Is it mostly us or them?

[AE 87]

...

I do not think CPJ offense gives us an advantage... If it did you would see CPJ avg more wins per season than GO or Chan, but he hasn't...

...

You may want to watch the games and not just the w-l numbers. When you do, you'll notice that the games require us to play defense.

Making a conclusion about the offense based only on wins shows a lack of understanding of a fairly basic aspect of the game.

 

[Skeptic]

....

Sure defenses make adjustment, practice for our offense and do special drills to defeat cut blocks and all that other stuff but if some son of a ***** is going at your knees and you see Lynch or Marshall come zipping by there is not going to be much you can do about it. Put enough people on their tails and this offense will go. Control the ball, shorten the game, limit the other team's possessions and be sound on both defense and special teams and we will win a lot of games. It's really not that complicated.

As a high schooler I had two years experience attempting cut blocks. I always threw it too early. The result was that my target stepped over me and put his high beams on the runner. Contrary to our critics, you don't throw the block at the knees -- or I wasn't taught that -- but at the thigh. (I don't know that this was sportsmanship as much as reality: the lower you throw the thing, the easier it is to step out of.) If you're good at it -- as we were in 2014 particularly, two things happen: the defender gets his hands down to fight you off, and he still goes down. (Until I moved and lost the cable DVR I watched the Orange Bowl several times; it was a coaching clinic on cuts.) We did not do that very well in 2017, and it seemed that D linemen sometimes took a quick half step back on the snap to avoid it. But schedule and all, I am optimistic.

 

[Skeptic]

You may want to watch the games and not just the w-l numbers. When you do, you'll notice that the games require us to play defense....

So after 10 years they're changing the rules on us?

 

[dressedcheeseside]

-



Flunkgate and our reaction to it would be on us and not on them.
NCAA probation and our reaction would be on us and not on them.
APR is universal.
The world being a much different place in the last millennium is a universal.
So how do these factors point to it not being more of an us and less of them issue?

Those things go a long way in affecting who we target in recruiting. Yes, most of it is self imposed, but for good reason and reasons that separate us from most every other school out there.

APR being universal doesn’t mean it has a universal affect. Schools that don’t have simple degree offerings have no where to hide athletes not interested in education. Before APR (Ross, GOL), we could keep knuckleheads eligible in remedial courses for 4 years as long as they didn’t flunk out. Not anymore. UGA just sticks ‘em in Housing or African Studies, etc.

 

[Troutbum]

You have to appreciate what Coach Johnson has done, both in the class room and on the field. He has won on par with those immediately before him and has seriously outperformed them in the classroom. I cannot remember any GT Coach in any sport that graduates kids like Johnson (Maybe Heppler). Not Curry, Not Ross, not GOL not Gailey. Johnson is selecting the right kids and they are graduating.

But make no mistake, we added to our list of limiting factors when Radakovich decided to hire Johnson. Our recruiting pool is limited out of the gate by the academic piece, but running the triple further limits this pool. I am friends with a successful current HS coach and his take on Tech is that it impressive to kids with a long term perspective "but yall run the triple!!"

Johnson has performed well in spite of the hurdles that are innate at GT AND he the hurdles that come with his offensive style.

I would love to see the impact of a coach that had the same discipline and fire as Johnson without the limitations of the triple. That combined with the Adidas change could be DABO like IMO.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

You have to appreciate what Coach Johnson has done, both in the class room and on the field. He has won on par with those immediately before him and has seriously outperformed them in the classroom. I cannot remember any GT Coach in any sport that graduates kids like Johnson (Maybe Heppler). Not Curry, Not Ross, not GOL not Gailey. Johnson is selecting the right kids and they are graduating.

But make no mistake, we added to our list of limiting factors when Radakovich decided to hire Johnson. Our recruiting pool is limited out of the gate by the academic piece, but running the triple further limits this pool. I am friends with a successful current HS coach and his take on Tech is that it impressive to kids with a long term perspective "but yall run the triple!!"

Johnson has performed well in spite of the hurdles that are innate at GT AND he the hurdles that come with his offensive style.

I would love to see the impact of a coach that had the same discipline and fire as Johnson without the limitations of the triple. That combined with the Adidas change could be DABO like IMO.

It could be argued the benefits of running the triple balance out or outweigh the negatives of running the triple.

 

[Sideways]

Ok to answer your question we need to look at Georgia Tech football from 1995 to present:

GO- avg 7.4 wins per season
6-5
5-6
7-5
10-2
8-4
9-3
7-5

CG- avg 7.3 wins per season
7-6
7-6
7-5
7-5
9-5
7-5

CPJ- avg 7.6 wins per season
9-4
11-3
6-7
8-5
7-7
7-6
11-3
3-9
9-4
5-6

So what I see is that GT from 1995 on has probably recruited the same..thus why we avg about 7.5 wins from 1995 to present.... So since our recruiting hovers around talent that should win around 7 games a year.... Our Success (Beating UGA, Clemson, Miami, a Bowl Game) is based on our Coaching staff....Thus why some folks like CPJ better than Chan.... CPJ is 3-7 while chan was 0-7 (GO was 3-4 vs UGA)

I do not think CPJ offense gives us an advantage... If it did you would see CPJ avg more wins per season than GO or Chan, but he hasn't... Since most everyone agrees that the ACC has improved in football since 2009...It would be interesting if our recruiting would improve if we had a different offensive scheme with all the changes to ACC football in recent years.

Well, Chan was consistent with every season but one either 7-5 or 7-6 I will give him that.

 

[Sideways]

Benson was solid and dependable up the middle. He had very few long runs that stretched his average. There were times when he was leaned on heavily when nothing else worked. Maybe the mutts "chased motion", but Benson was solid up the middle over the whole season. The mutts are not a good example, as they very nearly won the NC. We weren't in their league. Maybe other teams chased motion, too. But that does not negate the fact that Benson was solid up the middle. I know what I saw. And Benson was solid up the middle. Our ground game problems are at OT. As far as Mills vs. Benson against the mutts is concerned, last year and 2016 are not comparable because the mutts were MUCH better last year. I liked Mills a lot, but Benson filled his shoes well.

Benson was solid and dependable up the middle. He had very few long runs that stretched his average. There were times when he was leaned on heavily when nothing else worked. Maybe the mutts "chased motion", but Benson was solid up the middle over the whole season. The mutts are not a good example, as they very nearly won the NC. We weren't in their league. Maybe other teams chased motion, too. But that does not negate the fact that Benson was solid up the middle. I know what I saw. And Benson was solid up the middle. Our ground game problems are at OT. As far as Mills vs. Benson against the mutts is concerned, last year and 2016 are not comparable because the mutts were MUCH better last year. I liked Mills a lot, but Benson filled his shoes well.

Yep. UGA had the best linebackers we faced all year. Good thing they will be in the NFL where they belong this year. Last year was the best UGA team in living memory even better than their last great team in, I guess 2012 or 2013. Very good team all around just not quite good enough to win a national championship. More the pity.

 

[Sideways]

It could be argued the benefits of running the triple balance out or outweigh the negatives of running the triple.

Depends. If you can recruit without restrictions the triple option is not for you but in our situation it is the perfect equalizer in many respects including limiting the other team's possessions, increasing ball control to help our defense, allows us to recruit players specific to our offense and not compete with factories for oven ready 5 stars etc.

 

[Sideways]

As a high schooler I had two years experience attempting cut blocks. I always threw it too early. The result was that my target stepped over me and put his high beams on the runner. Contrary to our critics, you don't throw the block at the knees -- or I wasn't taught that -- but at the thigh. (I don't know that this was sportsmanship as much as reality: the lower you throw the thing, the easier it is to step out of.) If you're good at it -- as we were in 2014 particularly, two things happen: the defender gets his hands down to fight you off, and he still goes down. (Until I moved and lost the cable DVR I watched the Orange Bowl several times; it was a coaching clinic on cuts.) We did not do that very well in 2017, and it seemed that D linemen sometimes took a quick half step back on the snap to avoid it. But schedule and all, I am optimistic.

The 2014 team put on a clinic in cut blocking and yes your observation about blocking at the thighs is correct but trust me defensive players are more concerned about their knees. The 2014 game against Miami was textbook on cut blocking especially on the perimeter. Several of those Abacks had not done all that much in their careers but put it all together in their last year. Hill and Perkins were especially good that year.

 

[Sideways]

You may want to watch the games and not just the w-l numbers. When you do, you'll notice that the games require us to play defense.

Making a conclusion about the offense based only on wins shows a lack of understanding of a fairly basic aspect of the game.

Pray, what is this "defense" of which you speak? Can't say I have seen much of that around these parts lately.

 

[Skeptic]

Depends. If you can recruit without restrictions the triple option is not for you but in our situation it is the perfect equalizer in many respects including limiting the other team's possessions, increasing ball control to help our defense, allows us to recruit players specific to our offense and not compete with factories for oven ready 5 stars etc.

This has been argued so many times I now put claims we would do better with another offense in the alternate facts category,: there just ain't no such thing and it's not worth arguing.

 

[AE 87]

Pray, what is this "defense" of which you speak? Can't say I have seen much of that around these parts lately.

fair enough
I used the term loosely

 

[Sideways]

This has been argued so many times I now put claims we would do better with another offense in the alternate facts category,: there just ain't no such thing and it's not worth arguing.

I don't know. I think it would be kind of cool to bring in June Jones or a disciple of his "Run and Shoot" offense and try that. We probably would not win many games but at least we would quit arguing about whether or not there is enough passing.

 

[Skeptic]

I don't know. I think it would be kind of cool to bring in June Jones or a disciple of his "Run and Shoot" offense and try that. We probably would not win many games but at least we would quit arguing about whether or not there is enough passing.

That much is true. We would of course then move on to the "Why can't we run the ball?" argument. A Peter Sellers movie, "I'm All Right, Jack" had Stanley Windrush fired by the plant owner for doing a union job though not a member in an effort placate his union steward . Whereupon the steward called a work stoppage. Had to have a grievance, you see. Same deal.

 

[bobongo]

Because of the UNC academic scandal tainted that program to such a large degree. It is simply astonishing to me that UNC did what they did and the NCAA opted to do nothing. Players were showing up on the last day of class, having papers done for them, etc. It has nothing to do with "African" except that program was utilized by the Tar Heels to cheat. Nothing more, nothing less.

That might partly explain it, but I have seen regular, periodic denigrating references to African-related studies (funny how none about European or Asian Studies) for years, way back before UNC.