Life after Paul Johnson.... hypothetical question

[Sideways]

No, the best coach gives us the best way to be competitive. The offense is secondary to what CPJ has done. If we only look to hire someone who runs that offensive style, then we are limiting ourselves unnecessarily and overlooking other options that might be even better. This trap that only the option allows us to be competitive is why I don't want another option coach after CPJ. The best coach will allow us to be competitive, regardless of offense, but my personal reason for wanting a coach that doesn't run the option is to ensure that the program doesn't fall into the same mentality that you're displaying, that it can't be great without running the option. GT can and will be competitive without the option, and putting one more constraint on Tech by requiring the coach to run the option is counterproductive to making GT the best program it can be

An interesting take and I, for one, appreciate your desire to make Tech the "best program it can be" I happen to disagree that running the hurry up offenses out of the spread that is currently in vogue would be the best for Tech. One point you made that I and others have not considered is the PJ factor. He is so damn good at making adjustments on the fly that it will be almost impossible to duplicate that with another coach even one of his disciples who implements the same offense.

 

[PBR549]

An interesting take and I, for one, appreciate your desire to make Tech the "best program it can be" I happen to disagree that running the hurry up offenses out of the spread that is currently in vogue would be the best for Tech. One point you made that I and others have not considered is the PJ factor. He is so damn good at making adjustments on the fly that it will be almost impossible to duplicate that with another coach even one of his disciples who implements the same offense.

No doubt CPJ does a great job running this system but I think there are others who could run the system at a similar rate of efficiency. Paul has the whole package of not only running the offense with efficiency but also doing all the other thousands of things that goes along with being the head coach at Tech. He hasn't always been perfect but I think most of us would agree he's done a dad gone good job.

 

[bravejason]

No doubt CPJ does a great job running this system but I think there are others who could run the system at a similar rate of efficiency. Paul has the whole package of not only running the offense with efficiency but also doing all the other thousands of things that goes along with being the head coach at Tech. He hasn't always been perfect but I think most of us would agree he's done a dad gone good job.

That is the key thing for a head coach. I think Alabama got so good because Saban understood how to create a program and took full advantage of all the resources available to him. Look at Dabo and Clemson. I've never heard anyone say Dabo is a great football coach. However, it appears that he is pretty good at running a football program.

I'm in the camp that is not wedded to the triple option. I love CPJ's offense, but limiting the pool of head coach candidates to those that run a triple option offense is unnecessarily restrictive IMO.

 

[augustabuzz]

...

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.

Also, if you go to a shotgun spread, then you better have a great FG kicker because that is what you'll be doing in the red zone much more frequently.

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

It has nothing to do with an O formation. It has to do with the quality of the coach to recruit, teach, motivate.

 

[DH9387]

First off, let me preface this be saying that I absolutely love Mark Dantonio and I frequently argue in his favor as the best coach in college football, but I feel like comparing Michigan State to Georgia Tech is like comparing apples and oranges. First off, they have nearly twice the enrollment (50,543 vs 26,806), four times the degree choices (160 vs 40), and nowhere near the admission requirements; and that is just from the academic perspective. From the football perspective, they have significantly better average attendance (74,667 - sold out vs 47,503 - 86%, which as a season ticket holder seems highly inflated), much higher annual revenue ($108,687,274 vs $77,202,758) and better media exporsure (B1G vs ACC). These are all just the quantifiable things. Michigan State really only has to recruit against its own conference, whereas we have to recruit against our own and the SEC. Michigan State is also the #2 team in its home state vs GT being optimistically #4, although quite possibly lower. Also, Dantonio has had the pleasure of coaching at Michigan State during a time where most of which, Michigan was way down. It will be really interesting to see how he fares now that Harbough has them on the rise. I see Michigan State as being much more akin to Auburn or UCLA than they are to us. If you were to switch coaching staffs between the two schools over the last nine years, I think Dantonio would do worse here while I think CPJ does just as good if not better there.

I know all that has very little to do with the topic of this thread, but I guess my point would be that Tech is an anomaly in college football. Comparing the successes of coaches at other schools as if they would translate here is meaningless. Finding a great coach in college football is a fluke. It is just as much luck as it is due diligence by the athletic director. We have been very lucky that CPJ has worked out the way that he has. We will be very lucky to repeat that in our next hire. I am of the opinion that the spread option levels the playing field for us and I would look there first for our next coach. I am not saying that we should be married to the option nor that our next coach must run it. There are just too many variables that can change between now and when we will be looking for a new head coach. I want the best coach available, but realistically at this time, doing something different like the spread option gives us the best chance to be successful. Obviously this is just the opinion of a casual football fan.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

It has nothing to do with an O formation. It has to do with the quality of the coach to recruit, teach, motivate.

It has a helluva lot to do with Xs, Os, scheme, formations, recognizing same in opposing D, adjustments....too many more to go on. A lot more than what you cite though.

 

[Sideways]

I'd rather we go with a Defense or Recruiting oriented HC, and then get a true OC that runs this system.

Not saying you might be right but be careful of what you wish for. This is the exact approach that Florida chose with Ron Zook who replaced the Head Ball Coach himself. Zook was a former defensive coordinator who was a great recruiter. He was quite the show on the after game Florida radio network. Inventing gems like "Its correctable" for allowing a block punt and after losing to a mediocre Ole Miss team at the Swamp he claimed his team was "getting better, better and better" . He absolutely could talk more coach speak and say less than anyone I have ever heard. Entertaining to be sure, enlightening not so much. Talent he had plenty of and as advertised was a great recruiter but the face palm defeats doomed him to three largely forgettable seasons. Somehow he managed to lose to both Mississippi schools in one year. He did beat Georgia two out of three I will give him that.

 

[PBR549]

First off, let me preface this be saying that I absolutely love Mark Dantonio and I frequently argue in his favor as the best coach in college football, but I feel like comparing Michigan State to Georgia Tech is like comparing apples and oranges. First off, they have nearly twice the enrollment (50,543 vs 26,806), four times the degree choices (160 vs 40), and nowhere near the admission requirements; and that is just from the academic perspective. From the football perspective, they have significantly better average attendance (74,667 - sold out vs 47,503 - 86%, which as a season ticket holder seems highly inflated), much higher annual revenue ($108,687,274 vs $77,202,758) and better media exporsure (B1G vs ACC). These are all just the quantifiable things. Michigan State really only has to recruit against its own conference, whereas we have to recruit against our own and the SEC. Michigan State is also the #2 team in its home state vs GT being optimistically #4, although quite possibly lower. Also, Dantonio has had the pleasure of coaching at Michigan State during a time where most of which, Michigan was way down. It will be really interesting to see how he fares now that Harbough has them on the rise. I see Michigan State as being much more akin to Auburn or UCLA than they are to us. If you were to switch coaching staffs between the two schools over the last nine years, I think Dantonio would do worse here while I think CPJ does just as good if not better there.

I know all that has very little to do with the topic of this thread, but I guess my point would be that Tech is an anomaly in college football. Comparing the successes of coaches at other schools as if they would translate here is meaningless. Finding a great coach in college football is a fluke. It is just as much luck as it is due diligence by the athletic director. We have been very lucky that CPJ has worked out the way that he has. We will be very lucky to repeat that in our next hire. I am of the opinion that the spread option levels the playing field for us and I would look there first for our next coach. I am not saying that we should be married to the option nor that our next coach must run it. There are just too many variables that can change between now and when we will be looking for a new head coach. I want the best coach available, but realistically at this time, doing something different like the spread option gives us the best chance to be successful. Obviously this is just the opinion of a casual football fan.

Very well said. I would go so far as to say most of the factory head coaches or assistants for that matter would have trouble at Tech. Those guys would not be able to recruit the same type athletes. I think people need to be careful when trying to evaluate our coaches especially the head coach and coordinators. We need coaches who are able to make the best out of our unique situation. Just any coach from a factory is not likely to fill that bill.

 

[1979jacket]

Next coach - doesn't matter what offense he runs however the selection should take into account

Recruiting - Importance medium
GT is a tough recruiting road for many reasons - A great recruiter would struggle with the obstacles to get a highly rated recruiting class. Getting a medium rated class however is not overly difficult given in Georgia which is a football hotbed.

Game day coach/ability to develop players - Importance High
New coach will have some talent but not enough to say with equal teaching and coaching "mine will beat yours". Needs to be able to either to teach them well and/or out scheme the opponent to be successful.

This is what UGA may have missed. They will get talent no matter who the coach is to compete with anyone but you have to coach them to be great. GT is not a that level talent-wise. GT will have some athletes but they will need to be coached up to win.

 

[Vespidae]

Great thread. I've really enjoyed reading it.

It doesn't matter what offense you run as long as you are committed to it and can get the kids (recruiting process), coaching (teaching process), and player development.

You can't expect to be successful if you are changing systems every few years.

The TO gets more out of the type of SA we can get than any other offense. I think TStan should be taking steps to institutionalize this at Tech in a way that THIS is Georgia Tech Football. As much as I like the old SEC, it ain't coming back for us. But we can still be a successful team for a STEM school.

GoJax

 

[Boomergump]

For those of you willing to change system for a new coach I ask this question: are you willing to go through a three year down period to allow the roster to turn over? Most around here go bat %$#@ crazy after a single loss, let alone a few losing seasons back to back. Our roster is not built for other offenses and, at this point, it would not be an easy transition.

 

[ibeattetris]

For those of you willing to change system for a new coach I ask this question: are you willing to go through a three year down period to allow the roster to turn over? Most around here go bat %$#@ crazy after a single loss, let alone a few losing seasons back to back. Our roster is not built for other offenses and, at this point, it would not be an easy transition.

I truly don't know the answer, but are the athletes required to run Urban's style of option really much different than ours? Urban spent time with CPJ to learn our scheme and then he developed his system based on his reasoning that it would be easier to teach (more zone blocking vs assignments). I don't think caliber of athlete was considered when he was head coach at Bowling Green.

I am not saying I favor Urban Meyer's offense to ours (I don't), but I do think there are other offenses our recruits could transition to and not have a significant drop off.

 

[Boomergump]

I truly don't know the answer, but are the athletes required to run Urban's style of option really much different than ours? Urban spent time with CPJ to learn our scheme and then he developed his system based on his reasoning that it would be easier to teach (more zone blocking vs assignments). I don't think caliber of athlete was considered when he was head coach at Bowling Green.

I am not saying I favor Urban Meyer's offense to ours (I don't), but I do think there are other offenses our recruits could transition to and not have a significant drop off.

I hear you and I agree to a point, but in this specific case we are still talking about staying with the option.

 

[bravejason]

For those of you willing to change system for a new coach I ask this question: are you willing to go through a three year down period to allow the roster to turn over? Most around here go bat %$#@ crazy after a single loss, let alone a few losing seasons back to back. Our roster is not built for other offenses and, at this point, it would not be an easy transition.

First, a down period is not mandatory. Second, recruiting for CPJ's offense does not automatically mean the roster cannot run a different offense well. Third, the defense is not precluded from playing well and winning games if the offense has growing pains. Fourth, given the volatility of the annual win-loss record under CPJ, it's possible that a year 1 down year under the new coach would have been a year x down year under CPJ (not that we could ever know, but down years or sub-par years have been common under CPJ).

 

[65Jacket]

First, a down period is not mandatory. Second, recruiting for CPJ's offense does not automatically mean the roster cannot run a different offense well. Third, the defense is not precluded from playing well and winning games if the offense has growing pains. Fourth, given the volatility of the annual win-loss record under CPJ, it's possible that a year 1 down year under the new coach would have been a year x down year under CPJ (not that we could ever know, but down years or sub-par years have been common under CPJ).

Bull, CPJ has had one bad year and that was due in large part to injuries. You are not going to get all 8+ wins at GT, and you will be lucky to get a Coach who will fare as well as CPJ with the limitations he will face at good ole GT.,

 

[jacketup]

Bull, CPJ has had one bad year and that was due in large part to injuries. You are not going to get all 8+ wins at GT, and you will be lucky to get a Coach who will fare as well as CPJ with the limitations he will face at good ole GT.,

I guess that depends on how you define "bad year".

Getting 8 wins these days just means that you go 6-5 against your FBS schedule (in 2 of Johnson's seasons, 5-5 would have worked) and then get a win against a weak team in a bad bowl.

 

[JacketFromUGA]

I guess that depends on how you define "bad year".

Getting 8 wins these days just means that you go 6-5 against your FBS schedule (in 2 of Johnson's seasons, 5-5 would have worked) and then get a win against a weak team in a bad bowl.

And yet plenty of FBS teams don't do that.

 

[Longestday]

Fan = Fanatic and often unreasonable. If this was a UGA conversation, I would understand the consternation about not being 9 and above wins every year with an occasion victory over Alabama. I wonder if Kirby fails to do better, would the conversation here change. But, given the first part of this reply, I think the conversation would be the same.

CPJ and his spread offense may not the only one that could win at Tech, but it may take some pain trying the find the right one (see Virginia).

I understand the "you have your goals set to low" and I understand " you are not accounting for the realities of GT".

 

[TechPhi97]

Don't think the boosters would let it happen. We have the best Coach in the Game for our scheme. When he leaves we will likely transition to something else. I'm pretty sure I saw something were boosters were upset that he beat UGA because that might extend his stay.

That ain't my definition of booster.