As Fair as I Can Be

1982Jacket

Flats Noob
Joined
Sep 26, 2020
Messages
566
Vegas had us winning 2.5 games this year. How many games did you project us winning? We were picked last in the ACC. Where did you have us in the pecking order?
I hear this a lot. Is your point here that Vegas was telling everyone that we have a crappy coach before we all accepted that we have a crappy coach? If not, what is it?
 

Old-Fashioned UGA Hater

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
117
I hear this a lot. Is your point here that Vegas was telling everyone that we have a crappy coach before we all accepted that we have a crappy coach? If not, what is it?
Vegas knew the lack of talent and the patchworking of a team together from another system. They're experts and they put their money where their mouth is.
 

Buzzkill1974

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Dec 20, 2017
Messages
17
Vegas knew the lack of talent and the patchworking of a team together from another system. They're experts and they put their money where their mouth is.
I kind of get the Vegas thing...but they predicted O/U 2.5 before the season started. They just predicted BC would win by 3. If you are going to give credibility to Vegas for the total, by proxy you would have to give credibility to Vegas for the spread.

Just saying if we are a 2-3 win team and only 3 points worse H2H on the road in BC based on talent...well, that would speak volumes of coaching by getting our doors blown off by a team that would more or less be a pick ‘em game on a neutral field.
 

GEETEELEE

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
28,174
Furthermore, our coaches do have important strengths. They are young, energetic, and dedicated to Tech. They seem like good people. Most of all, they are excellent recruiters, which is very important.
Good talent makes coaches better.
The problem is that they are not even average coaches. I wouldn't be discouraged if we lost all our games, if we looked well coached, improved from game to game, and were as competitive in games as the talent would allow, because under those circumstances I think we could continue to upgrade recruiting. However, we do not look well coached, we don't improve from week to week, and we are not as competitive as we should be.
Not saying you’re wrong, but I don’t think you can yet conclude they are not even “average” coaches. There’s a lot of dynamics going on, not the least of which are COVID restrictions. This is a throwaway year in college football and it could be they’re focusing on the next year and beyond. You’ve got a very good point about the preparedness of the team, but in this year there may be other priorities.
 

THWG16

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
20
For better or worse, this is our coaching staff. We cannot really afford to pay them. We certainly cannot afford to fire them and replace them. They should, therefore, feel more secure in their jobs than any coaching staff in the country.

I will grant that we have weaker talent than a number of the teams we play. It is not realistic to expect us to beat Clemson, Notre Dame and perhaps a few others. Furthermore, there are no teams on our schedule that we have a decided talent edge over. I would even say it is amazing we have already beaten two teams this season.

Furthermore, our coaches do have important strengths. They are young, energetic, and dedicated to Tech. They seem like good people. Most of all, they are excellent recruiters, which is very important.

The problem is that they are not even average coaches. I wouldn't be discouraged if we lost all our games, if we looked well coached, improved from game to game, and were as competitive in games as the talent would allow, because under those circumstances I think we could continue to upgrade recruiting. However, we do not look well coached, we don't improve from week to week, and we are not as competitive as we should be.

This seems like it will make it hard for us to continue to upgrade recruiting. I hope I am wrong.

I don't think we have ever paid this much for a coaching staff, and I don't think we have ever gotten so little from one. It is incumbent for a man getting paid three million dollars a year to do his job very well.

Collins said he was going to change the culture. I'm willing to accept all his changes, if we are sacrificing everything I liked about our traditions, from school colors on uniforms on down, if we get a well coached team in return. But, we're not getting a well coached team.

I don't know what the solution is, or even if there is a solution. I would suggest that Collins try taking the wishes of the people who pay his salary into much more consideration. Frankly, as Rhett Butler said during another disagreeable time in Atlanta, I just don't give a damn if the players want to wear various colors of uniforms or want modern music blared through the loud speakers. And I wish the coach would dress more like a football coach and less like a clown.

My biggest worry is that these abysmal and historically humiliating losses, during which we show no sign of decent coaching, will kill recruiting. My second biggest worry is that many of our relatively few remaining fans will lose interest in identifying with a team that gets thrashed by the likes of Boston College, decisively beaten by Syracuse and Central Florida, and humiliated by Clemson by an historical margin.

It doesn't matter that the past regime had weaknesses, because this current group was highly paid to do a lot better. And they're certainly failing to do so. I don't want to hear the same worthless excuses anymore, either. Great coaches take responsibility.

I will always be a Tech fan. But, our losses used to be painful to me. Now, they're just funny. I used to yell at the TV. Now, I laugh out loud at play after play. My wife even complimented me today on how well I took the beating. I think that's a dangerous sign.
I for one want a coach who preaches fundamentals, is no non sense , dresses like a grown man , & doesn’t have all these side antics !
 

THWG16

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
20
Good talent makes coaches better.

Not saying you’re wrong, but I don’t think you can yet conclude they are not even “average” coaches. There’s a lot of dynamics going on, not the least of which are COVID restrictions. This is a throwaway year in college football and it could be they’re focusing on the next year and beyond. You’ve got a very good point about the preparedness of the team, but in this year there may be other priorities.
Everyone is dealing with covid
 

OptionsJacket

If you don't like what they say, punch em
Joined
Sep 3, 2020
Messages
698
Not sure that's really true, it's pretty clear some teams take COVID precauations way more seriously than others. Not going to comment on which approach is the right approach, but that is a reality.
I have a feeling we are taking it way more seriously than others. IIWII can't be good at football and good at Covid.
 

txsting

Elite level sh*tposting
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
1,225
^^^^^^
All of this!
For what Collins is getting paid, he shouldn't show up for work in a t-shirt...
Stupid old man talk. WTF. News flash. The team sucked last year. It sucks this year, but less so. The sky isn't falling. However, you should in fact retreat to your bomb shelter and remain there until we notify you.
 

midatlantech

Dodd-Like
Joined
Aug 20, 2003
Messages
5,733
I kind of get the Vegas thing...but they predicted O/U 2.5 before the season started. They just predicted BC would win by 3. If you are going to give credibility to Vegas for the total, by proxy you would have to give credibility to Vegas for the spread.

Just saying if we are a 2-3 win team and only 3 points worse H2H on the road in BC based on talent...well, that would speak volumes of coaching by getting our doors blown off by a team that would more or less be a pick ‘em game on a neutral field.
Well the reason you play the games instead of simulate them based on team parameters is that random occurences like turnovers make a huge difference. It's hard to guess on a young team when they win a few and then lose quite a few and have a slew of turnovers. If we cut the turnovers down and the penalties we would be much more competititve. But we have a young team....
 

CiraldoForever

Flats Noob
Joined
Aug 15, 2014
Messages
522
Stupid old man talk. WTF. News flash. The team sucked last year. It sucks this year, but less so. The sky isn't falling. However, you should in fact retreat to your bomb shelter and remain there until we notify you.
I don't mind people disagreeing with me or others. But, when people call other people names, use vulgar language gratuitously, and think they're superior to others, it is impossible for me to respect them or their opinions.

The last two weeks we have looked worse than we did last year, in my opinion. This is especially disturbing, since Collins has had more time to put his "new culture" into place and has some of his recruits on the field. During the last two years, Tech has had the worst coached football teams in its history.

The sky is falling.
 

1982Jacket

Flats Noob
Joined
Sep 26, 2020
Messages
566
I kind of get the Vegas thing...but they predicted O/U 2.5 before the season started. They just predicted BC would win by 3. If you are going to give credibility to Vegas for the total, by proxy you would have to give credibility to Vegas for the spread.

Just saying if we are a 2-3 win team and only 3 points worse H2H on the road in BC based on talent...well, that would speak volumes of coaching by getting our doors blown off by a team that would more or less be a pick ‘em game on a neutral field.
Please stop confusing folks with facts and reason. Thank you.
 

ramblinwise1

beware the zealot
Joined
Dec 17, 2001
Messages
16,191
I watched the condensed game highlights on U tube. We didn't look ready to play and lost the game in the 1Q going down 17-0. Sims is making some good throws but is boneheadedly giving the ball away again, early and often. Gibbs made some awesome plays and Mason did later in the game as well, great to have him back. The defense looked like the women and children running from the Mongol hord attack. OL was a train wreck in the 1H but actually seemed to get better as the game went on allowing the offense to make a few plays. Maybe the D tackles just need to submarine into the OL to provide some obstacles. They seem to stand straight up and get carried away by the OL leaving gaping holes.

The D needs to revamp coverages greatly. Quit playing man and play zone.
we are letting QBs slower than Christmas scramble for days before anyone notices except the MLB who can not catch them.
 
Last edited:

OptionsJacket

If you don't like what they say, punch em
Joined
Sep 3, 2020
Messages
698
The D needs to revamp coverages greatly. Quit playing man and play zone.
we are letting QBs slower than Christmas scramble for days before anyone notices except the MLB who can not catch them.
A lot of the deep plays we've given up were because we were in zone and the DBs couldn't suss out the play or got beat because perceived help was non-existent.
 
Top