Tech

By Burdell's Brother

September 5, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this

You had to go for it. It was a momentum killer. They had moved the ball and the play call before was terrible, Choice should have picked up the one on third. Anyway, you go for it, get the momentum, and let your defense rest more. Even if you do not score, you still rest your defense and keep their offense on the sidelines. We played not to lose in the second half. Long and the short, if Tech does not go 9-3 10-2, Nix and Gailey have to go. It is unfair to waste so much talent, and it will only get worse!

By A Bug's Life

September 5, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this

that was not Nix’s call. that was so predictably chan, you can not hang that on nix. there are many other issues with Nix the other night although it is hard to question Nix too much because he seemed to do well in the first half until the Chan Chan Man could not resist the self destructive urge to put on the headphones and screw the game up. CAN CHAN! NIX NIX!

By John-CE72

September 5, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this

Play calling in the first half was fine except for the third down call where Tech set up the field goal instead of trying to score. I thought the field goal was there anyway. Second half play calling was typical Chan - good enough for a 6 win season at best. CHAN - LOSE THE HEADPHONES AND LET NIX CALL THE PLAYS!!

By jackets fan

September 5, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this

The way you know Tech did the right thing is to ask yourself what would the “Can Chan” fans have said if Tech had been stopped on a 4th and 1 try? The rear end chewing that would have ensued would have been unbearable. If the try was unsuccessful, ND would have had a short field. On that possession, ND only got enough yardage to attempt a field goal. Had they been working from the 50, instead of the opposing 20, the plays they called on that possession would have gotten them in the end zone, or at least close enough for a point blank field goal. And with 3 minutes left in the 3RD QUARTER(!!!), how can you possibly think it was a now or never situation?!?!?!? Tech was in the game, there was no reason to panic and give ND a short field.

Patrick Nix has some work to do on his play calling, but it was his first calling plays in a 1-A football game, against the #2 team in the country. I think he did fairly well considering. Now he has 2 games (3 if you think Virginia is as bad as I do) to work out the kinks, find some more weapons to compliment CJ (including a f*cking TE!!!).

By Joel

September 5, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this

Pete would have gone on 4th and 1…Charlie would have gone on 4th and 1…and Chan did not.The difference is that the USC and Notre Dame coaches know that to get the reward of a 10+ game season, you have to be willing to take risks…the call to not go on that 4th and 1 was a clear signal that the Tech coaches are happy with a 7 - 5 season - low risk, average reward…

By Rod

September 5, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this

Mike - do you know anything about football? The decision to go for it or punt on a fourth down does not belong to the offensive coordinator - it’s the coach’s call. If you don’t know that then you shouldn’t be writing about football. I guess you have a gripe about Nix not being a Tech man or something.

Secondly - they just lost yardage on 3rd and 1. They did the right thing by punting and relying on the defense to get the ball back (remember, it’s a team game). To go for it on 4th and fail sends a strong message to your defense that you don’t think you can rely on them.

People like you are sad - you second guess after a play goes bad. Hindsight is 20/20 - and helpful for cowards like you.

By James Wilson

September 5, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

You go for it! We had been playing the type of offense where we could’ve made it. Either pass it short to Calvin, or do one of those Reggie Ball run-it-up-the-middle plays that gained like 20 yards each time we did it. Good game, though. We showed some more life in our offense, and our defense played like they usually do.

By GT

September 5, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this

I don’t fault the call as much as I fault the overall play calling of Tech. We had our chance on the third down play and lost a feet, if we had not made it on fourth the game is over in the third quarter. I think in these kind of games the idea is to get to the fourth and let it fly then. My problem is as I watch other coaches around the country, our conservative play calling when we are playing lesser teams. A lesser team has the advantage of knowing what is coming. Hell if I can guess and be right 80% of the time I would guess all the film study will allow the coach on the other side to guess in the 90% range. There will be no passes over the middle that is why ND left it open Saturday night, you take that out of any game plan. Then as the weeks go by you watch how other teams exploit Tech’s weaknesses and add that to your plan because they are not going to change. So now you have a team that is totally perdictable on offense with a defense that is having to be on the field more and more as the season goes on and even superman can’t handle that kind of load. Somewhere in the middle of all that a Duke or NC State or a Wake Forrest gets you if not all three. I will say that our talent is so good now that we could telegraph every play to Duke before running it and still win which was not the case a few years ago. Watch Spurrier Saturday to see how life is on the other side. Inferior talent, better results, all because he scares the hell out of the other side on what he will do next. I heard Chan say the other day that Duke is the only non bowl team that beat them. Bowl teams use to mean something like a millionaire use to mean something, now both are inflated to mean very little and the truth needs to be faced.

By James Wilson

September 5, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this

Rod, you must have been pulling for ND in that game.

By GT80

September 5, 2006 04:24 PM | Link to this

Here is the difference between Chan and Charlie Weiss (yes, it is Chan’s call not Nix’s).

Quotes from Weiss after the game -

“If I punt the ball into the end zone, they get the ball on the 20-yard line with a minute to go in the game,” Weis said. “Let’s say they hit 21 (Calvin Johnson) on a crossing route and he takes it to the house, here the spirit of the defense that has played so good the whole game is broken because I didn’t have the guts to go for it on fourth-and-a-half-a-yard.” “I was trying to win the game, not play to not lose it,” Weis said. “I usually coach the game to try to win the game, not to not lose it.”

Chan has always played to not lose and that’s why we are always going to be 7-5 with him.

Now if Nix is the one that called the run to set up a field goal on 3rd down at the 11 then he is also a loser. You have to throw the ball up to Calvin at least once when you get it inside the 15.

Sigh, looks like another year of Gaileyball.

By GREG

September 5, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this

I THINK NIX’S PROBLEM WAS THAT HIS BRITCHES WERE FULL OF CRAP,SO HE CALLED A BAD GAME!GIVE THE GUY A BREAK.

By GREG

September 5, 2006 05:01 PM | Link to this

NIX LEFT LOGS IN HIS BRITCHES IN THE 2ND HALF!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!!!!

By Ben Bulldog

September 5, 2006 05:43 PM | Link to this

Before the season started, Chan said Nix will make ALL the calls. Remember?

By RR

September 5, 2006 05:57 PM | Link to this

3 and 1 and we throw the ball after Choice and O-line had ND on it’s heels. Bad call, but I won’t second guess the coach or Nix. We played well, but Notre Dame was just too good overall. If special teams would have tackled someone, it would have been an issue. Never satisfied w/ a loss, but we will be better than average this year. Miami showed they can’t move the ball. We have a shot to win coastal if we can stay within 7 of VT in the first 10 minutes of the game in Blacksburg.

By KneeJerk

September 5, 2006 06:08 PM | Link to this

Yeah, those remarks by Weis make him look real gutsy AFTER they made it. If his guy is stopped short, we start to rethink the “genius” label that the media has adorned him with. Someone already said it: hindsight is 20-20. If the defense stops ND, Chan looks like he made the great move. Bottom line, the game was decided between the lines. Great game, no blame.

By Jim

September 5, 2006 06:10 PM | Link to this

The poorest call was not the decision to play it conservative on 4th, though it was bad. The call on 3 and inches was terrible. Run a QB sneak. Don’t give the defense time to get in the backfield and mess things up. It worked for us earlier in the game, and you saw N.D. do it with Quinn and ice things later. Chan was obviously involved once we played conservative and kicked the field goal. You have a weapon like C.J. and have him complete two passes in the second half. We don’t even know that we have a fullback, tight ends, or 3 receivers in the game. There are no reverses, no misdirections, no imagination. Compare the calls N.D. made on crucial downs to those we made, especially in the last half. I hate it for the players. We got outcoached, not outplayed. Even Ball had a good game overall. But, you just always expect more of the same with Chan.

By mark

September 5, 2006 06:49 PM | Link to this

Anyone who has watched Tech the last 4 years saw EXACTLY the same play calling Saturday night. Nix may be calling the plays, but make no mistake he had to mortgage his first born to make sure he called it just like Daddy Chan did.

The 4th and 1 was cowardly, but the bigger disgrace to me was running a yard to line up a field goal with half of the 2nd Quarter left. Once we got up 10 points, Tech went in the closet like the last 4 years and left it to Tenuta to win or lose.

Pathetic - I’d rather lose by 40 trying to win than lose by 4 trying not to lose.

By Shivas

September 5, 2006 08:09 PM | Link to this

Must go through the ACC to determine.

By Shivas

September 5, 2006 08:15 PM | Link to this

By the way Greg, Please ditch the “LOL,” it’s very stupid and that’s all you do. Grow up!

By SteveO

September 6, 2006 12:51 AM | Link to this

go for it go for it go for it What would USC do? They would go for it. Thats why USC wins championships.

By ken

September 6, 2006 06:48 AM | Link to this

fire chan and promote tanuda to head coach NOW

By Amelia

September 6, 2006 06:58 AM | Link to this

Yes guys…it is the same playcalling that we have seen for the last 4 years. We also have the same QB. The coaches would love to be more ingenious but they can’t. Reggie Ball handicaps this team because he is so limited. This program should have recruited a QB several years ago and the Reggie ordeal could have been a thing of the past. Of course when the fan base is firing the coaches that recruit the players in the blogs and paper everyday, what recruit will come. Look at UGA folks. They have FOUR quarterbacks better than Reggie and just got a commitment from another top gun QB out of Missouri for christsakes!

By GREG

September 6, 2006 07:58 AM | Link to this

GEORGIA TECH ALMOST BEATING A GIANT THAT HASN’T WON A BOWL GAME IN 14 OR 15 YEARS!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!SAMFORD GAME!!!LOL!!!!!!!I HOPE NIX WEARS DEPENDS FOR THAT ONE!!!!LOL!!!!

By mark

September 6, 2006 08:45 AM | Link to this

Amelia - you’re right on all counts. The only thing I would suggest is to look at the QB’s that Chan has had at Tech - Suggs (?), Bilbo and Ball. All have gotten worse under his coaching. Another high recruit was used to return punts until he transferred and the ones on the bench now have not gotten a shot at all.

A QB wants to go to a system where he has a chance to get better and get drafted - and even in the great Dawg nation, the system does not produce highly regarded QB’s for the pros. When was the last time a UGA QB was drafted in the first round?

Gailey had Troy Aikman at Dallas and made him mediocre with his play calling and strategy. He is a horrible coach and you can bet the highly regarded offensive players out there know it.

I like the idea to promote Tenuta now - let’s get the ship righted before we hit the tough games.

By Play that funky music whiteboy

September 6, 2006 08:50 AM | Link to this

Shivas, are we still overrated?

By GREG

September 6, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this

HA WHITEBOY…..WIN A BOWL GAME!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!

By Kentucky Jacket

September 6, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this

The reason the Jackets lost is because Notre Dame made adjustsments and Tech did not. What do you call that? Coaching. Of course, you go for it on 4th an inches. You play to win. Notre Dame had just taken the lead for the first time and you had to get the momentum back. I’m not at “Can Chan” yet but I’m leaning.

By jackets fan

September 6, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this

Okay, let’s get something clear, it was not 4th and inches. It was 4th and at least a yard, if not a yard and a half. Those are totally different situations. I agree with Jim, punting on 4th down was not the mistake, the call on 3rd and 1 was. The QB sneak is appropriate in that situation, especially when you have a QB who can run the ball. But once that 3rd and 1 play was stuffed, punting was the right call, no matter what any of you idiot Xbox champions think. This aint your NCAA 2006 game where the defense is always accomodating to what you want to do.

And yes playthatfunkymusicwhiteboy, ND is still overrated. Or Georgia Tech is underrated. However you want to put it. I think I recall some ND fan claiming they were going to win 49-10. Did they leave the other 75% of their offense on the bus?

By John

September 6, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this

The major decision to me was the 3rd down call. If I remember correctly, there was no nose guard over the center. Reggie had previously run a sneak with a couple of yards to spare. It looked to me like it was wide open for a repeat. If not, then that was the called for play on the 4th down (which I don’t think ever would have been necessary).

By JustMe

September 6, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this

Even though all else in Tech football is going great, the same old STUPID conservative offense is here. We have the defense and the appropriate risk-taking to win games. We have the players with talent. What we do not have is the appropriate risk-taking on the offensive play calling.

When will Chan learn (if ever)?

Tech cannot go to the next level playing ultra conservative on offense. I have been beating this drum for years now because I have seen it repeatedly lose games for us. And, this is the only reason that I am in favor of getting rid of Chan.

Hell would freeze over before Chan ever goes for 4th down and 1/2 inch!!!!

By GREG

September 6, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this

TECH SAT ON A 10-0 LEAD!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!L0L!!!!!!!!!!

By Reality

September 6, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this

This call hardly mattered….The big issue was in the 2nd Quarter in the red zone….We play for a field goal and go up 10-0….How much sense does it take to know that you go 4 times in a row to the best player in America on the FADE (6-5, 45 Inch vertical leap)….Chan Gailey is a f** Idiot !

By Play that funky music whiteboy

September 6, 2006 01:30 PM | Link to this

jackets fan - that’s why I asked the question, great answer from you and one I would expect. It would seem though that those in the AP don’t agree with many of the Irish fans that Tech was very underrated - the AP is looking like they felt the Jackets were the overrated ones, that Notre Dame should have kicked the snot out of them in Atlanta, night game, in front of a packed house.

Just so you know, I don’t agree with the AP’s assessment, and I think after what I saw Saturday night, the Big 10 teams we play are in real trouble. Tech has tremendous team speed, and Notre Dame hung right with them - which portends badly for the plodding Penn State, Michigan, Mich State and Purdue.

ND won’t see a defense that good again, unless we make the Fiesta Bowl.

Greg - go beat Florida for once. ND beat Spurrier with Florida the last time we played them in a bowl game, you can’t seem to beat them even after he left - PS Ron Zook owns UGA.

By greg

September 6, 2006 01:55 PM | Link to this

HA WHITEBOY…NOT WINNING A BOWL GAME IN 15 YEARS IS WORSE…ONE MORE THING HOW MANY CONFERECE CHAMPIONSHIPS DOES FLA HAVE SINCE 2002???..FLA OWNS GA…LOL!!!!!!!!CHECK THE ALL TIME RECORD AND CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE 2 SCHOOLS!!!!!!!!!!LET ME KNOW????PENN STATE IS OVERRATED TOO!!!!!

By GT90

September 6, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this

Bottom line here is if Tech goes to a wide open offense and goes for quick scores, Tenuta will not be able to do the things with his defense that he wants to do. A defense like Tech’s needs rest to be able to run around and pressure a team. However I would like to see Tech be a little more aggressive with play calling, but at the same time you don’t want to run Tenuta off. I’ll be honest and tell you that I would rather lose in a shoot out (like some of the late 90’s games) than a defensive struggle, but at the same time I understand what Gailey is trying to do.

By Ole GTimer

September 6, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this

I do not fault the punt on 4th and 1. I fault the 3rd and less than 1 call. QB sneak, get the first down and continue the drive. The only thing that concerns me about the 06 Team that reminds me of all Gailey teams is the lack of killer instinct. I felt we came out in the 2nd half playing not to loose. This needs to change. A ‘0’ in the win column is unacceptable.

By BUZZ

September 6, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this

Nix’s play calls on 2nd & 3rd down stink. I remember a situation where we had a nice 9yd. run on first down & it was 2nd & 1 at mid field & he’s makes back-2-back bonehead calls. A pass on 2nd down that was thrown deep but the receiver was short. Then on 3rd he tries to run out of the shotgun instead of a run formation. What the hell?

By buzztrip

September 7, 2006 07:06 AM | Link to this

Punt, early in 2nd half, more to lose than to gain, offense did not make it on 3rd down, better to regain momentum on defense, lots of reasons

By Jim Jenkins

September 7, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this

I’m mad and sad. I have never commented about a coach at Tech until today. It appears that for the last few years Tech has had men on the field that wanted to play and coaches on the side line that were afraid to play. If you are the underdog and expected to lose, what do you gain by playing conservative ball? Lose by fewer points?

Fear is new to the flats, and I don’t like it. The coaches’ lack of confidence can spread. If the coached don’t have faith in the men on the field, the men on the field will sooner or later give up. Remember the bowl game?

By GorillaDuck

September 7, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this

I agree Jim. Why play conservative (like on the 4th and 1 or setting up for the field goal on 3rd down)when you’re playing the #2 team and picked to lose.

Here’s the comment that scares me the most:

Nix was asked if there was more to his offense that he didn’t show Saturday night. “We sure didn’t hold anything back,” Nix said. “We played this one to win it.”

Evidently we’ve seen everything this offense has to offer. I’ve never been so disappointed with Tech’s coaching.

By Jason

September 7, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this

It was a good game, but we really know nothing about how either team will do this season. Tech fans and alumni lets wait a month or two before we throw Reggie, Chan, and Pat Nix under the bus. You can not make any reasonable judgement after one game. The best thing to do is get behind our Yellow Jackets. The AD is not going to make any mid season coaching changes. Lets all get behind the team for once. That includes Reggie, Chan, and Nix.