Life after Paul Johnson.... hypothetical question

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

What is Oregon's unique qualifier? They don't run an offense that the national media continues to spin a false narrative on; if anything, the national media loves it and promotes it. Even then, Oregon just hired a run-first, pro-style Harbaugh disciple as their coach after firing the Chip Kelly spread disciple that went 4-8 (so if you count a losing record as hurting the school, yes, it did hurt Oregon). They don't limit themselves only to what worked in the past, and it should absolutely be the same for Tech. Insisting on hiring another option coach is just short-sighted and stubborn, neither of which will work off in the long run without a lot of luck. The option used to be widely run, especially in the 80s and 90s, but it's not run as much anymore and the style has shifted to the pass-heavy hurry up offenses. I personally love watching the option; but it doesn't appeal to recruits, sorry to say. Our offense is one of the many reasons Tech doesn't land the top recruits (sure, it might not be the biggest reason, but it's absolutely a factor). But besides that point, the reason we should move on is because there is no point in limiting yourself. It only hurts you if you limit yourself and say "This is what it has to be and it can't change", and I'm afraid with another option coach after CPJ our fans will fall into that dangerous mentality. Whatever works, works, whether it's the option, hurry up, or air raid, and we shouldn't limit ourselves when there are already so many factors against us. That's just shooting yourself in the foot

SMDH. I couldn't disagree more.

 

[CrackerJacket]

Nothing succeeds like, well, success. If the next 4 or so years see us winning the Coastal a couple of times and continue to give the Dwags fits, then CPJ's replacement is likely to come from his post-KenN coaching tree.

But suppose we regress, while at the same time, the Houston Texans find a QB and contend for the Super Bowl. CPJ announces his retirement, and Texans offensive assistant Goose Godsey expresses interest in our HC job. You think this board and GTAA wouldn't jump all over that?

BTW, this is one of the best offseason threads I've ever seen on this board.

 

[Yomanser]

SMDH. I couldn't disagree more.

Like I said, just my opinion. I think that limiting yourself to just one particular offense that only 6 FBS coaches run and a handful of FCS coaches instead of allowing yourself to be open to all offenses as long as the coach is good and wins would hurt a program that already can't afford any more restrictions, but you can absolutely disagree

 

[JacketFromUGA]

Nothing succeeds like, well, success. If the next 4 or so years see us winning the Coastal a couple of times and continue to give the Dwags fits, then CPJ's replacement is likely to come from his post-KenN coaching tree.

But suppose we regress, while at the same time, the Houston Texans find a QB and contend for the Super Bowl. CPJ announces his retirement, and Texans offensive assistant Goose Godsey expresses interest in our HC job. You think this board and GTAA wouldn't jump all over that?

BTW, this is one of the best offseason threads I've ever seen on this board.

In your second scenario even if CPJ has a lot of continued success I'm sure we'd still go the goose route.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Like I said, just my opinion. I think that limiting yourself to just one particular offense that only 6 FBS coaches run and a handful of FCS coaches instead of allowing yourself to be open to all offenses as long as the coach is good and wins would hurt a program that already can't afford any more restrictions, but you can absolutely disagree

Well we had an offense that virtually all of the other FBS and FCS coaches run, and what did it get us? Did we ever beat Georgia? Did we ever go to the Orange Bowl? Did we ever have an 11-win season? I frankly don't give a damn what the other coaches run. Tech is unique among all the FBS colleges, and I like, in fact LOVE, that we have a unique offense that other coaches cringe at coaching against. No other schools ran the kind of offense that the Fridge did under both Ross and O'Leary, AND IT WORKED !!! So does Johnson's offense.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

At least the rest of the country doesn't look at Tech the way they do at Bama and Saban ---
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ce=newsletter&utm_term=.a9438eb52a73#comments

 

[UgaBlows]

Was anyone else bored by all the pass plays in the national championship game? I sure was. That 4th down winning play could have been a b-back dive. Heehee.

Bama's offense is boring as hell

 

[takethepoints]

The reason why most people don't run it is that you're basically saying that you can't recruit with the big boys for top line NFL talent. Likewise, if an AD sticks his neck out and it doesn't work, he'll be a pariah. Whereas, if he hires a coach that runs a conventional offense that doesn't work, he can just say that the school's limitations were the excuse for the lack of success. There's just a ton of group think when it comes to head coaching hires. Bucking conventional wisdom when it comes to what a good football coach does and doesn't run, comes with a ton of risk for decision makers. Frankly, that's why I was so amazed and happy when we hired CPJ in the first place. It took a lot of courage to do so, which is usually in short supply when higher ups have to make decisions of this magnitude.

There's one other factor here that makes it harder to find coaches who want to run the O: it's hard to coach. First, you have to understand D tendencies and know, almost instantly, how to counter them. Second, you have to be able to adjust blocking schemes within the game to take advantage of opportunities (Coach's justly famous "half-time adjustments" are feared because he's so good at this.) Third, you have to find assistants who not only know what they are doing, but who know how to coach techniques that have often fallen out of use (cut blocking isn't easy to coach). Finally, you have to be patient enough to watch your players fumble around on the field as they learn their trade (i.e. 2015) and have a fan base and an AD who'll be willing to wait.

For a shotgun spread all you need is a QB who can run, throw, and make a double option read every now and then. If he's Cam Newton you go to the MNC. If not, he can probably learn enough to be respectable. The backs take handoffs and kinda block. The OL waddles into zone blocks and oinks at the DLs. Easy-peasey. And all this works without major mental effort; the main thing you need to be is a good recruiter. Get real good players one on one and hope for the best is the main goal, not designing the offense to produce. Then do your best on D - good recruiting again. It's no wonder that this is the true high school offense; it makes everything easy and doesn't require a tremendous effort to learn and coach. That's why it has replaced most Os at the secondary level.

I might add that everything I say about our O above also explains why complex pro set Os have gone into eclipse. They demand both really good players and coaches who know what they are doing. Hence Smart's problems so far.

 

[tech_wreck47]

What is Oregon's unique qualifier? They don't run an offense that the national media continues to spin a false narrative on; if anything, the national media loves it and promotes it. Even then, Oregon just hired a run-first, pro-style Harbaugh disciple as their coach after firing the Chip Kelly spread disciple that went 4-8 (so if you count a losing record as hurting the school, yes, it did hurt Oregon). They don't limit themselves only to what worked in the past, and it should absolutely be the same for Tech. Insisting on hiring another option coach is just short-sighted and stubborn, neither of which will work off in the long run without a lot of luck. The option used to be widely run, especially in the 80s and 90s, but it's not run as much anymore and the style has shifted to the pass-heavy hurry up offenses. I personally love watching the option; but it doesn't appeal to recruits, sorry to say. Our offense is one of the many reasons Tech doesn't land the top recruits (sure, it might not be the biggest reason, but it's absolutely a factor). But besides that point, the reason we should move on is because there is no point in limiting yourself. It only hurts you if you limit yourself and say "This is what it has to be and it can't change", and I'm afraid with another option coach after CPJ our fans will fall into that dangerous mentality. Whatever works, works, whether it's the option, hurry up, or air raid, and we shouldn't limit ourselves when there are already so many factors against us. That's just shooting yourself in the foot

Sure it's nice if we get the big time recruits but what's it matter if we get them and we aren't winning? CPJ has done better than the past coaches everyone loves without the high rated recruits. Also we aren't like every other college, we have academic standards that hinder us way more than almost every major power 5 school and because of that you need a system that can help offset that and what we run does that. CPJ has won 3, 9 plus win seasons at GT, that's only been done 3 other times in what the past 50 or so years. Why would you want to change up to something that has not worked at GT and every other school does? I don't see the option as something that limits us with all our other limitations, I see it as something the puts us over the top for what we should be doing. I'm afraid if we go to something different we will become just like every other school that recruits outside of the top 30, and that's nothing special. Show me another school that does what we do with the talent we bring in? Any pro style, spread option teams you can think of that goes to their conference championship on a pretty consistent basis, or wins the orange bowl? Now if we bring in the wrong couch then none of this matter but that goes for any system, so hiring the right guy would be huge.

 

[Yomanser]

Well we had an offense that virtually all of the other FBS and FCS coaches run, and what did it get us? Did we ever beat Georgia? Did we ever go to the Orange Bowl? Did we ever have an 11-win season? I frankly don't give a damn what the other coaches run. Tech is unique among all the FBS colleges, and I like, in fact LOVE, that we have a unique offense that other coaches cringe at coaching against. No other schools ran the kind of offense that the Fridge did under both Ross and O'Leary, AND IT WORKED !!! So does Johnson's offense.

That's a common fallacy, though. Just because you go to a standard offense doesn't mean you need to hire a mediocre coach like Gailey. Even besides that obvious fallacy, did that system ever break a Top-3 in the country bowl streak, have the worst season since Bill Lewis, or even have a single losing season?

Now, I'm not advocating for Chan Gailey; I think he was mediocre at best, and don't get me wrong, I love CPJ. I love the triple option. I think that our highs have been better than our lows. But the argument isn't about whether I like the triple option over other systems or whether I like Coach Johnson or not: it's about whether we should move on from that scheme after he Johnson leaves. I think that if Georgia Tech allows it to become its identity, then we'll be forever known as that school and everything will revolve around that offense. That's just putting one more restriction on a school that already has a lot of inherent limitations. I personally want a different style so that GT fans don't fall into that exact same mentality that you're displaying above: triple option or bust. You can win with different offenses. In fact, 120 teams in the country win with a different offense. 25 of them were even better than Tech, according to the AP Poll that came out. It's not like the only way Tech can win is with the triple option, and I am afraid that another option coach hire will forever stigmatize GT as the same sort of school as Navy and Army. I don't want Tech to be a Navy or Army that overachieves with lesser talent. I want Tech to be a Michigan State. I want Tech to be a Clemson. I want Tech to bring in the best and win with the best. You saw what happened when you gave Ralph Friedgen great talent with Joe Hamilton. We don't have to be unique; we just have to win

And about being different, even Ralph Friedgen who you mentioned ran a pro-style system at Maryland and later Rutgers (I can't find any info about his style at Tech, but I would imagine it's the same), and his whole philosophy was balance: not run-heavy or pass-heavy (although it got increasingly more pass-heavy in his later years at Maryland, probably because defenses were catching up and the spread scheme was gaining more prevalence). The last time an option coach won the national championship was Tom Osborne in 1997. It's been 20 years, and it's not likely to change. I want Tech to win a National Championship. If we can do it with CPJ, great. If not, then there is not going to be any option coach out there that will guide us to that promised land. CPJ is the best out there, and anybody else is a step down. Why limit yourself to lesser coaches after CPJ leaves? You're purposely putting yourself a step behind the competition. If a great coach is available but he runs a different offense, I don't care about it. I just want the best coach. If it happens to be an option coach, that's fine. More likely than not, the best coach available will not be one. I'm just afraid that the same line of thinking you displayed above will be every GT fan's mentality if we hire another option coach. Instead of focusing on the offense, we should focus on the coach itself. CPJ has been great, but more likely than not a better coach than Candeto or whoever will be available, and he will likely run a different offense than CPJ, and as long as he wins that's OK. I'm just saying that it doesn't HAVE to be an option coach, and only looking at other option coaches means you're not looking at the hundreds of other options available, and as great as he's been for us I'd rather get the next Spurrier than the next Johnson

 

[Yomanser]

Sure it's nice if we get the big time recruits but what's it matter if we get them and we aren't winning? CPJ has done better than the past coaches everyone loves without the high rated recruits. Also we aren't like every other college, we have academic standards that hinder us way more than almost every major power 5 school and because of that you need a system that can help offset that and what we run does that. CPJ has won 3, 9 plus win seasons at GT, that's only been done 3 other times in what the past 50 or so years. Why would you want to change up to something that has not worked at GT and every other school does? I don't see the option as something that limits us with all our other limitations, I see it as something the puts us over the top for what we should be doing. I'm afraid if we go to something different we will become just like every other school that recruits outside of the top 30, and that's nothing special. Show me another school that does what we do with the talent we bring in? Any pro style, spread option teams you can think of that goes to their conference championship on a pretty consistent basis, or wins the orange bowl? Now if we bring in the wrong couch then none of this matter but that goes for any system, so hiring the right guy would be huge.

Michigan State. They don't recruit any better than we do, yet they do better than we do on a consistent basis.

I understand the limitations Tech has. I understand the academic standards. That's why I think it's not logical to put one more limitation on yourself when you already have so many; get the best coach available, not the best option coach available. You can win without the option, believe it or not. I love Johnson, but I fear and would hate for us to go the route of Georgia Southern, where it's option or bust

 

[tech_wreck47]

Michigan State. They don't recruit any better than we do, yet they do better than we do on a consistent basis.

I understand the limitations Tech has. I understand the academic standards. That's why I think it's not logical to put one more limitation on yourself when you already have so many; get the best coach available, not the best option coach available. You can win without the option, believe it or not. I love Johnson, but I fear and would hate for us to go the route of Georgia Southern, where it's option or bust

Michigans state has been in the top 25 for the past 3 or 4 years in recruiting. And I get what you are saying, but the best coach available might not do as good as the best option coach available because of our limitations. We have had very good coaches at GT yet they still did nothing, and it's something that has gone on for a while. Now if your going to give me a tom Herman, Dabo Sweeney, nick Satan type coach then ok, but I highly doubt we will get a guy like that at GT. We are not a factory school to where we will get all the big time recruits so we need to do what it takes to level the playing field.

 

[PBR549]

That's a common fallacy, though. Just because you go to a standard offense doesn't mean you need to hire a mediocre coach like Gailey. Even besides that obvious fallacy, did that system ever break a Top-3 in the country bowl streak, have the worst season since Bill Lewis, or even have a single losing season?

Now, I'm not advocating for Chan Gailey; I think he was mediocre at best, and don't get me wrong, I love CPJ. I love the triple option. I think that our highs have been better than our lows. But the argument isn't about whether I like the triple option over other systems or whether I like Coach Johnson or not: it's about whether we should move on from that scheme after he Johnson leaves. I think that if Georgia Tech allows it to become its identity, then we'll be forever known as that school and everything will revolve around that offense. That's just putting one more restriction on a school that already has a lot of inherent limitations. I personally want a different style so that GT fans don't fall into that exact same mentality that you're displaying above: triple option or bust. You can win with different offenses. In fact, 120 teams in the country win with a different offense. 25 of them were even better than Tech, according to the AP Poll that came out. It's not like the only way Tech can win is with the triple option, and I am afraid that another option coach hire will forever stigmatize GT as the same sort of school as Navy and Army. I don't want Tech to be a Navy or Army that overachieves with lesser talent. I want Tech to be a Michigan State. I want Tech to be a Clemson. I want Tech to bring in the best and win with the best. You saw what happened when you gave Ralph Friedgen great talent with Joe Hamilton. We don't have to be unique; we just have to win

And about being different, even Ralph Friedgen who you mentioned ran a pro-style system at Maryland and later Rutgers (I can't find any info about his style at Tech, but I would imagine it's the same), and his whole philosophy was balance: not run-heavy or pass-heavy (although it got increasingly more pass-heavy in his later years at Maryland, probably because defenses were catching up and the spread scheme was gaining more prevalence). The last time an option coach won the national championship was Tom Osborne in 1997. It's been 20 years, and it's not likely to change. I want Tech to win a National Championship. If we can do it with CPJ, great. If not, then there is not going to be any option coach out there that will guide us to that promised land. CPJ is the best out there, and anybody else is a step down. Why limit yourself to lesser coaches after CPJ leaves? You're purposely putting yourself a step behind the competition. If a great coach is available but he runs a different offense, I don't care about it. I just want the best coach. If it happens to be an option coach, that's fine. More likely than not, the best coach available will not be one. I'm just afraid that the same line of thinking you displayed above will be every GT fan's mentality if we hire another option coach. Instead of focusing on the offense, we should focus on the coach itself. CPJ has been great, but more likely than not a better coach than Candeto or whoever will be available, and he will likely run a different offense than CPJ, and as long as he wins that's OK. I'm just saying that it doesn't HAVE to be an option coach, and only looking at other option coaches means you're not looking at the hundreds of other options available, and as great as he's been for us I'd rather get the next Spurrier than the next Johnson

Ralph got fired at Maryland because he couldn't win with lesser athletes. Chan got fired here because he couldn't win with the guys he recruited here. If everyone starts running the triple from under center then yes find somebody that runs something that's unique. Until then the triple from under center gives us the best chance to be successful with the guys we can recruit.

 

[PBR549]

Michigans state has been in the top 25 for the past 3 or 4 years in recruiting. And I get what you are saying, but the best coach available might not do as good as the best option coach available because of our limitations. We have had very good coaches at GT yet they still did nothing, and it's something that has gone on for a while. Now if your going to give me a tom Herman, Dabo Sweeney, nick Satan type coach then ok, but I highly doubt we will get a guy like that at GT.

None of those guys would win consistently at Tech with what they run now.

 

[tech_wreck47]

None of those guys would win consistently at Tech with what they run now.

I'm not saying they would, I would say tom Herman has done very good at winning with what he had at Houston though, and that these guys could probably do better than some of the guys in the past. It's irrelevant though because I wanna run the option like we do now.

 

[Yomanser]

Michigans state has been in the top 25 for the past 3 or 4 years in recruiting. And I get what you are saying, but the best coach available might not do as good as the best option coach available because of our limitations. We have had very good coaches at GT yet they still did nothing, and it's something that has gone on for a while. Now if your going to give me a tom Herman, Dabo Sweeney, nick Satan type coach then ok, but I highly doubt we will get a guy like that at GT. We are not a factory school to where we will get all the big time recruits so we need to do what it takes to level the playing field.

Then the best coach available in that case is the option coach. And no, I don't see Tech bringing in an Urban Meyer, Jim Harbaugh, or Nick Saban, but we can certainly attract an up-and-coming Mike MacIntyre or Mark Dantonio or Gary Patterson or Chris Petersen or whoever, and any of those would do just as well if not better at Tech than Johnson. My fear is that we will get into this mentality (which we're already showing a LOT of signs of doing) that is HAS to be an option coach, that only an option coach has a good chance of winning at Tech, and that is just false and will hurt us in the future if we get into that mentality. But again, this is all just my personal opinion

 

[Yomanser]

Ralph got fired at Maryland because he couldn't win with lesser athletes. Chan got fired here because he couldn't win with the guys he recruited here. If everyone starts running the triple from under center then yes find somebody that runs something that's unique. Until then the triple from under center gives us the best chance to be successful with the guys we can recruit.

Then what you're saying is that Ralph would have been fired from Tech much earlier, because Tech doesn't get the athletes Maryland does (he consistently recruited in the Top 30, while Tech resides outside the Top 50 currently). Chan would get fired anywhere else too. It doesn't have to be those two guys: it can be ANYONE. Running the option under center might be what's best for Tech right now, because that is the best our staff can recruit. Get a staff who can recruit in the Top 30's and you can do well with most any offense. Here's my question for you: do you think that Georgia Tech can win the National Championship with an option coach that is not Coach Johnson? In my mind, no, we won't even get close. If that's the case, then strive to do better. But that's ignoring the whole point of this my entire argument: don't limit yourself even more by saying you can only choose from these certain coaches because we have to run this particular style of offense and no other.

People are starting to think that only an option coach can win at Tech, and that's just not true. THAT is what I'm worried will happen: that people will get so caught up in the triple option and get so set in their way and stubborn that they will refuse any other type of offense. That can't become Tech's identity, because it will come back and bite us in the butt if it does. It takes a good coach that understands and can coach around Tech's limitations to win at GT. Johnson is one of those. He's a great coach. But he's not the only one, and there is no guarantee that any of his assistants will do the same, or that a option coach will win as much as he does. We fired a coach for only averaging 8 wins a season. I am unwilling to go back to that mediocrity, and it doesn't matter what offense we run. And yes, I know that there's no guarantee a coach with a different system will do better than CPJ, but at least we're looking at ALL of our options and not just those that run a particular offense. That is my reasoning behind moving on from the option when CPJ is done, and you can disagree with it all you want, but that's what I'm starting to see happen, that's my fear, and I'm sticking to my opinion

 

[PBR549]

Then what you're saying is that Ralph would have been fired from Tech much earlier, because Tech doesn't get the athletes Maryland does (he consistently recruited in the Top 30, while Tech resides outside the Top 50 currently). Chan would get fired anywhere else too. It doesn't have to be those two guys: it can be ANYONE. Running the option under center might be what's best for Tech right now, because that is the best our staff can recruit. Get a staff who can recruit in the Top 30's and you can do well with most any offense. Here's my question for you: do you think that Georgia Tech can win the National Championship with an option coach that is not Coach Johnson? In my mind, no, we won't even get close. If that's the case, then strive to do better. But that's ignoring the whole point of this my entire argument: don't limit yourself even more by saying you can only choose from these certain coaches because we have to run this particular style of offense and no other.

People are starting to think that only an option coach can win at Tech, and that's just not true. THAT is what I'm worried will happen: that people will get so caught up in the triple option and get so set in their way and stubborn that they will refuse any other type of offense. That can't become Tech's identity, because it will come back and bite us in the butt if it does. It takes a good coach that understands and can coach around Tech's limitations to win at GT. Johnson is one of those. He's a great coach. But he's not the only one, and there is no guarantee that any of his assistants will do the same, or that a option coach will win as much as he does. We fired a coach for only averaging 8 wins a season. I am unwilling to go back to that mediocrity, and it doesn't matter what offense we run. And yes, I know that there's no guarantee a coach with a different system will do better than CPJ, but at least we're looking at ALL of our options and not just those that run a particular offense. That is my reasoning behind moving on from the option when CPJ is done, and you can disagree with it all you want, but that's what I'm starting to see happen, that's my fear, and I'm sticking to my opinion

Ralph was ahead of his time and unbelievably intelligent but he didn't pull in top 30 recruiting classes consistently, he didn't at Maryland and would not do any better than this staff is doing today at Tech. The only way I would go away from this scheme is 1. our recruiting limitations disappeared or 2. other ACC schools started running the the same scheme. Those who don't learn by history are bound to repeat it.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Then what you're saying is that Ralph would have been fired from Tech much earlier, because Tech doesn't get the athletes Maryland does (he consistently recruited in the Top 30, while Tech resides outside the Top 50 currently). Chan would get fired anywhere else too. It doesn't have to be those two guys: it can be ANYONE. Running the option under center might be what's best for Tech right now, because that is the best our staff can recruit. Get a staff who can recruit in the Top 30's and you can do well with most any offense. Here's my question for you: do you think that Georgia Tech can win the National Championship with an option coach that is not Coach Johnson? In my mind, no, we won't even get close. If that's the case, then strive to do better. But that's ignoring the whole point of this my entire argument: don't limit yourself even more by saying you can only choose from these certain coaches because we have to run this particular style of offense and no other.

People are starting to think that only an option coach can win at Tech, and that's just not true. THAT is what I'm worried will happen: that people will get so caught up in the triple option and get so set in their way and stubborn that they will refuse any other type of offense. That can't become Tech's identity, because it will come back and bite us in the butt if it does. It takes a good coach that understands and can coach around Tech's limitations to win at GT. Johnson is one of those. He's a great coach. But he's not the only one, and there is no guarantee that any of his assistants will do the same, or that a option coach will win as much as he does. We fired a coach for only averaging 8 wins a season. I am unwilling to go back to that mediocrity, and it doesn't matter what offense we run. And yes, I know that there's no guarantee a coach with a different system will do better than CPJ, but at least we're looking at ALL of our options and not just those that run a particular offense. That is my reasoning behind moving on from the option when CPJ is done, and you can disagree with it all you want, but that's what I'm starting to see happen, that's my fear, and I'm sticking to my opinion

A flaw in your line of argument. There is no combination of coaches that could be hired at Tech and consistently recruit in the top 30s.

Reasons: the way these rankings are generated, the unethical treatment of student athletes needed to rise in the rankings (related to the first point on how they are quantified), the fact the Institute only gives bachelor of science degrees, apr effect, further institutional limitations that have led to the football program consistently recruiting at a specific level historically without regard to coaching staff, the yahoo news investigative report that 100% of 5-star recruits accept bagmen bribes in choosing their school, and that 75% of 4 stars accept bribes . . . and on and on.

However, if your point is more limited to when you have an opening you go get the best coach you can find, to the best of your ability to judge who is the best, and let that coach determine the offense, then I totally agree with you.

 

[ATL1]

I'd like a Chad Morris, Malzahn, Willie Fritz type of O. A run oriented spread that has more of a passing component.