How long does it take to install the option?

[1BearJACKET]

Until we bring in a BIG QB that can sling it and is also a hard nosed, hard to bring down (not speedy, shifty, best athlete on his high school team) runner that can and will make would be tacklers pay for trying to stop them if they are forced out of the pocket, our success in the current system will be limited. The Hokies have had a string of this type of QB. The year that Attachou's personal foul cost us that game, their QB was a load to bring down. We need a QB like that. I don't see any QB recruits like that on the horizon for the Jackets.

 

[iceeater1969]

I think the next head coach at GT will be an up and coming mid major head football coach or an up and coming assistant and they will install the spread or pro set offenses.

If we are 5 and 7 and 6 and 6 in 18 /19 and are blown out by a couple of p 5 teams = yes.
I F we ADD 2 WINS ( Each year) AND GIVE US THE BLOW OUTS AND WE WILL RE UP.

In 18 Our first game is a free win. Then we go on road 2 weeks in a row .
These first 3 games are the easy part of a very tough schedule. Lets hope that we start fast and are 3 -0 when the tigers come there is positive buzz at b d s. Loose 2 road games and get wacked by clemson , then the buzz will have more of a "o" sound.

Its going to be fun in 18. Lets is gt swarm types support the team in 18 no matter how we start. We usually finish strong
.

 

[4shotB]

1. In order to install the option one has to know how to do it.

One reason why Coach has been so successful is that he's been running the O so long and has seen, literally, everything done to stop it. The reason the service academies have been successful is that they hired people who coached with him.

I think most places look at our offense as taking a step backward when it comes to recruiting and just the overall "package" of the team. Our W-L record with it isn't vastly different as the previous offense we ran that had very avg. results.

I think he question posed in the OP is a fascinating topic. And I think the answer is alluded to in these responses. If you are the AD at one of these forlorn outposts (Kansas, 'Cuse, etc.) you would look at GT and ask if it has produced tangible results? I think it would be easy to draw for an outsider to study the situation (without looking at other issues and underlying factors) and conclude that the offense didn't move the needle all that much in terms of overall W's and L's. (Of course we all know the variation has been much greater under CPJ's tenure).

So, if overall team (not offense) results running this O, under the recognized expert in the subject matter, aren't that much different, do you take the risk? On one hand, you might sell it as a differing approach (after all, these places have cycled through a bunch of coaches) that is worth a gamble. What do you have to lose? OTOH, I don't think you can point to GT and its offensive system as a panacea for competing with the schools with more tradition, resources, etc. I don't think the typical college FB fan would perceive it as such. And it would be risky for an AD to sell it that way.

 

[jacketup]

Lastly.... how surprised are you that given the success of Navy, Army, Georgia Tech, and Air Force that programs like this aren't making this change?

We're 1 game over .500 vs FBS in the last 8 years. Most people on this board seem to have a different definition of success than I do.

If the last 10 years has taught us anything, it's that the option works, but it's hard to recruit players to run it. A lot of other P5 schools (as they are called now) figured that out in the 80's.

 

[TheTechGuy]

Until we bring in a BIG QB that can sling it and is also a hard nosed, hard to bring down (not speedy, shifty, best athlete on his high school team) runner that can and will make would be tacklers pay for trying to stop them if they are forced out of the pocket, our success in the current system will be limited. The Hokies have had a string of this type of QB. The year that Attachou's personal foul cost us that game, their QB was a load to bring down. We need a QB like that. I don't see any QB recruits like that on the horizon for the Jackets.

Why do you think we need a large QB? Justin Thomas was a stud in this offense, and he was not close to "BIG." I don't understand your thought process regarding us being limited in success without a large QB. 2014 was one of our best seasons in a long time, and we had a 5'10'' QB.

I do agree that we need a QB who can throw; I've been consistent with that thought for a while.

 

[TheTechGuy]

We're 1 game over .500 vs FBS in the last 8 years. Most people on this board seem to have a different definition of success than I do.

If the last 10 years has taught us anything, it's that the option works, but it's hard to recruit players to run it. A lot of other P5 schools (as they are called now) figured that out in the 80's.

Just to compare our record over the last 8 years to the teams OP mentioned (Kansas, Syracuse, and Wake), the records against FBS and FCS are as follows:

Kansas: 15-81. They have had one season with more than 8 wins since 1995, 2007 (12).

Syracuse: 43-56. Last season with at least 9 wins, 2001. Last season with at least 11 wins, 1987.

Wake: 39-60. Last 9 win season was 2007, last season with at least 11 wins, 2006.

We had 11 wins in 2014 and 9 wins in 2016. I think all three of these schools would happily trade us our last 8 years for their last 8 years. So, it does beg the question, why not explore the option? For Wake, it doesn't make as much sense because they do seem to be on the upswing, although we did beat them last year.

 

[4shotB]

We had 11 wins in 2014 and 9 wins in 2016. I think all three of these schools would happily trade us our last 8 years for their last 8 years. So, it does beg the question, why not explore the option? For Wake, it doesn't make as much sense because they do seem to be on the upswing, although we did beat them last year.

While we understand that there are programs who would be happy to be GT, I don't think the offense is a magic bullet that will elevate these programs to GT levels of success. I think you have to evaluate the 1 game over .500 in relative terms....that may be great for Kansas, but it is marginal (or worse) performance for GT relative to its recent history. Thus,(to an outsider), there doesn't appear to be justification for making the switch. (we may know and understand the underlying issues and root causes, but is an AD looking to make a hire willing to invest the time to do so?)

 

[BCJacket]

I think the "option" is overblown. CPJ is a really good coach when it comes to X's and O's and getting the most out of his athletes. He's had above-average success everywhere he's run his offense. Mostly at schools without much history of success.

But the truth is that the offense really isn't as different as it's made out to be. This video is an oldie but a goody. CPJ likes the wishbone because it's a balanced formation so it doesn't tip anything about the direction of the play. Also, he likes the QB to be under center to read the D and get a quicker hit from the BB. But ultimately, with motion, it can be the same as an I or a single back set or whatever. Split Clinton Lynch out as a receiver and put big Jordan Mason at A-back to block like a TE and you're basically in a NFL-style single back set. Move the QB in that to shotgun and it's the Urban Meyer shotgun spread option...

Other than the wishbone formation, what CPJ does isn't very different from the other spread offenses out there. CPJ tried different things with Vad and the results were about the same. Give him Saban's players and he'd probably win big. Recruiting is about the same as it's always been. It's not the offense, it's the school and the resources.

 

[Techster]

Just to compare our record over the last 8 years to the teams OP mentioned (Kansas, Syracuse, and Wake), the records against FBS and FCS are as follows:

Kansas: 15-81. They have had one season with more than 8 wins since 1995, 2007 (12).

Syracuse: 43-56. Last season with at least 9 wins, 2001. Last season with at least 11 wins, 1987.

Wake: 39-60. Last 9 win season was 2007, last season with at least 11 wins, 2006.

We had 11 wins in 2014 and 9 wins in 2016. I think all three of these schools would happily trade us our last 8 years for their last 8 years. So, it does beg the question, why not explore the option? For Wake, it doesn't make as much sense because they do seem to be on the upswing, although we did beat them last year.

Apologies...but I NEVER want to be associated with those schools in football. In basketball, YES, but not football.

GT has been a good football school since the early 1990's. There have been a handful of not so fun years (Lewis years, 2010, 2015, 2017) but for the most part GT has been a good program. For a while, we had one of the longest bowl streaks. Every coach since the 90's, outside of Lewis, has either made the ACC Championship game, or won an ACC Championship.

My hope is that 2015 and 2017 were just anomalies for CPJ.

 

[UgaBlows]

Lots of good points in your post! I agree there are a ton of schools that would benefit going to a PJ type of attack yet for some reason they continue to try and recruit to the same offenses they compete against! I've heard a number of reasons why schools don't go to it but frankly to me they all sounds like excuses and bulls**t. But hey, it's their misery, let them wallow in it.

Probably the big money Alums won’t allow it

 

[AE 87]

I swear, the number of people who continue to post as if Defense is a non-factor in wins and losses still baffles the hell out of me.

 

[Techster]

1. In order to install the option one has to know how to do it.

IMO, THAT is the key. Not the scheme you run, but who is running the scheme. Schemes are a dime a dozen, and anyone with internet access can get coached up to run an offense if they want.

What separates the good ones from the mediocre to average (and bad) ones is knowledge and the ability to communicate it.

IMO, someone like Mike Leach, Art Briles (minus the unsavory makeup), David Shaw, Lincoln Riley, etc. would all do well anywhere they go. They would also do well at GT because they have a system they know in and out much like CPJ knows his system.

 

[TheTechGuy]

Apologies...but I NEVER want to be associated with those schools in football. In basketball, YES, but not football.

GT has been a good football school since the early 1990's. There have been a handful of not so fun years (Lewis years, 2010, 2015, 2017) but for the most part GT has been a good program. For a while, we had one of the longest bowl streaks. Every coach since the 90's, outside of Lewis, has either made the ACC Championship game, or won an ACC Championship.

My hope is that 2015 and 2017 were just anomalies for CPJ.

I agree, I do not want GT football to associated with those schools, and I do not think we are associated with those schools in football. I was just providing data regarding OP's original question as to whether those programs should explore the option offense.

 

[TheTechGuy]

I swear, the number of people who continue to post as if Defense is a non-factor in wins and losses still baffles the hell out of me.

To be fair, Kansas is in the Big 12, and defense does not seem to be a factor in Big 12 football.

 

[1BearJACKET]

Why do you think we need a large QB? Justin Thomas was a stud in this offense, and he was not close to "BIG." I don't understand your thought process regarding us being limited in success without a large QB. 2014 was one of our best seasons in a long time, and we had a 5'10'' QB.

I do agree that we need a QB who can throw; I've been consistent with that thought for a while.

I will admit we did have success with JT at the helm; however, the jury is still out on Marshall. I prefer a larger QB that is able to stand in the pocket to see over his OL, not having to move sideline to sideline to find a throwing lane, and have a big accurate arm to go with that height and weight. He doesn't have to be a track champion when the need to run arises. He just needs to bring the pain and move the chains.

 

[4shotB]

I swear, the number of people who continue to post as if Defense is a non-factor in wins and losses still baffles the hell out of me.

I would imagine that most know and understand that D is an important (if not the largest)component of overall record. WTBS, I also believe that this recent DC hire will go a long way in the narrative about whether you can have a good D while running this offense. That will be 4 DC's. And the previous regime had a much higher level of D performance. If we do not move the needle with this hire, I imagine most will draw the conclusion (right or wrong) that this system does not correlate well with good D. And since D wins championships as the old adage goes, this next 2-4 years will be pivotal in the general perception of this offensive system's OVERALL efficacy (i,e W's - L's)in P5 FB.

 

[year_of_the_swarm]

Pretty interesting responses.... Gathering them all up it begs the following question.

Is it easier to recruit to this style of offense than a pro style or spread offense? Kansas has been trying to implement Air Raid for years, with disastrous results. Syracuse has been trying to do west-coast, pro style, and spread for years. I guess it all comes down to that question though. Can Kansas, Syracuse, etc recruit the right kind of athletes for an option system that are better running that system than they can guys to run the spread offense? In other words, is it easier for Kansas/Syracuse to find Keenan Reynolds, Justin Thomas, TaQuon Marshall, or to find a QB capable of running the spread at a high level?

But guys to run option at QB is theoretically easier to find... especially in 2018 (modern era) because colleges aren't recruiting the Taquon Marshalls, Justin Thomas', Keenan Reynolds, etc of the world to play QB. They are recruiting them to play safety, wide receiver, etc. But you will always have guys that want to play quarterback instead of defense. Your lineman don't have to be as big because of the style.... Finding the right guys at AB and BB aren't that hard to find. Does anyone on this forum have any doubt that ANY of the people on roster can effectively lead this offense to a top 5 rushing offense nationally (Marshall, Lucas Johnson, Tobias Oliver)?

Of course you have to pair it with a good defense, which is clearly crucial with this system because you churn so much clock usually. Or, it could cover up some less-than-perfect defense because you have so much time of possession. Navy, Army, Air Force, and Georgia Tech consistently rank high, top 5 or top 10 in the country in time of possession. The other guys can't score if they don't have the ball. And, if Georgia Tech puts a legit defense on the field, watch out. That is when they will win a lot of games.

I guess what I am saying with all this.... if I am Kansas, Syracuse, Wake Forest, etc I would rather put my program in a position to be top 5 in rushing offense, top 5 in yards per completion, top 5 in time of possession, and get better athletes all over the field and let the chips fall where they may. GTech will always recruit better players than these bottom feeders, and will thus have a higher probability of success... But I would suspect Syracuse and Kansas to start steam-rolling lesser competition and be more competitive and go to bowl games more frequently, which to be honest should be the goal of their program. They aren't going to win national championships at Kansas in football, but they should be a lot more consistent if they bought into something that is easier to recruit to.

I could easily see Kansas hiring Troy Calhoun from Air Force and getting better immediately... and I could easily see a program like Syracuse hiring Monken and getting better right away. Monken is a flat out winner. He is working miracles with Army.

 

[MikeJackets1967]

Pretty interesting responses.... Gathering them all up it begs the following question.

Is it easier to recruit to this style of offense than a pro style or spread offense? Kansas has been trying to implement Air Raid for years, with disastrous results. Syracuse has been trying to do west-coast, pro style, and spread for years. I guess it all comes down to that question though. Can Kansas, Syracuse, etc recruit the right kind of athletes for an option system that are better running that system than they can guys to run the spread offense? In other words, is it easier for Kansas/Syracuse to find Keenan Reynolds, Justin Thomas, TaQuon Marshall, or to find a QB capable of running the spread at a high level?

But guys to run option at QB is theoretically easier to find... especially in 2018 (modern era) because colleges aren't recruiting the Taquon Marshalls, Justin Thomas', Keenan Reynolds, etc of the world to play QB. They are recruiting them to play safety, wide receiver, etc. But you will always have guys that want to play quarterback instead of defense. Your lineman don't have to be as big because of the style.... Finding the right guys at AB and BB aren't that hard to find. Does anyone on this forum have any doubt that ANY of the people on roster can effectively lead this offense to a top 5 rushing offense nationally (Marshall, Lucas Johnson, Tobias Oliver)?

Of course you have to pair it with a good defense, which is clearly crucial with this system because you churn so much clock usually. Or, it could cover up some less-than-perfect defense because you have so much time of possession. Navy, Army, Air Force, and Georgia Tech consistently rank high, top 5 or top 10 in the country in time of possession. The other guys can't score if they don't have the ball. And, if Georgia Tech puts a legit defense on the field, watch out. That is when they will win a lot of games.

I guess what I am saying with all this.... if I am Kansas, Syracuse, Wake Forest, etc I would rather put my program in a position to be top 5 in rushing offense, top 5 in yards per completion, top 5 in time of possession, and get better athletes all over the field and let the chips fall where they may. GTech will always recruit better players than these bottom feeders, and will thus have a higher probability of success... But I would suspect Syracuse and Kansas to start steam-rolling lesser competition and be more competitive and go to bowl games more frequently, which to be honest should be the goal of their program. They aren't going to win national championships at Kansas in football, but they should be a lot more consistent if they bought into something that is easier to recruit to.

I could easily see Kansas hiring Troy Calhoun from Air Force and getting better immediately... and I could easily see a program like Syracuse hiring Monken and getting better right away. Monken is a flat out winner. He is working miracles with Army.

Troy Calhoun will never leave Air Force for Kansas. I think Troy wants to finish out his coaching career coaching the Air Force Falcons.

 

[DH9387]

FWIW, there has been a small push among the Vanderbilt media and supporters to have them switch to the spread option. As far as I can tell the movement has not gathered any steam with the university's athletic department, but they are a very equivalent school to us and even though they experience periodic success, their results tend to be more of a roller coaster vs our consistently average to above average performances.

https://www.tennessean.com/story/sp...erbilt-offense-needs-another-option/75645666/

The recruiting deck is stacked heavily against Vanderbilt in the SEC. The five-star offensive skill players rarely choose to play in Music City. Their pathways to an NFL career are more easily found going through Tuscaloosa, Athens and Gainesville.

That's why Mason should follow the lead of Georgia Tech's Johnson and Navy coach Ken Niumatalolo. It's quite difficult for opponents to prepare for the Yellow Jackets and Midshipmen because their offenses are so radically different.

http://justwaittilnextseason.blogspot.com/2015/05/vanderbilt-should-become-secs-version.html

The biggest problem for Vanderbilt is that they're attempting to run a personnel-intensive offense while being a small private school in a football-mad state that is already dominated by a large public university in Tennessee. Running a pro-style offense requires standout personnel on the offensive line, at QB, RB, and TE, and most of the top recruits at those positions in-state are going to be going to Tennessee or elsewhere before they'll come to Vanderbilt.

Vanderbilt would be better off becoming the SEC's version of Georgia Tech, and run an offense based around the triple option. Like Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt is an excellent academic school, Georgia Tech, like Vanderbilt, has a large public university rival, the University of Georgia, that garners most of the attention from in-state recruits. Georgia Tech has won three Coastal Division championships and one ACC championship, along with 9 consecutive bowl trips, under the leadership of Paul Johnson and his flexbone triple option offense. Tech also has three 9-win seasons under Johnson, including an 11-3 record topped by an Orange Bowl win over Mississippi State last season.

Georgia Tech has experienced all of this success because they are happy being contrarian in the ACC, being the one triple option team in the conference. Currently, there are no teams in the SEC who run the triple option as their base offense, which would make Vanderbilt a rarity. Vanderbilt would actually have a schematic advantage on their opponents, because it would be difficult for opposing teams to learn and emulate their offense in just one week of practice.

http://justwaittilnextseason.blogspot.com/2015/05/vanderbilt-should-become-triple-option.html

If Vanderbilt ran a triple-option offense like GSU, the Commodores would be the ones benefiting from teams forced to resort to their base defensive alignment just to keep from confusing the defense. One of the big advantages of running a contrarian offense like the triple-option is that while defenses rarely see anything like you, you often see the same defensive tactics all the time, and know what do when you see them.

The ability to recruit and develop lighter players into offensive linemen is yet another advantage of running the triple-option, and another advantage Vanderbilt would be able to exploit by running the triple-option in the SEC. Compare Georgia Tech's offensive line roster to Vanderbilt, only 3 of 21 Yellow Jackets weigh over 300 lbs. Georgia Tech is able to cast a wider net in recruiting because they are searching for a different type of linemen than everyone else, and Vanderbilt would also have that recruiting advantage if they ran a triple-option offense.

https://www.seccountry.com/vanderbilt/derek-mason-vanderbilt-football-innovate-differently

Instead, Mason must be open-minded and innovative. Competing as a small, private school in a Power 5 conference is difficult. Notre Dame, Miami (Fla.) and Southern Cal are major historical examples, and all have tremendous pedigree. Stanford joined that caliber in the past few years after strong pressure to expand football funding.

However, look at other small, private schools that achieved success in recent memory — TCU, Baylor and Georgia Tech. All took non-traditional routes to compete at the highest level. The Yellow Jackets notably run a triple-option system in the ACC. TCU and Baylor both built high-powered, spread offensive philosophies combined with opportunistic defenses.

 

[GSOJacket]

I've watched Tech football for a long time, and I can only remember two Tech offenses that really gave us a competitive advantage, that opposing coaches hated to prepare for - CPJ's and Ralph Friedgen's.