Offensive Transition at Nebraska (4-8) last year

[Augusta_Jacket]

So pretty much like CPJ's

Yes, but with vastly different QBs. Most of our roster QBs were recruited for running and reading defenses, not for their passing ability.

One thing I noticed about CPJs QB recruiting, was that he always seemed to recruit a strong passer as well as a strong runner, (2 possible QBs a year was common under CPJ) but was invariably snakebit. Vad Lee had promise, then decided to transfer. Ratliffe's injury before he ever reported cut his career short before it even began. LJ's injuries prevented him from competing last year. Yates was another strong passer to complement Knights running ability. Yates ends up a 4* Dual-Threat QB with only 1 P5 offer, which is just nuts.

Long term, I think Yates will be our answer at QB, and while it's absolutely possible he could ball out day one and be all-world, I wouldn't bank on a T-FR QB saving the day year one.

 

[stech81]

[QUOTE="Augusta_J
Long term, I think Yates will be our answer at QB, and while it's absolutely possible he could ball out day one and be all-world, I wouldn't bank on a T-FR QB saving the day year one.[/QUOTE]
I guess you could say one did at Clemson but he did have +21 other good players.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I guess you could say one did at Clemson but he did have +21 other good players.

Clemson has a generational player at QB. Similar to Andrew Luck or Peyton manning. There are 5* QB's, and then there are Trevor Lawrences. No one who knows QB play ever doubted that Lawrence would dominate the college game. It also does help that the offense there is stacked as well, what with all the top 10 recruiting classes they are pulling in.

 

[Skeptic]

Dude, you need to can it with this kind of garbage. I was, and continue to be, as big a CPJ supporter as anyone on this board, but I can name you plenty of reasons why we shouldn't be expected to win more than 4 games this year. We are completely changing offensive schemes without a QB on the roster that was recruited to the new scheme. We have a surplus of RBs (former ABs) who don't fit in the new offense we are running. We lost our best OL to transfer and the rest of the OL has to learn a completely new blocking scheme. We have a fairly brutal schedule and our defense likely won't improve fast enough to make up the lost ground on offense. Every major publication and website that follows CFB is predicting us to win between 3-5 games. Yes, the experts were often wrong about GT in the past, but that had a lot to do with CPJ being able to outscheme opponents when the competition was close to even with us. CGC will not be on a hot seat unless we enter year 4 without any signs of progress, or if we truly tank and only win two or three games TOTAL in his first two years, which I see as highly unlikely. You can keep griping about it, but it won't change the facts.

He has a seven year contract, so is about three years and maybe five away from being on any hot seat. (If he can coach as well as he can negotiate, I see a NC in three years.) On the other hand let's not pretend his new "scheme" -- which looks and reads like that of dozens of college teams -- is rocket science. It isn't. A QB who could run last year's offense can certainly run this one, and I gather all of them ran a similar offense in HS. (My goodness? Did I just say it was a high school offense? No, just that it is an epidemic in high school circles it seems. And it seems to me Johnson left 2-3 QBs who can run it, and have run it.)

And come on, it is actually funny to read some posters saying we will live or die with our offense this season. Think about that one for a minute. Lastly I cannot wait for the first wailing of why we waited until it was third and forever to pass, or why we got off schedule by throwing on first down.

Really lastly, we cannot keep bemoaning the state of ACC football despite an influx of apparently quality coaches, and in the same breath complain about a tough schedule. Which is it? (LBJ was famous for saying he could teach it either way, so there is that.)

 

[slugboy]

Clemson has a generational player at QB. Similar to Andrew Luck or Peyton manning. There are 5* QB's, and then there are Trevor Lawrences. No one who knows QB play ever doubted that Lawrence would dominate the college game. It also does help that the offense there is stacked as well, what with all the top 10 recruiting classes they are pulling in.

Largely agree.

Out of ~125 top echelon football schools, we saw Tua Tagovailoa push out a 5* starter to win a natty two years ago at Bama and Lawrence do the same last year at Clemson. Those schools were otherwise loaded. Lamar Jackson at Louisville exploded on the NCAA scene in 2015 without the other players that you'd see at Bama or Clemson, but started 8 games that year.

Most of the other schools didn't have someone take over like that. So, it's certainly possible to get a player to show up like that for your team, and it's more likely than getting a lottery ticket to come through for you, but I certainly wouldn't expect it.

If someone plays like that for us, I'll respect it as the stroke of good fortune that it is.

 

[takethepoints]

Yates is, as I've said, a Ricky Dobbs clone. He was like Mills, only instead of Paul praying for another real Adrian Peterson, he was praying for another Dobbs. But he'll fit just fine in the new O, provided the coaches let him run.

I don't actually think our QBs are going to be a problem. All of them were lights out in high school; all of them ran a shotgun spread. One of them will work out (probably Lucas) and do ok. We shouldn't expect Archie Manning in the first year, though that would be nice. I also think the OL will do fine; if you can block for the spread option, blocking for a shotgun is not much of a challenge. People make too much of pass blocking. The main reason we had trouble at that under Paul was a) lack of practice and b) 3 to 4 foot splits. I also doubt we'll have trouble finding the other pieces, especially at RB. If we have trouble - I think we will - it'll be because of the transition in scheme. But I don't expect that too last.

D is going to be a problem. Losing Big B was a tragedy. Without him, we may lack the inner clog we'll need. Further, switching schemes again will probably lead to the same chickens-with-their-heads-cut-off scenario I expect for the first few games on O.

And that may mean a record like NU's. I expect a lot of our games to be close; talent in the Coastal is very even. We'll just have to see.

 

[iceeater1969]

Anything less than 6-6 will not only be disappointing, but should also place CGC on the hot seat. There is absolutely no reason win less than 6 games this year.

Wow, that did not take long!

Of course we all agree w u and look forward to your presentation at the annual hiesmen meetibg..

Since we give less and we buy fewer tickets that almost all acc schools, its obvious we are entitled to demand great results.

Thanks for your team building donations!! Work w large team?

 

[LibertyTurns]

Anything less than 6-6 will not only be disappointing, but should also place CGC on the hot seat. There is absolutely no reason win less than 6 games this year.

Wow dude. You’re pissed CPJ was not welcomed by the other side, now we get a new coach and YOU roll out the old thanks for showing up Jack welcome mat and shove it in the dumpster! Maybe we can all just support the coach we have?

 

[H-Wade]

The new scheme is way simpler to master and doesn’t require perfectly executed blocks, reads, spacing and timing like the old O.

I think that is part of the problem, though. Because of our lesser talent on offense during the CPJ era, we needed perfectly executed blocks, reads, spacing and timing in order to become the offensive juggernaut that we were. Now we have a simpler offense, but we also have the same talent level. Our new offense will need better athletes then we were getting under CPJ in order to be as successful as we were for the last decade.

So to expect the offense to be anywhere near as good this year as we have been seeing is a pipe dream, IMO. However, I think we will see an uptick in defense that can help us overcome that issue.

 

[iceeater1969]

I think that is part of the problem, though. Because of our lesser talent on offense during the CPJ era, we needed perfectly executed blocks, reads, spacing and timing in order to become the offensive juggernaut that we were. Now we have a simpler offense, but we also have the same talent level. Our new offense will need better athletes then we were getting under CPJ in order to be as successful as we were for the last decade.

So to expect the offense to be anywhere near as good this year as we have been seeing is a pipe dream, IMO. However, I think we will see an uptick in defense that can help us overcome that issue.

Your logic is pretty solid so please , please, please may offseason conditioning be a difference maker!

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

A QB who could run last year's offense can certainly run this one, and I gather all of them ran a similar offense in HS. (My goodness? Did I just say it was a high school offense? No, just that it is an epidemic in high school circles it seems. And it seems to me Johnson left 2-3 QBs who can run it, and have run it.)

Then why was it so important that we hire a good recruiter, if QBs with no P5 offers are good enough to win with the new scheme? We are now running the same scheme as other schools who didn't bother to offer our QBs.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I think that is part of the problem, though. Because of our lesser talent on offense during the CPJ era, we needed perfectly executed blocks, reads, spacing and timing in order to become the offensive juggernaut that we were. Now we have a simpler offense, but we also have the same talent level. Our new offense will need better athletes then we were getting under CPJ in order to be as successful as we were for the last decade.

So to expect the offense to be anywhere near as good this year as we have been seeing is a pipe dream, IMO. However, I think we will see an uptick in defense that can help us overcome that issue.

This.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I think that is part of the problem, though. Because of our lesser talent on offense during the CPJ era, we needed perfectly executed blocks, reads, spacing and timing in order to become the offensive juggernaut that we were. Now we have a simpler offense, but we also have the same talent level. Our new offense will need better athletes then we were getting under CPJ in order to be as successful as we were for the last decade.

So to expect the offense to be anywhere near as good this year as we have been seeing is a pipe dream, IMO. However, I think we will see an uptick in defense that can help us overcome that issue.

Everybody expecting to see an uptick in defense are in for a shock I’m afraid.

 

[H-Wade]

Everybody expecting to see an uptick in defense are in for a shock I’m afraid.

And this is why we see publications predicting 3 wins from us this year. I'm not expecting an above average defense, I just hope to see an improvement from the last few years.

If we don't see ANY improvement from the D this year I will be disappointed for sure.

 

[Skeptic]

Then why was it so important that we hire a good recruiter, if QBs with no P5 offers are good enough to win with the new scheme? We are now running the same scheme as other schools who didn't bother to offer our QBs.

I didn't see a Clemson or Alabama-ready QB, but one of the three can be serviceable until and if one can be recruited. Across the ACC spectrum it is a matter of degree, and I think it is easier to run an offense from 6-7 yards back than the quick-hitting under center option. I would not be surprised if we won six games, or consider it an outstanding job of coaching if it happens. Now, 8 games? That would get my attention. And I agree with H-Wade: we need better athletes, and I would expect by next year some really good running backs who wanted nothing to do with the option -- it is a supreme sacrifice to go from HS star to 4-5 touches a game, after all -- will be available ... if they can be induced to embrace the technical aspect of the school and its limited course offerings. I would think running back and QB will be the two positions getting the most attention in recruiting. I have always thought and wrote that the really outstanding running backs were not going to be attracted to Johnson's offense, and that is not a knock on his offense because it fascinates me, and he won with it. Much to the frustration of his critics.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Everybody expecting to see an uptick in defense are in for a shock I’m afraid.

Exactly. I also don't expect to see the offense outperform last years in terms of efficiency. (14th in OFEI in 2018) With a fall-off in Offensive output and with the D only making marginal improvements, as well as the SoS getting tougher this year (23 vs 60), I don't see us improving our win total, and see every reason why it could drop to 3-4.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I didn't see a Clemson or Alabama-ready QB, but one of the three can be serviceable until and if one can be recruited. Across the ACC spectrum it is a matter of degree, and I think it is easier to run an offense from 6-7 yards back than the quick-hitting under center option. I would not be surprised if we won six games, or consider it an outstanding job of coaching if it happens. Now, 8 games? That would get my attention. And I agree with H-Wade: we need better athletes, and I would expect by next year some really good running backs who wanted nothing to do with the option -- it is a supreme sacrifice to go from HS star to 4-5 touches a game, after all -- will be available ... if they can be induced to embrace the technical aspect of the school and its limited course offerings. I would think running back and QB will be the two positions getting the most attention in recruiting. I have always thought and wrote that the really outstanding running backs were not going to be attracted to Johnson's offense, and that is not a knock on his offense because it fascinates me, and he won with it. Much to the frustration of his critics.

I understand your logic, but I still contend that there is a wider gulf in capability of running an offense and ability to run it well enough to beat P5 defenses than many here would like to admit. I've stated elsewhere on these boards that GT could win anywhere from 1-7 games next year and none of those results would shock me. 8 would. I still feel as if we are looking at a 4-5 win campaign next year.

Edit to add that I agree with you on the recruiting going forward.

 

[GSOJacket]

SI's take:
https://www.si.com/college-football/2019/06/18/new-head-coaches-les-miles-kansas-mack-brown-unc

 

[Animal02]

Wow dude. You’re pissed CPJ was not welcomed by the other side, now we get a new coach and YOU roll out the old thanks for showing up Jack welcome mat and shove it in the dumpster! Maybe we can all just support the coach we have?

So we are supposed to set the bar low for a new coach? Sorry......I don't see it that way....... .500 ball is the least that show be expected (barring a large amount of injuries) Seems the expectations of the new coach from the kool aid drinkers keeps getting lower and lower.

 

[Animal02]

Dude, you need to can it with this kind of garbage. I was, and continue to be, as big a CPJ supporter as anyone on this board, but I can name you plenty of reasons why we shouldn't be expected to win more than 4 games this year. We are completely changing offensive schemes without a QB on the roster that was recruited to the new scheme. We have a surplus of RBs (former ABs) who don't fit in the new offense we are running. We lost our best OL to transfer and the rest of the OL has to learn a completely new blocking scheme. We have a fairly brutal schedule and our defense likely won't improve fast enough to make up the lost ground on offense. Every major publication and website that follows CFB is predicting us to win between 3-5 games. Yes, the experts were often wrong about GT in the past, but that had a lot to do with CPJ being able to outscheme opponents when the competition was close to even with us. CGC will not be on a hot seat unless we enter year 4 without any signs of progress, or if we truly tank and only win two or three games TOTAL in his first two years, which I see as highly unlikely. You can keep griping about it, but it won't change the facts.

Bull........just more excuses to set the bar low. Rather comical seeing all the kool aid drinkers walk back all the chest puffing from a few months ago.