Cutcliffe Out at Duke - Coastal Chaos

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,145
Cutcliffe is a walking skeleton. Close the thread.
Ok, but he's a walking skelton who can coach. But Collins wouldn't take him for the obvious reason: if the team continues to fail, they'll fire him mid-season and give the job to Cutliffe. This will probably - you heard it here first! - happen anyway, but the transition decision would be a lot easier.

Problem = Cutliffe is 67 and is probably in retirement mode right now. It would take more then a call from Tech, of all places, to lure him back to the sidelines. Too bad, that.
 

laoh

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
806
Hard to break people from group think. They have repeated the word “option” for so long it is a foundational truth for them even though it was never even true when CPJ was here when you looked at how few plays were actual option plays. No, they will pass on the most qualified available coach for the job because a talking point is stuck in their head. Some day the right school is going to offer Monken and they are going to enjoy a long run with an eventual hall of fame coach.

Let's not get all technical. When people say "option", we're not saying the plays are option 100% of the time. Spread option, gun with option sprinkled in, you can call it whatever. But CPJ and Monks both run a very run-heavy offense with occasional throws thrown in. That's what everyone's understanding is.
 

laoh

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
806
Guys, stop thinking one dimensional. Monken is Desirable because he is a winner and smart, not because he can run an option. He has already said he would change that up for the right location and conditions. That means something more like what we did under O’Leary, Fridge, and Joe Hamilton (remember all those option plays they used to run?) rather than what CPJ did.

Mentioning Monken does not mean option like what we had, but a mix of other things thrown in along with it with a smart, proven coach. TBH, if we HAD gone with Monken, I could have seen a gradual migration toward a more balanced system rather than a complete 180 like we did.

I don't think we've seen Monken succeed other than the option right? So wouldn't it be risky to bring in a winning coach (with option) that switches the offensive style (in which he's not deeply familiar with) in the next gig? Didn't we see how that experiment play out with Vad, when you move away from your bread and butter?
 

jgtengineer

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,066
I don't think we've seen Monken succeed other than the option right? So wouldn't it be risky to bring in a winning coach (with option) that switches the offensive style (in which he's not deeply familiar with) in the next gig? Didn't we see how that experiment play out with Vad, when you move away from your bread and butter?

Yes and no on this one. Monken had some games his first season they didn't run the option once just veer running. The bigger thing is not running the option its veer blocking. He still had a veer run game but he definitely was more pass heavy. I mean he also went to running a single wing/wing T run game at army one year because he didn't have a QB and had some success.
 

rodandanga

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
268
If you want to look at a guy who was successful with a Johnsonesqe offense and then changed when his personnel got better. Look at Mike Houston at ECU. He ran PJ's spread option at Lenoir-Rhyne and the Citadel and was successful enough to get the JMU job, then he shifted to a more traditional gun spread.

IIRC, Kenny at Navy has said he would prob not run what he runs at Navy if he got a job at a more traditional school.
 

g0lftime

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,047
Cutcliff is a dead man walking. The look on his face reminds me of Bear Bryant's in his last year. He did not know what was going on.
He had his best assistants either poached or they retired. The current DC at Oklahoma State (Jim Knowles) was at Duke when they had decent defenses. Knowles is up for the Broyles Award). He has not been able to replace them at the same level. I would think he would be a really good offense consultant.
 

jgtengineer

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,066
The truth is the Flex formaiton is just an effective formation for running deception and constantly challenging 4 verts. If you went back to a traditional I formation you can still run everything out of the offense. the only thing you lose is some of the balanced formation. But pretty much every concept and route is there.

Obviously nebraska and Friedgin used the same concepts out of the I and mulitple (often motionign into offset I for the fridge). So if monken came here. Line up in I as a base formation and then kept his splitback gun concepts (which Coach P finally started running alot of to some success) He'd look like a pro style power run offense. While still having the baility to run option and midline (which is what a read option or inverted veer out of gun is) while not retooling the offense. If Todd had said this is what he wanted Monken would have done it when Johnson left. He's done it at army. CPJ rightfully didn't want to give up what he was use to and works for optics.
 

Oldgoldandwhite

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,840
The truth is the Flex formaiton is just an effective formation for running deception and constantly challenging 4 verts. If you went back to a traditional I formation you can still run everything out of the offense. the only thing you lose is some of the balanced formation. But pretty much every concept and route is there.

Obviously nebraska and Friedgin used the same concepts out of the I and mulitple (often motionign into offset I for the fridge). So if monken came here. Line up in I as a base formation and then kept his splitback gun concepts (which Coach P finally started running alot of to some success) He'd look like a pro style power run offense. While still having the baility to run option and midline (which is what a read option or inverted veer out of gun is) while not retooling the offense. If Todd had said this is what he wanted Monken would have done it when Johnson left. He's done it at army. CPJ rightfully didn't want to give up what he was use to and works for optics.
Amen! You can run any play out of about any formation. Heck, the single wing we ran in the 60’s had a lot of plays that they use today.
 

jgtengineer

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,066
Amen! You can run any play out of about any formation. Heck, the single wing we ran in the 60’s had a lot of plays that they use today.

They still run single wing at the academies the Army NAvy game in the blizzard 3 years ago was basically two single wings because you couldn't throw, and it was to wet to run their game so they just both snapped it to the QB(TB) and ran left and right with a little bit of misdirection off that
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,145
The truth is the Flex formaiton is just an effective formation for running deception and constantly challenging 4 verts. If you went back to a traditional I formation you can still run everything out of the offense. the only thing you lose is some of the balanced formation. But pretty much every concept and route is there.

Obviously nebraska and Friedgin used the same concepts out of the I and mulitple (often motionign into offset I for the fridge). So if monken came here. Line up in I as a base formation and then kept his splitback gun concepts (which Coach P finally started running alot of to some success) He'd look like a pro style power run offense. While still having the baility to run option and midline (which is what a read option or inverted veer out of gun is) while not retooling the offense. If Todd had said this is what he wanted Monken would have done it when Johnson left. He's done it at army. CPJ rightfully didn't want to give up what he was use to and works for optics.
Yes! Both Nebraska under Osborne and Colorado under Crowder ran an "I-bone" with great success. Tech could too. I don't know if Monken would do that if he came to Tech, but I wouldn't be surprised. Sims would kill in that offense, btw.

Btw, I watched the so-fine Army/Air Force game a couple of weeks ago. Both teams had a very hard time running the ball. So both teams started throwing: Army 8/13: 214/Air Force 13/.23: 226. That was pretty much it for O in the game since both teams have real good Ds.

Oh, and also btw, if we hired Monken, we'd might get Woody back. And finally have a DC who knows what he's doing.
 

GTLorenzo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,594
I don't think we've seen Monken succeed other than the option right? So wouldn't it be risky to bring in a winning coach (with option) that switches the offensive style (in which he's not deeply familiar with) in the next gig? Didn't we see how that experiment play out with Vad, when you move away from your bread and butter?

Monken appears to be a winner, particularly at a tough place to win. If he can change the offense a bit and make it a more wide open spread option, I'd give him a chance. What we need is a winner who does things a bit differently. Not a never was who is all hype but doesn't know how to run an organization or put a winning team together.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,145
Monken appears to be a winner, particularly at a tough place to win. If he can change the offense a bit and make it a more wide open spread option, I'd give him a chance. What we need is a winner who does things a bit differently. Not a never was who is all hype but doesn't know how to run an organization or put a winning team together.
I'll hark back again to the Army/Air Force game. Both teams ran Os that were unlike Paul's spread option in many ways. Both had many formations that looked more like what the Falcons run when they have Ryan under center. And both teams ran shotguns about 1/4 of the time. This kind of stuff isn't sculpted in stone.
 

GTLorenzo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,594
I'll hark back again to the Army/Air Force game. Both teams ran Os that were unlike Paul's spread option in many ways. Both had many formations that looked more like what the Falcons run when they have Ryan under center. And both teams ran shotguns about 1/4 of the time. This kind of stuff isn't sculpted in stone.

Yep. Get me a "football coach" who is a winner and let him figure out the best offense to run.
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,585
I don't think we've seen Monken succeed other than the option right? So wouldn't it be risky to bring in a winning coach (with option) that switches the offensive style (in which he's not deeply familiar with) in the next gig? Didn't we see how that experiment play out with Vad, when you move away from your bread and butter?

The diamond/shotgun stuff with Vad was actually fairly effective. People claim that we went away from it because it stopped working but that isn't really the case. At the time I went back and charted every play from our first several games that year and the conclusion is that the plays from those formations were pretty consistently as effective as our base stuff and yet we went away from it heavily almost immediately following the duke win and I think completely just a few games later. It was certainly more effective than the base stuff was when we first started putting that in at the start of the 08 season.

In general, Johnson was most effective when he was innovating with his offense. The Johnson from his Sothern days would have 100% stayed utilizing the stuff out of the gun but later in his career he wasn't comfortable with it so he abandoned it in favor of what was more familiar.

The issue is that Monken's statement is that it likely won't be believed by suitors unless he either starts showing in on the field at Army or unless he agrees to come in with some outside OC choice that has a differently designed system.
 

jgtengineer

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,066
The diamond/shotgun stuff with Vad was actually fairly effective. People claim that we went away from it because it stopped working but that isn't really the case. At the time I went back and charted every play from our first several games that year and the conclusion is that the plays from those formations were pretty consistently as effective as our base stuff and yet we went away from it heavily almost immediately following the duke win and I think completely just a few games later. It was certainly more effective than the base stuff was when we first started putting that in at the start of the 08 season.

In general, Johnson was most effective when he was innovating with his offense. The Johnson from his Sothern days would have 100% stayed utilizing the stuff out of the gun but later in his career he wasn't comfortable with it so he abandoned it in favor of what was more familiar.

The issue is that Monken's statement is that it likely won't be believed by suitors unless he either starts showing in on the field at Army or unless he agrees to come in with some outside OC choice that has a differently designed system.

What happened with the diamond set was it very much limited our attack because we had maybe 3 plays out of it and it wasn't as mutable as the undercenter flex stuff and pistol flex was with the type of tweaks johnson did.

Justin Thomas is why we abandoned the gun stuff. At 5'10 on a good day he was much more effective undercenter than he would have been in the gun. Then Marshall was the same way. Had we actually got ratliffe you'd have seen the stuff we were doing with vad more.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
11,160
What happened with the diamond set was it very much limited our attack because we had maybe 3 plays out of it and it wasn't as mutable as the undercenter flex stuff and pistol flex was with the type of tweaks johnson did.

Justin Thomas is why we abandoned the gun stuff. At 5'10 on a good day he was much more effective undercenter than he would have been in the gun. Then Marshall was the same way. Had we actually got ratliffe you'd have seen the stuff we were doing with vad more.
And Vad was timid about running certain plays. CPJ wanted him to occasionally go under center on short yardage downs and be willing to follow the B-back but Vad was averse to contact. CPJ wanted a truly diverse playbook but Vad was only comfortable in shotgun. Quarterbacks under Friedgen had to be willing to line up in the wishbone if called for but Vad was pretty resistant to getting out of his comfort zone.
 
Top