Interesting comments on CPJ's base offense

Discussion in 'Georgia Tech Football' started by Techster, Jan 1, 2014.

  1. Techster

    Techster Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    7,954
    From Monken's Army introductory presser:

    http://coachingsearch.com/article?a=Jeff-Monken-introduced-at-Army-We-will-beat-Navy

    Pretty interesting if you look back and see that CPJ all but eliminated the diamond/pistol stuff after the VT game because he thought the offense was executing the base stuff well enough. Monken, on the other hand, realizes that the base stuff isn't always going to surprise the opposing team even though there's several adjustments you can make to blocking on various plays. In addition to changing blocking schemes, Monken is adding the dimension of timing and angles because of running plays out of the gun.

    My personal opinion is our talent deficit versus certain teams coupled with opposing teams getting better at defending it/use to defending is a big factor in why we were so bad in executing our base offense much of the year. Teams know if they can beat our cut blocks, they can get to the ball carrier. Ole Miss is a great example of a team focusing so much on defeating our cut blocks that once they got use to game speed, they were able to disrupt our base stuff. We were complaining that our players just weren't executing, but I've seen a lot of instances this year that our players were just purely beaten man versus man because the defender knew how to keep our players from cutting them (watch the Pitt game for a great example of it). Sometimes it's not because our players just missed their assignment, it's also because the defender was a lot strong enough/fast enough/and just flat out better than our guys trying to block the defender out of the play. Aaron Donald of Pitt (Yeah, I know we beat Pitt), Robert Nkemdiche are two examples of guys who just physically beat our guys and got to the ball. Would changing the timing and angles of blocking them have changed anything? Who knows, but it would have been nice to see more variation that Monken alludes to.
     
  2. Whiskey_Clear

    Whiskey_Clear Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    6,986
    We don't cut every play...we zone block etc. too. Seems like plays you refer to are instances of better players beating our guys....that's gonna happen regardless of scheme.
     
  3. AE 87

    AE 87 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    10,859
    We didn't stop the other formations because "he thought we were executing the base stuff well enough." We did it because we weren't executing anything well enough.
     
  4. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    6,778
    It's amazing how quick revisionist history comes to pass, isn't it? ;)
     
  5. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    6,778
    Do any of you really think CPJ wouldn't run anything in his playbook if he knew the plays would be executed properly? A head coach knows his players better than anybody and knows what they can handle and what they can't. CPJ's not about to keep the playbook closed if he thought for one minute it would help his teams win. To answer the why he has been so vanilla, he simply feels that gives his teams the best chance to win! Do I like it or agree? Not always but I'm not on the field at practice or in the locker room. Would you rather Tech be in the game with a chance to win with vanilla play calling or get blown out because the offense fumbles, bumbles and screws up a wide open game plan?
     
  6. Rodney Kent

    Rodney Kent Ramblin' Wreck

    Messages:
    558
    OldJacketFan: Well that is a can of worms, however, nothing ventured, nothing gained. I think many games are lost because a coach tries to play it safe.
     
  7. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    6,778
    Rodney, I know. That's why I said that I don't always agree with his play calling. IMO though I'd rather be in the game with a chance to win it rather being blown out.
     
  8. awbuzz

    awbuzz Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    6,743
    This... Sometimes it just comes down to the Jimmies and the Joes, and not the X's and O's.
     
  9. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    6,778
    Yep it dang sure does. Teams with superior talent can win games when they don't play to their abilities. Tech has to play at 100% to do that. We've seen it time and again when Tech plays clean and with passion they can play with anybody. When they don't we know the outcome.
     
  10. gtwin

    gtwin Jolly Good Fellow

    Messages:
    40
    For some reason, I think a playsheet might help CPJ remember all of those great plays in his base offense. I'm sure things may get lost in his head during the heat of battle.
     
  11. GTrob21

    GTrob21 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    808
    Monken... if this guy does well at Army, and CPJ keeps bringing in 7-6 seasons with loses to all of our big rivals, He is a guy who I think will be looked at by the administration when a change happens.
     
  12. Techster

    Techster Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    7,954
    That's part of my point in the OP. When the team couldn't execute anything well enough, CPJ went back to the "base" offense, what he was most familiar with and comfortable calling because he's been doing it for twenty-something odd years. He was going to battle with what he knew best. He doubled down on perfecting with the team what he got him this far.

    Why do you think CPJ installed the Diamond and Pistol based plays in the first place? Because he understood what Monken understands, no matter how much of a "master" you think you are at one thing (in CPJ's case, the flex option) the evolution of defenses and teams that are far more talented will blunt any scheme advantage you have. Offenses AND defenses have to evolve...that's an axiom that's true in any part of life.

    When CPJ first came here, he had a schematic and to some degree a talent advantage. As the years went by, and as our talent base left to go to the NFL, why is it that CPJ's record keeps getting closer to 0.500 every year? Teams like Miami, Clemson, UGA, VT are not only getting more talented, but their defensive coordinators are getting better and better at defending us. At the same time, our talent level hasn't exactly gotten better. If the other teams are getting more talented and better at defending us, while GT's talent has leveled off, what do you do? Either recruit better, or make adjustments/add wrinkles to our offense to make the defense adjust. CPJ hasn't recruited that well, so that only leaves the later option.

    So back to my OP, why is it that Monken would even say that? A lot of people on here think that execution problems are on our team, but sometimes execution problems come from the opposing team being far more talented that you can't execute what you want. Sometimes false starts occur because OLinemen can't block the other guy and they get antsy. Sometimes our perimeter blockers can't do their jobs because they're not talented enough to seal the perimeter or big enough to apply enough force to bring the other guy down. Theoretically, EVERY play works on the chalkboard. The chalkboard doesn't account for the other team being far more talented and the other teams players just flat out beating our guys. It's happened a lot this season. Outside of CPJ's days at GA Southern, and maybe 2008 and 2009, he's not been a coach that had the ability to out talent the other team. He's always been a coach that has outschemed and out adjusted the opposing coaches. When your schemes and adjustments you've run for the past twenty something odd years have been neutralized by other smart coaches with talent, you better have a plan B. That was what Monken was referring to. Instead of strengthening his plan B, CPJ doubled down on what he was comfortable with. It didn't work out this season.
     
  13. Techster

    Techster Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    7,954
    The cut blocking in the second paragraph was just an example, that's not all I meant. That's why I said "blocking schemes" in the first paragraph. I said cut blocking because those were examples of our guys not being talented enough to bring the defender down. You're right, better players will beat less talented players regardless of schemes. That's was part of my point in the OP.
     
  14. AE 87

    AE 87 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    10,859
    @Techster
    I appreciate your zeal. I responded to one part of your op that I think undermines your assessment of CPJs motivation. I don't think he puts the other stuff in at all if he is motivated by stubbornness.

    I think our playbook shrank as he tried to find st we could do that gave us the best chance to win. I also don't think the data supports our O being the driver in most of our losses in 2011 and 2012.
     
    OldJacketFan likes this.
  15. Techster

    Techster Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    7,954
    You're basically reiterating what I've said. In light of the Vad Lee transfer news, perhaps my assessment was more accurate than I originally thought. Instead of developing other schemes and "opening up" our offense that recruits and our own players have said for the past two years in the media, CPJ "shrank" the playbook back to his old staples. It looks like Vad saw it as well, and it's obvious his style doesn't mesh with CPJ's flex option staple, and now Vad is moving on. No one's fault, sometimes things don't work out.
     
    jwsavhGT likes this.
  16. forensicbuzz

    forensicbuzz Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,224
    I'm pretty sure that what we ran in the UGA game and the bowl game had little to do with "his old staples". I'm pretty sure it's been talked about ad nauseum on this board that Vad had trouble with CPJ's base offense. I think that's why we saw so fewer read-option plays called.
     
  17. John

    John Peacekeeper Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,897
    Not sure how you can come to this conclusion seeing as how we ran more plays from pistol this year than we've ever have since CPJ came to Tech... probably even including his tenure at Navy.
     
  18. Techster

    Techster Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    7,954
    What exactly did we run against UGA that was groundbreaking with respect to CPJ? I guess Vad is leaving because we ran too much Pistol and Diamond...
     
  19. Techster

    Techster Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    7,954
    Read my OP. I said we ran the Diamond and Pistol early, but when the schedule became tougher, CPJ "shrank the playbook" because we couldn't execute so he made a decision to "go back to the basics"...his flex offense. That's not a secret, and he even talks about it and our team has talked about it many times in the media.
     
  20. forensicbuzz

    forensicbuzz Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    2,224
    Again, it's not what we ran, my comment was about what we didn't run, which was "his old staples". I'm not sure we ran the true read T-O more than three times in either game. We didn't run any mid-line option. We ran what CPJ felt Vad (and the other members of the offense) could run successfully. He may have shrank the playbook, but it was to what played to Vad's (and the offense's) strengths.
     
    Whiskey_Clear likes this.

Share This Page