While recruiting is a fickle beast, it seems evident that Kirby Smart and staff are as good recruiters as there are in the country. Keeping together the '16 class during a coaching change, landing the #3 class in the country last year, and, although all the dominoes are yet to fall for '18, word around the campfire is that this class could be as good as or better than last year's.
That being said, there is still the matter of translating the talent to wins on the field. Likewise, that lack of success in recent years would seem to be the ace in the hole for other schools to negatively recruit against Georgia.
So far, Kirby can counter that by saying, "New staff, new day, look at how we've recruited so far - that will lead to big things, etc." However, that only lasts for so long.
While another mediocre season will not lead to a mass exodus by current recruits/commits, it's reasonable to expect that it would cause the Dawgs to lose at least a few key recruits. After all, a lot of top recruits want to feel confident that the school they are choosing will be competitive and challenge for a conference championship.
So, that brings me to my point: How many games/what type of season must Georgia have to more or less quash that one major negative recruiting point, that Georgia gets all these big time recruits, and does very little with them?
My thought is at least 9-3 w/ a trip to the SECCG, or possibly 10-2 and no SECCG. I think that either of those scenarios will be good enough this year to show recruits that Georgia has basically arrived, or will have by the time they get to school.
What are your thoughts?
Wednesday, July 5, 2017
Monday, July 3, 2017
Position by Position Breakdown Predicts Dawgs Will Be Better in '17
Preseason conjecture. It's about as reliable as star rankings on those beloved recruiting sites. That's not to say it's worthless. Far from it. Rather, it's to say that, for every example we find that proves its accuracy, we can easily find several others that prove out its flaws.
But, as we have no current examples to support conclusions, with kickoff still 2 months away, I present to you, dear unfaithful readers, about as close to a realistic scenario as one can come up with in early July.
Compare and contrast each unit with last year's deeply flawed, yet somehow still 8-5 team; a general improved/same/regressed, along w/ a degree of 1-10 on the level of improvement or regression.
Offense
QB: Improved, 7. History supports the notion that the biggest level of improvement for a QB, particularly one that starts his freshman year, comes from year one to year two. Although he looked eerily similar to last year in the first half of G-Day, Jacob Eason was throwing fluidly and accurately as the game went on. By all accounts, his familiarity with the system, playbook, calls, checks, etc. is night and day from last year. Add to that Jake Fromm, who, while most doubt will supplant Eason as the starter, is doing everything he can to keep Eason from resting on his limited laurels.
RB: Improved, 3. It's a very similar situation to last year. The improvement comes in what should be a healthier and more confident Nick Chubb, and the addition of the versatile and talented D'andre Swift. Count me among the biggest believers that Chubb will be closer to his pre-injury self, which will make a boatload of difference when it comes to breaking off some longer runs, and getting the extra yard or two that often mean the difference between a stalled drive and a scoring drive. Sony Michel, I feel, will be further utilized in the passing game along with his 10-12 carries per game.
WR/TE: Improved, 6. This one is tough to defend with any empirical evidence. After all, the top receiver, Isaiah McKenzie is now in the NFL, and there wasn't much behind him in terms of production. Where I see a marked improvement comes in terms of both experience and a huge bolstering of talented depth. TE's Nauta and Woerner should be better with a year under their belts (and Woerner having recovered from some nagging injuries). Ridley and Wims have a ton of talent, and should also be improved w/ an added year of seasoning. Godwin will be reliable if not spectacular. But, the interesting thing to me is that you've got the uber-talented Mecole Hardman making the transition to WR, and then 3 very talented pure WRs and a tall, athletic, yet raw WR coming in as freshmen. So, the Dawgs should have plenty of experience to go along w/ more talent than we've had at these spots overall in quite some time.
OL: Improved, ?? This is the wild card, and I suspect, as many do, that the fortunes of the offense will ultimately ride on just how much better the O-Line gets. The traditional thinking is that losing starters at any position, but particularly the O-Line, can't help but create problems, because as bad as this unit was last year, the guys behind them obviously couldn't beat them out. Enter JC transfer Demarcus Hayes, and the best O-Line recruiting haul in the history of modern recruiting rankings at Georgia. The overall competition created alone should pay dividends, and there is nobody more respected as an O-Line coach than Sam Pittman. I have a hard time believing that this unit will be unimproved from last year's. The question is, will it go from well below average to simply below average, or will it jump to average or beyond? If they can be at least average, then I see good things for the offense. If they go beyond that, look out.
Defense
DL: Improved, 2. This unit was very good last year, and I expect a slightly better version this year. Trent Thompson should be fully healed, and John Atkins anchors the line for what seems like his 9th season at Georgia. Add to that the fact that sophomores like Marshall, Clark, and Rochester will all be stronger and more technically sound with a year under their belts. The unit did lose coach Tracy Rocker, but new DL Coach Trey Scott is regarded as a rising star, so I'm bullish on the D-line for sure.
LB: Improved, 2. Here again is a unit that was very, very good in '16. Having Bellamy and Carter return at the OLB spots is huge. The question there is, can they take the next step to being more consistent both during the course of a game, and from one game to the next. Roquan Smith is as good an ILB as there is in the SEC, and there will be some good competition from some youngsters as well. I'm saying this unit will be better, because I'm thinking that Bellamy and Carter view this as their contract years, so to speak. They enter as 3rd or 4th round picks, but big years could bump them both up to a 1st or 2nd round pick, which would mean big things for their careers and bank accounts.
DB: Same. I see this as a bit of a wash in terms of what Georgia lost to go along with what they've gained. Mo Smith was absolutely key at the star position, and Qunicy Mauger was unremarkable but very reliable. Their experience and leadership must be replaced by guys like Dominick Sanders and Aaron Davis. The upside is that, like WR, there is an abundance of high-level talent coming in. Richard LeCounte III and DeAngelo Gibbs figure to push for significant playing time, if not a starting job at star or a safety spot, and I've got my eye on Ameer Speed among all the freshman DBs coming in.
Special Teams
Improved, 2. This might surprise some, as Georgia loses one of the best return men in its history in Isaiah McKenzie. I do think Godwin and/or Hardman can do some good things from that perspective, but I also see the vast upgrade in talent and athleticism with the incoming freshmen, many of whom will be counted on in the ST game. At kicker, Georgia brings in a highly regarded transfer from Wofford, David Marvin. So, Rodrigo Blankenship will have to show a lot more than he did during G-Day if he's to hold off Marvin or anyone else that might walk on.
Coaching
Improved, 5. This is where I think I disagree with a lot of Georgia fans. Many have already closed the book on OC Jim Chaney. While I agree there was little to be specifically excited about from last year's performance, I don't see the point of writing him off. There was just so much newness last year for everyone involved that I don't think an objective assessment can be made. I expect the overall familiarity to help, along with talent and experience. And, of course, Kirby Smart has got that first year out of the way. I have no doubt he'll still make some head-scratching calls in the heat of the moment, but look for him to be a bit more at ease, having seen and done it for a full SEC season already.
On the whole, I expect the defense to be a little better, which is OK, as the D certainly played at a level good enough to challenge for the SEC East (the Ole Miss game notwithstanding). For me, the offense is in a position to take a giant leap forward. If the O-line can get to the point of making sure Eason can feel comfortable in the pocket, and open up enough holes to let what is probably the best backfield in the country do its thing, then I can't imagine not seeing a vastly improved team and far better results in 2017.
But, as we have no current examples to support conclusions, with kickoff still 2 months away, I present to you, dear unfaithful readers, about as close to a realistic scenario as one can come up with in early July.
Compare and contrast each unit with last year's deeply flawed, yet somehow still 8-5 team; a general improved/same/regressed, along w/ a degree of 1-10 on the level of improvement or regression.
Offense
QB: Improved, 7. History supports the notion that the biggest level of improvement for a QB, particularly one that starts his freshman year, comes from year one to year two. Although he looked eerily similar to last year in the first half of G-Day, Jacob Eason was throwing fluidly and accurately as the game went on. By all accounts, his familiarity with the system, playbook, calls, checks, etc. is night and day from last year. Add to that Jake Fromm, who, while most doubt will supplant Eason as the starter, is doing everything he can to keep Eason from resting on his limited laurels.
RB: Improved, 3. It's a very similar situation to last year. The improvement comes in what should be a healthier and more confident Nick Chubb, and the addition of the versatile and talented D'andre Swift. Count me among the biggest believers that Chubb will be closer to his pre-injury self, which will make a boatload of difference when it comes to breaking off some longer runs, and getting the extra yard or two that often mean the difference between a stalled drive and a scoring drive. Sony Michel, I feel, will be further utilized in the passing game along with his 10-12 carries per game.
WR/TE: Improved, 6. This one is tough to defend with any empirical evidence. After all, the top receiver, Isaiah McKenzie is now in the NFL, and there wasn't much behind him in terms of production. Where I see a marked improvement comes in terms of both experience and a huge bolstering of talented depth. TE's Nauta and Woerner should be better with a year under their belts (and Woerner having recovered from some nagging injuries). Ridley and Wims have a ton of talent, and should also be improved w/ an added year of seasoning. Godwin will be reliable if not spectacular. But, the interesting thing to me is that you've got the uber-talented Mecole Hardman making the transition to WR, and then 3 very talented pure WRs and a tall, athletic, yet raw WR coming in as freshmen. So, the Dawgs should have plenty of experience to go along w/ more talent than we've had at these spots overall in quite some time.
OL: Improved, ?? This is the wild card, and I suspect, as many do, that the fortunes of the offense will ultimately ride on just how much better the O-Line gets. The traditional thinking is that losing starters at any position, but particularly the O-Line, can't help but create problems, because as bad as this unit was last year, the guys behind them obviously couldn't beat them out. Enter JC transfer Demarcus Hayes, and the best O-Line recruiting haul in the history of modern recruiting rankings at Georgia. The overall competition created alone should pay dividends, and there is nobody more respected as an O-Line coach than Sam Pittman. I have a hard time believing that this unit will be unimproved from last year's. The question is, will it go from well below average to simply below average, or will it jump to average or beyond? If they can be at least average, then I see good things for the offense. If they go beyond that, look out.
Defense
DL: Improved, 2. This unit was very good last year, and I expect a slightly better version this year. Trent Thompson should be fully healed, and John Atkins anchors the line for what seems like his 9th season at Georgia. Add to that the fact that sophomores like Marshall, Clark, and Rochester will all be stronger and more technically sound with a year under their belts. The unit did lose coach Tracy Rocker, but new DL Coach Trey Scott is regarded as a rising star, so I'm bullish on the D-line for sure.
LB: Improved, 2. Here again is a unit that was very, very good in '16. Having Bellamy and Carter return at the OLB spots is huge. The question there is, can they take the next step to being more consistent both during the course of a game, and from one game to the next. Roquan Smith is as good an ILB as there is in the SEC, and there will be some good competition from some youngsters as well. I'm saying this unit will be better, because I'm thinking that Bellamy and Carter view this as their contract years, so to speak. They enter as 3rd or 4th round picks, but big years could bump them both up to a 1st or 2nd round pick, which would mean big things for their careers and bank accounts.
DB: Same. I see this as a bit of a wash in terms of what Georgia lost to go along with what they've gained. Mo Smith was absolutely key at the star position, and Qunicy Mauger was unremarkable but very reliable. Their experience and leadership must be replaced by guys like Dominick Sanders and Aaron Davis. The upside is that, like WR, there is an abundance of high-level talent coming in. Richard LeCounte III and DeAngelo Gibbs figure to push for significant playing time, if not a starting job at star or a safety spot, and I've got my eye on Ameer Speed among all the freshman DBs coming in.
Special Teams
Improved, 2. This might surprise some, as Georgia loses one of the best return men in its history in Isaiah McKenzie. I do think Godwin and/or Hardman can do some good things from that perspective, but I also see the vast upgrade in talent and athleticism with the incoming freshmen, many of whom will be counted on in the ST game. At kicker, Georgia brings in a highly regarded transfer from Wofford, David Marvin. So, Rodrigo Blankenship will have to show a lot more than he did during G-Day if he's to hold off Marvin or anyone else that might walk on.
Coaching
Improved, 5. This is where I think I disagree with a lot of Georgia fans. Many have already closed the book on OC Jim Chaney. While I agree there was little to be specifically excited about from last year's performance, I don't see the point of writing him off. There was just so much newness last year for everyone involved that I don't think an objective assessment can be made. I expect the overall familiarity to help, along with talent and experience. And, of course, Kirby Smart has got that first year out of the way. I have no doubt he'll still make some head-scratching calls in the heat of the moment, but look for him to be a bit more at ease, having seen and done it for a full SEC season already.
On the whole, I expect the defense to be a little better, which is OK, as the D certainly played at a level good enough to challenge for the SEC East (the Ole Miss game notwithstanding). For me, the offense is in a position to take a giant leap forward. If the O-line can get to the point of making sure Eason can feel comfortable in the pocket, and open up enough holes to let what is probably the best backfield in the country do its thing, then I can't imagine not seeing a vastly improved team and far better results in 2017.
Sunday, May 7, 2017
Why Georgia will be vastly improved in 2017
First, a caveat: I never subscribe to the theory that returning more starters than other teams makes for a great season. It greatly depends on who is returning, and who is gone.
This was my contention when everybody was picking Tennessee to do great things last year. Sure, they were returning some solid college players (Dobbs, Kamara, Malone, etc.). However, there were very few players that I felt were anything more than that; solid.
Now, look at what Georgia lost, compared with what's coming back, and further, look at where some of those players were in their careers last year. Lastly, consider who is not returning.
It's no secret now that Georgia had one player taken in the NFL draft (free agent signings notwithstanding). Isaiah McKenzie was the only player leaving Georgia that NFL teams felt strongly enough about to use a draft pick on. There were a few of Georgia's senior O-Linemen that have, for the moment, caught on as free agents, but time will tell if/how long they'll last. (I do understand the notion that Georgia was forced to play a couple folks out of position)
The key here is that Georgia had no fewer than 4, and possibly 5 juniors who decided to return who would have been drafted: Nick Chubb, Sony Michel, Davin Bellamy, Lorenzo Carter, and possibly Dom Sanders.
Chubb, by all accounts, looks to be much closer to his pre-injury self this year, making he and Michel arguably the best tandem of running backs in the country.
Bellamy and Carter were inconsistent last year, but the ability is there, and with another year of seasoning, should be at least as good and hopefully better.
With the rest of Georgia's front seven, there was an abundance of raw talent, flush with freshmen and first-year starters last year. Obviously, Trent Thompson will need to be back healthy, but there is just so much depth filled with talented guys who were just getting their feet wet.
Jonathan Ledbetter is starting to round into form after a 6-game suspension last year, and guys like Tyler Clark, David Marshall, Julian Rochester will be more than capable of making plays and providing depth.
The linebacking corps, which includes All SEC candidate Roquan Smith in the middle, is athletic and experienced.
The Secondary, which added the surprising JR Reed, seems far more settled than it was going into last year (when guys like Juwuan Briscoe, Rico McGraw, and Reggie Wilkerson held some seniority, but were by accounts neither willing nor able to fit in with the new staff's demands).
I just see a talented and deep defensive unit.
The offense is full of a lot more "ifs," but they are ifs that weigh in Georgia's favor if you go by history.
2nd year QB, 2nd year impact players like Riley Ridley, Isaac Nauta, and Mecole Hardman's probable switch to the slot among others. A larger o-line with everyone seemingly settling in to positions for which they are best suited. A LOT of competition coming in at WR (JJ Holloman already seems set to challenge for significant playing time, for example).
Granted, these are still "ifs." If Eason makes the strides that a lot of QBs do from their true freshmen to sophomore years (or, hell, if Jake Fromm somehow beats him out because he's just that good), and if the o-line is more dominant and consistent, and if some WRs step up and become legitimate threats, and if Cheney and staff are able to better identify potential mismatches, etc. and so on.
The best thing, though, is that if nothing else, there is going to be far, far more competition at every spot on the field, especially when the bumper crop of freshmen O-linemen show up in the summer and fall. That's just something that Georgia hasn't had much of in recent years.
Now, here's where some folks chime in with "show me," or, "I've heard this all before. I want to see it on the field." That's certainly fair enough, but as the first game is almost 4 months away, this is all we can go off of for now.
I will say that I haven't been overly optimistic about a Georgia team in several years. I didn't expect much last year (figured we'd beat Vandy, though). I just see a team with more talent and experience, as well as a team where both the coaches and players have a better idea of who they are and what they can be.
This was my contention when everybody was picking Tennessee to do great things last year. Sure, they were returning some solid college players (Dobbs, Kamara, Malone, etc.). However, there were very few players that I felt were anything more than that; solid.
Now, look at what Georgia lost, compared with what's coming back, and further, look at where some of those players were in their careers last year. Lastly, consider who is not returning.
It's no secret now that Georgia had one player taken in the NFL draft (free agent signings notwithstanding). Isaiah McKenzie was the only player leaving Georgia that NFL teams felt strongly enough about to use a draft pick on. There were a few of Georgia's senior O-Linemen that have, for the moment, caught on as free agents, but time will tell if/how long they'll last. (I do understand the notion that Georgia was forced to play a couple folks out of position)
The key here is that Georgia had no fewer than 4, and possibly 5 juniors who decided to return who would have been drafted: Nick Chubb, Sony Michel, Davin Bellamy, Lorenzo Carter, and possibly Dom Sanders.
Chubb, by all accounts, looks to be much closer to his pre-injury self this year, making he and Michel arguably the best tandem of running backs in the country.
Bellamy and Carter were inconsistent last year, but the ability is there, and with another year of seasoning, should be at least as good and hopefully better.
With the rest of Georgia's front seven, there was an abundance of raw talent, flush with freshmen and first-year starters last year. Obviously, Trent Thompson will need to be back healthy, but there is just so much depth filled with talented guys who were just getting their feet wet.
Jonathan Ledbetter is starting to round into form after a 6-game suspension last year, and guys like Tyler Clark, David Marshall, Julian Rochester will be more than capable of making plays and providing depth.
The linebacking corps, which includes All SEC candidate Roquan Smith in the middle, is athletic and experienced.
The Secondary, which added the surprising JR Reed, seems far more settled than it was going into last year (when guys like Juwuan Briscoe, Rico McGraw, and Reggie Wilkerson held some seniority, but were by accounts neither willing nor able to fit in with the new staff's demands).
I just see a talented and deep defensive unit.
The offense is full of a lot more "ifs," but they are ifs that weigh in Georgia's favor if you go by history.
2nd year QB, 2nd year impact players like Riley Ridley, Isaac Nauta, and Mecole Hardman's probable switch to the slot among others. A larger o-line with everyone seemingly settling in to positions for which they are best suited. A LOT of competition coming in at WR (JJ Holloman already seems set to challenge for significant playing time, for example).
Granted, these are still "ifs." If Eason makes the strides that a lot of QBs do from their true freshmen to sophomore years (or, hell, if Jake Fromm somehow beats him out because he's just that good), and if the o-line is more dominant and consistent, and if some WRs step up and become legitimate threats, and if Cheney and staff are able to better identify potential mismatches, etc. and so on.
The best thing, though, is that if nothing else, there is going to be far, far more competition at every spot on the field, especially when the bumper crop of freshmen O-linemen show up in the summer and fall. That's just something that Georgia hasn't had much of in recent years.
Now, here's where some folks chime in with "show me," or, "I've heard this all before. I want to see it on the field." That's certainly fair enough, but as the first game is almost 4 months away, this is all we can go off of for now.
I will say that I haven't been overly optimistic about a Georgia team in several years. I didn't expect much last year (figured we'd beat Vandy, though). I just see a team with more talent and experience, as well as a team where both the coaches and players have a better idea of who they are and what they can be.
Sunday, March 26, 2017
For Mecole Hardman, Spring Practice is Key
Fans, especially those who keep a close eye on recruiting, always begin to shudder when one of their prized 5-star recruits switches positions.
It's easy to understand why. After all, no matter how good an athlete he is, getting his first reps at a foreign position in college puts him squarely behind the eight-ball. For Hardman, it's not as though the cornerbacks ahead of him are a bunch of Rudy Ruettigers, being 5 foot nothing, a hundred and nothing, with hardly a speck of athletic ability. Likewise for the receivers he'd be tasked with covering on Saturdays.
Many have said since he first signed that Hardman (5'11, 190lbs) could be a fascinating option on offense in the slot, or on some specially designed plays out of the backfield. So, while he does appear to be easing into that role this spring, the question Georgia coaches must answer heading into fall will be, "Is Mecole Hardman a cornerback, or not?"
To be completely fair and reasonable, this is not to suggest he needs to either earn a starting spot or be 100% migrated to offense. He is only heading into his sophomore year, after all. But, there does need to be a level of improvement and enough flashes of "it" as to warrant him staying put.
In my mind, there are basically two possibilities with respect to his starting to get some reps on offense this spring. Either he's beginning to grasp the concepts and techniques at CB to the point where he can afford to miss a few reps at the position, or he's coming along so slowly to the point where it's time to start seeing what he can potentially be on offense instead. Hopefully, it's the former.
There have been instances in the past where a highly rated prospect came to Georgia without a home (position). Richard Samuel and Brandon Miller stick out as guys who started one place, and then ultimately bounced around and never contributed to the level of what many expected. However, those were different cases, as they were both kind of "tweeners" in terms of size and speed. Not fast enough or perhaps quick enough for true speed/quickness positions, and not big enough for more size/strength positions.
With Hardman, he's definitely big enough, quick enough, and fast enough to play either CB or WR. So, the time between the end of spring practice and the beginning of fall is when Georgia coaches need to make a decision. To CB or not CB, that is the question.
It's easy to understand why. After all, no matter how good an athlete he is, getting his first reps at a foreign position in college puts him squarely behind the eight-ball. For Hardman, it's not as though the cornerbacks ahead of him are a bunch of Rudy Ruettigers, being 5 foot nothing, a hundred and nothing, with hardly a speck of athletic ability. Likewise for the receivers he'd be tasked with covering on Saturdays.
Many have said since he first signed that Hardman (5'11, 190lbs) could be a fascinating option on offense in the slot, or on some specially designed plays out of the backfield. So, while he does appear to be easing into that role this spring, the question Georgia coaches must answer heading into fall will be, "Is Mecole Hardman a cornerback, or not?"
To be completely fair and reasonable, this is not to suggest he needs to either earn a starting spot or be 100% migrated to offense. He is only heading into his sophomore year, after all. But, there does need to be a level of improvement and enough flashes of "it" as to warrant him staying put.
In my mind, there are basically two possibilities with respect to his starting to get some reps on offense this spring. Either he's beginning to grasp the concepts and techniques at CB to the point where he can afford to miss a few reps at the position, or he's coming along so slowly to the point where it's time to start seeing what he can potentially be on offense instead. Hopefully, it's the former.
There have been instances in the past where a highly rated prospect came to Georgia without a home (position). Richard Samuel and Brandon Miller stick out as guys who started one place, and then ultimately bounced around and never contributed to the level of what many expected. However, those were different cases, as they were both kind of "tweeners" in terms of size and speed. Not fast enough or perhaps quick enough for true speed/quickness positions, and not big enough for more size/strength positions.
With Hardman, he's definitely big enough, quick enough, and fast enough to play either CB or WR. So, the time between the end of spring practice and the beginning of fall is when Georgia coaches need to make a decision. To CB or not CB, that is the question.
Sunday, October 30, 2016
Gary Danielson, and the dreaded "REBUILDING" year
Many fans dismiss Danielson's analyses because he also tends to fall in love with teams and players, typically not Georgia. He still secretly wishes Tim Tebow had 10 more years of eligibility.
That aspect notwithstanding, if you listened carefully to what he was saying about Georgia, particularly offensively, you see that he knows what's going on.
After dissecting several plays, and I'm not saying this is all a big secret, he nailed our issues on offense.
In a nutshell, there was no protection, no run-blocking, no separation by receivers, etc. But, more to the point, all those things pointed to Florida being able to sit on anything short or intermediate, because the lack of worry of getting beat deep, coupled with the fact that they knew there would only be a clean pocket for maybe 2 seconds, turned a tough situation into an impossible one.
Georgia's o-line, time and again, had one or more o-linemen getting tossed aside or otherwise man-handled by a bigger, more athletic defensive front.
Even when Georgia was able to run a play that should have been successful x's and o's-wise, it resulted in either a dropped pass or an errant throw.
We as fans had hoped that Georgia was a team that never had to rebuild; just reload. We were wrong.
To recap:
Freshman QB, sub-par O-Line, mediocre receivers, Chubb at 75%-ish, rookie head coach, young defense, no pass rush by front 4, pitiful punting game/special teams, overall lack of senior leadership...probably leaving a few off.
The jury is still out on Cheney for me, but I did see him trying a number of different things to get the offense going. The real issue was that nothing was working. To me, this boils down to youth in some areas, but mainly just not having the horses to do what we want to do.
Thus, we are (HOPEFULLY) in a rebuilding phase. We had what looks like a solid '16 class, and if we can finish strong, should have an excellent '17 class (big 'if' if we don't win a few more games this year).
However, because it will take another year or two for these classes to bear fruit, we're stuck in this rebuilding, and not reloading phase. And it sucks.
That aspect notwithstanding, if you listened carefully to what he was saying about Georgia, particularly offensively, you see that he knows what's going on.
After dissecting several plays, and I'm not saying this is all a big secret, he nailed our issues on offense.
In a nutshell, there was no protection, no run-blocking, no separation by receivers, etc. But, more to the point, all those things pointed to Florida being able to sit on anything short or intermediate, because the lack of worry of getting beat deep, coupled with the fact that they knew there would only be a clean pocket for maybe 2 seconds, turned a tough situation into an impossible one.
Georgia's o-line, time and again, had one or more o-linemen getting tossed aside or otherwise man-handled by a bigger, more athletic defensive front.
Even when Georgia was able to run a play that should have been successful x's and o's-wise, it resulted in either a dropped pass or an errant throw.
We as fans had hoped that Georgia was a team that never had to rebuild; just reload. We were wrong.
To recap:
Freshman QB, sub-par O-Line, mediocre receivers, Chubb at 75%-ish, rookie head coach, young defense, no pass rush by front 4, pitiful punting game/special teams, overall lack of senior leadership...probably leaving a few off.
The jury is still out on Cheney for me, but I did see him trying a number of different things to get the offense going. The real issue was that nothing was working. To me, this boils down to youth in some areas, but mainly just not having the horses to do what we want to do.
Thus, we are (HOPEFULLY) in a rebuilding phase. We had what looks like a solid '16 class, and if we can finish strong, should have an excellent '17 class (big 'if' if we don't win a few more games this year).
However, because it will take another year or two for these classes to bear fruit, we're stuck in this rebuilding, and not reloading phase. And it sucks.
Monday, October 17, 2016
What you don't want to hear, but have to deal with this season
First, to be clear, Georgia has not played well this season for the most part. We know that. Can't lose to Vandy at home.
But, while the coaching staff and players continue to try to improve, we as fans are either at, or fast-approaching a crossroads. The crossroads consists of two choices, so it's a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure book, for those who are old enough or young enough to get the referenced.
1) You decide that Kirby is in over his head, that Chaney is not a good OC, that Beamer cannot coach special teams, etc., and scrap this little "experiment" before it's too late.
2) You acknowledge that this is a transition year, rife with the characteristics brought by a whole confluence of events which include, but are not limited to:
- First year head coach
- New offensive system
- Undermanned/Under-talented offensive line
- True Freshman QB
- Departure of a (from what we know) beloved head coach causing some lack of 'buy in'
- Lack of senior leadership
- Significant minutes being played by underclassmen
- Lack of familiarity with personnel/Lack of personnel equipped to do what we're trying to do
Now, to be fair, let's all acknowledge that there is a fine line between a reason and an excuse. Those with closed minds who are fed up beyond reason will say these are nothing but excuses. Perhaps they are. I believe that they are legitimate reasons.
Many will go back to what I initially acknowledged, that "even with all this, you still shouldn't lose to Vandy." No, you shouldn't, but you did. So, what exactly does that mean?
The simple truth is that nobody knows. When you are dealing with a laundry list of problems related to newness and inexperience, there's no real bar set as far as how good you should be, or how bad you're "allowed" to be.
So, again, you're nearing a crossroads.
My preference, which is in line with what I believe, is that we're having to break down a lot of aspects of the program in order to build it back up better. That's not always a pretty thing (which is not to say there aren't exceptions). I know I wasn't alone in being weary of fruitless 9 and 10 win seasons. So, if we have to deal with a 6 or 7 win season to set up for better years in '17, '18, and beyond, then that's something I'm willing to deal with, and it doesn't matter to me that we suffer a few embarrassing losses this year.
Now, we lose to Vandy next year, and I'll start to see what the other pages of that Choose-Your-Own-Adventure book look like.
But, while the coaching staff and players continue to try to improve, we as fans are either at, or fast-approaching a crossroads. The crossroads consists of two choices, so it's a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure book, for those who are old enough or young enough to get the referenced.
1) You decide that Kirby is in over his head, that Chaney is not a good OC, that Beamer cannot coach special teams, etc., and scrap this little "experiment" before it's too late.
2) You acknowledge that this is a transition year, rife with the characteristics brought by a whole confluence of events which include, but are not limited to:
- First year head coach
- New offensive system
- Undermanned/Under-talented offensive line
- True Freshman QB
- Departure of a (from what we know) beloved head coach causing some lack of 'buy in'
- Lack of senior leadership
- Significant minutes being played by underclassmen
- Lack of familiarity with personnel/Lack of personnel equipped to do what we're trying to do
Now, to be fair, let's all acknowledge that there is a fine line between a reason and an excuse. Those with closed minds who are fed up beyond reason will say these are nothing but excuses. Perhaps they are. I believe that they are legitimate reasons.
Many will go back to what I initially acknowledged, that "even with all this, you still shouldn't lose to Vandy." No, you shouldn't, but you did. So, what exactly does that mean?
The simple truth is that nobody knows. When you are dealing with a laundry list of problems related to newness and inexperience, there's no real bar set as far as how good you should be, or how bad you're "allowed" to be.
So, again, you're nearing a crossroads.
My preference, which is in line with what I believe, is that we're having to break down a lot of aspects of the program in order to build it back up better. That's not always a pretty thing (which is not to say there aren't exceptions). I know I wasn't alone in being weary of fruitless 9 and 10 win seasons. So, if we have to deal with a 6 or 7 win season to set up for better years in '17, '18, and beyond, then that's something I'm willing to deal with, and it doesn't matter to me that we suffer a few embarrassing losses this year.
Now, we lose to Vandy next year, and I'll start to see what the other pages of that Choose-Your-Own-Adventure book look like.
Sunday, October 2, 2016
Blame the loss on coaching? No freakin' way
Read some ridiculous comments about how Rico McGraw running out on the field without his helmet, leading to a crucial 15 yd penalty, should be blamed on coaches. Likewise, Georgia's inability to knock down a hail Mary pass was due to poor coaching.
Wrong.
When you have one guy (I guess a second in street clothes made his way out there) out of nearly a hundred doing something like that, it's the fault of an individual player. Perhaps next time the coaches should put shock collars on everyone if it's their fault.
As for misplaying the Hail Mary, I can say with a high degree of certainty that that scenario is practiced (properly) many times before and during the season. The only potential change I could see would be having a few taller folks out there. Maybe put Javon Wims, the 6'4-6'5 WR planted on the goal line, but that's splitting hairs. The bottom line is that UT's WR got in just the right spot, and our players did not.
Hell, I can look at Georgia's touchdown prior to the heartbreaking Hail Mary and tell you that UT's DB was probably given explicit instructions: "Do NOT let them get behind you, whatever you do." But, their DB got lulled to sleep by Ridley, who then turned on a burst to catch a long TD.
All this is not to say that the coaches don't have their share of responsibility in these cases. It is, of course, up to them to make sure they're not only teaching their players what to do and what not to do, but that they get players to respond and execute.
Kirby cites a lack of discipline. It is ultimately up to the coaches to make sure the players are exhibiting said discipline, but no matter who you are as a coach, in the moment, sometimes players just don't do what they're supposed to or need to do.
This loss, while devastating to me as a fan, will be a better teacher than any coach or drill can be going forward.
Wrong.
When you have one guy (I guess a second in street clothes made his way out there) out of nearly a hundred doing something like that, it's the fault of an individual player. Perhaps next time the coaches should put shock collars on everyone if it's their fault.
As for misplaying the Hail Mary, I can say with a high degree of certainty that that scenario is practiced (properly) many times before and during the season. The only potential change I could see would be having a few taller folks out there. Maybe put Javon Wims, the 6'4-6'5 WR planted on the goal line, but that's splitting hairs. The bottom line is that UT's WR got in just the right spot, and our players did not.
Hell, I can look at Georgia's touchdown prior to the heartbreaking Hail Mary and tell you that UT's DB was probably given explicit instructions: "Do NOT let them get behind you, whatever you do." But, their DB got lulled to sleep by Ridley, who then turned on a burst to catch a long TD.
All this is not to say that the coaches don't have their share of responsibility in these cases. It is, of course, up to them to make sure they're not only teaching their players what to do and what not to do, but that they get players to respond and execute.
Kirby cites a lack of discipline. It is ultimately up to the coaches to make sure the players are exhibiting said discipline, but no matter who you are as a coach, in the moment, sometimes players just don't do what they're supposed to or need to do.
This loss, while devastating to me as a fan, will be a better teacher than any coach or drill can be going forward.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)