This is a big week and clearly...

Explain to me this hard headed conspiracy theory. Vad Lee is CPJ's recruit - its not like he's a step child.

Are you saying that CPJ is stubborn because he does not want to throw this season away in order to throw Vad Lee into action?

This season is already thrown away. There is only one objective left: beating Georgia. With Vad, we may have a shot at beating Georgia. With Vad + Tevin, we may have a shot at beating Georgia. With Tevin, we have no shot at beating Georgia.

Stubborn because he refuses to scrap our run based triple option mid-season to capitalize on our stud backup QB, stacked wide receiving corps, and stellar pass protecting offensive line?

Stubborn because we are not gaining a single thing by playing Tevin, and are still losing games on top of it.

It seems that you have blind faith in Vad Lee.

No. More like I have zero faith in Tevin.

New conspiracy theory: CPJ is holding Vad Lee back so he and Justin Thomas will have nearly the same experience going into the off-season QB competition.

Not likely. More likely is that CPJ keeps incorrectly thinking that Tevin is about to win us games that Vad can't.

Were you part of the fanbase that expected Taylor Bennett to start over Reggie?

Most assuredly. Not because I thought Taylor Bennett was any good. It's because I knew how bad Reggie was.
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
:bowrofl:

The team quit because we played Vad Lee?

This is the funniest website on earth.
Click to expand...

The D quit because they were gassed. They didn't get a rest between MTSU's scoring drive and the fumble on the first play following (which they made a stop on) and then in comes Vad and they were right back on the field. There was no time to make adjustments or catch their breath. That combined with a slow start in the second half and starters being out lead to them quitting later in the second half.

If CPJ pulled a popular starter and Vad couldn't score, they'd quit. There are still some obtainable goals beyond UGA like not visiting Shreveport and if the team sensed the coach giving up on them, Shreveport would be a dream. Tevin has unspectacularly put points on the board in 4 of the 5 games. You can't argue that.
 
He gave the third series last week as an example that Vad wasn't ready, not as the reason the defense quit.

He could have worded it better.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but I don't even agree with that premise. No head coach anywhere has ever made the determination of whether or not to bench his starting QB based on 4 plays of the backup. I'm not trying to argue that Vad is 'ready' whatever that means, but this line of argumentation is so flimsy I am supremely amused anyone decided to pursue it.

GEETEELEE said:
No, he said IF you benched the starter and started Vad, you'd see the D quit. He's probably right.
Click to expand...

This notion is evidence to me that we have lost our minds watching GT football. Our inability to forecast these games is fueling the inferno of our paranoia to the point where we have become craven neanderthals bowing to the shadows of superstition and speculation dancing on the wall of our football caves. We are so perplexed by their motions that we are uprooted from our common understanding of the world around us.

We've already fractured off into different little football-religions around variances in how we interpret the signs, but this little belief is like the Scientology among them. It is as hilariously strange as it is troubling in the knowledge that anyone could believe it.

Bravo. Just wow.

Also, does it cost money to join the 'Vad is the problem' cult? I'd really like to attend the meetings, this stuff is amazing.
 
Thought CPJ was pretty clear on this topic during his radio show.
 
alpha said:
Thought CPJ was pretty clear on this topic during his radio show.
Click to expand...

You can't tell the Vad Lee fanboys anything. They think there is some nefarious plot against him and that they know better than the coach on how to approach these things because he doesn't have the teams best interest in mind.
 
GT1992 said:
The D quit because they were gassed. They didn't get a rest between MTSU's scoring drive and the fumble on the first play following (which they made a stop on) and then in comes Vad and they were right back on the field. There was no time to make adjustments or catch their breath. That combined with a slow start in the second half and starters being out lead to them quitting later in the second half.
Click to expand...

Again. Serious disconnect with reality here. The defense didn't quit in the second half, they quit in the middle of the first quarter. MTSU's box score reads thusly: 7 14 14 14. We only lead for 1 possession the entire game, and that was their second offensive series before they scored on a 12 play 75 yard drive. I was also at the game and unusually sober at the time, the defense looked terrible to me the entire time.

If CPJ pulled a popular starter and Vad couldn't score, they'd quit.
Click to expand...

I admire your conviction. What are you going to call your cult? Do I have to chant this to join?

There are still some obtainable goals beyond UGA like not visiting Shreveport and if the team sensed the coach giving up on them, Shreveport would be a dream.
Click to expand...

In what world is pulling Tevin giving up on the team? CPJ wouldn't pull Tevin unless he thought Vad gave them the best chance to win. If he puts the guy in who has the best chance to win, that's called trying to win, which is (in most cultures) the exact opposite of giving up.

Tevin has unspectacularly put points on the board in 4 of the 5 games. You can't argue that.
Click to expand...

Not here to argue about Tevin.
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
Possibly, but I don't even agree with that premise. No head coach anywhere has ever made the determination of whether or not to bench his starting QB based on 4 plays of the backup. I'm not trying to argue that Vad is 'ready' whatever that means, but this line of argumentation is so flimsy I am supremely amused anyone decided to pursue it.



This notion is evidence to me that we have lost our minds watching GT football. Our inability to forecast these games is fueling the inferno of our paranoia to the point where we have become craven neanderthals bowing to the shadows of superstition and speculation dancing on the wall of our football caves. We are so perplexed by their motions that we are uprooted from our common understanding of the world around us.

We've already fractured off into different little football-religions around variances in how we interpret the signs, but this little belief is like the Scientology among them. It is as hilariously strange as it is troubling in the knowledge that anyone could believe it.

Bravo. Just wow.

Also, does it cost money to join the 'Vad is the problem' cult? I'd really like to attend the meetings, this stuff is amazing.
Click to expand...
Benching Donnie Davis in favor of Luginbill cost Bill Lewis the respect and trust of the players and eventually his job.

Vad Lee isn't the problem, nor is Tevin. Neither are the solution, either.
 
GT1992 said:
You can't tell the Vad Lee fanboys anything. They think there is some nefarious plot against him and that they know better than the coach on how to approach these things because he doesn't have the teams best interest in mind.
Click to expand...

Don't confuse me with a Vad Lee fanboy just because he's in my avatar. As I've explained before, I'm using that to mock people who constantly call for the starter to be benched. That's also why I've got a high school junior QB we haven't even recruited in my sig.

IMO the offense is not the problem, and doesn't need to be touched until the defense is fixed. I just find it hilarious that anyone thinks Vad Lee has something to do with that. Really. That's the funniest thing I've heard all week.
 
TechPreacher said:
Exactly. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The rally cry ought to be for some of the back-ups on defense to be playing.
Click to expand...

We saw what some of the back-ups on D looked like last week and it was not pretty. Would not mind seeing what Kallon could do but he is very raw
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
Don't confuse me with a Vad Lee fanboy just because he's in my avatar. As I've explained before, I'm using that to mock people who constantly call for the starter to be benched. That's also why I've got a high school junior QB we haven't even recruited in my sig.

IMO the offense is not the problem, and doesn't need to be touched until the defense is fixed. I just find it hilarious that anyone thinks Vad Lee has something to do with that. Really. That's the funniest thing I've heard all week.
Click to expand...

So you don't think short first half drives have a cumulative effect on the stamina of the defense? I'm trying to make sure I get your position correct. We were VERY thin in the LB and DB corps last week and the more they could be on the bench, the better. Beyond that, CPJ chose that week to kick Groh upstairs, so he had former player Julian Burnett trying to coach up Marcodes. That plan worked so well that Nealy decided he could play after all instead of watching the abomination on the field.

You're not the Vad Lee fanboy, see my post stating the offense hasn't been the problem since week one. I'm all for getting Lee some pt, when we have a lead. The offense was clicking before and after Lee's series (other than a WR fumble). That's why I thought it was a horrible move at the time.
 
Getting something beyond Shreveport will likely require beating Georgia at this point.
 
Nawaab said:
Getting something beyond Shreveport will likely require beating Georgia at this point.
Click to expand...

Music City or Belk are possible. The last two weeks probably killed Russell Athletic. Tomorrow might do the same for the others. Meet you at the Applebee's.
 
GT1992 said:
So you don't think short first half drives have a cumulative effect on the stamina of the defense? I'm trying to make sure I get your position correct. We were VERY thin in the LB and DB corps last week and the more they could be on the bench, the better.
Click to expand...

Of course they do, and I recognize that we were thin, but the second defensive series was before the short Vad drive. As thin as we want to be, we should absolutely be able to play more than 4 plays (the length of the first defensive series) before becoming winded. I point out the second series because that's when it all broke down, IMO. The short turnaround on the Tevin/Waller fumbled pass to the next series may have compounded it, but the problem was in full swing when we let them go 75 yards in 12 plays for a TD essentially at the very beginning of the game. At no point in that drive did we have any kind of defensive presence, no sacks, no TFL, we let them convert 2 3rds and a 4th and complete 3 passes for 10+ yards while holding the ball for 5+ minutes.

The short turnaround didn't really mean much in the face of that because the next series they played was MTSU going 4 plays for -2 yards and then missing a field goal. They put an additional 1:19 on the clock. Sounds like they weren't fatigued but if you watched they ran on us to a 3rd and 1 and then decided to drop back and pass for some weird reason and drew an intentional grounding call. They could have and they should have punched it in there and scored 56 that game. But they didn't really boss us around there any more than they bossed us around on the previous drive. That trend was present from the beginning.

And all that was before Vad got the ball. Tevin's offense had the ball for 2:42 total PT over 2 drives totaling 7 plays at that point, and Vad's drive lasted for 2:58 over 5 plays. Who was turning it over faster? Some might also say Vad didn't really have a chance that drive anyway because on 3rd and 7 we called a really bad play. We threw a short pass to Laskey but it wasn't ever in the cards and he got clobbered for a loss.

Then we let them score again lightning fast (Cunningham's first 60 yard rush of the evening), after the longest break they'd had yet, and fumbled the KO to get them right back on the field. At this point we were already in full blown defensive uselessness, and I don't feel like it's even conceivable to lay the blame for that at Vad's feet, or even at CPJ's proxy feet for putting Vad in for a series.

Our next drive after that was a death march, too, so they had plenty of time on the bench to catch their breath, but we still played like ass when our defense went back on the field. I just don't see any point in the game where I can call the defense any better than any other point in the game. That game was a total disaster.

Beyond that, CPJ chose that week to kick Groh upstairs, so he had former player Julian Burnett trying to coach up Marcodes. That plan worked so well that Nealy decided he could play after all instead of watching the abomination on the field.
Click to expand...

Sure, why not, but that doesn't have anything to do with Vad Lee. I'm not saying motivation wasn't a problem, it's fairly obvious that it was, I'm just contending that it had very little if anything to do with Vad's presence on the field in the third series.

You're not the Vad Lee fanboy, see my post stating the offense hasn't been the problem since week one. I'm all for getting Lee some pt, when we have a lead. The offense was clicking before and after Lee's series (other than a WR fumble). That's why I thought it was a horrible move at the time.
Click to expand...

Given what we know now, it was an irrelevant move. I wouldn't have called the offense clicking before Lee's series, we had one TD and one fumbled pass, and we'd only run 7 plays for less than 3 minutes of PT. Our offense had barely been on the field. I really wouldn't have called it clicking afterwards either. We had one good death march, then a freaky 9 play 45 yard TD drive that wasn't nearly as good as the 5 ypp that implies. They almost stopped us on the goal line, everyone had shades of Miami in their head when Tevin went for it on the 1 and failed to get any yardage again; thankfully that play was only 2nd down. Then we had 7 drives in the 2nd half and they went like this: punt, fumble, downs, TD, INT, downs, half. We still put up decent yardage, but clicking we were not, IMO.

Wasn't relevant anyway. We should not have to put up 60 points just to WIN against MTSU. On this, I'm sure we all agree. :lol:
 
TheTaxJacket said:
It has come to me reading player quotes, coaches comments, and looking in past history that we were victim to the hang over. Lost to VT in OT which was very, very hard on the team that had yelled 9/3 all summer, then exact revenge on UVA in a big way only to get beat again in OT to Miami who have beaten GT 4 years in a row now.

It's not the first time it's happened in CFB either. See VT and JMU after Boise. Hell see UGA vs. Colorado. Colorado is an awful team that MTSU could destroy.

Yes it's one of the worst losses in GT history, but I offer when has GT had to play 3 divisional teams in 4 weeks right off the bat and lose in OT to two of them? That's probably historical too.

It's not an excuse, but it does shed some light on the situation.

Now comes Clemson. If GT can beat Clemson on Saturday the MTSU loss will be forgotten. When VT went on a tear after losing to JMU it was hardly ever mentioned again by media.

Georgia Tech has to take care of Georgia Tech and get it done.

The team clearly has problems. Average QB, secondary issues, inconsistent blocking. But I think we'll all be surprised what a little ride on the win train will do for them. They need that big win they were so close to getting twice in one month. The collective wind was swiped from their sails, now it's go time.

I am over it and back on board. Let's go beat Clemson! Go Jackets!
Click to expand...

It's not about MTSU.

It's about 4-8 in the last 12 games.

It's about 16-15 since the beginning of 2010.

It's about 13-15 against FBS teams since the beginning of 2010.

It's not a hangover. It's a chronic illness. It's cancer. An aspirin (QB change) is not going to cure it.
 
jacketup said:
It's not about MTSU.

It's about 4-8 in the last 12 games.

It's about 16-15 since the beginning of 2010.

It's about 13-15 against FBS teams since the beginning of 2010.

It's not a hangover. It's a chronic illness. It's cancer. An aspirin (QB change) is not going to cure it.
Click to expand...

What are you suggesting will cure it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top