The man doesn't sleep

savbandjacket said:
CPJ was one of the great playcallers of all time and his offense was an engineer’s wet dream. We have a lot of fans that seem to not care so much whether we win or lose but rather cared about being entertained by watching CPJ tinker with his creation. That’s probably the source of a lot of butthurt.
Click to expand...

People defending CPJ here has nothing to do with geeking out over the offense. It has to do with people criticizing with nonsense like "he recruited whenever he felt like it". What a dumb statement. CPJ's recruiting was right in line with our average and he said so himself. That means he isn't great but doesn't suck either.

savbandjacket said:
CGC’s strength seems to be recruiting. I highly doubt that his tenure will ever be known for masterful playcalling like CPJ’s. He may balance that out by bringing in a lot higher quality of athlete and having a system that gets it done. Remains to be seen.
Click to expand...

I agree and hope he can get the right pieces. One person isn't an expert at everything. Saban didn't have much of an offense until Tua showed up.
 
savbandjacket said:
Look what he ran at Temple. Not pro style. However, it does allow WRs to run actual route trees, lineman to pass and run block (not ankle dive), and RBs to run on vision rather than hitting a predetermined gap immediate after the snap.
Click to expand...

Look.

You and I have been alive about the same amount of time. We've both seen a lot. And one thing you and I have never seen, is a GT team beat UGA without the triple option in the playbook.

If we aren't creative somehow, this thing doesn't work. I'm not saying we have to run flexbone. But we aren't going to get anywhere running the same crap everyone else runs.
 
beej67 said:
Look.

You and I have been alive about the same amount of time. We've both seen a lot. And one thing you and I have never seen, is a GT team beat UGA without the triple option in the playbook.

If we aren't creative somehow, this thing doesn't work. I'm not saying we have to run flexbone. But we aren't going to get anywhere running the same crap everyone else runs.
Click to expand...

I’ve said multiple times that I prefer a Friedgen type offense that incorporates pro set, option, 3 receiver sets, etc. I don’t see any reason why Tech can’t run something more like that or an Urban Meyer/Dan Mullen style offense and be successful. I’ve never said to flush the option completely - I have gotten my fill of an offense in which it (it being the flexbone that everyone thinks is a 3O offense) is the centerpiece with no consideration of a viable passing game.
 
savbandjacket said:
I’ve said multiple times that I prefer a Friedgen type offense that incorporates pro set, option, 3 receiver sets, etc. I don’t see any reason why Tech can’t run something more like that or an Urban Meyer/Dan Mullen style offense and be successful. I’ve never said to flush the option completely - I have gotten my fill of an offense in which it (it being the flexbone that everyone thinks is a 3O offense) is the centerpiece with no consideration of a viable passing game.
Click to expand...
I think everyone was sick of when we were behind in a game knowing that we would essentially throw desperation passes that looked like they were drawn up in the dirt before the play. Our QB's were woefully inaccurate. TQM the most inaccurate QB we have likely ever had at GT. If we were down 6 with 2 minutes to go and 1 or 2 timeouts (because one timeout would be used on the fake 4th down earlier in the 3rd quarter), we just looked incapable of running a two minute offense. We'd act like we had all day and, instead of the strategy that helped Miami beat us in 2017, we would throw super low percentage home run passes and hope for the best. Sometimes, you gotta take the middle of the field and hurry your ass to the line and get off another play. It was the most frustrating thing the last several years.

JT5 was a baller and made us look good throwing to Smelter. Been terrible since
 
So how much credit does TStan get for the recruiting improvement (assuming it pans out)? CGC rightly gets a lot of credit; but how effective or less effective would his efforts be if MBob was still here, our recruiting staff was still nearly non-existent and we were in the old facilities wearing Russell?
 
I prefer the kind of offense that helps Tech win. Beyond that I'm not particularly interested in style points. Paul Johnson's spread option was pretty damn good and was really fun to watch when it was clicking.
 
GSOJacket said:
I prefer the kind of offense that helps Tech win. Beyond that I'm not particularly interested in style points. Paul Johnson's spread option was pretty damn good and was really fun to watch when it was clicking.
Click to expand...
No doubt that it was fun to watch when it was clicking. It was also immensely frustrating when not clicking or when there are 2 minutes left and we are down a score.

The defenses throughout his tenure were miserable to watch.
 
savbandjacket said:
Look what he ran at Temple. Not pro style. However, it does allow WRs to run actual route trees, lineman to pass and run block (not ankle dive), and RBs to run on vision rather than hitting a predetermined gap immediate after the snap.
Click to expand...

Since we are on the subject and the subject seems to keep coming up, how many offensive players at Temple did he put in the pros? (include projected draft picks for this year)
 
aeromech said:
So how much credit does TStan get for the recruiting improvement (assuming it pans out)? CGC rightly gets a lot of credit; but how effective or less effective would his efforts be if MBob was still here, our recruiting staff was still nearly non-existent and we were in the old facilities wearing Russell?
Click to expand...
Wearing Russell was an embarrassment.

On a related note. UA is getting killed by Nike and Adidas. I wonder at what point one of the two makes a move on UA. Should I buy UA? The stock has been flat. Adidas is making moves that will likely take more UA teams away in CFB. There is more Adidas in HS football. I think Adidas wants to compete with Nike directly and UA could be an excellent addition. Nike had $34 Billion inn revenue 2017. Adidas had $21 Billion, UA $5 Billion.

Adidas revenue grew 15% year over year from 2016 to 2017 and looks strong so far for growth to 2018
UA revenue grew 3% from 2016 to 2017 and is pretty flat for 2018
Nike revenue grew 6% from 2016 to 2017.

It is interesting to watch Adidas start to pick off colleges and high schools after being more of an overseas soccer company, at least in perception, before. It will be interesting to watch the Nike vs Adidas battle and see if UA can survive. I have a feeling UA has lost its luster with folks. It used to be the cool brand to wear, now it seems to be getting more Walmart-like, at least in my perception.
 
JJacket said:
Wearing Russell was an embarrassment.

On a related note. UA is getting killed by Nike and Adidas. I wonder at what point one of the two makes a move on UA. Should I buy UA? The stock has been flat. Adidas is making moves that will likely take more UA teams away in CFB. There is more Adidas in HS football. I think Adidas wants to compete with Nike directly and UA could be an excellent addition. Nike had $34 Billion inn revenue 2017. Adidas had $21 Billion, UA $5 Billion.

Adidas revenue grew 15% year over year from 2016 to 2017 and looks strong so far for growth to 2018
UA revenue grew 3% from 2016 to 2017 and is pretty flat for 2018
Nike revenue grew 6% from 2016 to 2017.

It is interesting to watch Adidas start to pick off colleges and high schools after being more of an overseas soccer company, at least in perception, before. It will be interesting to watch the Nike vs Adidas battle and see if UA can survive. I have a feeling UA has lost its luster with folks. It used to be the cool brand to wear, now it seems to be getting more Walmart-like, at least in my perception.
Click to expand...

I think the question would be, what does UA have that Adidas can't get without buying UA out? UA's shtick was high tech compression gear; but now everyone has a version of it so it is no longer a niche market they dominate. So as Adidas, do you attempt to buy them out or simply keep chipping away at their market share.
 
aeromech said:
I think the question would be, what does UA have that Adidas can't get without buying UA out? UA's shtick was high tech compression gear; but now everyone has a version of it so it is no longer a niche market they dominate. So as Adidas, do you attempt to buy them out or simply keep chipping away at their market share.
Click to expand...
or chip away until they have to sell or UA can just go all Russell and embrace Walmart and Target
 
savbandjacket said:
Reggie was a better QB than TQM
Click to expand...
Yes he was. I think folks like to forget what shape we were in just before Reggie arrived. He nearly got beaten to death against Miami on their first trip to BDS and still battled all game long.

And yes, he threw it away on a 4th down and 20 against UGAg because he had a moron coaching staff that had him spike it on third down. I seriously doubt, if he threw the ball away, that we were going to convert the ööööing play anyway. We had plenty of opportunities to win that ööööing game. Plays could have been made by several players. Go back and watch the ööööing game if you don't believe me.

The is no way in hell TQM would have beaten Auburn 2X and #3 Miami as starting QB. I also don't think TQM would have punched the UGAg assistant on the sidelines. Maybe even hugged him and took a quick picture
 
aeromech said:
So how much credit does TStan get for the recruiting improvement (assuming it pans out)? CGC rightly gets a lot of credit; but how effective or less effective would his efforts be if MBob was still here, our recruiting staff was still nearly non-existent and we were in the old facilities wearing Russell?
Click to expand...

I dunno. Who was MBob? Was he ever here?
 
JJacket said:
Wearing Russell was an embarrassment.

On a related note. UA is getting killed by Nike and Adidas. I wonder at what point one of the two makes a move on UA. Should I buy UA? The stock has been flat. Adidas is making moves that will likely take more UA teams away in CFB. There is more Adidas in HS football. I think Adidas wants to compete with Nike directly and UA could be an excellent addition. Nike had $34 Billion inn revenue 2017. Adidas had $21 Billion, UA $5 Billion.

Adidas revenue grew 15% year over year from 2016 to 2017 and looks strong so far for growth to 2018
UA revenue grew 3% from 2016 to 2017 and is pretty flat for 2018
Nike revenue grew 6% from 2016 to 2017.

It is interesting to watch Adidas start to pick off colleges and high schools after being more of an overseas soccer company, at least in perception, before. It will be interesting to watch the Nike vs Adidas battle and see if UA can survive. I have a feeling UA has lost its luster with folks. It used to be the cool brand to wear, now it seems to be getting more Walmart-like, at least in my perception.
Click to expand...

UA has had major issues for sure BUT it is still the preferred brand with baseball players and many football players. Their clothes and gloves are preferred my most athletes. Footwear is where they have been getting killed. They have their first professional contract as they are the official provider for MLB now. Also, they are growing much more rapidly in Asia than anyone. I think UA could make a turn around; they actually had made one the last year but then at their investor meeting this past week, they scared everyone again. I personally think Adidas finishes 3rd in the US market but continues to be #1 in Europe while Nike and UA fight over Asia/Africa/etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top