Updated Rivals Depth Chart (Seniors Removed)

[Architorture23]

2011 at MTSU
2012,2013,2014 at GT
2015 ---> his last season

He redshirted in 2011. Sat out in 2012. Played in 2013 & 2014.

Or does his transfer sit out year count as a year of eligibility? I don't stay up on the transfer rules. Or is it the 5-years-to-play-4 rule?

It doesn't matter either way because a. he will likely graduate and move on next spring and b. he doesn't have a lot of other options for playing QB in an option offense anyways.

 

[cyptomcat]

He redshirted in 2011. Sat out in 2012. Played in 2013 & 2014.

Or does his transfer sit out year count as a year of eligibility? I don't stay up on the transfer rules. Or is it the 5-years-to-play-4 rule?

Yes, you get 5 years to play 4. He sit out one of those 4, but that doesn't matter. 2015 is his last season.

 

[LegendaryGT]

By post #262 in his commit thread, somebody had already suggested moving him to A-back.

EDIT: That's 3 days after his commit.

 

[GTCrew4b]

By post #262 in his commit thread, somebody had already suggested moving him to A-back.

EDIT: That's 3 days after his commit.

can you really blame them? I bet his hands are tiny.

 

[LeonardWood]

can you really blame them? I bet his hands are tiny.

I get this reference

 

[Sidewalk Fan]

Depends on how long you lurked before joining. If your join date is indicative of your exposure to stingtalk, then yes, you absolutely missed those. Much like you would have missed all the people predicting we'd miss out on a bowl game this year.

Ain't it grand that people who have never seen a player save perhaps on a recruiting highlight tape posted on YouTube know more about him, his readiness, and the position that he should play than the professional coaches who recruited and coached him? Guess they were peeved with the move of Days to B back, too. It would never work.

 

[WreckRod]

By post #262 in his commit thread, somebody had already suggested moving him to A-back.

EDIT: That's 3 days after his commit.

Well now. To be fair: we mostly all thought that Vad Lee was going to be what we ended up with in JT. Everything pointed to him being the cure for what ailed us. But, everyone also recognized JT's speed and just wanted to get him on the field. There's nothing dumb about that. Besides all of that, NO one expected JT to come in and set the world on fire. We expected more of a learning curve in his first year starting.

It's the same thing with Byerly to BB. Okay yeah, he's our best backup QB. Got it, that's an important position. But if he can contribute and be the starter at a another position then lets get the absolute best 11 on the field on offense.

It's GT man. We can't afford the luxury of having excellent players riding the pine unless the guys in front of them are really that much better. Imagine this: Leggett wins the starting job and is basically Days 2.0. But Byerly wins the #2 BB job and has the same stats as Laskey from this year. Which one would be better? His same stats at QB from last year or Laskey's BB stats from last year?

 

[LegendaryGT]

Well now. To be fair: we mostly all thought that Vad Lee was going to be what we ended up with in JT. Everything pointed to him being the cure for what ailed us. But, everyone also recognized JT's speed and just wanted to get him on the field. There's nothing dumb about that.

I think some people put way too much emphasis on this 'best 11 on the field' thing. It's important if you've got a starting 11 that are deficient in some way, or if your 'best 11' are way better than your actual starting 11, but that's not the case for us. We are at the stage, and we pretty much have been the entire time we've had JT, where our starting 11 were fine, with hilarious exceptions at OL and QB in 2013, and putting JT out there was not going to improve it much. When you're at that point, it's way more important to build depth.

Besides all of that, NO one expected JT to come in and set the world on fire. We expected more of a learning curve in his first year starting.

This is incredibly wrong, man. JT's commit thread had twice as many posts about how he would blow the doors off the offense than about how he should move to AB. A solid chunk of the board was convinced he was the golden future going into this year too.

It's the same thing with ______ to __. Okay yeah, he's our best backup QB. Got it, that's an important position. But if he can contribute and be the starter at a another position then lets get the absolute best 11 on the field on offense.

It's GT man. We can't afford the luxury of having excellent players riding the pine unless the guys in front of them are really that much better. Imagine this: _______ wins the starting job and is basically ______ 2.0. But ______ wins the #2 __ job and has the same stats as ______ from this year. Which one would be better? His same stats at QB from last year or _______'s __ stats from last year?

Just seemed appropriate to make this into a generic form we can fill out for every backup QB we ever have. We can post it right before/after we post "put in _____!"

Byerly should stay right where he is. He doesn't have any more experience at BB than anyone else on our roster. QB depth is way more important than the very marginal chance this guy is slightly better than one of our first-year starters will be.

 

[Legal Jacket]

I think some people put way too much emphasis on this 'best 11 on the field' thing. It's important if you've got a starting 11 that are deficient in some way, or if your 'best 11' are way better than your actual starting 11, but that's not the case for us. We are at the stage, and we pretty much have been the entire time we've had JT, where our starting 11 were fine, with hilarious exceptions at OL and QB in 2013, and putting JT out there was not going to improve it much. When you're at that point, it's way more important to build depth.



This is incredibly wrong, man. JT's commit thread had twice as many posts about how he would blow the doors off the offense than about how he should move to AB. A solid chunk of the board was convinced he was the golden future going into this year too.

Just seemed appropriate to make this into a generic form we can fill out for every backup QB we ever have. We can post it right before/after we post "put in _____!"

Byerly should stay right where he is. He doesn't have any more experience at BB than anyone else on our roster. QB depth is way more important than the very marginal chance this guy is slightly better than one of our first-year starters will be.

I don't see why it was so weird or incorrect to say that JT should have seen limited time at AB if Vad was the starter. Just as I don't think its that weird or incorrect to say that Byerly should see limited time at BB next year (provided that he's got some skill set our other BBs don't have).

JT very clearly has a great skill set (particularly re speed) running the ball. If Vad had established himself at QB, there's no harm in running a few plays with JT at AB. Hell, teach him two plays - a rocket toss and a counter RT fake that goes the other way. The point is to find a way to get JT the ball in space.

Byerly may well be our most bruising runner next year. He may not be. I don't know. But if the younger BBs have issues holding on to the ball, etc., I could see us using Byerly as a goal line BB. I'm not saying he should play every down there, but Byerly likely has some talents that we could use at BB next year, and which will go to waste unless we get him in the game. No harm in giving him some BB reps when JT or the #3 QB on the depth chart is running plays.

 

[LegendaryGT]

Apples don't ripen on a cherry tree son.

 

[GTLiebs]

The thing is how often have we moved a players position in the spring and have them contribute at that position immediately? How long did it take Days to break into the depth chart at A-back or B-back? Perkins and Snoddy as well who both started at B-back but moved to A. I think we might be assuming that changing positions is easier than it really is. At best, Byerly would have a spring up on the other candidates for 2nd string B-back unless any of them enrolled early, then he would be no more experienced at it and instead we would have a freshman backup QB.

If you're talking about just using him in short yardage situations, why not just do what we have already done and have him be the QB in those situations and run it in.

 

[Architorture23]

Apples don't ripen on a cherry tree son.

And a jack of all trades truly is a master of none.

It is simply too important to have a capable backup QB in this offense, maybe moreso than other offenses. IMO, we can not risk Byerly's injury nor should we be taking any reps at QB away from him to give him reps at another position.

 

[Flywheel]

And a jack of all trades truly is a master of none.

It is simply too important to have a capable backup QB in this offense, maybe moreso than other offenses. IMO, we can not risk Byerly's injury nor should we be taking any reps at QB away from him to give him reps at another position.

Yep. We need a good backup QB more than most teams do, seeing as how ours are expected to tuck and run often. Also, Vad left.

If JT5 had been practicing at AB, we'd now have Byerly starting at QB and JT5 at AB, or at minimum, JT5 would have missed a year of practicing at QB. How do you think that would have turned out for us in 2014? It's not like Perkins, Zenon, Hill, Snoddy, Andrews, and Bostic weren't getting it done. Our perimeter blocking excelled this year.

 

[gtrower]

Yep. We need a good backup QB more than most teams do, seeing as how ours are expected to tuck and run often. Also, Vad left.

If JT5 had been practicing at AB, we'd now have Byerly starting at QB and JT5 at AB, or at minimum, JT5 would have missed a year of practicing at QB. How do you think that would have turned out for us in 2014? It's not like Perkins, Zenon, Hill, Snoddy, Andrews, and Bostic weren't getting it done. Our perimeter blocking excelled this year.

I'd like to see some stats on how many games/drives/snaps QBs in this offense have missed because of injuries sustained in a game. Off the top of my head...

'08: Nesbitt 1/2 games for an ankle, Jaybo 1 game
'09: Nesbitt 1/2 drives for UGA intentionally twisting his ankle
'10: Nesbitt 4/5 games for breaking his arm trying to tackle
'11: none
'12: none
'13: none
'14: none

The only significant missed time was for a play from Nesbitt that was not option-related. I don't remember Tevin, Vad, or JT missing a game for any reason - maybe a play or two here and there? I won't call it a myth, but just another strange misconception that people have about this offense despite never seeing any of them with their own eyes. Add it to the pile I guess...

- QBs take a beating (5'11" 190 JT didn't miss a drive)
- extra prep time neutralizes advantage (49-34)
- OL chop and injure (sometimes cut, rarely injure)
- can't convert 3rd and long (6th in the country)
- can't pass (18 passing TDs)

These are all incessantly repeated by every arm-chair QB out there because they heard it from one of their friends and it fit in with their agenda. Nobody likes to look at results though?

I'm also going to put together some stats to refute the "can't play from behind" argument. We scored points while trailing late in the 4th quarter of GSU, VT, Duke, UNC, UGA, and FSU. The 6-6 for 90 yards and a TD against FSU with 5 minutes left was a thing of beauty.

 

[Sidewalk Fan]

I don't see why it was so weird or incorrect to say that JT should have seen limited time at AB if Vad was the starter. Just as I don't think its that weird or incorrect to say that Byerly should see limited time at BB next year (provided that he's got some skill set our other BBs don't have).

JT very clearly has a great skill set (particularly re speed) running the ball. If Vad had established himself at QB, there's no harm in running a few plays with JT at AB. Hell, teach him two plays - a rocket toss and a counter RT fake that goes the other way. The point is to find a way to get JT the ball in space.

Byerly may well be our most bruising runner next year. He may not be. I don't know. But if the younger BBs have issues holding on to the ball, etc., I could see us using Byerly as a goal line BB. I'm not saying he should play every down there, but Byerly likely has some talents that we could use at BB next year, and which will go to waste unless we get him in the game. No harm in giving him some BB reps when JT or the #3 QB on the depth chart is running plays.

I can still see Byerly helping fill the depleted A back corps. He has enough speed, though not great. But depending what goes down in the spring for B back, that might be in play. As for Thomas, he does have great speed. But what sets him apart, what springs him, is remarkable quickness and footwork. Just watched part of the MS State game again, and he hit gaps that weren't gaps. Great to watch.

 

[GoldenTornado]

I also suggested moving Byerly to B-Back in 2015, depending on the upcoming QB situation.

This is not because I think Byerly is not valuable at QB. I'd love to keep him at QB and I am sure Byerly would be glad to play wherever he can contribute the most.

It's because the B-Back situation looks scary thin to me. We have two scholarship B-Backs in for spring and neither has played a down of college football.

A-Back looks pretty scary thin, too. I think posters are right that we'll likely see Qua Searcy and a DB move to A-Back.

The point about players taking a few years to contribute after moving is a moot point. We don't have that luxury. Look at the scholarship player depth chart. Maybe a walk-on or two will prove out, that happens pretty often, though usually we know about it before they're getting major playing time. Even if that happens, SOMEBODY is gonna have to contribute at A-Back and B-Back with no experience at those positions.

All that said, I personally think that playing backs with little experience is a much better position than playing OL's or QB with little experience. Especially B-Backs -- if they can just hold onto the ball during the mesh, we're probably okay. A-Back blocking is something we'll need, but if Snoddy and Andrews stay healthy I think we will be okay bringing along a couple of new guys in the rotation.

 

[midatlantech]

I can still see Byerly helping fill the depleted A back corps. He has enough speed, though not great. But depending what goes down in the spring for B back, that might be in play. As for Thomas, he does have great speed. But what sets him apart, what springs him, is remarkable quickness and footwork. Just watched part of the MS State game again, and he hit gaps that weren't gaps. Great to watch.

I agree. We have a tough schedule and do not have enough mature horses at the A or B Backs. Byerly is a very good idea for B Back. Or put the #3 QB at A back?

 

[wesleyd21]

AJ Gray will start 4 years for us at safety.

And Kyle Henderson will be a beast for us at DT. He has 6 more offers than Attaochu did and they had the exact same ranking on Rivals.

 

[Flywheel]

These are all incessantly repeated by every arm-chair QB out there because they heard it from one of their friends and it fit in with their agenda. Nobody likes to look at results though?

I don't think it's an agenda-based comment on our offense being dangerous to QB's. Just because a house in the floodplain didn't get flood damage last year doesn't mean it's not at greater flooding risk, and just because we've not had a big QB injury since Nesbitt's arm doesn't mean we're not at greater risk.

Look at a bigger picture than our offense. It's fairly common knowledge that scrambler-type QB's get hurt more as a result of taking more hits. Maybe that's a myth (it might be), but you need to pull more results than just the last 7 years at Tech to prove it, and it's still not a myth about our O in particular.

My second point still stands. Had we moved JT5 to AB to get the "best 11" on the field, he'd have missed a year practicing QB at best. At worst, he'd have left. In between those, we have him at AB and Byerly under center for 2014. None of those are better than what happened.

 

[BuzzCzar]

some of you guys need to be much more realistic; put down your Xbox controllers, it aint a video game

Byerly will stay at QB, should stay at QB and should not waste his practice time trying to play catch-up to becoming an Aback. If anything, he should want to run the Bback spot if he wanted time at a position that he might actually be able to man on Sunday; a quasi-Hback hybrid TE blocking FB sorta guy. But the staff will surely want him to stay at QB, practice his limited snaps at QB and be mentally focused on playing QB