Conservative Offense Will Not Work At Tech...

S

SouthGa

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Nov 19, 2001
Messages
357
I believe Tech can attract good talent at QB, RB, and WR with a wide open offense. Now I realize The FRIDGE is a once in a lifetime coach, but I don't think Tech will ever be a consistent 7 - 10 win team with a conservative offense. Curry and O'Leary tried it and were .500 coaches. A Fridgen type offense shows up in the early 90's...RESULT - NAT'L CHAMPS, Fridge show back up in late 90's...RESULT - 27 wins in 3 seasons. Why Tech can't attract the talent required to be a physically dominant team, I don't know unless it's because they can't pass at Tech. Even during the Dodd years Tech was known for being smaller than everybody else but faster and smarter. I think we've got to have an OFF COORD that is innovative with formations and giving our receivers matchups that are in their favor. I loved the way FRIDGE would get the ball to his flankers/wings by motioning them right behind the QB or into the halfback position. Remember the different ways he would get the ball to Charlie Rogers? WE NEED THAT CREATIVITY!!!
 
SouthGa, I agree with you. We have to maximize the talent we get at Tech. It is essential that we play smart football as well as fundamental football. In the modern area, we have never been able to smash-mouth with another team consistently.

We must be innovative and be smarter than the other team. Bud Carson tried smash-mouth and failed, Pepper tried it with the bone and failed. Others along the way have tried it and failed. Once Friegden left, O'Leary tried it with Burns and was not effective.

I think it is becoming obvious to Gailey, it will not work at Tech. I am not trying to give the impression Tech does not have tough athletes, we do, but we do not have as many of the quality athletes as the State schools nor those with lesser academics.

I think it is essential to take the athletes we recruit and make them as physical as possible, but we also need to take advantage of the smarts our athletes have over many of the other schools.

Father Time
 
Originally posted by ahsoisee:
SouthGa, I agree with you. We have to maximize the talent we get at Tech. It is essential that we play smart football as well as fundamental football. In the modern area, we have never been able to smash-mouth with another team consistently.

We must be innovative and be smarter than the other team. Bud Carson tried smash-mouth and failed, Pepper tried it with the bone and failed. Others along the way have tried it and failed. Once Friegden left, O'Leary tried it with Burns and was not effective.

I think it is becoming obvious to Gailey, it will not work at Tech. I am not trying to give the impression Tech does not have tough athletes, we do, but we do not have as many of the quality athletes as the State schools nor those with lesser academics.

I think it is essential to take the athletes we recruit and make them as physical as possible, but we also need to take advantage of the smarts our athletes have over many of the other schools.

Father Time
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Totally agree. Let's get the Purdue offensive coordinator, Jim Chaney. Been there 7 years. Good school. Been in top 15 in offense 4 out of last 6 years, was the recruiting coordinator for 5 years. And he looks like a Friedgen!
 
While I tend to agree that we may not have gotten the desired results trying to have physical offenses in the past, let me ask you this- don't you believe execution has a major role in the success or in our case, the current lack of success? Also, I do not necessarily equate a wide open offense to be our only hope of success.

For instance, would you consider the current Wake offense wide-open or conservative? If I'm not mistaken, they are one of the leading rushing teams in our conference or they were last year. To me that was attributed to the QB's execution in ball fake, good execution in blocking, and keeping the opposing defense off-balance with motion and play-calling.

For whatever reason, we have done none of these things effectively going on the third season-that's right 3rd season. Give me Wake's execution and I'll be happy watching us in 'power, smashmouth' formations all day.
 
Originally posted by 2ndgenjacket:
While I tend to agree that we may not have gotten the desired results trying to have physical offenses in the past, let me ask you this- don't you believe execution has a major role in the success or in our case, the current lack of success? Also, I do not necessarily equate a wide open offense to be our only hope of success.

For instance, would you consider the current Wake offense wide-open or conservative? If I'm not mistaken, they are one of the leading rushing teams in our conference or they were last year. To me that was attributed to the QB's execution in ball fake, good execution in blocking, and keeping the opposing defense off-balance with motion and play-calling.

For whatever reason, we have done none of these things effectively going on the third season-that's right 3rd season. Give me Wake's execution and I'll be happy watching us in 'power, smashmouth' formations all day.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">----------------------------------------------

This is a very very good and interesting point(s).

First of all, I think Wake has the best coach in the ACC, and maybe in the top 5 in the country. He lost most of the OL from last year, and look what they have done (BTW, they should have beaten UVA--&gt; if you saw the game, you know what I mean).

They execute to perfection..I actually dread playing Wake more than almost anybody, because he has the players executing that offense to perfection.

Seeing the success at Wake probably disturbs me more than anything. It shows me where we could/should be; especially as I had grown accoustomed to the Fridge type of perfection.

I'm still hoping Gailey can do it. Sure would make things easier overall. But when I see how Wake plays the game (with MUCH less talent than we have IMO), as compared to our last 2 outings, I have to admit its frustrating........
 
I mostly agree. Hanging our hat on a physical offense would be an excercise in futilty.

It'll take smart, innovative football to win consistently at TECH. We can still recruit some all-America OLs, we've had them before, and run the ball but we need an offense that keeps the defense guessing.

Conservative football can be confused with fundamental football. Hopefully, that's what we've been seeing; Gailey trying to establish some basics rather than expecting more from the team than they're ready for with new wrinkles being added as we go along.

As has been pointed out, a lot of it is execution. Broken plays, missed balls, dropped balls, fumbles, penalties all play and have played a major part.

One thing's for sure. NCST will be in Atlanta this Saturday and we've got several more tough football games to play this season.
 
Good thread until certain "unnamed individuals" crapped in the middle of it.......Hey, you know who you are...swallow it till January, please: you will do the Tech World a great favour!!!!!!
 
I guess I'm torn. You have to be physical on defense, and you have to be physical in the O-Line. That doesn't mean you have to play a conservative offense or that you run 65% of the time, but if you can't be physical you will lose. We had a pretty good mix with O'Leary and Fridge but if you remember George talked about how we still needed to be more physical on the line to compete with the big boys.

Just another note, Wake IS physical. Their O Line is big and strong and loves to take it to the defense. Now their defense is more finess but don't discount their strength on offense.
 
2ndgenjacket, I believe Grobe has a very versatile offense. He uses a lot of different variations on his rushing offense. He is also not hesitant to pass when a team loads up on his rushing attempts.

He is the kind of coach that would fit well at Tech. Every team needs to be physical to play football. When you have teams that can recruit many more of the better athletes than you can recruit, you train your players the same as this opponent, he will still beat you in smash-mouth football.

You then have to outsmart that opposition. So, it is not saying you are not physical, you just can't match that team athlete for athlete. You must outsmart him.

Grobe's Wake Forest Team cannot out smash-mouth the average team. He uses his coaching genius to vary his offense to the opposition's defense much as Ralph. Yes, he has well conditioned players, but Grobe is a smart coach and uses his material effectively.

Hopefully, as the team progresses, we will see the same thing at Tech.

Father Time
 
Originally posted by ahsoisee:
2ndgenjacket, I believe Grobe has a very versatile offense. He uses a lot of different variations on his rushing offense. He is also not hesitant to pass when a team loads up on his rushing attempts.

He is the kind of coach that would fit well at Tech. Every team needs to be physical to play football. When you have teams that can recruit many more of the better athletes than you can recruit, you train your players the same as this opponent, he will still beat you in smash-mouth football.

You then have to outsmart that opposition. So, it is not saying you are not physical, you just can't match that team athlete for athlete. You must outsmart him.

Grobe's Wake Forest Team cannot out smash-mouth the average team. He uses his coaching genius to vary his offense to the opposition's defense much as Ralph. Yes, he has well conditioned players, but Grobe is a smart coach and uses his material effectively.

Hopefully, as the team progresses, we will see the same thing at Tech.

Father Time
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">-------------------------------------------

Ahso - I couldn't agree more....Good post
 
Originally posted by 2ndgenjacket:
While I tend to agree that we may not have gotten the desired results trying to have physical offenses in the past, let me ask you this- don't you believe execution has a major role in the success or in our case, the current lack of success? Also, I do not necessarily equate a wide open offense to be our only hope of success.

For instance, would you consider the current Wake offense wide-open or conservative? If I'm not mistaken, they are one of the leading rushing teams in our conference or they were last year. To me that was attributed to the QB's execution in ball fake, good execution in blocking, and keeping the opposing defense off-balance with motion and play-calling.

For whatever reason, we have done none of these things effectively going on the third season-that's right 3rd season. Give me Wake's execution and I'll be happy watching us in 'power, smashmouth' formations all day.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Coaching and Discipline. End of story.
 
I certainly did not intend to 'pooh' on someone's thread-whether we're pro-Gailey or anti-Gailey, I think it is safe to say that the offense has not been executing to it's potential.

Also, my point in bringing up Wake is not to debate Grobe vs. Gailey, but to address the original question of whether we can only be sucessful by running a wide open offense. Shouldn't we be able to recruit O-line as well as Wake? Why is their line able to execute even though they lost a senior QB and their best WR and ours is not playing to their potential?

I still think execution is being impacted by something- look at the Falcons right now, they question the offensive system, the coaches and their teammates. Vick may be a big part of that, but shouldn't their line continue to execute like last year?

Gailey has proven in other places and even in specific games at Tech that he can call plays to keep a defense off-balance; I believe if he ever gets the confidence of the team where they beleive in him and his system, the execution will follow, and it won't necessarily require a wide open offense to consistently win.
 
Honest question:
What type of Offense did Ross run?

He was the best coach we have had in the past 35 years.

The one thing I remember about him was that he was aggressive in building up our "trenches". He did it in the late 80s and early 90s so it can be done today.

I remember seeing Pat Swilling for the first time in Harrison. He completely blocked out the sunlight in the stairway door.

It looks like from the guys CCG is bringing in, that he is going the bigger route also. Newberry and Wrotto was impressive.
 
2ndgenjacket quote [I still think execution is being impacted by something- look at the Falcons right now, they question the offensive system, the coaches and their teammates. Vick may be a big part of that, but shouldn't their line continue to execute like last year?]

This is a valid concern. I am not sure what the problem might be with the offensive line, but it is not performing as well as it should be, considering the talent on the line.

Father Time
 
I pretty much agree.

I think the problem with us and being a run first always team is that it takes five very good offensive lineman plus backups to do this.

One really good quarterback or running back can make a whole offense a lot better if used properly. See Mike Vick

That doesn't mean we don't need to be tough physically, we do.

Chan Gailey's history as a coordinator in the NFL shows that his preference is run first then play action pass. I think he will need to modify this philosophy somewhat to be successful here.

I think his biggest mistake thus far is that he did not go ahead and put in the offense he really wanted last year. If he had we would probably have a lot better idea if it is going to work.

Basically we are 5 games into a new offense with a true freshman quarterback and there is no way to judge yet how it will turn out
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top