At which position are we deepest?

I didn't imply that you were delusional, its just my opinion, and I'm not alone on this, that your and Kyle's definition of depth is completely wrong.

My definition of depth is lots of experience and lots of bodies. Most football coaches, players, analysts, fans, etc. etc. etc. would agree with me. We have both at AB,BB, and DB.

At DE we have lots of bodies with one guy having major experience, and about two more having a tidbit of experience. So we don't have a lot of experience.

The only way you can defend your viewpoint is by re-defining what the word "depth" means as it applies to a football team. Your wrong. you made an incorrect statement, deal with it.

Otherwise, I'll just assume you're like one of those Hive sunshine crew members who automatically think certain players with high school creds automatically mean future all american. I'll never forget the post on the Hive in 2001, predicting that in 2003 we would compete for the National Championship because we would have all this senior experience, namely at the QB position with Suggs and Bilbo, etc. etc. About half the board fell over themselves agreeing we would be very strong in 2003.

I remember laughing because all these Hivers automatically thought that because we had some names on papers with some highschool stats, we were going to be badasses on the field. They don't understand college football.

Ok, so at A-Back we've got 1 guy with "major" experience in RJ. Then we've got 2 guys with a "tidbit" of experience in EP and MW. Then we've got one more guy with a decent resume from the Big East whose defenses are about as strong as a good high school region. You've got 2 spots, 1 proven guy, 2 semi-proven guys, and 1 guy with a resume from a different level. So, going by your definition Mr. Officer, it ain't much different than what we've got a DE.

DB, we've got 4 positions (so double all of your needs for experience).
CB, 3 position needs with dime package: 2 guys with major experience, MB and RR, everybody else has almost no experience.
Safety/Worlf, 3 position needs: 3 guys with major experience, MB, DR, and CT. Everybody else has almost no experience.

If you think we're "deep" (according to the definition by the afformentioned officer), then you sound like the one with the sunshine coming out of your butt.

Maybe you could quit acting like a jerk know-it-all, and just enjoy the discussion without having to express so much of a need to feel better about yourself.
 
Dude, I cannot believe I'm arguing with you now.

At B-back you got:
Dwyer - ACC player of the year
Allen- Louisville's leading rusher from 2 years ago.
Cox- if he's even in the rotation.
Watson- no experience for a RS Fr but lots of potential
Drummond- true frosh with no experience.

That's depth we can probably all agree on. 3 deep of guys who have major game experience and a guy in Watson that will surely beat one or maybe two of them out for a back-up role.

Now lets go to Aback
Roddy Jones- second leading rusher on team.
Allen- yeah he's going to play two positions. Louisville leading rusher from 2 years ago.
Cox- The blue collar do it all guy on our team
Embry Peeples- Lots of snaps, a few touches
Marcus Wright - Lots of snaps, a few touches

Wright and peeples played a lot last year even though they didn't touch the ball a lot. Go look at the film.

That's almost 3 deep at a position that requires two people on the field with guys who have played significant minutes and not toally in mop up duty.

Not to mention that we've got some serious potential in the wings that haven't played a snap.

So lets go down your list at DE.

Then you got to Defensive end which again has a left DE and a Right DE on the field at all times.
Derek Morgan- total stud
Robert Hall- soild minutes on special teams, good minutes in non-mop up duty games.
A Egbuniwe - no substantial minutes played
Dieke - true frosh no experience
Izaan Cross - true frosh no experience.
Cummings - true frosh no experience
Crenshaw - true frosh, no experience.

So effectively we only have one deep at the DE position with any truegame experience, and we cannot field a two deep without putting someone in with NO game experience.

You wanna keep defending your argument, or can you now admit you were incorrect?
 
Maybe you could quit acting like a jerk know-it-all, and just enjoy the discussion without having to express so much of a need to feel better about yourself.

Don't hate me because I'm honest... love me because I'm right. Because in this case, I am right and you're not. I'm not a jerk for pointing out that you're arguement is incorrect. Do discussions in this forum mean we have to agree with one another, or can I not point out the fallacies of your argument without you getting bent out of shape.

I also forgot to mention DB in my argument above.
At the safety positions: Morgan Burnett, Cooper Taylor, and Dominique Reese all have major game experience. We're 1 and a half deep of guys who have played a lot of minutes at safety including a preseason All American.

Then you got Jasper and Earls who have played some minutes although Earls no on the same side of the ball who are upperclassmen. Then you got Mario Edwards who has game experience in mostly mop up duty. Then you got all the RS freshman and frosh with no experience.

At CB:
You got Butler and Reid with major game experience. Peterson with decent game experience and not all of it in mop up duty. Tarrant hasn't played a down but by all accounts will be starting over one of the two guys with major game experience. You got Reese who plays both positions in Safety and CB. Martin Frierson with solid game experience at CB and some even at safety. Not to mention the rs freshman and true frosh who have no game experience.

I'm not trying to rub it in your face, but frankly, you don't know what depth is if you think we have it at DE.
 
Last edited:
You forgot Lyons at B back BOR. Overall a great post that I totally agree with. Watch the UGA game last year and Marcus plays a lot. He absolutely wipes a guy out on the Lucas Cox TD run. Then he has the big special teams play. If you went to the spring game you seen how good Allen is.
 
BOR, I never questioned if we had depth. I questioned your method of determining depth.

Depth isn't based on the experience of the players backing up a position, it's based on the talent gap between your starters and your backups. This has NOTHING to do with experience.
 
BOR, I never questioned if we had depth. I questioned your method of determining depth.

Depth isn't based on the experience of the players backing up a position, it's based on the talent gap between your starters and your backups. This has NOTHING to do with experience.

Kyle, let me sum this up for you so you may actually understand dip****.

While I think you MAY have talent and are a solid poster, you have yet to show me anything impressive so you don't have any experience to back it up. Therefore, you're just a guy who has unrealized potential.

Its like Lavar Arrington. Guy had unreal talent... but never really became the next Lawrence Taylor did he? Experience on the field is typically a good indicator of talent levels.

Stop talking out of your ass numb nuts.
 
BOR, you are a jerk. Discussion is awesome. Debate is awesome. I love talking about something in the off season and debating different viewpoints. When you tell someone they know nothing about college football because they're expressing a different viewpoint, that's when you become a jerk. Understand the logic there? Please tell me you can at least acknowledge your own social issue.

I never claimed that DE was the deepest position on the team. I never said that it was deeper than any of the positions you named. My original post simply said "we're pretty deep at DE", and then I named off about 10 young scholarship players that we'll have for the next 2 years at least.

The original poster never qualified his definition of the word depth. Maybe you could've qualified it for us by saying that you think the discussion should be about "experienced depth", or "proven depth", or something like that. The fact is that we go 12 DEEP with scholarship players for 2 positions ... which many logical people could make an argument for having "depth" ... proven depth, no ... but depth, yes.

So, back to your A-Back vs DE depth thing:
RJones = DMorgan; Morgan probably gets a slight edge over Jones, but both are great proven starters.
EPeeples and MWright = RHall and JPeters; If you can use Cox at the AB and BB positions even though he's only playing BB, then I can use JPeters even though he's only playing DT. These guys have signficant PT and have shown the ability to make plays.
AAllen = AEbuniwe; Allen certainly gets the edge here. Both played at a level below the ACC and showed good potential.
OSmith, JThomas, PReese, QB's = AWilson, EDieke, ICross, ECummings, CCrenshaw, ARocker, OTongo; These players round out the possibilties of finding playmakers at the two positions if the need arises. The edge here certainly goes to the DE's as there are more bodies and AWilson has impressed at practice already.

At least acknowlege when someone makes a logical argument with a viewpoint different than yours without the childish namecalling. Jeez, you act like freakin' RexnEFx.
 
At least acknowlege when someone makes a logical argument with a viewpoint different than yours without the childish namecalling. Jeez, you act like freakin' RexnEFx.

I agree. Its funny how some people think the internet give you special license to be a horse's arse. Debate is much more enjoyable when people demonstrate the same tact they'd most certainly use if they were face to face. We're all Tech fans, anyway.

As far as the topic goes, nobody qualified "depth", so both posters have some validity. Some people use the term "quality depth" but that still isn't universally defined.
 
BOR, you are a jerk.

I think you are being overly sensitive.

If I'm a jerk for pointing out the obvious, I'm sorry. That's just me... that's just what I do. I also try to do it with a little bit of humor to keep things interesting. Which is why I took my dig at the Hive because posters over there, make these far out comments all the time. That wasn't directed at you perse.

As most here can attest, I point out the obvious. I call it exactly the way I see it. As ncjacket will tell you, I think I'm right even when sometimes I may be wrong. Sometimes I've made some pretty bold statements that I rightfully get called out for too.

But I do call it like I see it. Like when someone says the sky is red, I say they are wrong, and that it is blue. I don't have a conversation over their incorrect opinion and how it could be a shade of red at times. The sky is blue, the clouds are white, the sky is not red.

We are not deep at DE. Lots of bodies doesn't equal depth. At least not what most people associated with the sport of football would consider "deep". As dressedcheeseside pointed out, there are varying definitions of that. But that doesn't make your definition correct. Its not. So don't hate me when I point that out. I'm not trying to single you out, again, I'm just pointing out the obvious... we are not deep at DE. I do agree we have lots of potential talent at DE. We are deep, or at least deeper at three other positions that I can think of.

I didn't mean to lump you in the same category as the sunshine crowd at the Hive, but what you said reminded me of some of the jaded gold colored glasses view points that the Hive is constantly inundated with which makes discussions on this board so much better because they are far more even keeled. I didn't say you don't know dick, I haven't formed that opinion yet.

The only person I am very sure of on this forum doesn't know squat about anything related to football is Yukon Jacket. Maybe a couple of others too, but Yukon has made some pretty stupid statements in the past, like his famous: "Georgia Tech is trying to de-emphasize college football by hiring Paul Johnson" and the fact that he predicted PJ would do no better than 5-7 and that PJ was a terrible hire. So while I can converse with Yukon and have fun with Yukon on this forum, I will still candidly point out to him that nothing he says holds any weight with me because he's made too many dumbass statements.

My first reply wasn't blunt as you initially stated. That's how you took it because you are being overly sensitive that I disagree with you. My response was matter of fact that most anyone who follows football would hold true and that most on here would agree with, other than Kyle, who is an idiot in his own right, but nevertheless enjoyable.

I don't recall many other posts from you, but in a vacuum, based on that one post, I would compare it to the sunshine gold colored glasses analysis you would find on the Hive. Sorry if that is offensive, its just my opinion. You may say something next week that I think is right on.

If I'm a jerk for pointing out the obvious, I'm sorry. That's just me... that's just what I do. I point out the obvious. Don't get bent out of shape on it. I rarely take myself very seriously on this board unless someone has a detrimental opinion or mindset which hasn't happened in a long time. For the most part, I can even laugh at myself for some of the ridiculous things I've said over the years, and expect others to do the same. That's just the way of it.

I'm the board asshole. Most people recognize I don't respond with a feather, I respond with a hammer. That's just me. I don't think I'm going to change that. While some people hate me, some find me as enjoyable as I find them and their stupid opinion. So its all good. :laugher:
 
I think you are being overly sensitive.

If I'm a jerk for pointing out the obvious, I'm sorry. That's just me... that's just what I do. I also try to do it with a little bit of humor to keep things interesting. Which is why I took my dig at the Hive because posters over there, make these far out comments all the time. That wasn't directed at you perse.

As most here can attest, I point out the obvious. I call it exactly the way I see it. As ncjacket will tell you, I think I'm right even when sometimes I may be wrong. Sometimes I've made some pretty bold statements that I rightfully get called out for too.

But I do call it like I see it. Like when someone says the sky is red, I say they are wrong, and that it is blue. I don't have a conversation over their incorrect opinion and how it could be a shade of red at times. The sky is blue, the clouds are white, the sky is not red.

We are not deep at DE. Lots of bodies doesn't equal depth. At least not what most people associated with the sport of football would consider "deep". As dressedcheeseside pointed out, there are varying definitions of that. But that doesn't make your definition correct. Its not. So don't hate me when I point that out. I'm not trying to single you out, again, I'm just pointing out the obvious... we are not deep at DE. I do agree we have lots of potential talent at DE. We are deep, or at least deeper at three other positions that I can think of.

I didn't mean to lump you in the same category as the sunshine crowd at the Hive, but what you said reminded me of some of the jaded gold colored glasses view points that the Hive is constantly inundated with which makes discussions on this board so much better because they are far more even keeled. I didn't say you don't know dick, I haven't formed that opinion yet.

The only person I am very sure of on this forum doesn't know squat about anything related to football is Yukon Jacket. Maybe a couple of others too, but Yukon has made some pretty stupid statements in the past, like his famous: "Georgia Tech is trying to de-emphasize college football by hiring Paul Johnson" and the fact that he predicted PJ would do no better than 5-7 and that PJ was a terrible hire. So while I can converse with Yukon and have fun with Yukon on this forum, I will still candidly point out to him that nothing he says holds any weight with me because he's made too many dumbass statements.

My first reply wasn't blunt as you initially stated. That's how you took it because you are being overly sensitive that I disagree with you. My response was matter of fact that most anyone who follows football would hold true and that most on here would agree with, other than Kyle, who is an idiot in his own right, but nevertheless enjoyable.

I don't recall many other posts from you, but in a vacuum, based on that one post, I would compare it to the sunshine gold colored glasses analysis you would find on the Hive. Sorry if that is offensive, its just my opinion. You may say something next week that I think is right on.

If I'm a jerk for pointing out the obvious, I'm sorry. That's just me... that's just what I do. I point out the obvious. Don't get bent out of shape on it. I rarely take myself very seriously on this board unless someone has a detrimental opinion or mindset which hasn't happened in a long time. For the most part, I can even laugh at myself for some of the ridiculous things I've said over the years, and expect others to do the same. That's just the way of it.

I'm the board asshole. Most people recognize I don't respond with a feather, I respond with a hammer. That's just me. I don't think I'm going to change that. While some people hate me, some find me as enjoyable as I find them and their stupid opinion. So its all good. :laugher:

I appreciate the explanation. You just communicated to me like I'm a person not below you. I sound like a liberal, but I'm far from it. Like anybody else, I just don't like to be talked down to.

I've seen many of your posts and have agreed with the vast majority of them. I enjoy all the boards for different reasons. Unfortunately I couldn't get the same font here when I signed on a few years ago that I use on the others (vamosjackets).

I can appreciate your bluntness and humor. Sometimes it crosses an (invisible/undefined) line though.

Again, I would agree that we're in great shape at BB, probably the same at DB, and I also feel good about AB. If you're arguing that DE is not as deep as those positions, you're arguing against a point I never intended to make. I'd probably say that I feel pretty good about DE. DMorgan is as good as we've ever had. RHall is more than solid. The coaches wouldn't have moved Peters so freely if Hall wasn't solid. And behind those two we've got a LOT of guys to find a couple more playmakers. And, we're not losing any of those for a couple of years and will only add to that number. Woudn't you agree that that is a lot of players for two spots? That and BB may have the most players proportional to the positions of any on the team. That's all I was trying to say. It's just something I thought would be interesting to add to the discussion.
 
I appreciate the explanation. You just communicated to me like I'm a person not below you.

Don't fool yourself, you guys are all beneath me. Except Architech, because he would enjoy that too much. :D
 
Unfortunately I couldn't get the same font here when I signed on a few years ago that I use on the others (vamosjackets).

For what its worth, I have a high regard for vamosjackets opinion on GT football based on the many posts I've read of his on other boards. He brings a certain amount of inside info and insight as he was a member of the football team under Chan.

Vamos, was 59 your playing #?
 
For what its worth, I have a high regard for vamosjackets opinion on GT football based on the many posts I've read of his on other boards. He brings a certain amount of inside info and insight as he was a member of the football team under Chan.

Vamos, was 59 your playing #?

Thanks DCS. Much respect to you as well. You're one of the good guys.

Yes 59 was my number.
 
Well that's totally understandable that Gailey didn't teach you anything about depth. :laugher:

ba dump dump.
 
David Sanborn?

Nope. Jonathan Rowe. David got it after me. 59 went from Matt Etheridge to me to David, then to Kyle Jackson I think. 59 was kind of the number passed down to the next tough white-boy walk-on linebacker ... Until Kyle had to go and upgrade it ;).
 
Debate is much more enjoyable when people demonstrate the same tact they'd most certainly use if they were face to face. We're all Tech fans, anyway.

BTW- You've obviously never met me, but I use the same tact when I'm in person. Ask around.
 
Back
Top