Offensive Transition at Nebraska (4-8) last year

[4shotB]

Exactly nothing should be read into this year's results, if they are negative.

CPJ was an X's and O's whiz, who succeeded by getting more out of less. You could judge his early results more, because his road to success didn't involve great recruiting, it involved a great scheme.

CGC is not the same. He's a salesman, first and foremost, and his road to success involves sustained improved recruiting. You knew this when you hired him, and so he should be allowed to succeed or fail based upon what you hired him to do.

This should be required reading for all GT fans, most especially for those struggling to let go of our recent past. Thanks for posting this.

 

[stech81]

I'm not going to stop buying season tickets. I love CPJ but he is gone. What I have seen of this coaching staff they put in the hours. Unlike some I just don't see 6 wins or less I don't care if we changed schemes. I have to believe the coaches will call plays that will work they are not dumb. Do I think we beat Clemson no but it is the first game and anything can happen. The players may not have been signed to play in this offense but they are not quitters they will play hard. Those of you who think less than 6 wins is all we get need to listen to CGC and stop reading those magazines.

 

[tech_wreck47]

In my humble opinion, we lost 4 meaningful starters. We lost 2 other starters where we will get an upgrade, and we lost a few others who were sporadic starters at best.

4 meaningful: Branch, Cerge-H, JalenJ, ASA
2 others where we'll upgrade: Rivera, Mitchell (I mean no ill-will against those guys, but IIWII)

We could possibly upgrade at DE if the UF transfer gets eligibility this year. Plus some of those young guys that got good playing time last year should be bigger, stronger, and overall just better.

 

[Jim Prather]

Exactly nothing should be read into this year's results, if they are negative.

CPJ was an X's and O's whiz, who succeeded by getting more out of less. You could judge his early results more, because his road to success didn't involve great recruiting, it involved a great scheme.

CGC is not the same. He's a salesman, first and foremost, and his road to success involves sustained improved recruiting. You knew this when you hired him, and so he should be allowed to succeed or fail based upon what you hired him to do.

To ask him to be CPJ instead of being CGC is unfair, and frankly unproductive to your program. If he's going to sell, you have to give him something to sell, and a second-guessing, uncommitted fanbase isn't an easy sell. You guys need to be rah rah, at least for a couple years, whether you love what you see on the field or not.

Winning by recruiting takes longer than winning by scheme. That's what you guys signed on for, so that's what you have to plan for, and not be disappointed by.

If he gives you something scheme-wise, that's bonus. Just like anything you got recruiting Wise by CPJ was bonus. (I remain genuinely salty that I will never get to see Yates play for Coach Johnson).

Collins is not my cup of tea, but you can win like that. If you guys want to win though, you need to produce an environment conducive to winning like that, and that means essentially being willing to write off the next two years.

Absolutely! This single post probably sums up the debate better than any other! Glad to see you still around ILTO...

 

[Deleted member 2897]

\

Exactly nothing should be read into this year's results, if they are negative.

CPJ was an X's and O's whiz, who succeeded by getting more out of less. You could judge his early results more, because his road to success didn't involve great recruiting, it involved a great scheme.

CGC is not the same. He's a salesman, first and foremost, and his road to success involves sustained improved recruiting. You knew this when you hired him, and so he should be allowed to succeed or fail based upon what you hired him to do.

To ask him to be CPJ instead of being CGC is unfair, and frankly unproductive to your program. If he's going to sell, you have to give him something to sell, and a second-guessing, uncommitted fanbase isn't an easy sell. You guys need to be rah rah, at least for a couple years, whether you love what you see on the field or not.

Winning by recruiting takes longer than winning by scheme. That's what you guys signed on for, so that's what you have to plan for, and not be disappointed by.

If he gives you something scheme-wise, that's bonus. Just like anything you got recruiting Wise by CPJ was bonus. (I remain genuinely salty that I will never get to see Yates play for Coach Johnson).

Collins is not my cup of tea, but you can win like that. If you guys want to win though, you need to produce an environment conducive to winning like that, and that means essentially being willing to write off the next two years.

This is what Dabo did. Dabo is not a good Xs and Ox coach. He's a goofy, likable recruiter who raised good money to hire great coaches around him. Venables is making nearly as much as our head coach was. But when you get elite talent, even a mental midget like Kirby "Smart" can win games.

We won't get there overnight, and our schedule is especially difficult the year after this one (10 of our opponents in 2020 were ranked last year). so whether you like CGC or not, to be fair you need to at least withhold judgment until the 2021 season.

 

[Animal02]

\


This is what Dabo did. Dabo is not a good Xs and Ox coach. He's a goofy, likable recruiter who raised good money to hire great coaches around him. Venables is making nearly as much as our head coach was. But when you get elite talent, even a mental midget like Kirby "Smart" can win games.

We won't get there overnight, and our schedule is especially difficult the year after this one (10 of our opponents in 2020 were ranked last year). so whether you like CGC or not, to be fair you need to at least withhold judgment until the 2021 season.

My point is if he goes below .500 this year, he will be on the "Hot seat" he repeats that again in 20, it will be even hotter, he does it a third time, It will be hard for TStan to keep him around for a fourth.
I don't expect that to happen, and I do not expect to be under .500 this year, like so many kool aid drinkers do. '20 may be a rougher road and show a dip because of schedule. He will then need to show vast improvement in year three.

 

[BCJacket]

Vad Lee was a different kind of QB than what we have on our rosters today. VL was being recruited by other P5 schools as a QB. He completed 47% that year for a little over 1400 yards. I'm not sure I'd call that very successful. Other than the last 2 years under TM and the first year under JmfN, it's one of our least successful passing campaigns. I'm not saying we're dragging the lacrosse team out there, but ask yourself this: other than Yates, what QBs on our roster would CGC have recruited to GT as a QB? I think LJ can succeed if he stays healthy, as I think he was undervalued during his recruiting. I think Graham is athletic enough to succeed somewhat. I think our best bet is to let LJ/Yates run with it and move Oliver and Graham to other positions.

My point wasn't that we were "very successful" in 2013. Only that CPJ and company were able to install at least a portion of a different offense in a single off season with his recruits; while keeping the base offense in place. I just question the thesis that our football coaches and football players can't learn a new scheme well enough to compete when that is their primary focus for 8 months.

"Well enough" isn't great. I don't expect great. But I doubt we're going to look like the Cumberland club team out there (well, maybe against Clemson ). We had the 14th ranked OFEI last season. It's not like CGC inherited an empty locker room.

CGC probably wouldn't have recruited 80% of our offensive roster. But that's the roster he has to work with. Even if the formation looks different than past years. We have play making athletes on this roster. It shouldn't be differential calculus to figure out ways to get it to them.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

If CGC goes 5-7 next year (for example) I don’t think his seat gets hot 1 degree. Same even in 2020. I think more important is how are our recruiting classes going and if we’re competitive. If we don’t have a top 30 class in the next 2 years and if we have 2 losing seasons, only then do I see his seat getting warm in 2021. Remember, CGC has a 7 year contract.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

My point wasn't that we were "very successful" in 2013. Only that CPJ and company were able to install at least a portion of a different offense in a single off season with his recruits; while keeping the base offense in place. I just question the thesis that our football coaches and football players can't learn a new scheme well enough to compete when that is their primary focus for 8 months.

"Well enough" isn't great. I don't expect great. But I doubt we're going to look like the Cumberland club team out there (well, maybe against Clemson ). We had the 14th ranked OFEI last season. It's not like CGC inherited an empty locker room.

CGC probably wouldn't have recruited 80% of our offensive roster. But that's the roster he has to work with. Even if the formation looks different than past years. We have play making athletes on this roster. It shouldn't be differential calculus to figure out ways to get it to them.

I think the big difference is that CPJ was installing wrinkles into an established offense. He didn't completely change what we were doing at the time. CGC and CDP are starting completely over.

The 14th ranked OFEI was due mainly to scheme. We are no longer running that scheme.

There is also a difference between competing and winning. I have no doubt we will be competitive in many of our Coastal Division games. I'm just not banking on winning those games.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

If CGC goes 5-7 next year (for example) I don’t think his seat gets hot 1 degree. Same even in 2020. I think more important is how are our recruiting classes going and if we’re competitive. If we don’t have a top 30 class in the next 2 years and if we have 2 losing seasons, only then do I see his seat getting warm in 2021. Remember, CGC has a 7 year contract.

I don't think his seat gets hot if he goes 3-9. Only 2 wins *might* cause it to get warm a tad. IMO, only way his seat gets hot is if he goes full B*** L**** and loses to The Citadel in an 0-12 campaign...

 

[H-Wade]

My point wasn't that we were "very successful" in 2013. Only that CPJ and company were able to install at least a portion of a different offense in a single off season with his recruits; while keeping the base offense in place. I just question the thesis that our football coaches and football players can't learn a new scheme well enough to compete when that is their primary focus for 8 months.

"Well enough" isn't great. I don't expect great. But I doubt we're going to look like the Cumberland club team out there (well, maybe against Clemson ). We had the 14th ranked OFEI last season. It's not like CGC inherited an empty locker room.

CGC probably wouldn't have recruited 80% of our offensive roster. But that's the roster he has to work with. Even if the formation looks different than past years. We have play making athletes on this roster. It shouldn't be differential calculus to figure out ways to get it to them.

The reason we were 14th is because of the offense. Army was 9th, I don't think any of us would trade our offensive roster for theirs.

 

[takethepoints]

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.

I think this makes a common argument that is a common mistake:

Some of our O recruits under Paul we're not highly rated, therefore our O talent pool is lacking. The scheme was everything.

Well … yes and no. Paul picked players so they would fit with what he wanted to do. For that they were talented, just in ways shotgun spread teams tended to overlook. The ABs were (usually) smaller then those teams wanted; the BBs (looked) slower then most shotgun feature backs; the QB too ready to run; the OLs slightly smaller. And that worked just fine: we got the best offensive performance, year over year, in Tech history.

Now we switch over to a shotgun spread with those players. This leads to some justifiable concerns, but I don't think they are crippling. First, recent recruiting for ABs has resulted in a lot of backs that are very similar in size to what you find on shotgun spread teams - 5' 10" - 6', around 195 - 200. And most of them easy fast enough. The BBs tend to be faster as well; no more (and I loved him) Preston Lyons types. They also seem to be the kind of back that a lot of shotgun spread teams are going to for feature backs these days - 6' - 6'2", around 220. The QB candidates all showed well in shotgun spreads in high school and haven't forgotten what they are supposed to do. The OLs, as recent weights show, are eating and weightlifting themselves into shotgun style types. Problem = while the talent is, imho, there, the field experience with the shotgun against P5 competition isn't. I expect that to show up a lot early on, but to get ironed out by the time Tech gets to the meat of the season against Coastal opponents.

Hope I'm right and you're wrong. We'll see Real Soon Now.

 

[Animal02]

I don't think his seat gets hot if he goes 3-9. Only 2 wins *might* cause it to get warm a tad. IMO, only way his seat gets hot is if he goes full B*** L**** and loses to The Citadel in an 0-12 campaign...

He makes .500 year one, he has wiggle room year 2 with the tougher schedule, and year 3 to show improvement. He stays below .500 his first 2 years, he has to be lights out good year three or he will not make 4.....despite the 7 year contract. 5 years is a lifetime now for a head coach, going barely .500 over three years and he would be done. This is all just speculation, because I do believe we should hit .500 this year.....maybe not in '20 though.

 

[H-Wade]

I think this makes a common argument that is a common mistake:

Some of our O recruits under Paul we're not highly rated, therefore our O talent pool is lacking. The scheme was everything.

Well … yes and no. Paul picked players so they would fit with what he wanted to do. For that they were talented, just in ways shotgun spread teams tended to overlook. The ABs were (usually) smaller then those teams wanted; the BBs (looked) slower then most shotgun feature backs; the QB too ready to run; the OLs slightly smaller. And that worked just fine: we got the best offensive performance, year over year, in Tech history.

Now we switch over to a shotgun spread with those players. This leads to some justifiable concerns, but I don't think they are crippling. First, recent recruiting for ABs has resulted in a lot of backs that are very similar in size to what you find on shotgun spread teams - 5' 10" - 6', around 195 - 200. And most of them easy fast enough. The BBs tend to be faster as well; no more (and I loved him) Preston Lyons types. They also seem to be the kind of back that a lot of shotgun spread teams are going to for feature backs these days - 6' - 6'2", around 220. The QB candidates all showed well in shotgun spreads in high school and haven't forgotten what they are supposed to do. The OLs, as recent weights show, are eating and weightlifting themselves into shotgun style types. Problem = while the talent is, imho, there, the field experience with the shotgun against P5 competition isn't. I expect that to show up a lot early on, but to get ironed out by the time Tech gets to the meat of the season against Coastal opponents.

Hope I'm right and you're wrong. We'll see Real Soon Now.

I hope you're right, too! Maybe if we have unexpected offensive success this year with our current roster we can bring CPJ back as a recruiting coordinator.

 

[Ibeeballin]

Mitchell is probably the most maligned starter on our D. He was much better than a lot of us give him credit for. Scheme had more to do with his production woes than talent.

Ehhh....

 

[Skeptic]

Win 'em all or loose 'em all, my big rear end will still bleed white and gold. We've been in the valley and on the mountain top.

CGC is has been given full rein of a program that IS a sleeping giant. The funding will come. The support staff will be hired. The atmosphere will keep charging up. It might not be this year, but we could shock people very soon. We can't complain about how our schedule changes from year to year, it's always gonna be tough with uga and Clempson. But we will beat them still. We did it with smaller, lesser rated players. So what the difference now? Top 30 recruiting is nowhere near top 5. Development is the key word. Star ratings are just projections, potential and possibility.

2014 was an amazing year in which 1 loss would have been 1 too many. But, why does it seem soooooo long ago?

I ask this in the spirit of genuine puzzlement, and because I just don't see it. And that is the return of GT to its glory days as a national power. I thought 2014 was just about dead solid perfect and we were so close to the hated Seminoles in the championship game, and then beat up on MSU in a game that could have been called on a mercy rule, an even then, even then, I did not think we were NC caliber.

I see too many obstacles, too many barriers. We have the advantage of the Coastal Division, but I'm not foolish enough to think it is not going to get a lot tougher sooner than later -- let me be the first to say UNC is going to shock some people this fall; the coaching alone will account for some wins (and I don't mean genius-type playcalling but preparation and coaching quietness on the sidelines and not a frenetic dashing too and fro by a guy who knew where the end of his rope was and kept trying to avoid it).

I would like to be convinced, but in this one I really am a skeptic. (You know, like wondering why if we have space satellites that can read an automobile license plate, something the size of an oil tanker is barely recognizable even if it could lead to war. It is just natural I suppose.)

Very good, yes. Division champs, maybe. (But like the guy at Clemson said several years ago in another context, if we're going to get it then it has to be soon because later all those teams will be rebuilt.) In the meantime there will be the inevitable shakeout and shakedown with coaches quitting, getting fired or burning out, and the biggest assumption being that Collins is the guy to get us there assuming everything else lines up. Moreover, is he any good at player development? I don't think it unfair to note his high hurdling job resume, and a couple of years doesn't really develop anybody. I don't think that question has been addressed by anybody with knowledge.

I get it that a different scheme might attract better athletes, but it doesn't change the fact we are still in a catfight with a dozen major programs. though it could be said that at least we'd be in the fight.

I have more questions than answers. Maybe Reagan got it right when he swiped it from the Russians and made it his own: trust but verify?

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

Guys, this is ACC, Coastal football, meaning it comes down to turnovers, flags, and who makes the plays in the last 5 minutes. All these teams are generally equal from a talent standpoint. It comes down to who has a playmaker. UVA is getting love, not because Mendenhall is a genius but because he has the most dynamic returning QB. I loved CPJ, but he lost games in this division not because he wasn’t a smart coach but because with equal teams a flag or turnover at the wrong time kills you. Just like he won some games when we should have lost (Miracle). It will be the same this year. We will win anywhere from 4 to 9 games depending on who makes a play or gets a timely turnover in the last 5 minutes. We’ve all witnessed this over the last 7 years when no one in the Coastal stepped up to seize control. When we had a dynamic playmaker (Thomas) we tended to win some of those. When we didn’t (Marshall) we lost some of those we probably should have won.

What is unique for us is that we have gone from a total known (QB and BB will get 70% of production) to a complete unknown. I find that very fascinating because I think we have several potential play makers on this roster. I think we are going to be tough to defend because there is no film on our players. I look at Graham and see a young Hamilton (talent wise). Our WR’s are gonna be kids in a candy store and we have talent there (big guys to win 1 on 1’s and the young speedsters). At RB all we need are two legit guys. I think we have that covered with Mason and Howard (I love Griffin as well). OL is my biggest worry, but honestly, Key knows what he is doing. So far, Collins has made all the right moves like Dabo did his first full season concerning the staff. I just hope we can keep these assistants during the build process. Honestly, if we were in a tougher division I’d be worried about the “transition”, but the Coastal has been subpar chaos for years so I’m not worried. I even like opening up with Clemson as it will keep us focused and give the Collins regime a nice data point.

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

Skeptic,
I hear you and ultimately all that matters are wins, but since we haven’t played a game yet all we can judge is what we’ve seen and heard and it’s all been positive. As for the “hurdling resume” comment, come on. Every professional looks to make career enhancing moves. Collins has a heck of a resume and from where I sit he’s made very smart career choices. He hasn’t joined questionable staffs, he’s joined legit staffs. If CPJ hadn’t retired Collins would still be at Temple for another few years continuing to learn, but you don’t turn down better jobs when they are presented. If you look at him objectively, he has made great decisions in his coaching life - and he never settled for the “comfortable” but he pursued challenges. I love that. Our entire staff is cut from that same mold.

 

[LibertyTurns]

Winning by recruiting takes longer than winning by scheme. That's what you guys signed on for, so that's what you have to plan for, and not be disappointed by.

That’s a really good point. I had rationalized why I thought we might have an 8-5 or 7-6 year- better coaching on D, much less complexity on line and easier blocking schemes with a stable of high quality RBs, short/low threat dink and dunk passing, more physicality, etc. You make a good case for 4-8, 5-7, 6-6 type results.

 

[4shotB]

That’s a really good point. I had rationalized why I thought we might have an 8-5 or 7-6 year- better coaching on D, much less complexity on line and easier blocking schemes with a stable of high quality RBs, short/low threat dink and dunk passing, more physicality, etc. You make a good case for 4-8, 5-7, 6-6 type results.

One thing to remember also is that Paul voluntarily stepped down. I don’t think coaches will do that if they believe that they have a power house squad coming back next year.