Assuming Choice is gone for the year...

dressedcheeseside

dressedcheeseside

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
5,900
or is far less effective if and when he does return, does this fact give Gailey a little more slack with all you "fire Chan if he loses to Georgia" folks.

The way I see it, we stood a very good chance of beating the pups with Tashard. Without, who knows, even at best, but we probably won't be favored. So, is it fair to hold Gailey to your same ultimatum if he doesn't have the guy who represented 80% of the offense?

Just curious.
 
My concern is that in reaction to Choice's absence, our playbook shrinks. Which will make it easier for our opponents to chart our tendencies.

Time for Mr. Bond to show us what he can do with some adversity.
 
As I alluded to in another thread, there are always 3 or 4 excuses that the hard core Chan supporters lean on year after year. Flunkgate, the Hill, RH, RB, academics, etc, ets.

It seems that as one excuse expires, another pops up to replace it, such as TC injury.

At some point folks, when are people going to stop making an excuse for the results (such as 0-fer against the mutts), and just say "You know, the guy just hasn't gotten the job done"....?
 
In my opinion, depth is important aspect of running your program and is one portion the head coach is responsible for.

Once a coach has been at a program 4-5 years...you really have to lessen the "excuse factors" for not being able to replace for injuries and/or attrition. CG is at this point now...and fortunately recruiting is on the upswing.

That being said, schollie limits have hurt our ability to build depth (we have 74 on scholarship now out of 85 that are usually possible). This year will be a full class...as well as next. The depth excuse will always e somewhat of a factor for whomever is the coach as we are Georgia Tech...but should be much less of an excuse each year as it dwindles to no excuse at all.

I still think there is enough talent at RB, and experience in Rashaun Grant should he remain healthy, to continue the great running game. We can use Cox more in short yardage...even put Kelly in front of him. ...or...if Dwyer can learn to make his reads on his OL's better he could be a good short yardage back this year...he just has to resist the urge to look for all the daylight on the outside...only to find it closed up by a speedy D1-BCS conference OLB.
 
3rdGenJacket said:
As I alluded to in another thread, there are always 3 or 4 excuses that the hard core Chan supporters lean on year after year. Flunkgate, the Hill, RH, RB, academics, etc, ets.

It seems that as one excuse expires, another pops up to replace it, such as TC injury.

At some point folks, when are people going to stop making an excuse for the results (such as 0-fer against the mutts), and just say "You know, the guy just hasn't gotten the job done"....?
Click to expand...
I consider myself a supporter of Georgia Tech so supporting our coach and players follows along (for me). I don't think I have the right to tell others who to support and how to support - that's for each individual to decide.

As far as excuses are concerned, flunkgate is REAL. It could've had a devastating effect on the program - aside from SMU, no school had ever been affected by a probation more serious than losing 12 scholarship players in one season. Alabama is just now recovering from a probation in which they lost far fewer players spread out over a couple of seasons. The coaching staff deserves to be credited for keeping the ship stable during flunkgate and the aftershocks resulting from it.

All of those other things you've listed - I'm not sure that I've ever seen them listed by anyone as excuses (certainly not by me). Reggie Ball, perhaps by some, but why should he be excused? Aside from losing his mind every Thanksgiving Saturday, he did many good things for GT (but that ship has sailed).

Finally, to comment on the topic at hand - injuries to team leaders (key players) are a funny thing. They can either demoralize a team or they can motivate the remaining players to elevate their games. Given the character and experience, I'll bet on the latter.
 
it is his offense, injuries are a part of football. no, he gets no slack. i am tired of EXCUSES.
 
ContactBuzz said:
I consider myself a supporter of Georgia Tech so supporting our coach and players follows along (for me). I don't think I have the right to tell others who to support and how to support - that's for each individual to decide.

As far as excuses are concerned, flunkgate is REAL. It could've had a devastating effect on the program - aside from SMU, no school had ever been affected by a probation more serious than losing 12 scholarship players in one season. Alabama is just now recovering from a probation in which they lost far fewer players spread out over a couple of seasons. The coaching staff deserves to be credited for keeping the ship stable during flunkgate and the aftershocks resulting from it.

All of those other things you've listed - I'm not sure that I've ever seen them listed by anyone as excuses (certainly not by me). Reggie Ball, perhaps by some, but why should he be excused? Aside from losing his mind every Thanksgiving Saturday, he did many good things for GT (but that ship has sailed).

Finally, to comment on the topic at hand - injuries to team leaders (key players) are a funny thing. They can either demoralize a team or they can motivate the remaining players to elevate their games. Given the character and experience, I'll bet on the latter.
Click to expand...


I guess I should have only put the following in my post:

"At some point folks, when are people going to stop making an excuse for the results (such as 0-fer against the mutts), and just say "You know, the guy just hasn't gotten the job done"....?"


Is there ever going to be a point in Chan's tenure when this will happen?
 
If Gailey gets fired this year, it's not going to be because he lost to UGA in 2007. It's going to be because he lost to UGA every game this century. 2007-specific excuses will not matter.
 
The day of the tailback oriented offense is dead. Chan Gailey seems to think it is 1980, but it is not.

UK's starting tailback did not play against Florida, and UK was within one possession of winning. They started a freshman who is not as good as Dwyer, but UK's back Locke could never play for Gailey because, like Dwyer, he breaks it outside and does not run north south enough. UK's TE is an amazing receiver, but he would never play for Gailey because he does not block well enough. However, UK's diversified offense is far more productive than GT's, and I'd argue that they have no more talent.

If we had a diversified offense, losing Choice would not be such a big deal. I am not going to cut Gailey slack because his style of offense is hampered due to an injury. Injuries to backs are common, and losing your strating tailback is certainly not to be unforseen.
 
I'm on the fence about Gailey. That said, TC's injury should not give him a reprieve for this season.
 
It seems to me the "we win when Tashard plays / is healthy" will definitely be the excuse to replace the Tony Hollings injury, Flunkgate, Young QB, Young OL, and Reggie Ball excuses.
 
You know, the guy just hasn't gotten the job done. We lose to too many teams that aren't as good as us. It happens every year.

And he's 0-for-forever against UGA.
 
dressedcheeseside said:
So, is it fair to hold Gailey to your same ultimatum if he doesn't have the guy who represented 80% of the offense?
Just curious.
Click to expand...

Is it fair to give Gailey a pass for having such a pathetic offense that 80% of it is attributed to one man? Choice's back up are capable...just not capable of carrying the entire offense (see: 30+ carries a game).

This is not a valid excuse. There is always something...I'm sick of it. Its time for a new fresh start.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top