Why are things going to get better? (Part II)

[BarrelORum]

Originally posted by JTS:
I asked this question last week and only got two replies. So I thought I give it another go.

Why are things going to get better?

The idea is that if we give Gailey time there will be a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. So if you are someone that beleives that Chan Gailey will end up being a great coach if we just give him time, please respond with:

(Remember this coaching staff has been in place for almost two years, two and a half if you include the initial off season, so this should be easy.)

1. What steps has this coaching staff taken to lay the foundation for a successful football program?

2. Provide examples of how this staff has contributed to the improvement of the football program.

3. How will this staff's plan lead to a better team in 3 months, 12 months, or 24 months?

I really want to beleive, but to be honest with you I do not have any real good answers for these questions. If you do, please share them because I think it would make me and others feel better about our current situation.

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Good questions, unfortunately I don't think many of us will know the answers until sometime next season.

We have the most inconsistent team right now week in and week out. One week they are a brilliant, undermanned football team playing their guts out, and the next, I could probably field a more competitive team of high schoolers.

3 years is a MINIMUM for any coaching staff and 4 should be the norm. Unless he pulls a Bill Lewis, give the man 3 years and let's answer those questions then.

I think he's recruited some REAL talent, and on top of that Chan has had his hands tied by Braine, Moore, and Clough. I think the Tech fans psyche needs to be patched up, and the only way I see this happening is through bloodshed (ie. someone's job). I am hopeful that after December, we have a new AD.

 

[beeware]

Originally posted by BarrelORum:



3 years is a MINIMUM for any coaching staff and 4 should be the norm. Unless he pulls a Bill Lewis, give the man 3 years and let's answer those questions then.

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">If you give Chan Gailey 3 or 4 years to run this program into the ditch, it will take Heisman, Rockne, and Lombardi to bring us back....and even with them it might take 10 years.

This needs to be the last year.....and that would make two years more than he should have gotten.

 

[ylojk8]

Originally posted by beeware:
If you give Chan Gailey 3 or 4 years to run this program into the ditch, it will take Heisman, Rockne, and Lombardi to bring us back....and even with them it might take 10 years.

This needs to be the last year.....and that would make two years more than he should have gotten.

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">lol .. let's talk some sense here .. oh well .. i'm asking beeware to talk some sense, i should know better.

bill lewis took our program to dust just a cpl of years after a MNC. it took o'leary and friedgen a few years and we were back.

o'leary and friedgen are no heisman and lombardi.

 

[kirbee]

Since this question is asking for the good things they've done to improve the program, here's some off the top of my head:

Moved Tony Hollings to RB and found a star. Had to deal with his unfortunate injury last year.

Found able replacements for the unexpected loss of All-American Greg Gathers in Eric Henderson, Tony Hargrove, and Wilkenson.

Decided to start a true freshman Reggie Ball at QB in order to move the program forward and build for the long-term future. Also moved Bilbo to WR where his talent might be better suited.

Played FSU closer than any coach we've had since they joined the ACC. Have beaten NC State and Auburn (both top 15) and UVa (top 20). Two of these were on national TV.

Had to deal with losing 10 players to academics, most starters, including the best we had on offense (Hollings) and defense (Hargrove).

Hired John Tunuta (more good than bad so far), Patrick Nix (seems like an up and coming young coach), and moved away from O'Brien (too much internal friction - overrated), changed S/C coaches last year after looking weak last year.

As with most recruiting classes, it takes at least 3 years to accurately assess. So we should have a good idea by fall next year of Chan's first class.

 

[BEESerk]

Originally posted by kirbee:
Found able replacements for the unexpected loss of All-American Greg Gathers in Eric Henderson, Tony Hargrove, and Wilkenson.

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I take issue with this one. I do agree with you on the others though.

Gailey didn't "find" these guys. They were already there. This was no stroke of genius on Gailey's part. They simply moved up the depth chart. Granted Wilkerson was moved, but somebody had to be moved to fill the depth.

The credit goes to the kids for taking advantage of the opportunity given to them by the flunkout situation.

 

[Wrecked]

Is the basic premise of your question how has he improved the program from when he took over, or from last year? There is a difference. The program has taken huge steps back from when he was first hired (exhibit A is our fan base's LOW expectations.) However, since his first season his biggest improvement is taking the program away from Braine.

Your other "improvements" Gailey actually had little control over. They were more dictated to him and he reacted.

 

[JTS]

Originally posted by BEESerk:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Originally posted by kirbee:
Found able replacements for the unexpected loss of All-American Greg Gathers in Eric Henderson, Tony Hargrove, and Wilkenson.

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I take issue with this one. I do agree with you on the others though.

Gailey didn't "find" these guys. They were already there. This was no stroke of genius on Gailey's part. They simply moved up the depth chart. Granted Wilkerson was moved, but somebody had to be moved to fill the depth.

The credit goes to the kids for taking advantage of the opportunity given to them by the flunkout situation.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I agree with BEEserk on this point. Eric Henderson in particular was already a rising star. He might have started regardless of missing Hargrove and Gathers.

The second point that I am not real sure about are the hiring decisions Gailey has made. I beleive that Braine (gag, ack!) is largely responsible for bringing in Tenuta who is really looking like the best hire during the Gailey era. I hear a lot about how Patrick Nix is supposed to be this great up and coming coach, but other than the name recognition I have not seen any tangible on field results to support this postion. It could be that Nix is being stifled by Gailey the same way O'Brien was, but I do not know. Clearly our offense this year does not support this position.

BEEware, please let us talk through the issue. We all know that you have come to a definitive decision in your mind as far as what needs to be done. Simply restating your position without putting forth a cause and effect relationship between what our coaches are or are not doing and the results is not going to convert anyone to your line of thinking. I would actually be very interested in hearing you lay out such an argument, because you clearly have very strong opinions on the matter and have been opposed to this hire from the get-go. What was it about Gailey when he was first hired that made you beleive he was not the right coach for Georgia Tech?

 

[JTS]

Wrecked,

I am not really trying to focus on the results to date, because I think just about everyone can agree that the results are not to our liking. I think that most of the people that are still supportive of Gailey believe he should be given another year or two and that if he has this time we will get back to or surpass the level we were at before his hire. I do not have a crystal ball, but I do know that future success relies primarily on good planning and preparation. So what I am trying to focus on are the steps that Gailey has taken over the past two years to improve the program, because I believe that these past steps will largely dictate the on-field success over the next year or two. If we are not currently implementing good, well thought out plan or doing a good job of preparing ourselves for success, then I do not understand why we should have the expectation that things will be any different in a year or two. And if things are not going to get any better, why wait to make a change in leadership?

I think I could build a pretty solid argument that we have not taken the appropriate steps in order to be successful in just about every aspect of the program based on my own information and information gathered from other knowledgable, die-hard Georgia Tech fans. On the other hand, I really cannot think of any good reason why I should expect things to improve other than the "you should always give a coach 3 or 4 years" argument. What I want is for someone to change my mind by giving me reasons to beleive that if we give Chan more time we will be rewarded with on the field results, but right now I just cannot fathom us fielding a successful team with this coach and I have a lot of reasons for this belief.

 

[ylojk8]

Originally posted by JTS:
but right now I just cannot fathom us fielding a successful team with this coach and I have a lot of reasons for this belief.

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">ok .. let's turn this discussion on it's head. we have seen 18 games under this head coach. that is not 2 seasons but anyways ..

what are your plentiful reasons for the belief that you have?

 

[kirbee]

I think you have to weigh this discussion with the string of bad luck the program has suffered the past year and a half. Burns, Gathers, Hollings, flunk gate. Those are some serious losses to account for.

 

[Wrecked]

JTS, this is an excellent thread and discussion and I agree, people should offer up more than "he needs 3 to 4 years" as a reason to believe the program is headed in the right direction. I will offer up some, although I too am not sold on Gailey, but among my Tech fan friends, I am the only one not calling for his head.

He has assumed public responsibility for the program. I believe that his first year was completely under the shelter of Braine (who secretley wants to be the coach). He got burned by the academic fiasco and said enough is enough. He was a man and admitted he was not prepared for coaching at this level. That was huge in my book.

Last year's recruiting in Florida was a nice step. It is imperative that Tech carve a niche out down there and landing Grant and Scott was big. He needs to step it up in Georgia however.

I am still on the fence and barring a 4 win season (which would be a disaster) he deserves another year.

 

[BLACK WATCH]

Originally posted by BEESerk:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Originally posted by kirbee:
Found able replacements for the unexpected loss of All-American Greg Gathers in Eric Henderson, Tony Hargrove, and Wilkenson.

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I take issue with this one. I do agree with you on the others though.

Gailey didn't "find" these guys. They were already there. This was no stroke of genius on Gailey's part. They simply moved up the depth chart. Granted Wilkerson was moved, but somebody had to be moved to fill the depth.

The credit goes to the kids for taking advantage of the opportunity given to them by the flunkout situation.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Well beeeejerk.....

I noticed you stressed the Def. ends that were already there..but you didnt give Coach Gailey credit for his Brillance..In the move of Tony Hollings to RB..Possibly the best personeel move here on the flats in the last 20 years or so...A close 2nd would be Coach Gailey's move of Dawan Landrey to Safety from QB..Landrey just may end up in the NFL as a result...

So im SURE this was just an oversight by yourself???????

 

[BEESerk]

Welcome back BLACK WATCH,

Glad to see you are still your old same self! The ONLY thing you can still offer to this board is the ability to attack other GT fans.

Were you at the Clemson game? Did you have to pay a lot for your scalp tickets?

Now lets just show eveyrone your stupidity (hey, if you can come on here and call me beejerk, I can come on here and point out the obvious)....

Kirbee said...
Moved Tony Hollings to RB and found a star. Had to deal with his unfortunate injury last year

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">

BEESerk said...
I do agree with you on the others though

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Hmmmm, seems like I just said that moving (actually he didn't move him, he agreed to give him a shot at RB per Tony's request, but don't let facts get in the way) Tony was a POSITIVE thing Gailey had done, and Gailey found a Star.

Unlike you, I don't feel the need to recite everything single word that someone I agree with says (I am beginning to think you and Ahso are the same person with multiple accounts). "I agree" suffices for most of the time.

As far as Landry.... He MAY end up there. For the time being has has looked VERY Good in run defense. He has a long ways to go on his coverage skills. He has been burned on mulitiple occasion. I didn't mention it, because it isn't worth mentioning YET. In case you haven't looked it up, we are #67 in Pass defense. #67 as in the lower half of all of D-1 football. Again, don't let facts get in the way of your rants.

 

[JTS]

ylojk8,

Here you go.

1. Failure to coach up talent.

I cannot think of a single offensive player that has made any noticable improvement since Gailey arrived. However, I think of a number of players that have taken a step back in my opinion. I beleive that in order to be successful at GT you have to be able to coach up your talent, because we have not and will not ever be able to attract the top atheletes across the board.

2. Sloppy technique and execution

Our execution and technique is so poor on offense that it looks like Jim Donnan is coaching our offense. The only difference is we do not have nearly the talent Donnan had.

With the exception of Smith and Curry who have actually been coached under the previous staff, our WR do not run good clean routes or consistently use good footwork on their breaks. Nor do we have anyone that consistently raises or corrects these problems during practice.

QB technique is not where it should be. Reggie consistently drops his elbow which leads to the many overthrown balls that we have seen. His play fakes and footwork are good, but could still stand improvement. Ball is a phenomenal talent, but still needs coaching. When the media asks your coach what he is doing to correct these obvious problems and his response is that "he beleives in letting people do what got them to their current postion and not messing with what their doing", it does not sound like we are setting ourselves up for future success. This strategy might work in the NFL where players have received this kind of coaching for years, but young kids coming high school often have not. I could also understand taking this postion if we were winning, but we are not.

The offensive line play has not even been close to where it should be. This is fairly senior group. The pass blocking has been just atrocious. I am really surprised Reggie has not gotten hurt yet.

3. Failure to motivate the team.

Do I really need to explain this item to anyone?

4. Failure to adapt to your personnel.

I mean if you can't get your offensive line to execute proper pass blocking at least put your QB in shotgun to buy him a little extra time. I am not sure what Gailey saw in our team that made him beleive we would be able to run over every team we played. We have very average RBs that do not possess gamebreaking speed and we were not that successful running the ball in practice. He has pretty much come in and imposed his playbook on this team without consideration for the talents of our existing personnel. All summer long what worked in practice was getting Reggie outside the pocket letting him throw it or pull it down and run it. Once the season started, we seemed to abandon this strategy in favor of the run or straight drops. It just did not make any sense.

5. Failure to make in-game adjustments.

Since Gailey has arrived it seems like our offense has gone into hibernation at halftime and anytime we get a lead we go into ultra-conservative mode rather than going for the kill. We have not been able to counter the oppositions halftime adjustments on numerous occasions. This fact is born out by our poor second half offensive performance.

Why are we running play action fakes on 3rd and long or late in the fourth quarter when we are trailing? You're not fooling anybody, but you are certainly wasting valuable pocket time for your QB and OL.

6. Failure to recruit the necessary quantity of atheletes.

I am not going to say anthing about the quality of our recruits, because at this point really who knows. What I do know is that we have had 9 scholarships over the past two years that have gone unused. So whenever you hear complaints about lack of deph, don't lay all the blame on flunkgate because we have essentially missed out on an equal number of players because of our inability to recruit at the level necessary to be successful. Making matters worse we are only able to bring in 25 signees a year so we will be carrying this deficit for awhile.

7. Failure to use all recruiting visits.

I could understand not using all your visits if you were using all your scholarships, but to fail to use all your recruiting visits and have nine scholarships go unused reeks of mismanagement. In fact, this might be an unprecendented event in GT recruiting history. I just cannot beleive we are putting in the appropriate effort to be successful if we are not using all of our visits and if the coaching staff is really putting forth a best effort in recruiting what does it say about our ability to recruit. I mean convincing a recruit to go on a visit has to be about as difficult as giving away free trips to Disney World with the way they are treated on these trips.

8. Failure to be proactive.

Gailey has failed to go out and make things happen for Georgia Tech. He has instead sat back and allowed things to happen to Georgia Tech. Rather than practively going out fixing or improving things before they fail or become a problem, Gailey seems content to wait until something becomes a problem and then react to it.

His lack of proactivity is also evident in his lassez faire type attitude about just about everything. What are you doing about Ball's technique problems? Nothing. What did you tell your team to get ready for OT? Nothing. Your offensive schemes have been a miserable failure through the first three games, what are you going to change to fix the problem? Nothing

9. Failure to capture the "hearts and minds" of the Georgia Tech fan base.

One thing all successful ventures share is a genuine confidence in its leadership. Chan Gailey has two and a half years to grab the confidence of our fan base and has failed to do so. There are a lot of hardcore fans out there that want nothing more than to beleive in him and he has not been able to convert them. If can't make hardcore fans beleive, what hope does he have in getting indifferent recruits to commit to him.

If you need more, just let me know.

 

[ncjacket]

Actually there are a number of things that have improved from last. Whethe they will result in the kind of team/program we want is another story.

But for what it's worth:

1) IMO our athletes in the defensive secondary are much improved from what we've had in the past. They aren't there yet from the coordination/performance standpoint but you can see the talent there.

2) QB position with Reggie and Pat Carter looks solid for the next few years. They obviously are very raw but the potential is there.

3) Tenuta's defense is probably the best we've had since the MNC team. Not to say they're great, but we haven't had a great defense in years.

4) I do like the kids we're recruiting. We need more, and more speed would be good but they all look like solid contributors.

5) We'll see on how good a teacher Nix is. But I do like what I've seen so far. How Reggie develops over the year will tell a lot about him IMO.

6) It does appear Gailey understands better what he's up against than he did a year ago. Braine doesn't seem as involved with the football program, which is a good thing. The staff seems more together (nothing against BOB, but it never seemed that either he or Chan was comfortable last year) and that is noticeable to the players.

7) Attitude of the team seems better than last year. While that may not seem like much, I think it bodes well going forward.

As I said before, none of this means Chan will ultimately be successful at Tech. How the team competes the rest of the season and how we recruit this year will be critical IMO. I will say this however, those who compare today with the Bill Lewis debacle don't remember BL very well. Until the players are openly hostile to each other and divided into camps we're still way ahead of those days.

 

[JTS]

Black Watch and BEEserk,

If you guys want to carry out your personal arguments, please create a separate thread and go at it, but I am trying make this a civil thought provoking thread, not a "You're stupid." / "Oh yeah, well you're wrong and even more stupider / Oh yeah, well you're wrong, stupid, and not a true GT fan / Oh yeah, well you're wrong, more stupider, not a true GT fan because, and a bad human being / Oh yeah, well you're still wrong, not a true GT fan, a bad human being, and the love child of Vince Dooley and Uga IV" thread. I hope you can respect the fact I want to stay on topic.

 

[BEESerk]

Originally posted by JTS:
Black Watch and BEEserk,

If you guys want to carry out your personal arguments, please create a separate thread and go at it, but I am trying make this a civil thought provoking thread, not a "You're stupid." / "Oh yeah, well you're wrong and even more stupider / Oh yeah, well you're wrong, stupid, and not a true GT fan / Oh yeah, well you're wrong, more stupider, not a true GT fan because, and a bad human being / Oh yeah, well you're still wrong, not a true GT fan, a bad human being, and the love child of Vince Dooley and Uga IV" thread. I hope you can respect the fact I want to stay on topic.

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I absolutely respect that, but you are addressing the wrong font in this case. He was the one who tried to hijack the thread. I am sick of the FOC'ers who constantly attack people (even those who have been very soncsistent about giving Gailey his due chance) simply because they don't like what others have to say. Your issue is with them not me. I offer no apology for not tolerating their crap. I have no problem participating in well thought out and rational discussions. I think I have more than proven that on this board time and time again.

Don't worry this is the last I have to say about it in this thread.

 

[ylojk8]

JTS,

Here you go.

1. Failure to coach up talent.

I will make you think of many offensive players that have made noticable improvement since Gailey arrived.

Tony Hollings: How does a guy who played high school QB, college backup DB become the leading rusher in the NCAA?

PJ Daniels: How does a walk on come on so strong?

Gordon Clinkscale: How does a perennial bench warmer come in and start producing all of a sudden?

Damarious Bilbo: Looks like he's arrived at WR doesn't he? How does someone who has never played WR start contributing?

Now, we cannot count the successes of folks like Foschi, Curry, J. Smith because these have been coached prior to this staff tookover. LOL

These are our veterans in these positions and keep the youngsters like Logan, Cooper and Williams off the field. How do we know how these guys will produce? When the seniors leave because the performance of the veterans cannot be taken into account here. LOL

Please do mention which players have taken a step back in your opinion due to lack of coaching.

2. Sloppy technique and execution

Our execution is poor. Our technique is poor also? Our defense's tackling technique is poor? What technique is poor?

Our execution is poor and a lot of that has to do with poor execution in the part of the QB. Ball is still getting his feet set and over throws as well as under throws receivers. he'll get there and a lot of our execution will improve.

Nor do we have someone who consistently raises problems in practice? excuse me but now you're making yourself sound like an insider who attends all practices and such. are you one?

QB technique is not where it should be. He's a true freshman, of course it is not where it should be. Guess what, you have a habit of misinterpreting and twisting what the coach says. Gailey said regarding Ball's technique that you can coach him regarding setting his feet etc. during the season but when it comes to mechanics etc., these things are looked into in the off season. Sensible?

Gailey points out that Ball wouldn't be a Div 1 quarterback if he wasn't doing something right. That doesn't mean that Ball isn't being coached.

Where should the offensive line play be? The pass blocking has been great! what are you talking about? The run blocking has not been good. Excuse me again but you paint yourself like an expert. I'm not an expert, i'm a casual fan. Are you a football expert? please share your football expertise with us before reaching conclusions like you do here.

There is a reason why Reggie hasn't gotten hurt it. Pass Protection and Reggie's elusiveness.

3. Failure to motivate the team.

This point is conceded. Gailey himself concedes it so I cannot argue it. Area of major concern. An intangible that is very important.

4. Failure to adapt to your personnel.

Our offensive line is executing wonderfully in pass blocking. It's the run blocking that's missing.

Shotgun, shotgun, shotgun. Gailey says that this is not suited to our personnel. You say it is suited. They may have tried it in practices to see how it goes .. they may have not. I don't know ..

All summer long Reggie made plays and I agree, he needs to be more in designed roll outs and such. I don't know why we don't use that either.

But to state that the staff is failing to adjust and adapt to our personnel is a reach. We made Ball our starting quarterback and Bilbo a wide receiver. We made hollings running back and landry a defensive back. We converted Wilkinson to a DE. adapting to our personnel.

5. Failure to make in-game adjustments.

In game adjustments. Who knows what kind of adjustments are made if any. I wish I did. I don't. I can't comment.

I agree that play action won't fool anyone in obvious passing downs or if we cannot make the defense respect our running game that we're faking with the action.

6. Failure to recruit the necessary quantity of atheletes.

Yeah, this one is biting us. Will be corrected. We'll take in 23-25 this year per Gailey.

7. Failure to use all recruiting visits.

If you don't want to recruit a kid, why bring him in and show him the around? I agree with the problem in numbers that we are recruiting but this is related ... and if you're not going to recruit someone, we don't need to bring that kid in to amuse him. we're not Disneyland.

8. Failure to be proactive.

Sorry but this is another reach. Reggie Ball becomes the starting quarterback .. is this a reactive step or a proactive step? As a head coach .. i can't see how he could have taken a more proactive step.

Flunkgate .. Your new boss tells you don't mess with this aspect. I'd like to know what you would have done.

9. Failure to capture the "hearts and minds" of the Georgia Tech fan base.

Well, indifferent recruits are commiting to him. We have 6 commitments already.

Tech fans want to win and Gailey will capture the "hearts and minds" if he does that. If Gailey won't win .. he'll not just not capture the hearts and minds .. he'll get the boot.

I do need more JTS

 

[techsamillion]

Topic Subject: Topic: "Why are things going to get better? (Part II)"

Because we have a good team and a good coaching staff and neither one are stagnant despite all the detractors who are a delight to Ugag!!!!!!

 

[BEESerk]

Originally posted by techsamillion:
Topic Subject: Topic: "Why are things going to get better? (Part II)"

Because we have a good team and a good coaching staff and neither one are stagnant despite all the detractors who are a delight to Ugag!!!!!!

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Hold on now....

I absolutely agree that we have the POTENTIAL to be a good team, and our coaches have the POTENTIAL to be a good staff. However, there is zero evidence that even remotely suggests we are a good team or this is a good staff at this very moment.

Good teams don't have losing records, and rank in the lower portions of D-1 football in just about every statistical category.

Both the players and coaches have shown greatness, and that is why I still have a lot of hope for this year. They also have shown extreme badness. If the team and coaches meet my own personal expectations this year, then it will carry over to next year. I will set new ones and feel good in my conscience that I gave Gailey his fair shot.

To say we ARE a good team right now is an impossibility. At least it is impossible according to my definition of good. If you're definition is different than mine, then I respect the position that you have. I would like to know what your definition of "good" is though.