Looking ahead to next year

GT Adamni

Flats Noob
Joined
Dec 3, 2001
Messages
543
I don't think this season is over, but I was just wondering what we'll have next year. Here are the players returning for next year, and likely candidates for spots that are opening up.

Offense - 8 returning starters
Defense - 7 returning starters
Sp. Teams - 0 returning starters (ouch)

QB: Suggs, Bilbo
TB: Hollings, ACE, Sampson, Daniels
FB: Jackson, Dixon, Johnson
WR: Curry, Thomas, Logan
WR: Jonathan Smith, Bridges, McGuire
TE: Foschi, Williams, Cooper
LT: Dorsey, Honeycutt
LG: Robinson, Besirevic
C: Reilly, Tidwell-Neal
RG: Clay Hartley
RT: Wallace, Phillips

We return 18 of 22 from the 2 deep. We return nearly all of the offensive line, including all but one of this year's 2 deep, both QBs, we get back Hollings and return ACE, and Foschi is back. By next year I would expect Curry to be back at full strength again, so hopefully losing Watkins and Glover won't hurt us TOO bad. We still have some quality proven receivers in Smith, Curry, and Bridges. Hopefully Thomas, Logan, and McGuire will step up to provide depth.

Obviously we return a lot of experience on the offensive side of the ball. Will that translate into better offensive production next year? I think that will depend on some more creative play calling and better QB play. At least one of the QBs needs to step up in crunch time and demonstrate the ability to make plays when it counts.

DE: Gathers, Henderson, Matthews
DT: Parker, Billy
DT: Malone, Koon
DE: Hargrove, Pullen
OLB: Brown, Lawston
MLB: Smith, Anyansi
OLB: Fox, Wilkinson
CB: Cox, Davis
CB: Houston, I-Perfection
SS: Butler, Landry, McNair
FS: Burton, Gilliam

We lose 4 starters on defense, most notably both safeties and one corner. I don't think there will be much of a dropoff from Hester to Houston at corner. Houston is getting some good experience this year as the nickelback, and he has looked good. Losing Wimbush would be bad, but Ather Brown is a good one, and should do fine.

The question with the defense comes at both safety positions and who will play nickelback. The nickel will likely be either I-Perfection or Dennis Davis, so one of them will need to step up. As far as safety goes, I think Butler will be our Free Safety, and that wouldn't be much of a dropoff. He will actually give us an upgrade in speed and athleticism, although he obviously doesn't have the experience that Muyres does. Who will be our Strong Safety? Landry? Reis? McNair?

The question with special teams is who will punt for us? Punter is a position that doesn't come with much fanfare, but it's important to have someone back there that is consistent. We're losing 2 good ones after this year.

Although it is difficult to tell how he will do, I feel confident that Jordan will be our kicker.

I see a very solid offensive line for next year. It usually takes more than a year for players to come back all the way from an ACL, so I don't think it would be fair to expect Hollings to perform at the level he did early this year. I also see some quality receivers and 2 QBs with some experience.

On defense I see Gathers and Hargrove on either side of the line, a solid group of linebackers, and 2 good corners.

Anyway, the purpose of this post isn't really to predict how we'll do next year. There are simply too many factors that can come into play. The point is that we have a lot of good players coming back next year, so the coaching staff has lots to work with.
 
1. We have one more year of good LB, but our backups will be very inexperienced and unproven. Any injuries here naxt year and we could be DOA in 2003. If Tenuta/Chan cannot convince several good LBs to come here with our depth chart we are in big trouble in more ways than one. On a side note, LB play (while excellent) does not seem to be improving like the DB and DT play. Our LB seem good against the run but weak against the pass. And they were not able to make the adjustments to stop Wake according to what the coaches said.

2. The DB improvement has been noticeable IMHO. Houston may or may not be able to make the transition to corner. If he does we should be pretty good. If he does not it will be a wild card. IMHO Tenuta will find capable replacements for our losses in the backfield. With our major losses coming in the D backfield, I am glad we have a staff that appears to have it under control back there.

3. The good news is the OL. They will keep us from being bad singlehandedly. Hollings and those five will be tough to handle. Will a QB emerge to make us a contender, or will we have to be content to spoil others' seasons.

4. I have been very disappointed in our WR. Noone seems to have emerged as a posession receiver. They have to work hard this Summer to get better at making the hard catches. Anybody can make the easy ones. Suggs is a long way from making perfect throws. Great WRs would catch his bad throws as well as his good ones.

The good news is we still have more talent than most of our opponents. What we do with it is the million dollar question.
 
Yes,we will be ok except for DBs next year seemingly(.Which may be a little like saying Custer would have had a nice campaign if not for the Indians) considering passing will get you killed quicker than anything.
Unfortunately if this team and staff doesn't shape up ,NOTHING can be counted on next yr.
 
I too think we should look a little further than the returning players. The problem with this team is that they are being coached down. In the call in show today a caller questioned Gailey's decision to kick with fourth and inches against WF and he said if he had it to do over he would go for it but he only had 10 seconds to make the decision
and we had to live with it and move on. Well, excuse me but all coaches work under time constraints and the successful ones are able to make good decisions under fire. I will watch closely to see what CG does with his staff and I can say to you that if CG stays with the current
group it will be evidence to me that we have the wrong man at the helm. If he retains this group That will kill any enthusiasm for the future regardless of how well he recruits.
 
Big Buck actually Gailey said he felt that the defence would hold but in retrospect it is evident they didn't so it was a bad call and he said you have to live with them good or bad also Wes ask if I remember right how long you have to make a decision like that and he said about 10 seconds . Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
 
Fan of Bobby Dodd.. you are right... the way I heard it... Gailey was stating that he would go for it now... knowing what the outcome has already been by kicking...

in my opinion, its tough to second guess calls like that... you never know what would have happened with the alternative... we could have gotten it... or we could have lost a yard... if we had lost a yard, for some reason I dont get the feeling that most would have applauded the call to go for it...the criticism then would have been.. ."why didnt we kick?" or "why did we call that play"...

At the time, I thought the call was the right call.. it was a conservative call, and apparently he had more confidence in the D rather than the O...

and Ahsoisee.. I can agree that the team is a mirror image of its coaching... but I cant help but think we are making progress... I think if you put Godsey and Burns on this team.. we are 6-0.. by a landslide... I like the "positive" chemistry on this team... the season is not over...
 
The season is most assuredly NOT over and as Gailey said, the coaches are still learning the players and vice-versa. Just what you'd expect. Now don't give me the example of Friedgen, etc because those are rare cases. We ARE on the right track. This staff is committed to winning and will do what it takes to do so.
 
Jacketguy

I thought not going for it on that 4th down play was HUGE for a number of reasons, such as the message it sent to the team, the fact that we were tired defensively at that time, we couldn't stop them at all etc etc

And if we hadn't made it, I WOULDN"T have complained about not punting....

Of course, however, I WOULD have complained about the specific call if we didn't make it
grin.gif
..Thats why I get the big bucks as a fan
in the stands
 
Originally posted by Gold Rush:
Jacketguy

I thought not going for it on that 4th down play was HUGE for a number of reasons, such as the message it sent to the team, the fact that we were tired defensively at that time, we couldn't stop them at all etc etc

And if we hadn't made it, I WOULDN"T have complained about not punting....

Of course, however, I WOULD have complained about the specific call if we didn't make it
grin.gif
..Thats why I get the big bucks as a fan
in the stands
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">GoldRush... you make excellent points... and I cant say that I disagree with you... I guess I just tend to be a little more conservative by nature (doesnt mean its always the smartest thing)... but I probably would have punted... thinking that maybe the D could suck it up one more time... and that if we pinned them deep, we would have seen a more conservative play selection on their part... as it turned out... they just continued to run the same thing they had been running all game, and we couldnt hold... I hear you... either way would have been fine with me... if we would have won in the end...
 
Fan Of Bobby Dodd, I will quote ver batim what was said on the call in show as pertaining to my post above.

WAYNE IN LAWRENCEVILLE-"Gents,in WF game, seemed to be one or two or three plays that defined the outcome. One I think, was end of 3rd qtr. on 50 yd. line 4th and short, we chose to punt and WF proceeded to drive and use a lot of time. We all have 20-20 hindsight, we are Sunday morning QB'S
but had we gone for it and made it,it would have possibly changed the game.

CG-I agree. If we also had gone for it and not made it they may have scored quicker. Our D had played pretty good for 5 straight games. We wanted
to punt deep and see our D hold em. I thought it was smarter how our defense was to kick it down there to their 12.
I agree ,I wish I had gone for it now. Who doesn't knowing the outcome? I thought it was the best decision at the time. You got about 10 seconds to make a decision to give your guys a chance to win the game. Not easy but that's what you do. Make those decisions, go for it and make it, you're really smart. You don't and you're dumb. Wayne's right, there are 3 or 4 plays that you change one and the outcome could have been different."

I haven't seen this man carte blanc take responsibility for any goof.Why mention the 10 seconds if he didn't want us to facor it in. A friend of mine who happens to be a Chan apologist
said to me that he had hurt himself with that remark, and added that all coaches have to make snap decisions. Chan has a reputation of being conservative and it is costing us.Another thing I would point out is that in justifying his punting on 4th and inches was that Tech had played good defense the first five games. This was game number six and the end of the third quarter and if he hadn't got the message by then that our defense didn't come to play then he needs some serious help.
 
Big Buck I love the way you overanalyze everything that Chan says to prove whatever point you are trying to make at the time. The fact is if the D had held and we had gotten a short field and scored he would have been a genious. For anyone to say anything different is just stupid. He admits that the decision didn't work and that if he had to do it over again he would go for it. Just what is he supposed to say?

You also said in an earlier post that if he keeps the current staff it will be a sign he is the wrong man for the job because it will kill enthusiasm for the future no matter how well he recruits. Just what does that mean? Whose enthusiasm? If he recruits well (as in you scenario) and the current players are enthusiastic about the staff, just whose enthusiasm are you worried about? Ours? If the team wins we will be fine, if it doesn't we'll have issues. To paraphrase Casey Stengal, "don't think too much, you're hurting the team."
 
Hey Jacketguy

One thing I didn't mention FWIW - on that play (4th) down, I would agree to punt in most "normal" situations...Its just that we were getting killed defensively at that time, and were worn out. I hated that the only solution was to gamble - but it was our best shot at the time...Hate to admit that against Wake
pat.gif
 
4th down and 8 INCHES at midfield in a game where Wake?!?! had completely eaten up our defense and held the ball all day...and we are scared to go for it??? What does that tell you about this staff???? It completely showed lack of faith in our offense and put the pressure on the defense that was already worn out from being on the field all day. Completely changed the momentum of the game.
This is not a second guess.....said so at the game at the time.
Not going for it was the dumbest call that he made since calling time-out and allowing klimpsum time to go for the touchdown right before half-time..a move that ultimately cost us the game.
 
BW, you hit the nail right on the head. LAME!
I booed the sorry decision right on the spot.
mad.gif
mad.gif
mad.gif
mad.gif


As a rule of thumb, always go for it on 4th and one (or two) once you've crossed the 50. This is the best decision 95% of the time IMHO.
 
If the team (not the players) does not improve dramatically the rest of this year, personally, I am looking for Gailey to make some coaching changes.

If the offensive and defensive coaching does not change drastically the remainder of this year, and we keep the same coaching staff, it would make little difference if we had 22 of the top 22 players returning.

"The team is a mirror image of its coaching".

pat.gif
pat.gif
pat.gif
 
What coaching staff are you talking about it ALAGOLD seems to me we are allowing approximately 15 points less a game than last year. The offence is another question. I am convinced Gailey will get things together lets give him time.
 
Originally posted by FAN OF BOBBY DODD:
What coaching staff are you talking about it ALAGOLD seems to me we are allowing approximately 15 points less a game than last year. The offence is another question. I am convinced Gailey will get things together lets give him time.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Actually, we are giving up 16 points per game through six games; Last year through all 13 games we gave up 22 points per game. So this year we are giving up 6 points per game less, but we have not played the meat of our schedule.

Offensively we scored 32 points per game last year through 13 games, and are scoring 27 points per game this year through 6 games. So we are scoring 5 points per games less, but we have not played the meat of our schedule.

Overall, we are giving up less points, but also scoring less points so far this season. We are still scoring about 10-11 points more than we give up, just like last year...but we haven't played the meat of our schedule (FSU, NCState, Ugag).
 
Why don't you guys who think football is all about coaches go find another team for a while? Pull for Maryland if Friedgen is so great. Pull for the Vikings.

Or better yet , go play some computer game where you're the damn coach. Or, if you're going to be a football fan, get over the idea that punting on 4th down is the worst decision ever. Or else shut up and conceal your ignorance.
 
Originally posted by bellyseries:
Why don't you guys who think football is all about coaches go find another team for a while? Pull for Maryland if Friedgen is so great. Pull for the Vikings.

Or better yet , go play some computer game where you're the damn coach. Or, if you're going to be a football fan, get over the idea that punting on 4th down is the worst decision ever. Or else shut up and conceal your ignorance.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Dang Belly - take some Midol ok ?

shocked.gif
 
Back
Top