Phil Steele

gth874t

Jolly Good Fellow
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,995
Good call. I remember one of the first Steele publications I purchased was in 1995 and he had a very similar sentiment regarding a bounceback for GT's 1-10 team in 1994. He noted several of those close losses and how the team just lost chemistry, confidence and fell apart. He predicted a better than .500 record in '95. GT went on to go 6-5 that year and were two brutal end-of-game losses to Arizona and UGA away from going 8-3.
How is it we have, outside of the 2014 team, seemingly tons of insane losses?
 

saxondawg

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
492
Phil Steele on Buck and Kincade right now.

Says GT will be the #4 most improved team this year. Key will be improvement in QB play and maturing of BBs and ABs over last year.
I can't remember who it was on this board (to me, all jackets look alike) who convinced me last year what a big deal it was to have so many inexperienced backs. In a traditional offense, it's much less of a big deal. In Johnson's offense, those blocks on the outside are the difference in the explosive runs that make the 3O what it is. It will be interesting to see if that's a big improvement this season.
 

Architorture23

If ur players know u luv them, then u already won.
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
28,924
I can't remember who it was on this board (to me, all jackets look alike) who convinced me last year what a big deal it was to have so many inexperienced backs. In a traditional offense, it's much less of a big deal. In Johnson's offense, those blocks on the outside are the difference in the explosive runs that make the 3O what it is. It will be interesting to see if that's a big improvement this season.
I think last season convinced ALL OF US what a big deal it was to have so many inexperienced backs.
 

southendzoneBEE

Gailey-Like
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
13,579
I think last season convinced ALL OF US what a big deal it was to have so many inexperienced backs.
It opened my eyes for sure. Until 2015 I didn't think it was as important as depth. But now I feel the opposite. We showed how much depth we had but the inexperience was telling.
 

GTDGN04

Flats Noob
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
773
I can't remember who it was on this board (to me, all jackets look alike) who convinced me last year what a big deal it was to have so many inexperienced backs. In a traditional offense, it's much less of a big deal. In Johnson's offense, those blocks on the outside are the difference in the explosive runs that make the 3O what it is. It will be interesting to see if that's a big improvement this season.
That and we didn't have a B-Back who could break a tackle after Days and Laskey were so great at it in 2014. Skov looked like a Greek God but he'd fall down if you laid a pinky on him.
 

GTDGN04

Flats Noob
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
773
How is it we have, outside of the 2014 team, seemingly tons of insane losses?
There have been too many of them - plenty to UGA, of course.

Just remember the good ones where we snatched victory from the jaws of defeat - UGA '85, All-American Bowl '85, UNC '89, VT '90 en route to the natty title, Aloha Bowl '91, UVA '98, Clemson '98, UGA '98 and '99, Kerry Watkins & Calvin in Death Valley, FSU '08 and 2015, ACCCG 2009, Ga. Southern and VT 2014. There have been some very sweet wins to lead to very special seasons where it looked like we were dead in the water and clawed back.

But, yeah, plenty of the sucky ones, too.
 

gth874t

Jolly Good Fellow
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,995
Very true, appreciate the perspective, GTDGN04.

There was no reason to lose to Duke or UNC in 2014. Insane and inexcusable.
Good point - I guess that 2014 was different in the sense that we had the insane wins to go with it (dwags, VPI, and Southern). Seems like the gut-wrenching losses always outweigh the snatching-victory-from-jaws-of-defeat wins.
 

swampsting

Now with incredulous facial expression
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
8,352
I think last season convinced ALL OF US what a big deal it was to have so many inexperienced backs.
It didn't help with the problems on the O line. We were hurting Georgia on the counter but when two of our most experienced linemen pull and run right past the Mutts' end and don't lay a finger on him, and that guy winds up making a tackle for no gain on a play that should have been wide open, I sat there and went WTF are we doing.
 

ramblinwise1

beware the zealot
Joined
Dec 17, 2001
Messages
18,344
Honest question and would appreciate an honest answer.

How "downhill" do you think the average Navy team (not the 2015 version with 20 of 22 Sr. starters) would look against Clemson, FSU, UGA, etc.? You think their OL would have those front 7s flummoxed all day?
There is an old adage that the best way to run at a bigger/athletic team is to run straight at them. If you run sideways you let them use the superior athleticism to run you down and throw you for a loss. Hitting the hole quickly is important to beating a superior line.

For sure, Navy would have had more trouble with those guys you named than the ones they played, but our reads on the option are noticeably slower than Navy's IMHO.
 

BuckNasty

Damn Good Rat
Joined
Jun 12, 2016
Messages
1,167
I think we have a very decent chance of winning 10 games this season. Our schedule last year was brutal, and yeah, I was happy mixing drinks during the Tulane game but we had a bad stretch of upcoming games. I remember watching that Georgia game at my uncle's house and I was trying to think of where he hid his firearms. I was feeling that bad.

I don't know what to say about last season. It is like my life, you think everything is going well and then, BOOM!
 

GTDGN04

Flats Noob
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
773
We will smoke those clowns this year. Like a Weber.
Common theme in the Duke series the past couple years is getting marched on out of the gate - giving up 7-8 yards a chunk and falling behind by a TD or two. Hoping not to see that this year.
 

floridajacket

The Real DB Cooper
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
17,799
Duke 2014 is as weird as I remember it. GT had 6.7 yards per play while Duke had 5.1. 3 turnovers by GT plus that bizarre lightening delay and all the borderline calls went against us.

2014 didn't really come together until the NC State game. Despite how we jumped out in front of Pittsburgh, even that game got close because of our defense.
 

ClydeBrick

All Being Master of Time Space & Dimension
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
4,611
Duke 2014 is as weird as I remember it. GT had 6.7 yards per play while Duke had 5.1. 3 turnovers by GT plus that bizarre lightening delay, all the borderline calls went against us, the butt-scoot 1st down and the gator-roll with a twist of JT's ankle.

2014 didn't really come together until the NC State game. Despite how we jumped out in front of Pittsburgh, even that game got close because of our defense.
Made the memory worse for you.
 

GTDGN04

Flats Noob
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
773
Duke 2014 is as weird as I remember it. GT had 6.7 yards per play while Duke had 5.1. 3 turnovers by GT plus that bizarre lightening delay and all the borderline calls went against us.

2014 didn't really come together until the NC State game. Despite how we jumped out in front of Pittsburgh, even that game got close because of our defense.
Yup, our offense got going and protected the ball better. But D was unsung hero of that second half run in 2014, IMO. They gave up yards but were good for 2-3 turnovers/game and had some pick-6s and scoop-and-scores - those are game-changing plays that turn the momentum drastically. When the other sideline sees that happen and our offense humming, they start to lose hope/press rather rapidly. We were clicking on several cylinders and it was a beautiful thing to watch.
 

deeeznutz

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
7
Phil Steele on Buck and Kincade right now.

Says GT will be the #4 most improved team this year. Key will be improvement in QB play and maturing of BBs and ABs over last year.
There's the old Phil Steele we all know and love, the guy who has us outside the top 50 but #4 most improved. If we win or we suck, doesn't matter, he predicted it. This guy is a clown.
 

texstinger

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jul 12, 2002
Messages
8,816
In which parallel universe did you EVER expect to beat teams like UGA, BAMA, UT, UF, and AU with any regularity?
1960's into the 1970's. Then sadly the dumbing down was allowed to take over.
Now it is a great accomplishment to puke & wake. And people then want to whine about lack of press coverage and not selling tickets.
 

texstinger

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jul 12, 2002
Messages
8,816
College football in the 1950s was a parallel universe where southern colleges were segregated. Teams in the South would not play teams from the North unless they agreed not to play any black players. The names of the colleges are the same, but nothing else from that period is of any relevance to the competition today.
Well, as has been pointed out, we did play Pitt in a bowl game with a black player. That was indeed an exception not the rule.
And the truth is, in the 50 / 60's, GT not having black players did not have one single thing to do with academics. And we all know that is the truth. One thing I always did find strange were a lot of northern teams talking about how stupid southern players were back then, and yet they would come recruit the group of players that were, due to racism, the most educationally discriminated group.
I can never forget the Lemon Street School in Decatur. They had a QB (first named Jake? I can not remember) that was the best I ever saw come out of this state. Went to Mich St. Many talked back then that Lemon team wouldhave wiped any team in the state off the field.
Regardless, I believe GT is exceptional enough to have the highest standards in any endeavor it undertakes. With the right leadership.
I expect to beat ugag. If not our goal, why are we wasting all this money?
 
Top