Potential Of The Tech Team

ahsoisee

Dodd-Like
Joined
Nov 19, 2001
Messages
5,925
I just read an interesting article from the AJC archives. Gailey made this comment, "we did not play up to our potential in the first game". Since we were playing vanilla and not using our entire arsenal on offense or defense, what does this mean to the posters on Stingtalk?

Comments?
wink.gif
 
It probably means we were a sloppy penalized team that blew coverages that normally would have been taken advantage of by a good team. Also missed a few assignments on the option game.

I love our team to death...but our secondary play did not look great against a team that didn't pass the ball much nor had the talent at QB and WR to really challenge us.

To compete with the better teams, we still need to be sharper in the 2ndry on D.
 
I think the more interesting question is what does this mean for fans like beeware? Beeware has stated repeatedly that his standard for this team is 10 wins. Since he did not hold O'leary to the same standard the year before, is he trying to tell us that he thinks that Gailey should be held to a higher standard?
wink.gif
All joking aside, I wish that people would realize, that you can be grateful for what O'leary did, appreciate what he did for the program and the state he left it in (from a talent standpoint) and want Gailey to succeed as well. I doubt seriously any GT fan worth his salt would not be thankful that O'leary left a pretty full cupboard for the new coach to work with.

As for the team's potential, I think that we will know in the next couple of weeks. Clemson played better than I thought in the Ugag game and will be very difficult to beat at Clemson. We have the talent to win, but we must execute as well as we did against Vandy, which will be tough to do. The BYU game concerns me since they also have a high powered passing attack; to me the real unknown on our team still lies in the secondary. There are some good athletes there, but they must play more discplined than they have in recent years.

Not to be a wet blanket, but I think that 8-4 is still realistic given that we play a lot of swing games on the road and have a small number of proven players on the o-line.
 
It makes me think he is referring to penalties and lack of execution on JUST A FEW plays. I wouldn't call CG a perfectionist in the negative sense of the word (i.e. anal-retentive,) but I think he pursues perfection and is not happy with less.

He intends to win championships and knows what it takes to win them.
 
Back
Top