Problem is NOT the offense

"Consecrate"--probably my "Freudian slip"-obviously meant concentrate--BUT--it is applicable since i believe that playing D is something you must really WANT to do, kinda like a "calling"--LOL.
 
GTplusCPJequalsSuccess said:
Do you think the offense takes away from our defense in terms of preparing them for 100% of the opponents on our schedule? That’s the question. The offense is fine but at what cost with how unconventional it is?
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. That's just a conveniently poor excuse that is used in lieu of having a valid explanation for lack of athleticism and depth on that side of the LOS. All things being equal, coaching can only take a group so far. You have to have hosses on the defensive side of the ball. Why GT doesn't get "those" guys has been hashed and rehashed hundreds of times. The old cliche "defense wins football games" is more fact than fiction.
 
Interestingly enough, defensive recruiting has been better than offensive, as far as star ratings are concerned, for most of PJ's tenure.
 
Architorture23 said:
Interestingly enough, defensive recruiting has been better than offensive, as far as star ratings are concerned, for most of PJ's tenure.
Click to expand...
IF this is true then the evaluation process is seriously flawed or the problem is COACHING.
 
Obviously the man in charge--OR--the self-righteous evaluation services.
 
I'm not throwing in the towel over the ST and D over one game.

If we have the same result against Pitt, however....
 
After thinking about the OP for a minute, I would point out something that, it seems to me, has been happening a lot more often in recent seasons.

Late in games where we find ourselves down by less than 7 with the ball and with 5 minutes or less left on the clock, it used to be that I just assumed we were going to win (the early Johnson years). But the last three seasons, it seems that scenario almost never results in the needed score to retake the lead at the very end of the game. Just like USF - seems our opponents play a high-risk defense which lately always seems to work on what is supposed to be our game-winning drive.

Has anyone else noticed this? It would take a good bit of time to pour over game charts over the last three years to see how many times we had the opportunity for a game winning drive but fell short. But it seems to happen a lot more than it used to.
 
OP is exactly right: PJ's offense ain't the problem.

Responders are exactly right: PJ is responsible for the defense too.

If we can't field a successful defense through no fault of PJ, we are going to be in really bad shape if we change coaches. If another coach can get us better at defense without losing too much on offense, a change may be warranted.
 
BEEFENSE said:
IF this is true then the evaluation process is seriously flawed or the problem is COACHING.
Click to expand...
All rivals ratings*
2009 - 1 ****, JC Lanier, a DT. 3 **, all also on defense but one of them was Julian Burnett

2010 - 5 ****, 4 of them were on D, only BJ Bostic on O. Of the 4 on D, only Lou Young ever really contributed. (Anthony Williams, Denzel McCoy, Ryan Ayers) There were 2 **, one was Tony Zenon and one was a kicker (Justin Moore.)

2011 - 1 ****, Jabari Hunt Days, a LB. There were 4 **, 3 on defense including Jimmie Kitchen who contributed. Zach Laskey, Sean Tobin, and Kyle Travis the others.

2012 - 2 ****, Francis Kallon on D and Justin Thomas on O. 2 **'s, a punter and Adam Gotsis.

2013 - 0 ****, 4 **, 2 on O (Messick and a QB named Ty Griffin) and 2 on D (PJ Davis and Corey Griffin, both starters.)

2014 - 1 ****, Step Durham, a CB. 3 **, Jake Whitely (OL), Clinton Lynch (AB), and Shaun Kagawa (DB.) All contributed with CL being a standout.

2015 - Nothing but ***.

2016 - 1 ****, Jordan Woods, a DE. There were 7 **:
Des Branch - DE, Jakob Brashear - LB, Ajani Kerr - DB, Jalen Camp - WR, Jair Hawkins Anderson - WR, Jahaziel Lee - OL, Kenny Cooper - OL

2017 - 4 ****, all on D. (Kaleb Oliver, both Swillings, and Gentry Bonds.) 5 **, a kicker, a WR, an OL, a DT, and a DB.

2018 - 3 ****, Dingle (DT), Jaylon King (DB), and Graham (QB.) 3 **, a DB, a DT, and an OL.

So in that time, we have signed 18 **** athletes, 15 of whom played defense.
We have signed 33 ** athletes. 17 were/are on defense, 13 on offense, and 3 kickers.

Craziest thing is that our ** athletes have contributed more than our **** as a whole.
 
00Burdell said:
After thinking about the OP for a minute, I would point out something that, it seems to me, has been happening a lot more often in recent seasons.

Late in games where we find ourselves down by less than 7 with the ball and with 5 minutes or less left on the clock, it used to be that I just assumed we were going to win (the early Johnson years). But the last three seasons, it seems that scenario almost never results in the needed score to retake the lead at the very end of the game. Just like USF - seems our opponents play a high-risk defense which lately always seems to work on what is supposed to be our game-winning drive.

Has anyone else noticed this? It would take a good bit of time to pour over game charts over the last three years to see how many times we had the opportunity for a game winning drive but fell short. But it seems to happen a lot more than it used to.
Click to expand...

Yes, our offense repeatedly folds under pressure in the scenarios you described the past 2 years. I think it's less due to our opponents playing a 'high-risk D' and more due to our opponents stopping our base stuff combined with untimely penalties by our OL. With the exception of the Fumble drive in the 4th qtr and the meaningless one at the end when we were down 10 pts with no time remaining, we really didn't move the ball when we absolutely needed to keep our dead D off the field and either protect or retake the lead.
 
Architorture23 said:
Craziest thing is that our ** athletes have contributed more than our **** as a whole.
Click to expand...
Internalizing this would go a long way to helping the people on this board realize that the recruiting rankings get us way more upset than they should.

I for one do *not* believe that recruiting at GT is *so* hard that its unreasonable to think we can compete against the big boys.
 
Architorture23 said:
Craziest thing is that our ** athletes have contributed more than our **** as a whole.
Click to expand...

I think all that proves is that star ratings are a bunch of BS for the most part. Kallon never contributed at the 4* level that's for sure.

Unless your whole roster is made up of 5* anyway.
 
Offense just as big a problem as defense or special teams as long as it turns ball over near crucial TDs & fails in clutch game ending drives.
 
coit said:
I think all that proves is that star ratings are a bunch of BS for the most part. Kallon never contributed at the 4* level that's for sure.

Unless your whole roster is made up of 5* anyway.
Click to expand...
I don't think they'er a bunch of BS. There are several issues:
- players play at different classifications and not necessarily against each other so you rarely get head-to-head comparisons
- puberty hits at different times and even after puberty players grow at different times/rates
- you cannot tell how players are going to adjust to the game at the next level. Used to being the biggest, strongest and fastest on the field, many of these guys have never really been physically tested. I once heard Paul say that you can often tell within 3 practices after they put on pads whether a player will be able to play or contribute in their first year. Once they get hit in the teeth a couple of good times, some guys will shrink away from contact while another player gets mad and goes back for more. The ones who go back for more have a shot.

We have an advantage in baseball and basketball that football doesn't have. Basketball has AAU to let the best of the best compete against each other to make it a little bit easier to evaluate them. In baseball, travel ball has done the same and with the Perfect Game tournaments over the past 6 or 7 years, it's now even more frequent that we see these youngsters competing against each other for evaluations. Football doesn't really have that and to further complicate things, these guys are so scattered out that it's not possible for a single analyst to watch games in person and see every player. So you have one guy watching this region and another watching a different region in something that's already subjective.

Not saying they get it right all the time or even most of the time. But it's a hell of a difficult task.
 
BEEFENSE said:
Been watching Tech 'ball for 65+ years in person and "otherwise" I don't post much on here but monitor all the time. I don't bash the jackets win or lose--BUT--gotta say this. Tech's problem is NOT CPJ's offense (just check the numbers) like the offense or not , the problem is and has been the D. I hate to say it but you must have a D that can give at least 2-3 stops in a game when it is crunch time AND we have been "lacking" this game element for quite sometime. Sad to say. You can't simply outscore the opponent all the time.--(be gentle with rebukes-just my observation).
Click to expand...
Fify.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top