APP at Coastal tonight

[slugboy]

Patterson's defense wasn't what was winning them games in the Big XII, it was their offense which you mentioned was primarily the Air Raid, an offense that almost everyone in college football (or its concepts) runs today. As for Kansas State, the option heavy shotgun spread is not an innovative scheme in todays game. Chip Kelly with Oregon, Urban Meyer at Florida, Rich Rodgriguez at Michigan, Gus Malzahn at Auburn, and others were doing it at big name schools before Kansas State started implementing it with Colin Klein (their most successful period in the last 20 years). Chris Peterson was great a trick plays, I will give you that, but trick plays account for how much of an offense? Most of things he did on the offensive side were similar to the old pro style offenses that many teams in college football used during the early 2000s. At the end of the day it's about finding a good coach. Are there good coaches that innovate, yes many do. But to say that the only way to be successful at a non Bama like school is to be innovative is false.

1. If you look back at 2010 or so, there were three big unconventional coaches in the NCAA: Mike Leach with the Air Raid on offense, Paul Johnson with the run-heavy flexbone on offense, and Gary Patterson on defense. Many of us often wished to see a Patterson defense combined with a Leach or Johnson offense to see how far you would go with scheme. I’m sure Patterson would be shocked to hear that his defense wasn’t winning games.
2. Patterson had the #1 ranked defense 5 times during his tenure at TCU: https://247sports.com/college/tcu/A...s-Gary-Patterson-coaching-timeline-174319500/
3. Here’s more info on Patterson’s innovations in defensive scheme: https://www.footballstudyhall.com/2...e-gary-patterson-4-2-5-how-to-stop-the-spread
4. Mississippi State and some other schools run Air Raid. Running run-and-shoot route trees doesn’t mean that you’re running Air Raid, and if it did then Paul Johnson was an Air Raid coach. If you ask Dabo Swinney or Nick Saban if they run Air Raid, they’ll say “no”.
5. Urban Meyer’s offense was unconventional, but he didn’t want to be as unconventional as Paul Johnson and he said so. But he definitely crafted his offense for a scheme advantage.

 

[UgaBlows]

Johnson ran essentially this same play for a touchdown on more than one occasion. Started like any other spread option play out of the flex bone but hitting a wide open A-back with a pass. Used to live that play.

JT was deadly with that because they feared his running so much

 

[4shotB]

I am hoping we can hire a head coach who can do more with less - less money, less recruiting appeal, less gimmicks.

I certainly understand that but it's never an approach we would use when picking a job or when hiring candidates. "Person X. we want you to consider our offer but understand that you will be making 80 % of industry standard wages for your position and, btw, we have a freeze on hiring, expansion or capital spending. When can you start". I would never trust myself to hire a "diamond in the rough" under those conditions and I have seen few, if any AD's, do that successfully. In fact, from the outside looking in, it almosts appear to be a throw a dart and hope to get lucky rather than a scientific process that can be repeated. In fact, the great Dr. Rice made what until recently was widely considered the worst hire ever for a major GT sports program. And we haven't had an AD even close to Dr. rice in terms of intellect and achievemnt even since. In fact. some of them have been incompetent to put things kindly.

I am not saying throwing money at a coach either is the answer, The answer is that the President and new AD have to fix the systemic issues that keeps GT low on the pecking order of "good jobs" for football coaches. Will we get someone to fill the position. Of course, the money will cause some to think emotionally rather than logically. And all of them at the level believe they are good enough to knock down barriers that others wouldn't or couldn't. This was as true for Collins as it was for Coach Johnson in his time.

 

[BCJacket]

I don't get the negative reaction against Chadwell and 'the option'. I do see that if we hire a coach that runs an 'option offense', it's going to draw some media criticism about us 'going backwards'. But Chadwell's offense is not the flexbone, at all. Everything Chadwell does - RPOs, option runs, play action - are things NFL teams and big P5 programs are doing. He just does more of it.

I agree I'd want to see Tech give him the resources to hire some assistants with P5 experience, a great defensive staff, recruiting support. But that is true of every potential hire.

Put me in the camp that believes that option heavy offenses are a good fit for Tech. It worked for Fridge and Joe Hamilton. It worked for CPJ. I think DRad was right that Tech needs to do something a little different. The nature of who we are is that we need to focus on quality over quantity. We have to play smarter, use our resources creatively, find an edge. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to expand our fanbase, raise more money, recruit better. But it's always going to harder for us than our big StateU SEC neighbors. We're never going to have a huge alumni base or easy academics.

Option concepts let a team of smart disciplined players create mismatches and advantages even against bigger competition. That's what we need to be successful, IMHO. I'm open to other realistic ideas. But option based offenses are what's proven to work here in modern times. Chadwell's offense is a modern and innovative take on the option. I'd love to see it here.

 

[lv20gt]

Seems to me this whole argument is kinda silly.

Many folks feel that we could never compete with the factories because we have too many handicaps in doing so....Money, academics, money, stadium and fan base size, NIL money, etc Those folks are NOT arguing that we should try to do better/the best we can with those areas...they are arguing that because of our handicaps we must find another angle if we wish to compete.

Those arguing against the option are arguing that it creates its own handicaps for anyone running it. Mostly (iiuc) in that top notch players don't view it as a path to the NFL so we'll never be able to have top notch athletes here running a "gimmick" offense. This ignores the fact that any offense can be called gimmicky and every offense employs option principles. Every. Single. One. I suppose it's a matter of how heavy the option is compared to more vanilla plays like, I dunno...power sweeps? But I also think that those who protest so much about option offenses ignore and offer no solutions to the handicaps that GT has anyway, and it sure sounds like all they are saying is that if we just raised more money, we could compete.

I agree with those amongst us who feel we should try to do everything we can to improve, not JUST focus on one thing (say a gimmick offense or recruiting) over all the others. Under that criteria, I don't see how Chadwell should be excluded. I also count myself as one who feels some sort of unique approach is the only thing that has worked for us on the last 30 years, whether it was Tenuta's crazy defense, or Johnson's crazy offense. THAT is what elevated us to success when we had it.

So basically when it comes to the positives, the option is different than what everyone else does and so gives us a scheme advantage, but when it's time to talk about the negatives its everyone employs option principals so those negatives don't exist. Man really walking that fine line between different from what everyone else is doing and everyone employs its concepts.

But there is only one group saying we can't do something, with the implication heavily being that we shouldn't try to compete in that area, and that's those saying we must have a special snowflake offense. "We can't recruit with clemson or uga so we have to do something else". That same group also puts forth the idea that the option is the solution to the handicap of having worse recruiting. So add one and one. If we can't recruit to a certain level and there exists a magic offense to make it so we don't have to recruit to a higher level what is the logical conclusion? That we shouldn't worry about? That is the conclusion that is being led to even if it isn't being said directly.

But all of this is akin to someone trying to run a race with a broken leg and the option folks are arguing that a wheelchair is better than crutches. Maybe. But better still is to fix the broken leg. That's the response to your bold. The solution to our recruiting disadvantage is to try and recruit better. There isn't a magical workaround to that. Address the actual issue because even "scheme offenses" will also need to recruit better. And those protesting the option have put forth a solution to the handicap which is the form of Sanders and his status in the community being able to overcome the hurdles we have to improve recruiting. The best thing is that solution doesn't stop us from running any particular scheme. It is fully within reason that we could hire Sanders or Obrien as HC and then Willy Korn as OC. That doesn't work in the other direction. We can't hire Chadwell as head coach and expect to get the impact of Sander's recruiting by hiring Jackson States recruiting coordinator.

And just like we didn't need Tentua to be head coach to have his defense, we don't need Chadwell to be head coach to have his offense. We need to hire a head coach based on his ability to do all aspects of the job, not just for his offensive system.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

I don't get the negative reaction against Chadwell and 'the option'. I do see that if we hire a coach that runs an 'option offense', it's going to draw some media criticism about us 'going backwards'. But Chadwell's offense is not the flexbone, at all. Everything Chadwell does - RPOs, option runs, play action - are things NFL teams and big P5 programs are doing. He just does more of it.

I agree I'd want to see Tech give him the resources to hire some assistants with P5 experience, a great defensive staff, recruiting support. But that is true of every potential hire.

Put me in the camp that believes that option heavy offenses are a good fit for Tech. It worked for Fridge and Joe Hamilton. It worked for CPJ. I think DRad was right that Tech needs to do something a little different. The nature of who we are is that we need to focus on quality over quantity. We have to play smarter, use our resources creatively, find an edge. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to expand our fanbase, raise more money, recruit better. But it's always going to harder for us than our big StateU SEC neighbors. We're never going to have a huge alumni base or easy academics.

Option concepts let a team of smart disciplined players create mismatches and advantages even against bigger competition. That's what we need to be successful, IMHO. I'm open to other realistic ideas. But option based offenses are what's proven to work here in modern times. Chadwell's offense is a modern and innovative take on the option. I'd love to see it here.

Great take.

 

[4shotB]

We need to hire a head coach based on his ability to do all aspects of the job, not just for his offensive system.

This pretty much sums it up. If you would have added "or recruiting prowess or any other singular skillset" to the end of your sentence we could have locked this thread. really, what more needs to be said about this whole debate?

 

[senoiajacket]

Nice watching a physical football game. Get tired of watching what's essentially become flag football. Put your pads on and ****ing hit someone, this is supposed to be football.

I miss the Eleven Angry Men, the Steel Curtain, the Doomsday Defense, the Big Blue Wrecking Crew, the Bruise Brothers, Purple People Eaters. Gimme the Assassin, Dr Doom, Mean Jo Greene, the Enforcer, Samoan Headhunter, Minister of Defense. Not that there's anything wrong with the physical guys on the other side of the ball like Beast Mode, Diesel, Smash & Dash, The Bus, Refrigerator, Iron Head, Stump, etc.

Don’t forget the Black Watch

 

[lv20gt]

This pretty much sums it up. If you would have added "or recruiting prowess or any other singular skillset" to the end of your sentence we could have locked this thread. really, what more needs to be said about this whole debate?

Except it's not about being a singular skillset but rather it being a non essential one, for a head coach. Any head coach is likely to have at least one side of the where the scheme is mostly handled by the coordinator. Thus, that dynamic, of having a well designed offense and defense, is a skill that can be handled by a coordinator. To me what is essential to a head coach is recruiting, media relations, and an umbrella term of program structure which would include things like putting together a coaching staff (which includes finding those coordinators). Any head coach we hire should be judged on those essential skills and not having the main selling point being something that can be handled by a coordinator for the most part.

 

[leatherneckjacket]

So basically when it comes to the positives, the option is different than what everyone else does and so gives us a scheme advantage, but when it's time to talk about the negatives its everyone employs option principals so those negatives don't exist. Man really walking that fine line between different from what everyone else is doing and everyone employs its concepts.

But there is only one group saying we can't do something, with the implication heavily being that we shouldn't try to compete in that area, and that's those saying we must have a special snowflake offense. "We can't recruit with clemson or uga so we have to do something else". That same group also puts forth the idea that the option is the solution to the handicap of having worse recruiting. So add one and one. If we can't recruit to a certain level and there exists a magic offense to make it so we don't have to recruit to a higher level what is the logical conclusion? That we shouldn't worry about? That is the conclusion that is being led to even if it isn't being said directly.

But all of this is akin to someone trying to run a race with a broken leg and the option folks are arguing that a wheelchair is better than crutches. Maybe. But better still is to fix the broken leg. That's the response to your bold. The solution to our recruiting disadvantage is to try and recruit better. There isn't a magical workaround to that. Address the actual issue because even "scheme offenses" will also need to recruit better. And those protesting the option have put forth a solution to the handicap which is the form of Sanders and his status in the community being able to overcome the hurdles we have to improve recruiting. The best thing is that solution doesn't stop us from running any particular scheme. It is fully within reason that we could hire Sanders or Obrien as HC and then Willy Korn as OC. That doesn't work in the other direction. We can't hire Chadwell as head coach and expect to get the impact of Sander's recruiting by hiring Jackson States recruiting coordinator.

And just like we didn't need Tentua to be head coach to have his defense, we don't need Chadwell to be head coach to have his offense. We need to hire a head coach based on his ability to do all aspects of the job, not just for his offensive system.

Chadwell is not just his offense, he is 30-4 the past three years as a Head Coach. Also, if we could just hire someone to run his offense, why haven't we? His offense is exceptional and he wins. Period.

 

[MWBATL]

Seems to me this whole argument is kinda silly.

Many folks feel that we could never compete with the factories because we have too many handicaps in doing so....Money, academics, money, stadium and fan base size, NIL money, etc Those folks are NOT arguing that we should try to do better/the best we can with those areas...they are arguing that because of our handicaps we must find another angle if we wish to compete.

Those arguing against the option are arguing that it creates its own handicaps for anyone running it. Mostly (iiuc) in that top notch players don't view it as a path to the NFL so we'll never be able to have top notch athletes here running a "gimmick" offense. This ignores the fact that any offense can be called gimmicky and every offense employs option principles. Every. Single. One. I suppose it's a matter of how heavy the option is compared to more vanilla plays like, I dunno...power sweeps? But I also think that those who protest so much about option offenses ignore and offer no solutions to the handicaps that GT has anyway, and it sure sounds like all they are saying is that if we just raised more money, we could compete.

I agree with those amongst us who feel we should try to do everything we can to improve, not JUST focus on one thing (say a gimmick offense or recruiting) over all the others. Under that criteria, I don't see how Chadwell should be excluded. I also count myself as one who feels some sort of unique approach is the only thing that has worked for us on the last 30 years, whether it was Tenuta's crazy defense, or Johnson's crazy offense. THAT is what elevated us to success when we had it.

 

[Blue&Gold1034]

Records previous 4 years, not exactly elite:

TCU: 5-7, 6-4, 5-7, 7-6
KSU: 8-5, 4-6, 8-5, 4-7
OSU: 12-2, 8-3, 8-5, 7-6

What does OSU have, T Boone Pickens money?

The conversation isn't about elite, it's about competing against the big schools. Many Tech fans would love to have the record that OSU has had over the last 4 years as the consistent norm. Also, the KSU records aren't the records under Bill Snyder.

 

[ibeattetris]

For the people saying Clawson’s name, why is the world would he leave his safe job at Wake to coach us? I feel like only GT fans would think that’s even an upgrade, and Wake comes with less expectations. Do we even have the money to make an attempt at him?

 

[4shotB]

Except it's not about being a singular skillset but rather it being a non essential one, for a head coach. Any head coach is likely to have at least one side of the where the scheme is mostly handled by the coordinator. Thus, that dynamic, of having a well designed offense and defense, is a skill that can be handled by a coordinator. To me what is essential to a head coach is recruiting, media relations, and an umbrella term of program structure which would include things like putting together a coaching staff (which includes finding those coordinators). Any head coach we hire should be judged on those essential skills and not having the main selling point being something that can be handled by a coordinator for the most part.

I perhaps think you think we are disagreeing when, in fact, we are not.

 

[Blue&Gold1034]

1. If you look back at 2010 or so, there were three big unconventional coaches in the NCAA: Mike Leach with the Air Raid on offense, Paul Johnson with the run-heavy flexbone on offense, and Gary Patterson on defense. Many of us often wished to see a Patterson defense combined with a Leach or Johnson offense to see how far you would go with scheme. I’m sure Patterson would be shocked to hear that his defense wasn’t winning games.
2. Patterson had the #1 ranked defense 5 times during his tenure at TCU: https://247sports.com/college/tcu/A...s-Gary-Patterson-coaching-timeline-174319500/
3. Here’s more info on Patterson’s innovations in defensive scheme: https://www.footballstudyhall.com/2...e-gary-patterson-4-2-5-how-to-stop-the-spread
4. Mississippi State and some other schools run Air Raid. Running run-and-shoot route trees doesn’t mean that you’re running Air Raid, and if it did then Paul Johnson was an Air Raid coach. If you ask Dabo Swinney or Nick Saban if they run Air Raid, they’ll say “no”.
5. Urban Meyer’s offense was unconventional, but he didn’t want to be as unconventional as Paul Johnson and he said so. But he definitely crafted his offense for a scheme advantage.

1. While in the MWC, Pattersons defense was the formula for winning games. When TCU moved to the Big 12, it was the offense taking over. In 2014 TCU was 2nd in ppg and in 2015 they were 7th. People have a ton of respect for Patterson as a defensive mind, but it wasn't until the offense started putting up numbers that TCU found success in the Big 12.
4. Mississippi State, Oklahoma at various points over the last 20 years, Texas A&M under Sumlin, and other coaches at big name schools have run the air raid. It's not something that only the little guys are using as an advantage anymore.
5. Meyer's case may be different. Are you saying its unconventional because it was run heavy shotgun spread, cause if that's the case, it wasn't unconventional, but if you're looking at if from the perspective that when he came to Florida he started to utilize more power running schemes, then I may agree with you there. For the sake of my previous post talking about run heavy option offenses, Meyer's offenses fit that description.

 

[Towaliga]

…the user called collins a savior, which no one has ever called him….

I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if our former “coach” called himself (or at least thought of himself) as just that.

 

[stigs02jrt]

I watched the game, I REALLY like Chadwell's offense. Only problem is can he recruit. He hasn't exactly killed the Sun Belt with his recruiting.

Now here's a crazy idea: What if we hire Deion and get Chadwell as OC, pay him $1.5 million. He makes $850k now. Deion will get him the monster recruits AND we run an option offense.

Deion will likely leave for FSU after 3-4 years if he does well, and Chadwell can get promoted.

Yeah, it's dream world, but what if....

 

[MWBATL]

And just like we didn't need Tentua to be head coach to have his defense, we don't need Chadwell to be head coach to have his offense. We need to hire a head coach based on his ability to do all aspects of the job, not just for his offensive system.

I don't argue with that take...not even a little.

 

[Longestday]

This pretty much sums it up. If you would have added "or recruiting prowess or any other singular skillset" to the end of your sentence we could have locked this thread. really, what more needs to be said about this whole debate?

You mean like turn a bad program into a winning program? Check.

 

[bobongo]

For the people saying Clawson’s name, why is the world would he leave his safe job at Wake to coach us? I feel like only GT fans would think that’s even an upgrade, and Wake comes with less expectations. Do we even have the money to make an attempt at him?

I'd be very surprised to see him here for just those reasons.