CPJ had his faults and these have been acknowledged. Repeatedly.
But there are folks who prefer a pro-style offense, and they simply refuse to admit that the TO was (and still is) an effective offensive system that can be an equalizer for the teams running it.
And I have no problem blaming CPJ for the lousy defense and special teams. So there. ;)
Now, please explain how running the TO created or contributed to these problem areas. I really would like to understand this.
Great question. One of the knock-offs against the TO (at least one that I thought had possible merit) is the idea that our D was constantly practicing against an offense that they will never face in a game. Is that right?
Wouldn't the Defense be working out against a scout team running whatever...
So awesome. Thanks.
You're spot on: the question is whether the TO is positionally sound. I feel like it is; CPJ always seemed to find a way to put more Jimmy's at the point of attack than they had Joe's.
The other question is that of "style". Are you an attacking player or do you prefer quiet...
Have you ever looked at those old photos of the Tech teams from the 50's & 60's? Crew cuts and flat tops and all that. There was no zillion-dollar NFL contract waiting for any of them.
(Most of the early NFL greats retired and got real jobs. I met Johnny Unitas once when I was on a sales call...
Is the "hurry up" offense a unique scheme? Guys holding up weird posters on the sidelines so that players get their signals quickly without waiting for someone to run in with the play from the coach?
Yeah, these are innovations that have changed the game. Everyone is looking for an edge.