Our Football Program - an unbiased review

Gold Rush

Flats Noob
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Messages
776
Good:

1. I believe Gailey and co. COULD be very good recruiters. I base this on getting Ball, who had as good of a "first game" as almost any QB I have seen inhis first game, and that doesn't include being a true frosh. We're FINALLY recruiting big DL players, and from what I have seen, they have the ability to find "hidden gems" which Tech has to be able to do.

2. Against all odds, losing 10 players to academics, and then the injuries etc., we lost to BYU for one reason - TURNOVERS.

3. The players seemed to give 100% against BYU - I was relieved and happy to see that.

4. With a Frosh QB, I can't imagine a game plan much different than the one we had.

5. With the 10 player losses, did we REALLY expect to go 11-1 this year ?

BAD:

1. Questionable game day decisions - strategy etc. (see below posts)

2. Lack of player substitutions - why no Bilbo ? (it seems that we could have lobbed a pass his way in the red zone - using his height ...Couldn't we have had 1-2 plays to Bilbo ?????). Chris Woods ?

Did we substitute much on the DL ?

3. Lack of depth was VERY apparent. Nothing we can do this year, BUT PLEASE CHAN - RECRUIT MORE PLAYERS !!!! We have MANY SLOTS TO FILL, LETS DO IT !!!!

4. I thought we could have had a LITTLE more variety in the game plan.

5. We seem to run the SAME play over and over, with no different motion/adjustments/formations to hide the same play over and over.....I don't get this......

UGLY:

1. Turnovers...What can be done ?? Its starting to grow as a trend ---> Anybody know how many TOs we have had in the last 3 games ? I can't imagine how many....

2. Turnovers (see above).

3. Strength - we still seem less strong than we could be, but that may be because we are so small on the DL.

Overall : For me, the verdict is still out on CG.

Frankly, I don't care who is coaching as long as we are winning...But what perplexes me, is this.
We all know that we have an amazing lack of depth - like being on probation....Then BYU does exactly what we expected (tiring out the defense with 2 long drives - we run out of gas (predictably) and everybody seems surprised (?????) abd disappointed...I don't get it.

I thought with ALL THINGS CONSIDERED - Thursday night was about as good as I would have expected. With the cards we have been dealt - I don't think Bill Parcells would have a winning season this year.

Didn't most folks agree before the season - that this year we'd be more focused in team attitude, work, and enthusiasm ? I thought that was all very good Thur.

Still - again - to me, the verdict is still out.

I also think we're going to pull 1-2 big upsets this year...we'll see......
 
Many of these complaints are the same that I use to hear about O'leary

O'leary refused to play Gregory (and just kept Burns in)

I believe the substitution issues are the coach has "faith" in one player over another. Bilbo is probably slow on learning the routes are staying on blocks etc.

The reality the Offense was on the field so few minutes fatigue was never an issue. Also we were trying to win and this is not some game we could just experiment w/ different players. I believe CG put the players on the field that he felt gave him the best opportunity to win the game and protect his freshman qb.
 
Law

I see your points, but I can't believe that even in 7-8 practices, that Bilbo couldn't have learned a FEW routes down in the red zone (?). Its not that complicated, and I believe that he could use his athleticism to get up high and grab a TD pass.

Also, I didn't recall seeing many substitutions on the DL ( I could be wrong here, as TV doesn't focus on the DL as much as I'd like). Did Billy play much?

Also thought this game would have been good to get Woods some snaps, if nothing else, to get some game experience. What about Hatch ? It would have been nice to see him in there to see how he could respond in a game situation.

Its not really a criticism, I'm just perplexed
 
Back
Top