Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we're full @ RB"?

G

GT Ace

Jolly Good Fellow
Joined
Dec 3, 2001
Messages
1,853
Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

Tashard Choice, who signed with Oklahoma, said that is exactly what Coach told him. GT could've given, at least, 5 more scholarships this past Feb(Pena counted against last yr). Possibly even more without taking the last 3-4 that we did. Wouldn't it be nice to have Choice, or Skylar Thornton or both, coming in this Aug with Reshaun Grant? This position is so prone to injury that I just don't see how our staff could've possibly turned down the real good RBs that may have come here with a little recruiting. 'U can never have enough running backs'.
When I wrote that we were messing up in recruiting back in Jan & not giving enough 'ships, not getting enough RBs & not getting enough OL, there was much anguish here on this board. Many hollered "wait til recruiting's over". Well, it's over, & the Spring evaluation is over & the attrition is mostly over.
Can we see clearer now that our staff knew Hollings wasn't coming back, knew Sampson was in trouble & knew Hatch wasn't returning to RB form?
Can we see clearer now that they knew McHargue & DLs were in trouble?
This staff really needs to get their recruiting priorities down pat & get more & better players in here or we'll be just like WF very soon. They got a few real good ones, but we DID NOT GET ENOUGH. Gailey's publicly stated philosophy of "if u get 20 recruits & don't lose any of them, then u don't need to recruit more than 20" DOES NOT WORK. Today's players leave if they don't like something, along with the academic attrition & injuries..
Obviously, I still have a huge question as to whether this staff can recruit players to compete for more than a Humanitarian Bowl trip. I truly pray that this staff can learn to recruit 20 really good players/yr rather than have to go thru another 3-4 yr rebuilding agenda under a new coach.
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

Ace.. In February, I spent an hour on the phone with one of our coaches discussing the Tashard Choice situation... all I can say is that things are not always what they seem... and that sometimes the reasons for decisions cant be printed ... after my discussion I was satisfied in the way that they handled the situation.
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

While you were on the phone with the assistant coach did you ask him why we are only giving out 20 'ships considering all the impending academic casulaties?... Based on this, did you ask him if they are firing up the smoke & polishing up the mirrors?....
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

BB: I could never understand why anyone would hold scholarships, other then you don't know how to recruit! For all the scenarios that can arise in college football with SAs - MORE is better the less all the time!
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

GT Ace, your assumptions cannot be justified. No coach anywhere, not even on the moon, would have withheld scholarship offers from any viable recruit if they had any idea we would need them later.

So, this is just one more item that actually confirms the statements that Gailey did not know the players were going to fail. If so, there is no doubt, he would have recruited more replacements.

A coach's tenure depends on his ability to recruit and retain players. It would be beyond normal reasoning to believe a coach would purposely fail to recruit players that he thought would be needed this year.

In my opinion, those that think he purposely let the recruits get away if he knew the other players were failing gives me the obvious impression they are far short on reasoning ability for this issue.

rolleyes.gif
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

Originally posted by BeeBad:
While you were on the phone with the assistant coach did you ask him why we are only giving out 20 'ships considering all the impending academic casulaties?... Based on this, did you ask him if they are firing up the smoke & polishing up the mirrors?....
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I was satisfied with the information I recieved during my call.. why dont you give one of them a call and ask them the questions you posed above..I am sure they will take the time to answer you...
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

Jacketguy, the question posed does not have to be Choice or Thornton or anyone specific. The ? posed is why the heck we didn't get another good RB coming in with Grant, who's coming off a dislocated ankle, btw, & didn't play the last 1/3 of the HS season.
The public statement was made by Choice & perhaps Gailey was blowing smoke (or lying) to him, I dunno, but it brings up the question of, if not Choice or Thornton or____, then why not someone else? Could Coach G just plain out not get another div1a RB? If not, why not? The following statements were/are saying that the GT staff had better do a much better job of getting & keeping div1a RBs, imo, or we will be WF VERY soon.
The question posed reveals that the coaches 'knew' more about the impending dearth @ RB than they want the fans to realize. The ? posed states that something could've been done during recruiting, but wasn't. Between the lines, the question asks 'does the staff realize how quickly we could be in deep doo-doo with an injury or 2 @ RB, which usually happens in a season?
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

Originally posted by GT Ace:
the GT staff had better do a much better job of getting & keeping div1a RBs, imo, or we will be WF VERY soon.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Hate to remind you but WF beat us last year, at our place....
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

So why don't you take Jacketguy's advice and call up and ask these questions?

Oh, I'm sorry, they're rhetorical questions, designed to show how much more you know about football than Chan Gailey.

My bad.
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

Ace, I understand your original question, and the questions about why we would hold scholarships if we had more available. But I don't understand your comments about the coaching staff knowing about the pending loss of RBs. Are you saying they knew but didn't do anything? That's what I think you are saying. If so, I'd like to understand your logic for arriving at that conclusion. Based on everything I've seen and heard, and the simple logic that if you knew you were losing players you would try to replace them, leads me to think they didn't know we had academic difficulties to contend with.
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

Ahso, I did NOT say that Coach G withheld 'ship offers from viable candidates. He may have offered PLENTY, but he only got Grant, coming off injury. He did tell Choice 'no thanks', for whatever reason.
Of course, neither Gailey nor anyone, KNEW who or how many of the players in serious jeopardy of failing out of GT would actually do so. He KNEW Hollings was out. He KNEW Sampson was on probation & in jeopardy. He KNEW the others were too. Who, if any, of those in serious trouble would pull enough grades to not get dropped was up in the air.
The question is, why take that kind of dicey chance & not get other good RBs in here? Hey, a miracle could've happened & Sampson stays eligible, so we then have 1 xtra RB for a yr, which we'll probably need anyway, as we sure needed everybody last yr.
Gailey CERTAINLY did know many players were on probation & could be OUT of GT by the end of Spring. That's what probation means. He may not have let players or recruits get away 'on purpose'. He may have gotten absolutely every player that wants to play for him & is qualified.
All I'm saying is a much better job of anticipating what our football team needs & a much better job of recruiting needs to be done. Selah.
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

Ramblingwise, & still finished 7th in the ACC. 7th!
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

NCJacket, I'm not saying they didn't try to get more RBs or more players in general. I'm saying saying didn't DO IT. They may have tried everything they knew to get it done. They may have offered 25 RBs. They may have gotten dumped by some who they thought would come here. They may have crapped in their mess kit.
My answer to Ahso, above, may shed some light as to my reasoning of why the coaches knew RBs were in trouble. To tell me that Gailey didn't know Hollings was out when TH wasn't in school for Spring semester is asking me to believe that Coach G is much dumber than I believe he is. To ask me to believe that he didn't know Sampson, et al, were on probation is asking me to believe that Coach G is much dumber than I believe he is. To ask me to believe that Gailey doesn't know what probation means, that these players could be out of Tech at the end of Spring, is asking me to believe Coach G is much, much dumber than I believe he is.

I personally believe that Gailey & staff didn't get the job done coaching (good try tho), recruiting (a hop-scotch, hodge-podge mess) or academically (a total disaster).
I AM asking for improvment in all phases in the next yr or I think we should have someone new for Spring Practice '04.
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

GT Ace, I say you are making assumptions, because you do not know that Gailey had any idea Samson, Hollings, and the other players were in jeopardy.

I have seen no proof anywhere that Gailey knew these players grades were in jeopardy. He recruited basically up through the end of January and just found out the players had failed.

There is every possiblility he did not know the seriousness of their grades. If he had, I am sure he would have gone after other backs.

Father Time
wink.gif
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

It's cool, my man PJ is gonna pick up the slack this year. He lived across the hall from one of my friends last year, and he was talkin trash about winning the starting job before any of the academic stuff came down. I like his attitude and the guy plays hard. Huge game against UVA, people seem to forget about him. I realize we're thin at the position, but I'm just trying to put some positive energy into this discussion.
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

Originally posted by GTMoney:
It's cool, my man PJ is gonna pick up the slack this year. He lived across the hall from one of my friends last year, and he was talkin trash about winning the starting job before any of the academic stuff came down. I like his attitude and the guy plays hard. Huge game against UVA, people seem to forget about him. I realize we're thin at the position, but I'm just trying to put some positive energy into this discussion.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Very good point on our man PJ's attitude. It means a great deal to me.

We've all talked a lot about RB situation and not giving a lot of props to someone that has produced.

I remember in a practice this spring where he was knocked down hard by Hargrove to end the practice. Big hit in open field, punishing. PJ was fired up because of the intensity of the play. He's there to win.

PJ is a guy that gives it his all every down. When it's time to go to war, I want PJ on my side. Wouldn't be surprised to see him be out #1 TB come fall. Others will have something to say about that which is good.

Go JACKETS!
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

Originally posted by ahsoisee:
GT Ace, I say you are making assumptions, because you do not know that Gailey had any idea Samson, Hollings, and the other players were in jeopardy.

I have seen no proof anywhere that Gailey knew these players grades were in jeopardy. He recruited basically up through the end of January and just found out the players had failed.

There is every possiblility he did not know the seriousness of their grades. If he had, I am sure he would have gone after other backs.
QUOTE]

ahsoisee.. either way it is an indictment of gailey.. either he did know the players were in jeopardy & didn't allow for it in his planning OR he doesn't have a good enough relationship with his players that they felt like they could go to him when they were in academic trouble for support & guidance.. I'm sure you will agree that good coaches have the kind of rapport with their players that the players will be straightforward & honest when there is a problem... marginal/bad coaches do not...
Click to expand...
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

I'm not sure I buy your premise BeeBad. Somehow I can't see too many players going to O'Leary's office to confide in him about their academic troubles. In fact, I thought he used spies to make sure they were in class and doing what they were supposed to. George seems to have relied on a very active academic support group to make sure things were going well and report problems to him. Not on players coming in on their own volition. Besides, he had recruited most of the guys we're now talking about so it would be natural for him to have a better relationship than somebody who has only been here a year.

My head is starting to spin a little. Ace says Gailey is too smart not to know guys were on the way out due to academics. But I think we're now saying he's too dumb to realize that meant he needed more RBs? To me its simple. He didn't know, or didn't know how serious the problems were. If he knew he needed more players he would have offered more.

Why he didn't know is another story. Here's my take. You can't blame the guy for not knowing and also blame him for knowing and not doing anything about it. PICK ONE AND STICK WITH IT. E
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

Originally posted by BeeBad:
Originally posted by ahsoisee:
GT Ace, I say you are making assumptions, because you do not know that Gailey had any idea Samson, Hollings, and the other players were in jeopardy.

I have seen no proof anywhere that Gailey knew these players grades were in jeopardy. He recruited basically up through the end of January and just found out the players had failed.

There is every possiblility he did not know the seriousness of their grades. If he had, I am sure he would have gone after other backs.
QUOTE]

ahsoisee.. either way it is an indictment of gailey.. either he did know the players were in jeopardy & didn't allow for it in his planning OR he doesn't have a good enough relationship with his players that they felt like they could go to him when they were in academic trouble for support & guidance.. I'm sure you will agree that good coaches have the kind of rapport with their players that the players will be straightforward & honest when there is a problem... marginal/bad coaches do not...
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">BB: Again, you're right on target - coaches knowing their players and I mean really knowing.
Darn, from Pee Wee League football - your coach is your mentor, teacher, father figure, consultant, overseer. What rapport? Sounds to me like there needs to be an "inservice" on how to connect with your players on ALL LEVELS!

I'm really sick of hearing something was taken away from the coaching staff - academics IS GOING to drive the success of your team - if the kids can't play, failure to succeed looms very big for your team! You have to know what the driving force is outside of x's, o's.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Reckon Coach G would like to rethink "we\'re full @ RB"?

BeeBad, I will answer your post because you have reasoned sensibly in your last post here.

Yes, the coaches should have good relationships with their players, and the players should go to their coach with such problems.

We do have some indication there was a morale problem and some of the players laid down in some of the games. It could be explained just as well, if some of the players were sympathetic to Mac not getting the job along with O'Brien and his attitudes, and were opposed to Gailey being here.

The problem could have been one of disgruntled players, a disgruntled O'Brien, and possibly intrusion with some players from disgruntled left-over insiders from the last regime.

The problem could have been an impossible one for Gailey to solve at the time. That is the reason a coach is generally given 4-5 years to get his own players and staff in place.

When players have only one person in charge and their loyalties are not split, then the players have no choice but to go to the top man.

So, we are in a position where you nor I have all the answers. I guess, you guess, and that is all we have at this time, opinions.

This year will be good indicator of the real problems with the team. If it is a good year, then we can believe part of the problems have gone with O'Brien and some of the seniors.

If it is a bad year, then we can assume the problem lies with Gailey and his ability or inability to solve them.

It really makes little difference at this particular time. Gailey will be the coach this year, and his performance this year will determine his tenure here.

smile.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top