe that any coach wouldn’t assess the situation and play a little more to his personnel. It almost seemed that we made a conscious decision NOT to do that. Could’ve been: - Collins’ inexperience? - Collins’ hubris? - GT / Stansbury direction? - All of the above (my money is here) Heck, we all watched (and noted after the fact) Patenaude come here and run a different style of O from his previous stops, then after leaving GT, revert back to things he had done prior to GT. Odd? (Fully conscious of likely bias here. Maybe I just wanted him to run the plays that worked other places a little more often. :D) They say the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I firmly believe that everyone involved thought our best long term interests were served by a quick and total transition. Everything surrounding the program was a conscious effort to distance ourselves from the previous decade. To me, it felt like the team motto for a couple of years was, “we may fail, but we won’t fail by running the option!” They all stuck to it to their demise. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
How many points did Georgia Tech score against Cumberland in 1916?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Yet another CPJ vs CGC thread
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