ESPN list of 5 make or break coaches for 2014 (CPJ mentioned)

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
12,991
Just curious, but did YOU watch the VT game last year?

Yes, but this response to my post suggests to me one of two things:
1) You think last year's VPI game was representative of our losses "over the last few years"

OR

2) You know that our offense executed poorly against VPI this past year and think that this performance reflects on the scheme and talent more than the execution on that particular day and chose to ignore that my post referred to "over the last few years"

Which is it? Or is it something else? Your posts began by referring to our record over the last four years. That was the context of my post, so why did you choose to refer to one game in 2013?

I'll admit that our offense had a down year in 2013, ranked 30 or 31 in efficiency iirc, but our D was still worse, like 59. The VPI game was a bad offensive performance, much of which was on our QB overthrowing open receivers and almost everyone else acting like they couldn't hear the snap count.

However, consider that BC and NC State, as well as FSU and SCar, held Clemson to less than the 31 we scored against them. UNC, WF, FSU, VPI, as well as UF, held d'oh U to less than the 30 we scored on them.

Now, since we've tried having conversation about this before, I don't expect this post to change anything. However, if you want to continue, please respond to my questions about why you responded to my post about the last few years by referring to one game.
 

Rodney Kent

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
558
Location
McDonough, GA
TheSilasSunRising: I understand the toungue and cheek statements you made, but the Hill does not determine if a coach stays or is fired! It boils down to the same thing in most all matters, $$$$$. If the fans get upset enough and stop going to the games and the big money boosters withdraw their support, the Hill has little choice but to either drop the sport or go into a smaller Division of football. The Hill also knows that these big contributors also help them build other facilities not associated with sports, so they want to keep the big boosters as happy as possible.
 

OldJacketFan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,348
Location
Nashville, TN
Just one final thought. I'm going to give the records in there first seven years (with one exception) of 5 highly respected Div 1 coaches, after looking at this list please tell me if any or all of them should have been on the hot seat or fired.

Coach 1 33-43-1
Coach 2 52-57-1
Coach 3 42-26
Coach 4 42-38-1
Coach 5 34-24-1

Bonus points for being to identify these 5 coaches.
 

ATL1

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,377
2) Balance. Say what you want but we run the ball almost 90% of the time. In 2011, we ran it 87.2% of the time. Conversely, Oregon ran it 68.1% of the time. I don't really care that we ever become a 50/50 team. But if the other team has a dominant run defense, you better be able to throw the football. We have averaged between 12 - 15 passes per game over CPJ's tenure. So when we are forced to pass, we are very poor at it. I've seen many people postulate as to why, but the #'s speak volumes to me. If you want to be good at something, you better rep it. We don't rep it much in games or in practice comparative to the # of running plays we execute. Therefore, we stink at it.

Those are just 2 differences...but they are significant in my mind...and probably more importantly, in the mind of offensive recruits.[/quote]

You stated my reservations perfectly.
Outside of CPJ's in game and media antics this is the biggest/greatest issue I have with the coach. Unfortunately from what I studied he's only developed a 2500 + passer 3 times in his 30 year career. I just don't see that creating a consistent 9, 10 game winner in big league CFB.
 

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
12,991
Imo, @ATL1. makes an important point. When you don't throw more when your QB has a passer rating better than the
 

daBuzz

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
965
Yes, but this response to my post suggests to me one of two things:
1) You think last year's VPI game was representative of our losses "over the last few years"

OR

2) You know that our offense executed poorly against VPI this past year and think that this performance reflects on the scheme and talent more than the execution on that particular day and chose to ignore that my post referred to "over the last few years"

Which is it? Or is it something else? Your posts began by referring to our record over the last four years. That was the context of my post, so why did you choose to refer to one game in 2013?

I'll admit that our offense had a down year in 2013, ranked 30 or 31 in efficiency iirc, but our D was still worse, like 59. The VPI game was a bad offensive performance, much of which was on our QB overthrowing open receivers and almost everyone else acting like they couldn't hear the snap count.

However, consider that BC and NC State, as well as FSU and SCar, held Clemson to less than the 31 we scored against them. UNC, WF, FSU, VPI, as well as UF, held d'oh U to less than the 30 we scored on them.

Now, since we've tried having conversation about this before, I don't expect this post to change anything. However, if you want to continue, please respond to my questions about why you responded to my post about the last few years by referring to one game.

Your original statement was:
Peoplw who claim to have watched GT football but post as if our offense has been the problem with our record over the last few years are probably not worth serious conversation, imo now.

Besides being snide and condescending, your statement implies that our offense hasn't been the problem with our record over the last few years. Of our 6 losses last year, I pointed out that 2 of them were games in which the offense played really poorly and yes, they were primarily the ones to blame for the loss IMO in that game.

I've never tried to be transparent about it. I don't like Paul Johnson as our coach. I don't like the triple option offense...I find it incredibly boring to watch and I think it's outdated and very very difficult to recruit upper tier players to come play in the offense. But those are just my opinions.

I was also asked by another poster what I thought was so different about Oregon/Auburn's spread offense versus ours and I answered that question honestly as well. You may not like my opinion or agree with it; that's your prerogative.

And finally, I am very much aware of how horrible our defense has been for almost the entire tenure Johnson has been the coach. In 2009, when we won the ACC championship, we did out by outscoring teams because we couldn't stop anyone. 2008 was pretty much a similar story because our defense was bad then as well. But we have had our share of bad offensive games during Johnson's tenure as well. Hell, in 2009 when we had the best team under him that we've ever had, we couldn't do crap against Iowa in the bowl game. In 2008, I had to sit in the Georgia Dome and watch LSU beat the living hell out of us and we were only able to score 3 points against them.

I mean, if we really want to play this game, we lost 4 games in 2008 that were the offense's fault (Virginia Tech, Virginia, North Carolina, and LSU).
In 2009, we lost two for which the offense was to blame (Miami and Iowa).
In 2010, the offense was the culprit in four games (Miami, Clemson, Virginia Tech and Air Force). You could potentially make the claim that the Kansas loss was equally on the offense and the defense that year.
In 2011, 3 losses (Virginia, Miami, and Georgia).
In 2012, (Virginia Tech, BYU, Georgia, Florida State). In fairness, BYU was a beatdown on both sides of the ball that day.

But even though we can do that exercise, I think it's fruitless and stupid, to be honest. I don't generally put blame on offense or defense for a game. Wins are team wins and losses are team losses. If you win because your offense was able to score 52 and the other team scored 51, then your team did what it needed to do to win. Conversely, if the offense is only able to score 7 but the defense holds the other team to 6, then your team did what it needed to do to win.
 

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
12,991
@daBuzz I guess seeing posts as snide and condescending goes both ways because most of your posts come off that way to me.

I appreciate you saying that you just don't like our offense. I disagree but respect that perspective. I don't respect the suggestion that our offensive scheme has been the root of our mediocre records.
 

daBuzz

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
965
@daBuzz I guess seeing posts as snide and condescending goes both ways because most of your posts come off that way to me.

I appreciate you saying that you just don't like our offense. I disagree but respect that perspective. I don't respect the suggestion that our offensive scheme has been the root of our mediocre records.

I didn't mean to imply that it had. I believe our defense has been subpar and that has been the primary root of our mediocre records. But I don't find the offense blameless either because there have been games that it has been the culprit when we have lost. That's what I was trying to point out by listing those games.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,873
I didn't mean to imply that it had. I believe our defense has been subpar and that has been the primary root of our mediocre records. But I don't find the offense blameless either because there have been games that it has been the culprit when we have lost. That's what I was trying to point out by listing those games.
How many times in those games you mentioned did the offense have to go 80+ yards because the D couldn't get off the field? Offenses and defenses don't operate in a vacuum, they greatly affect each other. Think of how bad our D stats would have been (yes, even worse) if our O didn't chew clock.
 

jacketup

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,421
The debate over Johnson is really very simple. He is 23-25 against FBS competition over the last 4 years. That 4 year record has been achieved with pretty consistent year to year records.

Either you think that is good enough, or you don't. There is no reason to pull out obscure facts and arguments to hurl at the "other side". Some people are happy at 23-25. Some aren't. That's the bottom line.

Personally, I don't see how 23-25 is good enough when the guy is making a salary that is significantly above average for an FBS coach. But others disagree.

A lot of folks who don't think it is good enough have stopped attending games. That will have to be dealt with sooner or later. To get back to the point of the thread, that is why he is on the hot seat.

If Johnson didn't have such a rich contract, I believe Bobinski would have brought in "his guy" after the Ole Miss loss. Johnson's rant against GT after the season may have been papered over by Bobinski and Johnson--because it had to be-- but it happened, and Bobinski won't forget it.
 

CuseJacket

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
17,325
The debate over Johnson is really very simple. He is 23-25 against FBS competition over the last 4 years. That 4 year record has been achieved with pretty consistent year to year records.

Either you think that is good enough, or you don't. There is no reason to pull out obscure facts and arguments to hurl at the "other side". Some people are happy at 23-25. Some aren't. That's the bottom line.

Personally, I don't see how 23-25 is good enough when the guy is making a salary that is significantly above average for an FBS coach. But others disagree.

A lot of folks who don't think it is good enough have stopped attending games. That will have to be dealt with sooner or later. To get back to the point of the thread, that is why he is on the hot seat.

If Johnson didn't have such a rich contract, I believe Bobinski would have brought in "his guy" after the Ole Miss loss. Johnson's rant against GT after the season may have been papered over by Bobinski and Johnson--because it had to be-- but it happened, and Bobinski won't forget it.

I am not happy with 23-25. I doubt you'll find many on this board who think 23-25 is good enough - feel free to ask. That's not mutually exclusive with thinking CPJ can make it work.

I am happy with what Ted Roof did in year 1. I am happy with the increased recruiting staff and decreased recruiting restrictions. Therefore I am happy with CPJ being here this year. My outlook may be proven wrong, and it won't be fun being a GT fan this year if that's the case, but it's a risk I'm willing to take.

I tend to agree with your opinion on Bobinski. I'm just not sure there's any way to prove it.
 

OldJacketFan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,348
Location
Nashville, TN
One thing I find interesting are folks who use the last 4 years of CPJ time as their baseline. Do the first 2 years not count? Oh and where did I ever say I was happy with 23-25?

Oh and as to attendance. Since 2008 Tech's home attendance is 47968 or 87.2% of BDS capacity. The attendance numbers have been consistent, sorta like CPJ's teams. ;)
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,873
The debate over Johnson is really very simple. He is 23-25 against FBS competition over the last 4 years. That 4 year record has been achieved with pretty consistent year to year records.

Either you think that is good enough, or you don't. There is no reason to pull out obscure facts and arguments to hurl at the "other side". Some people are happy at 23-25. Some aren't. That's the bottom line.

Personally, I don't see how 23-25 is good enough when the guy is making a salary that is significantly above average for an FBS coach. But others disagree.

A lot of folks who don't think it is good enough have stopped attending games. That will have to be dealt with sooner or later. To get back to the point of the thread, that is why he is on the hot seat.

If Johnson didn't have such a rich contract, I believe Bobinski would have brought in "his guy" after the Ole Miss loss. Johnson's rant against GT after the season may have been papered over by Bobinski and Johnson--because it had to be-- but it happened, and Bobinski won't forget it.
Too simplistic. Everything has to be taken into account. Everything. The most important thing, imo, is completely lost in your analysis and that is are there signs of an improving program or does it appear that we have reached an unbreakable ceiling. I firmly believe this staff has this program heading upward at this point in time. It may not be the exact trajectory angle wanted by some, but I still think it's pointing up and that's what matters most to me. The refusal to cave in to "factory" practices is a pretty big plus, too.
 

jacketup

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,421
Too simplistic. Everything has to be taken into account. Everything. The most important thing, imo, is completely lost in your analysis and that is are there signs of an improving program or does it appear that we have reached an unbreakable ceiling. I firmly believe this staff has this program heading upward at this point in time. It may not be the exact trajectory angle wanted by some, but I still think it's pointing up and that's what matters most to me. The refusal to cave in to "factory" practices is a pretty big plus, too.


Where are the signs that the program is pointed upward? Four years--the four most recent years---is long enough to know what we have. And as I said, he has been consistent: One game under .500 v. FBS for 2010-2011; One game under .500 for 2012-2013. To most people, that's not pointing up.

If our coach had a proven track record of success at a BCS level, maybe there would be reason for hope. But he doesn't. He has never coached at major conference school prior to coming to GT. Four years of history (2010-2013) shows what he is. People are either happy with 23-25, or they are not---or maybe they are blind optimists.

Maybe it's a nice thing to be an optimist even though the facts don't support the optimism--- but I am glad such persons are not making decisions for my business.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,873
Where are the signs that the program is pointed upward? Four years--the four most recent years---is long enough to know what we have. And as I said, he has been consistent: One game under .500 v. FBS for 2010-2011; One game under .500 for 2012-2013. To most people, that's not pointing up.

If our coach had a proven track record of success at a BCS level, maybe there would be reason for hope. But he doesn't. He has never coached at major conference school prior to coming to GT. Four years of history (2010-2013) shows what he is. People are either happy with 23-25, or they are not---or maybe they are blind optimists.

Maybe it's a nice thing to be an optimist even though the facts don't support the optimism--- but I am glad such persons are not making decisions for my business.
You have to look beyond record to see the signs. If I have to point them out it means you can't see them for yourself so it doesn't really matter.
 

jacketup

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,421
You have to look beyond record to see the signs. If I have to point them out it means you can't see them for yourself so it doesn't really matter.

I have followed this program closely for 40 years, and I have seen "pointed up." And this is not it--not in any meaningful way. In Bobby Ross' third year, for example, you could see the turnaround. But then again, we saw a turnaround in Paul Johnson's third year too, didn't we?
 
Top