Vote of confidence poll requested for Gailey....

bobby dodds ghost

Damn Good Rat
Joined
Jun 5, 2002
Messages
1,492
I think it would be interesting to survey all STINGTALK members about our head coach . A formal poll in the next 24 hours would be both timely and informative.
.
.
.
BOO
 
I have to agree. I can only thank GOd my son made a travel hockey team and I do not have to waste my time watching a coach that was a miserable failure as a HC on the professional level. We need HELP and we need it fast!
 
Me thinks Beeware is, at least, 1/2 right. Gailey bad choice, but don't know whether ones he wanted would be any better. This hire did nothing to excite me from the get-go, and I am far from excited tonight. FWIW.
rolleyes.gif
rolleyes.gif
rolleyes.gif
 
I agree bizzybee. I have never gotten a good read on Gailey. He wasn't on ANYONE'S radar screen as a potential hire, so like many Tech fans at the time, I crossed my fingers, and hoped for the best when he was hired. I honestly think we just hit the iceberg....but the orchestra is still playing beautiful music on deck. I don't know about you guys, but I'm looking for a life preserver.
.
.
.
BOO
 
I FULLY support Coach Gailey and I think many of you knee jerk folks will think differently given time. The sky is NOT falling. If it was, it would have started at UNC or BYU or even vs. Vandy for gosh sakes. We're 4-2, not 2-4. A little perspective please.
 
You want perspective... We almost lost to BYU. If we had not eventually relied on Hollings so much, we probably would have lost. Hollings is gone. UNC was too close for comfort. Bilbo loosened things up for us on offense and we had some great defensive plays.
.
Here's great perspective... GOOD teams never lose to Duke or Wake Forest. They are the canaries in the mineshaft of ACC football. Lose to either of these teams, and you got big problems....We got big problems.
.
.
BOO
 
PLEASE don't delude yourself like SO many others do that Wake Forest is a doormat. They most certainly are NOT. They are a well-coached team that has lost MANY close games to MANY good teams (including us last year). They are a program on the rise! That thinking that they are the doormat of the conference along with Duke is WAY overplayed and flat-out UNTRUE. They WILL have other big wins this year and in future years.

As for us, we WILL rebound. If you can't give credit to the coaching staff for last week's win in the face of all the adversity we suffered, you just refuse to see anything positive. Again, we are 4-2, NOT 2-4. Had we gone 11-2 last year by winning the close ones against Clemson, UVA, and Maryland, I doubt if you would be so despondent.
 
Wake Forest is a doormat, was a doormat, and will forever be a doormat. 3000+ students, 25,000 average football home attendance, poor facilities, basketball school = doormat.
.
.
BOO
 
That "doormat" has beaten us TWICE in the past four years, and nearly beat us last year.

Try thinking PROGRESSIVLELY!
 
Here is the real kicker! It is hard to know where the real trouble lies at this point, because Gailey has stated he would let the OC and DC have control of their sides of the ball. That is fine as long as their side of the ball is performing with efficiency.

At this point, it should be obvious the offense and the defense is performing poorly. If Gailey has allowed the OC and DC to call their own game, then they have had enough time to get better. Instead, they are getting worse. It is way past time for Gailey to make some changes, because the final results belong to him.

The entire offensive strategy and play-calling has been very predictable and not in sync. The receivers seem to have lost some of the edge they had in previous years. It also seems the routes are not run as precisely as in the past. Yes, there are some occasional good plays, but no consistency.

The defense can key on whichever back is in the game to run the ball. The blocking back can be ignored. The running game has no mystery to it. It is easy to defend. If we did not have some good offensive linemen, it would really be a disaster.

The defense has two great problems. Both are very obvious and stick out like a sore thumb. Our tacklers are not hitting the ball carriers with explosiveness, nor are they locking the ball carriers down on attempted tackles. The other shortcoming is the lack of playing man-to-man on obvious short passing situations.

It is incomprehensible that we would let the receiver catch the ball rather than try to intercept it on short passes. It has become an automatic first down for the opposition on the short passes. We give it to them. No wonder, the defensive players tire.

If the QB escapes pressure and throws over the defenders head, he has to be more accurate on the longer passes. If he should connect, so be it. We get our defensive players off the field for a rest and we depend on our offense to get the points back. It is far better than having the other team score anyhow by keeping the drives alive on short passes and wearing down our defense.

Both are correctable. It is essential to cut off the short passes on third and long, and second and long when it is an obvious passing down. We are playing way too passive on defense.

The defensive team must play aggressive and take the action to the offense. If we get caught in the wrong play, so be it. At least we will not allow a team to score by keeping the ball the entire game and wearing out our defense.

We should take chances and stop the other team and defend against the short pass. A QB can be much more accurate on a short pass than a long pass. His chances of completing a long pass stretches his odds.

As far as poor tackling, it is either poor techniques that have not been corrected by the defensive coaches, or, as someone else has suggested, our strength conditioning is not adequate.

It is time for Gailey to make some serious decisions. If the team does not turn around and begin to improve greatly, it will be obvious to me, Gailey cannot get the job done at Tech.

frown.gif
frown.gif
frown.gif
 
I think Gailey can get the job done here. The real constant that I see is poor QB play, and poor play calling. We give up on the run when we don't have to. I think the problem is with O'Brien. Our QB's have not improved since he was here. My guess is that you'll see a new OC/QB coach here next fall with O'Brien off to the NFL. I think Gailey was a good hire b/c he knows football, and he knows how to win. He was not dismal at Dallas, just look at their record before he got there and after he left. Those teams were short on talent, and he did a great job with them. Tenuta is an outstanding DC, and the defense will be fine. I'm not sure why we didn't see the usual half time adjustments. However, I think this loss goes directly to poor QB play and Bill O'Brien.
 
bobbydoddsghost, that is so funny about the orchestra on the Titanic - a very clever analogy. I think there are some people that think like that - all is rosy and nice. The glass is 1/2 empty for me.
drinking.gif
 
You DO NOT lose to Weak Forest at home, not unless you're willing to relive the days of Bill Lewis.

We've got a MAJOR, I repeat MAJOR coaching problem, and the timing couldn't be worse in this state.

I thought O'Leary was conservative. Lord Have Mercy!
 
I have felt very lukewarm to the Gailey hiring from day one. He refused to sign a buy out for Georgia Tech, so if he is not committed to GA Tech football why should I be committed to him. After the O'Leary defection I did get the feel that Gailey gave the impression that he was going to be 100 percent behind Ga Tech. I felt that if he was successful at Tech, he would quickly lobby good friend Dan Reeves for the Falcon head coaching job when Reeves decide to go to the front office. In defense of Braine, most people does not remember that Tom O'Brien of Boston College was his first choice but some influential boosters did not go along with the hiring.

Also half the staff went with O'Leary to Notre Dame and OBian wanted a job with the Vikings. I know I have read in previous posts that coaches have a job and always are looking to better themselves, but they should not be upset when fans questions their committment and coaching ability.

The coaching situation at GA TEch the last nine months has been clouded to stay the least. If I was a recruit I would wonder why I would commit four years of my life to a coaching staff that not seem committed to the school.
 
I was not happy when CG came here and I'm still not happy. I don't think we got the right man. I will support him and the coaching staff but I would support WHOMEVER was there. I think our recruting is going to suffer from his being here. Lord I hope we're not in for BLII!!

confused.gif
 
Can Chan make the big adjustment?, or he will retain the same Climpsum game plan. I was sueprised whe he told Kim, in the post game show, that he gave up un the running game because the team fell behind.
 
It is not a matter of knowing football or not knowing football. All coaches know football-it is not a complicated game otherwise I could never have played the game. Remember that Bill Lewis is a very respected coach-that is as an assistant coach but being a head coach requires more than a knowledge of x's and o's. It requires hiring a staff that can function as a unit and it requires motivational skills as well as the ability to understand what your opponent is up to and adjusting accordingly. It requires a man that can evaluate talent and put your players at the position in which they are most effective plus he must be a good recruiter and public relations guy. This is not an exclusive list but you get the idea of where i'm going. But the most important quality that a head coach must possess is the ability to take responsibility for his teams short comings. All the great coaches possess
these attributes as well as others not mentioned.
Let us ask ourselves, how many times have we heard
Chan admit his shortcomings for his teams poor play. O'Leary did on more than one occasion and all the outstanding coaches will also. I am convinced That coach DULL is not the man that can
be successful at Tech. Sure i will continue supporting Tech but I'm not very hopeful right now. This will be a long season. By the way the Atlantic Coast Sports Journal said in a preseason issue that one of the coaches from O'Leary's staff
said that O'Leary and his staff had felt that this years team would be the best team that O'Leary had in his run at Tech. Didn't happen under Chan and his group. CHAN IS NOT THE MAN.
 
Back
Top