Started By
Message
re: Who do you consider A level College Head Football Coaches?
Posted on 7/23/16 at 3:13 pm to DawgsLife
Posted on 7/23/16 at 3:13 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
And if Kirby is not better, then we shouldn't have changed.
Change at hc was needed, but that doesnt necessarily mean Kirby was the right choice. I think everyone expects Uga to win big under Kirby after year 1. I know I expect a big time 2017.
1
Posted on 7/23/16 at 3:29 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Change at hc was needed,
But only if we upgrade, right? I mean, if we get Mark Richt II, then we could have just kept him. Don't get me wrong. I think he will prove to elevate the program, and I am overall happy with the choice. But why make a change if it is not for the better?
quote:
I think everyone expects Uga to win big under Kirby after year 1.
Certainly. I won't be calling for his head after one year. Or two, for that matter.
quote:
I know I expect a big time 2017.
And I'm hoping you are right. but, I think I'll give him until 2018 to show major results.
Posted on 7/23/16 at 3:37 pm to DawgsLife
We should have lost or were lucky to beat Mizzou,, Georgia Southern, and possibly Tech. How do you not know what lucky to win 10 games means? Not to mention we lost to the only three good teams we played. If the schedule wasn't so easy last year and we don't get a little lucky in some games we are looking at 7 wins not 10.
Because they are Auburn with JJ another year in the system. He can't be worse. Malzahn has typically produced good offenses all but last year so I have to assume that will be worked out. They have a lot of talent on defense according to recruiting rankings
Where do we have more depth than we did last year? Except running back and maybe corner all of our depth is young or shitty.
quote:
Why? They downgraded their DC. They didn't get a QB.
Their coach seems unwilling to tailor his offense to his personnel. They have a poor OC. Don't get me wrong...Auburn tends to come on strong when they are expected to be bad. But their tackling was awful last season and they downgraded at DC.
Because they are Auburn with JJ another year in the system. He can't be worse. Malzahn has typically produced good offenses all but last year so I have to assume that will be worked out. They have a lot of talent on defense according to recruiting rankings
quote:
Reread. I said we are thin at DL.
More depth all over the field except, maybe at DL,
Where do we have more depth than we did last year? Except running back and maybe corner all of our depth is young or shitty.
This post was edited on 7/23/16 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 7/23/16 at 3:38 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
But only if we upgrade, right? I mean, if we get Mark Richt II, then we could have just kept him. Don't get me wrong. I think he will prove to elevate the program, and I am overall happy with the choice. But why make a change if it is not for the better?
No a change was needed even if Kirby goes 0-12. How good the person you hire does doesn't erase the need to hire said person.
Posted on 7/23/16 at 3:47 pm to td01241
quote:
We should have lost or were lucky to beat Mizzou
How so? I don't remember us needing a spectacular play to win. Were we impressive? No. Lucky? Why?
quote:
Georgia Southern
Again...GSU was not pretty. And was frustrating. I'll give this one to you, though. I was genuinely afraid we might lose that one.
quote:
and possibly Tech.
I was never really concerned with tech. Again, it could have been better and SHOULD have been better, but lucky to win that one? I don't see it.
(Doesn't mean I am right...just my opinion)
quote:
Because they are Auburn with JJ another year in the system.
JJ? He is totally lost.
quote:
Were do we have more depth than we did last year? All of our depth is young or shitty.
That's a fair question. Runningback. QB. OL. Secondary. I THINK we will be at least equal at LB, although I understand the concern there. If you can assume Auburn will be better because of recruiting, then why can't we? We have had better classes than them.
We should be better at OL, QB, RB on offense.
We should be as good at DB on defense. I honestly believe we will be equal at LB and maybe a small step backwards at DL until the young guys get their feet under them. This team should be as good if not better than last years team. Improvement at QB, OL coach and OC alone should make a big difference.
Posted on 7/23/16 at 3:53 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
we upgrade, right? I mean, if we get Mark Richt II, then we could have just kept him. Don't get me wrong. I think he will prove to elevate the program, and I am overall happy with the choice. But why make a change if it is not for the better?
We made the change with the intention of improving, but even if we don't improve, the need for change still existed.
Posted on 7/23/16 at 4:20 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
Again...GSU was not pretty. And was frustrating. I'll give this one to you, though. I was genuinely afraid we might lose that one.
We went to overtime and if GSU hadn't been terrible at managing their affairs they win that game. They led 14-7 and 17-14 at critical moments.
quote:
How so? I don't remember us needing a spectacular play to win. Were we impressive? No. Lucky? Why?
It was the first game we won without scoring a touchdown since like, the early 90s. Mizzou fumbled a touchdown away and had to settle for a fg early in the game. We didn't force the fumble he literally dropped it away.
quote:
was never really concerned with tech. Again, it could have been better and SHOULD have been better, but lucky to win that one? I don't see it.
Just because you "weren't concerned" doesn't mean you aren't lucky to win a game where your offense plays like that.
quote:
JJ? He is totally lost.
A lot of players turn bad seasons around. Malzahn has had a good offense every football stop he's every coached. Last year was an abomination and exception to the rule.
quote:
That's a fair question. Runningback. QB. OL. Secondary.
Runninback sure. Only one QB plays at a time. Who is our good depth on O line who isn't a true freshman? Same for secondary?
quote:
I THINK we will be at least equal at LB
We lost 3 starters
quote:
If you can assume Auburn will be better because of recruiting, then why can't we
Their good proven depth isn't mostly compromised of freshman.
quote:
We should be better at OL, QB, RB on offense.
We will be the same at RB since the same two players will play. QB will not be much better assuming Eason starts, he will turn the ball over much more than Lamby. O line will probably be better solely because of coaching most of the faces are the same.
All of that plus our schedule is much harder this year.
This post was edited on 7/23/16 at 4:31 pm
Posted on 7/23/16 at 4:35 pm to djsdawg
quote:
We made the change with the intention of improving, but even if we don't improve, the need for change still existed.
Ok. Maybe I am misunderstanding you. If we knew we would not improve, we would not have made a move, is what I am saying.
I THINK you are saying we needed a change, so we changed, hoping/expecting it would be an improvement.
If this is what you are saying, I agree.
Posted on 7/23/16 at 4:40 pm to DawgsLife
Yes. There is no way to know if you will improve when you make a change. You can only hope you hired the right guy.
Posted on 7/23/16 at 4:55 pm to td01241
quote:
We went to overtime and if GSU hadn't been terrible at managing their affairs they win that game. They led 14-7 and 17-14 at critical moments.
I understand what you are saying, but you can't play ifs. Once we made it to OT, I felt we would win. They looked and played tired. Depth won out. However, I said I would give you that game.
quote:
It was the first game we won without scoring a touchdown since like, the early 90s. Mizzou fumbled a touchdown away and had to settle for a fg early in the game. We didn't force the fumble he literally dropped it away.
They didn't score either, though. So it would be just as accurate to say we SHOULD have won. I understand they fumbled, but we fumbled twice on the goal line against Tech and nobody said "We'll count that as a win." It just doesn't happen that way. I never really felt threatened in the Mizzou game. Frustrated? Yes. Threatened? no.
quote:
A lot of players turn bad seasons around.
And a lot don't. And their defense was the bigger problem. It's not any better and their DC got significantly worse.
quote:
Runninback sure. Only one QB plays at a time. Who is our good depth on O line who isn't a true freshman? Same for secondary?
QB? Really? Eason is head and shoulders better than Lambert. Not will be. IS. OL? Doesn't have to be anything other than Freshmen. They are depth, not starters. Plus, we hired Pittman. Another significant improvement. He is one of the best in the nation. We were #1 in pass defense last season and return everybody, I think. If not everybody almost. Plus several players that got significant playing time last year are coming back.
I understand what we lost at LB. And, this is just a feeling, mainly. I really believe Lorenzo Carter breaks out this year. We have some quality guys at LB, but you are right. Playing up to the level of the guys we lost will be tough...or impossible.
quote:
Their good proven depth isn't mostly compromised of freshman.
So the group that did so horribly last season is coming back? With a much worse DC?
quote:
We will be the same at RB since the same two players will play.
They will get the lions share of carries, no doubt. But if one goes down, I am feeling like Holyfield can take up the slack. (Why does it feel like we say this every year, then we end up so thin?)
quote:
QB will not be much better assuming Eason starts, he will turn the ball over much more than Lamby.
If we feel that way, then we shouldn't start him at all. He will stretch the field much better than Lambert. He won't panic under pressure AS MUCH. But, yes. He will throw more picks....but part of thta reason is because we will be able to throw the ball more. We became VERY one dimensional when Chubb went down. Lambert simply could not get the respect that Eason will.
quote:
O line will probably be better solely because of coaching most of the faces are the same.
Faces are the same, but they have made a move or two and they have more experience. Auburn gets credit for a better defense because they have the same faces but worse coach...and we get slightly better even though we have the same faces and a much better coach?
We'll have to agree to disagree, then. And that's ok. We all have opinions. I have no doubt that your opinion will be right on some of these things, and mine will be right on some.
Posted on 7/23/16 at 4:56 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Yes. There is no way to know if you will improve when you make a change. You can only hope you hired the right guy.
If nothing else, Kirby has given the program a breath of fresh air. He has brought a spark we've been missing for awhile. I was a huge Richt supporter, but we all should get behind Smart, now. he is our future, and I honestly believe it will be abetter future.
Posted on 7/23/16 at 8:03 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
They didn't score either, though. So it would be just as accurate to say we SHOULD have won. I understand they fumbled, but we fumbled twice on the goal line against Tech and nobody said "We'll count that as a win." It just doesn't happen that way. I never really felt threatened in the Mizzou game. Frustrated? Yes. Threatened? no.
You don't consider something happening that hasn't happened since 1995 lucky? The same thing can be said about all of these games, the defense won it for us. The defense WILL NOT be as good this year. No way we are the #1 pass defense in the country with a worse, at least much younger, LB and DL core.
quote:
And a lot don't. And their defense was the bigger problem. It's not any better and their DC got significantly worse.
Huh? Their defense was pretty good, and will be again. Their offense was awful and I seriously doubt a Malzahn offense will be that bad again.
quote:
QB? Really? Eason is head and shoulders better than Lambert.
He is more talented. I can't think of any QB who has had what I would consider a good campaign as a true freshman other than UCLAs qb last year. The whole point of that was you were talking about depth at QB which doesn't matter. We could have the next Tom Brady on the bench and it wouldn't matter because he is never gonna see the field.
quote:
Doesn't have to be anything other than Freshmen. They are depth, not starters.
We were talking about depth.....
quote:
We were #1 in pass defense last season and return everybody, I think. If not everybody almost.
We are returning our whole secondary. You don't think losing a top 10 pick and a third rounder at pass rusher will hurt our pass defense?
quote:
I really believe Lorenzo Carter breaks out this year. We have some quality guys at LB, but you are right.
Carter is good....is he Floyd good? We have highly rated guys at LB who are all young. They may be better than we what we lost, but it's not likely.
quote:
So the group that did so horribly last season is coming back? With a much worse DC?
Already covered this. Their defense wasn't the problem.
quote:
They will get the lions share of carries, no doubt. But if one goes down, I am feeling like Holyfield can take up the slack
I agree with this. We have been churning out quality backs for so long.
quote:
If we feel that way, then we shouldn't start him at all. He will stretch the field much better than Lambert. He won't panic under pressure AS MUCH. But, yes. He will throw more picks....but part of thta reason is because we will be able to throw the ball more. We became VERY one dimensional when Chubb went down. Lambert simply could not get the respect that Eason will.
We have to start him. He is the future. He will stretch the field better he has a better arm, but how do you know how he will handle pressure?
This post was edited on 7/23/16 at 8:05 pm
Posted on 7/24/16 at 6:08 am to td01241
quote:
The defense WILL NOT be as good this year
Oh. We are misunderstanding. I agree the "D" will not be as good. But we should be head and shoulders better on offense with a better QB, Better OL, better OL Coach, Better OC.
quote:
Huh? Their defense was pretty good, and will be again. Their offense was awful and I seriously doubt a Malzahn offense will be that bad again.
Not really. Did you watch the LSU game at all? Did it improve? MAYBE. Against our offense that was putrid by then. They gave up 54 to Arkansas. True they held Alabama down, but that was a rivalry game. They gave up 34 to Idaho. They will tell you it looked better...and it might compared to the year before, but it was by no means pretty good. AND they are going from perhaps the best DC in the country to a terrible one.
quote:
The whole point of that was you were talking about depth at QB which doesn't matter.
Depth is not what I meant. Apparently I did not make myself clear. The QB position will be MUCH better for us, if for no other reason than we will have a deep ball threat. Defenses will have to back off the line or get burned. There will be growing pains, for sure.
quote:
We are returning our whole secondary. You don't think losing a top 10 pick and a third rounder at pass rusher will hurt our pass defense?
The last 2-3 years we have lost our top pass rusher. We always have another one waiting in the wings. We do this year, too. Lorenzo Carter will break out and have a HUGE year. Our defense may not be as good, but our offense will be MUCH better.
quote:(For clarification we were talking about Auburn, here)
Already covered this. Their defense wasn't the problem.
When you give up 54 to Arkansas, 34 to Idaho, and 45 to LSU, your defense is a problem. It always looks good against weaker offensive teams and, possibly a rival. And, just to be clear, Idaho did NOT score all their points against Auburn's second string late in the game. They scored 17 points in the first half, and 17 in the second.
Posted on 7/24/16 at 6:54 am to td01241
quote:
Where do we have more depth than we did last year?
RB without question,O line without guestion and MUCH better coaching:Pyke,Wynn,Kublanow,Sims and Baker return and all should be improved. Catalina,Galliard,Madden and Cleveland all will add depth.TE without question.
LB is somewhat of a push and lets stop with the Leonard Floyd nostalgia.The guy had 4.5 sacks last year and some games throughout his career he looked lost on the field.
Yes,he's a freak of an athlete who shredded the combine but losing him is not gonna create some huge void.
DB is a talented group and if Mcgraw get get his arse out of his head we could have one of the better groups in the country.
DL is absolutely an issue.
As good as our defense was last year lets also remember we competed vs some of the worst offenses in the SEC.Mizzou,Kentucky,Florida,Vandy and Auburn we all God awful.
quote:
JJ another year in the system. He can't be worse
Who says he can be better amd improve?Good lord,Mahlzan isn't a magical wizard who can make a mediocre a QB a superstar.Hell,he already had JJ under his magical coaching powers for a year before he became a starter.
Newton and Marshall were both exceptional talents who also got a year of JC ball under their belts before
they started at AU.BOTH were perfect fits for Mahlzan's offense and both pretty much fell into AU's lap.
quote:
Mizzou,, Georgia Southern, and possibly Tech. How do you not know what lucky to win 10 games means? Not to mention we lost to the only three good teams we played. If the schedule wasn't so easy last year and we don't get a little lucky in some games we are looking at 7 wins not 10.
Please,STFU up about "luck".Was GT,"lucky" in '14 when we had 2 goal line fumbles?Was SC "lucky" in 14 when we missed a chip shot FG?Was Auburn "lucky"vs us 2013?Was Ole Miss "lucky" vs Bama in '15?Was UT lucky last year when Chubb blew out his knee or Carter dropped an easy TD?Its the dumbest term used in sports and for as much supposed good luck you have one season or game you have just as much bad luck the next.
This post was edited on 7/24/16 at 9:24 am
Posted on 7/24/16 at 9:08 am to td01241
Georgia Southern was lucky they didn't lose in a blow-out.
You forget they got a couple of lucky turnovers including a fumble return for a touchdown. Georgia should have won in regulation by at least 2 touchdowns.
The game against Tech wasn't nearly as close as the score indicated.
I don't consider those lucky wins. They were unlucky in that they were way closer than they should have been.
You forget they got a couple of lucky turnovers including a fumble return for a touchdown. Georgia should have won in regulation by at least 2 touchdowns.
The game against Tech wasn't nearly as close as the score indicated.
I don't consider those lucky wins. They were unlucky in that they were way closer than they should have been.
Posted on 7/24/16 at 9:17 am to RD Dawg
quote:
Was Auburn "lucky"vs us 2013?
yes
Posted on 7/24/16 at 10:42 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
Was Auburn "lucky"vs us 2013?
quote:
yes
In fairness, they made their luck, as good teams do. Ricardo Louis could have given up on the play. Our guys had position on the ball and it should have been intercepted, or knocked down. He could have given up and slacked off, yet he kept running and stayed in position to make the catch off the deflection. never should have happened, but he never gave up on the play.
Posted on 7/24/16 at 12:02 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
fairness, they made their luck, as good teams do. Ricardo Louis could have given up on the play. Our guys had position on the ball and it should have been intercepted, or knocked down. He could have given up and slacked off, yet he kept running and stayed in position to make the catch off the deflection. never should have happened, but he never gave up on the play.
This is a load of shite. Louis never even went for the ball to begin with. A good WR would have challenged the db's for the ball.
Posted on 7/24/16 at 12:21 pm to djsdawg
quote:
This is a load of shite. Louis never even went for the ball to begin with. A good WR would have challenged the db's for the bal
He was running full stride and the was thrown behind him.It would have been virtually impossible to make a play on the ball.Our DB's were incredibly stupid in tipping the ball.
Posted on 7/24/16 at 12:25 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
He was running full stride and the was thrown behind him
exactly, which refutes:
quote:
Ricardo Louis could have given up on the play. He could have given up and slacked off, yet he kept running and stayed in position to make the catch
He was just running as far as he could, he didn't do shite to make a play on teh ball.
not to mention the holding on the pass
It was the luckiest play in auburn history. This isn't some "preparation meets opporutnity" or "never say die attitude" type of thing, it was pure straight up dumb luck. Sometimes it happens, it's ok to call it what it is. There is simply zero, no way whatsoever to call that play anything other than lucky.
Page 4 of 6
Latest Georgia News
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News