I`m betting Shoop will cost Jones his job

#26
#26
Wow, you do realize they almost beat us playing a WR at QB

It doesn't get any less ignorant sounding, no matter how many times you say that.

We got it; you are utterly ignorant (I don't mean stupid, this isn't an insult, it's a very careful word choice) about the role of the QB in a triple-option offense, and the complexity and skill sets required.

It is nothing like being a WR, or a RB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#27
#27
I understand your sentiment and mindset....

...but after a 'W', this is a stupid thread.

Not really, considering his def has give up so many yards as of his past 6 games or so. If you don't question Shoop as a bust you aren't watching the game
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#28
#28
This was not a good defensive showing, but it was against an offense we won't see again this year. I'll hold my judgements until UF.
 
#29
#29
It doesn't get any less ignorant sounding, no matter how many times you say that.

We got it; you are utterly ignorant (I don't mean stupid, this isn't an insult, it's a very careful word choice) about the role of the QB in a triple-option offense, and the complexity and skill sets required.

It is nothing like being a WR, or a RB.

Nice try guy but a WR completed passes and almost beat us playing QB. I know the role of the QB in TO, and a WR should never put up those numbers
 
#31
#31
Not really, considering his def has give up so many yards as of his past 6 games or so. If you don't question Shoop as a bust you aren't watching the game

Don't deflect. I wasn't talking about Shoop.

I was questioning your characterization of Ga Tech's QB as a "WR" (in another thread, you said "RB" which was equally wrong).

The issue is your ignorance of what a triple-option QB does and what skill sets he needs.
 
#33
#33
We were favored.

Digging your own grave and then crawling out of it doesn't qualify as winning a game we shouldn't win.

Fair enough. Maybe I'm more impressed that his team didn't give up on him.

Just trying to squeeze something positive from this game.
 
#34
#34
Shoop is a good d coordinator. He played a triple option that wore on the defense all night. 96 plays will gas any defense not to include having to shed cut blocks all night as well. Just watch what happens for the defense when we play a more traditional offense.

96 plays that kept our defense on the field for three quarters. But, no hands on hips!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#35
#35
D was doing fairly good in first quarter, especially considering that their 2 best players (kirkland, Smith) and core of D against triple option were removed just recently. After that, they just got gassed from being on the field so much and with little depth. Consider that when our O finally started to get it together, GT's D was gassed too.

I was encouraged by the D frankly and expect they will be ok - no, the trouble was with the Offense last night.
 
#36
#36
When the game was on the line and GT needed 3 yards to win, our guys blew up the play and took the win.

Great win.

Plenty to look at to improve.

4 days till Game 2. I'm glad it's the Sycamores.

Turnovers and missed/blocked FGs was the difference.

Reminds me of Air Force back in 99 going for 2 to get the win. They didn't get it either.

I thought the same thing. That damn wishbone offense Air Force ran was killer. That game was in 2006 not '99
 
#38
#38
Nice try guy but a WR completed passes and almost beat us playing QB. I know the role of the QB in TO, and a WR should never put up those numbers

Don't eat paint chips. You are so obviously clueless as to what you're talking about it hurts. And what's so bad is...you don't even realize how clueless you are either....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#39
#39
:rock:When both the offensive and defensive lines gets knocked 3 to 5 yards backwards on virtually every play, where are those "great strength coach" results???? Somewhere our line coaches along with the strength coach are not getting the job done. Tim Priest of the Radio Vols constantly found fault with both of our line performance.:clapping:

Not sure that I buy it, but some posters claim our line was giving yardage to stay away from the cut blocks. Personally, the soft play at the line is a concern to me. They had some great stands, but the other team pushed them around most of the game, at least enough to let their backs run free. Giving up that kind of yardage to any team is a head shaker..
 
#40
#40
Don't deflect. I wasn't talking about Shoop.

I was questioning your characterization of Ga Tech's QB as a "WR" (in another thread, you said "RB" which was equally wrong).

The issue is your ignorance of what a triple-option QB does and what skill sets he needs.

He's a converted slot WR with 14 snaps and one pass prior to last night. Fact.
 
#41
#41
Don't eat paint chips. You are so obviously clueless as to what you're talking about it hurts. And what's so bad is...you don't even realize how clueless you are either....

So you are telling me he's not a converted WR? Go look at the facts.
 
#42
#42
Yes, Bob Shoop has been a major disappointment. What did they prepare for all Summer long? I could hold GT to 600 yards
 
#43
#43
Not sure that I buy it, but some posters claim our line was giving yardage to stay away from the cut blocks.

I wondered about that. GT is known to cut block. Having the players off the line makes those type of blocks harder to do and disguise.
 
#45
#45
Shoop is a good d coordinator. He played a triple option that wore on the defense all night. 96 plays will gas any defense not to include having to shed cut blocks all night as well. Just watch what happens for the defense when we play a more traditional offense.

When you constantly have to make excuses for a coach, it can only mean he is putting bad results on the field.
 
#46
#46
Shoop is a good d coordinator. He played a triple option that wore on the defense all night. 96 plays will gas any defense not to include having to shed cut blocks all night as well. Just watch what happens for the defense when we play a more traditional offense.

Well spoken.....I wouldn't dare make a judgement over last nights game. Our defense was still in the game as the clock ticked 0:00 and the scoreboard had us on top and no serious injuries. UT is very fortunate plus they learned a heckuva lot last night. Be patient and support our coaches and things will work to the good. GO BIG ORANGE!!!!
 
#47
#47
He's a converted slot WR with 14 snaps and one pass prior to last night. Fact.

This is your ignorance continuing to shine through.

Triple-option college QBs (and RBs) come from all sorts of high school backgrounds. Some were QBs, others were tailbacks...slot backs...receivers...even (once in a blue moon) defenders.

The skill sets required of them in college is unique...which means you're looking for athletes with really fast-firing synapses, the ability to make split-second decisions most can't, and the hand-eye coordination to turn that decision into very precise action.

Where you find that...well, it can vary greatly.

If you really knew much about the triple-o QB, you'd know that and wouldn't be hung up on where the guy came from.

This isn't Florida redux. This is a whole different animal.

You're trying to be cute that way, but you're just showing your ignorance.
 
#48
#48
Not sure that I buy it, but some posters claim our line was giving yardage to stay away from the cut blocks. Personally, the soft play at the line is a concern to me. They had some great stands, but the other team pushed them around most of the game, at least enough to let their backs run free. Giving up that kind of yardage to any team is a head shaker..

"Blitzing is typically a bad idea against the triple option because a good quarterback can read it and make you pay for not having a guy in the right place. So now we're talking straight up football so assignment and tackling become top priority. Oklahoma is going to have to play close to the line of scrimmage to stop the ball which puts you in danger if something gets behind you."

This is from a Oklahoma page. But yeah. Basically a good strategy to go with agains the triple option is to play "prevent" defense, but against the run. Limit big runs. Hope they make a mistake. Triple option teams have a bad habit of turning the ball over or getting penalties. Then you capitalize on their mistakes.

This seems to be what we did. Played prevent. Let them get their 3-4 yrd runs. Played a clean game on our end. No turnovers. Only 2 penalties from us.
 
#49
#49
So you are telling me he's not a converted WR? Go look at the facts.

Out of high school he was an all purpose back, playing QB, RB and yes some WR. He did play WR his first year at GT but then played RB and now QB.

Jennings is a QB converted to WR. Do you ridicule every team that allows him to catch the ball??

Like Jennings, the GT QB, seems to be an all around good athletic player that has been willing to play where needed.
 
#50
#50
This is your ignorance continuing to shine through.

Triple-option college QBs (and RBs) come from all sorts of high school backgrounds. Some were QBs, others were tailbacks...slot backs...receivers...even (once in a blue moon) defenders.

The skill sets required of them in college is unique...which means you're looking for athletes with really fast-firing synapses, the ability to make split-second decisions most can't, and the hand-eye coordination to turn that decision into very precise action.

Where you find that...well, it can vary greatly.

If you really knew much about the triple-o QB, you'd know that and wouldn't be hung up on where the guy came from.

This isn't Florida redux. This is a whole different animal.

You're trying to be cute that way, but you're just showing your ignorance.
14 snaps, one pass attempt. Former WR. Enough said. Shoop sucks
 
Advertisement



Back
Top