Option Football

[Deleted member 6494]

Chadwell fans: please note that this guy is an unknown name amongst high level recruits; he's not going to be able to move the needle on recruiting period. He might spread option, but better athletes with some basic understanding of assignment football will stop this (sound familiar from when you ran off CPJ?). Deion or a bigger name is all we should aim for. If we can't get that (probably can't), then maybe we stick with Key and get lucky like we did with oleary.

Remember, O'Leary's record was 25-25 without Ralph Friegden. The years with Friedgen was 35-14.

 

[Deleted member 6494]

And this is where I disagree 100%

Recruiting is not what it’s all about and it does not make for a successful program. If it does, God help us, because we will never beat UGA again. Or UNC, FSU, ND, Clemson, Miami.... they all out recruit us and will continue to.
A quick shot in the arm might be exciting for a couple of years, but we’ll be empty again when it’s over. It could also be disaster.
We need a successful, sustainable program to recruit to and retain recruits. Retention is going to be huge for us; bigger than recruiting itself. Signing stars isn’t worth a damn thing if we can’t keep them and can’t coach them. There are examples of this up and down the college football landscape.

Bobby Dodd was always out recruited by his opponents but beat them.

 

[Deleted member 6494]

i just don’t see how this makes the small classes look better. Even then it’s not too-25 even average rankings and not enough of it anyway.

If the next coach is hired in part on recruiting ability I hope they execute better and more consistently.

A good coach will take his team and beat your team, or take your team and beat his team.

 

[Deleted member 6494]

Whether you buy it or not, it happened and is now in the past. It has been discussed on here numerous times, probably before you joined.

I can assure you that some of the insiders wanted Chan Gailey to be ousted prior to his first season with the team.

 

[Techster]

I can assure you that some of the insiders wanted Chan Gailey to be ousted prior to his first season with the team.

Gailey was not a popular pick by Braine. It was out of left field, and Gailey was an NFL lifer that had not been in the college game for decades.

I'll give Gailey this. He quickly put together one of the most talented rosters I can remember...that's not including the legendary 2007 class that he really didn't get to coach. His recruiting classes were widely panned, but they ended up being way more productive than originally thought. Look at all the retrospective recruiting rankings. They were top 10-top 15 level. Of course, we all wish he would have done better with that talent. His games against Auburn gave us a glimpse of what he could do when everything was humming.

If I'm a coach, I hire Gailey to "consult" on watching recruiting film and scouting players. That guy knows how to evaluate talent.

 

[Deleted member 6494]

Your post is actually a case in point providing some proof to my argument. People who stress recruiting ABOVE all else, ignore everything except recruiting. Are we discussion flexbone specifically, or a "scheme" in general? Yet, you go straight to all the reasons flexbone can't possibly succeed.

Cam Newton went to an RPO team. He won a national championship in a scheme offense. GT won the Orange Bowl, and was closer than we had been in 24 years to sniffing a national championship in 2014 with the flexbone AND what you consider far inferior talent. Miami has been a top 10 recruiting team for a long time, and hasn't done squat with all of that talent.

It does take more than just scheme. However, it takes more than just talent. If you don't believe that, look at Miami. They have had talent. They have changed coaches multiple times, but still are an undisciplined train wreck.

The one most important item in the results of a team is the coach. He must be analytical; it matters little the system he uses, but he must be innovative. He absolutely will recruit better as his team wins. However, he generally begins at a smaller school and taken by a higher classification. He continues to win as he has a better chance at better athletes; he wins and recruits even better athletes.

The gist is that it starts with a good coach with a good analytical brain and is innovative. I could be almost anyone, but generally shows by his winning record at the lower schools and advancement from there.

 

[CEB]

A good coach will take his team and beat your team, or take your team and beat his team.

That'd be "his'n" and "your'n"

 

[Deleted member 6494]

Gailey was not a popular pick by Braine. It was out of left field, and Gailey was an NFL lifer that had not been in the college game for decades.

I'll give Gailey this. He quickly put together one of the most talented rosters I can remember...that's not including the legendary 2007 class that he really didn't get to coach. His recruiting classes were widely panned, but they ended up being way more productive than originally thought. Look at all the retrospective recruiting rankings. They were top 10-top 15 level. Of course, we all wish he would have done better with that talent. His games against Auburn gave us a glimpse of what he could do when everything was humming.

If I'm a coach, I hire Gailey to "consult" on watching recruiting film and scouting players. That guy knows how to evaluate talent.

Gailey was attacked by a group from the insiders and some of his players were part of the problem. Many were against him from the start and helped to destroy his efforts. I met with one of the insiders by accident and was told the whole story back during the transition from O'Leary to Gailey.

 

[Deleted member 6494]

I don't disagree with you. I was just trying to point out that all of those things have to be taken into consideration.

Scheme with 3* and 4* players isn't going to do much if we are playing 5* DTs, 5* LBs, and 5* DBs, who are all disciplined, well coached, and well prepared for the scheme. In the TO, if the MLB can get around his block, he can blow up the play. RPO depends on mismatches. If the CBs and safeties are talented enough to shut down in single coverage, one linebacker can take the RB, and another linebacker can take the QB, it will be difficult to execute successfully.

There are very few teams with that have that high a level of talent, that level of coaching, and that level of discipline. Unfortunately for use, there are two of them on our schedule every year. To beat those teams with scheme, it will take them having an off day. But to beat them with high talent and no discipline will also take them having an off day.

I think too many people put too much emphasis on one or the other. (Probably as a bias, I think that mainly people who thing recruiting is more important make it a one or the other argument.) If we want to win consistently, I think it will take not only recruiting, nor only scheme. I think it will take a higher level of recruiting, a higher level of coaching, and something unique all at the same time.

Texas A&M had the #1 recruiting class this past year and have won only 3 games this year. My take is that a team may dislike some of the attitudes of a coach and will sit down on him during critical parts of a game to get rid of him. It has happened many times over the years.

 

[Deleted member 6494]

Would you have issue with the Chadwell offense?

I think a lot of the negative posters regarding aspects of the Triple Option are using it only as tool to try and blackball Chadwell as a legitimate candidate maybe to push their candidate on this board such as those who want Sanders or O'Brien. However, it is obvious by the poll that most want Chadwell.

 

[whitegoldsphinx]

Texas A&M had the #1 recruiting class this past year and have won only 3 games this year. My take is that a team may dislike some of the attitudes of a coach and will sit down on him during critical parts of a game to get rid of him. It has happened many times over the years.

I think Texas A&M has been ravaged by injuries this year, similar to our 2015 season.

 

[takethepoints]

I do have to say that it is all speculative. Some of it is more certain than others.

The $4 million donation: CPJ said on a radio show in either 2014 or 2015 that they had done preliminary arch/engineering for a new locker room. That CPJ and a donor, willing to pay the $4 million price tag, had gone to the AD to present the idea, but it was rejected. Not long after TStan came to GT, it was announced that an anonymous donor was paying for a new football locker room, which opened in 2018 I think. I was not involved, and did not personally speak to anyone involved. However, I think the coincidences are too large for it to not be the same donor. I think the coincidences are too large for it to not be the case that MBob turned down a $4 million donation that would have helped the football program, and very quickly after starting the job, TStan accepted it.

As to the sabotage, that is indeed more speculative. It is a combination of things such as: Locker room as described above. MBob's radio comments during 2014 which insinuated he was planning to fire CPJ at the end of the year. Rumors about a few large donors urging Mbob to fire CPJ. Begging, and sometimes publicly begging by CPJ for resources for the football program. (recruiting personnel, operations and travel staff, etc) Decline of spending on the football program during those years, even as athletic association revenue increased and the percentage of revenue spent on football declined compared to other ACC programs.

I don't have any inside information and did not personally witness anything directly incriminating by MBob. However, between DRad and TStan, the GT football program became the second lowest funded football program in the ACC. I haven't looked at percentages, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was the lowest funded as a percentage of athletic association revenue. It didn't take long after MBob left to get funding for a better plane for the team to travel to Ireland. It appears that anything that CPJ asked for was denied. It also appears that funding wasn't the reason for denial. The locker room money was already available. The money for a better plane to travel in was found within a month. That leads me to believe that the reason for the denials was that MBob didn't want to provide CPJ of any requests.

I just saw this.

It's like Thoreau said, "Sometimes circumstantial evidence is very strong, like when you find a trout in the milk." If ever there was a trout, it's funding for the football program decreasing in the face of pleas from a successful coach to increase it. I'm surprised (well, I'm not actually) that anybody thought your original post was in error.

 

[jgtengineer]

I think you mean Carter. McCollum was a CGC commit in 2020.

I think you are right... shows what i get for posting full of helluvienna lager.

 

[stylee]

Chadwell's offense is a lot like what I wished CPJ would've tried here at times. I could go back 7 years and find posts talking about it. CPJ had his (valid) reasons for sticking with the flexbone - speed of the mesh, balanced formation, 'girl you came with'. But I always wondered if 2013 had gone a little differently if he would've kept some of the 'wrinkles' he tried that season.

It felt like the biggest knock in recruiting was that the flexbone was so unique in P5, and so different from anything the NFL did, that it just didn't translate. But that was never a knock against Urban or Malzahn who were running a lot of option concepts at the same time - 2 back sets out of the gun, RPOs, QB runs. Their QBs won Heismans and got drafted. CPJ tried some of that in 2013. He actually had a lot of success with some of that in '08 and (less so) '09 before the flexbone was fully installed IIRC. CPJ was great at reading defenses and calling plays. He believed the flexbone was the best formation for what he wanted to do on the field. Some years, it looked unbeatable. I love watching that offense. But I also do believe it held the program back in some ways.

What Chadwell does seems like a happy medium. Option offense, but out of a lot of formations with a heavier emphasis on passing options. Things that a lot of NFL teams and 'big' programs are doing with dual threat QBs. Easier for recruits to see a pathway to the NFL in his offense than the flexbone. It also is a lot of fun to watch.

Maybe counterintuitive, but the 2013 pistol stuff was far more elementary than our base flexbone offense. It was easier to "figure out" in the sense that there was less going on in the running game. The passing game was pretty much the same - at Duke, Vad had two touchdown passes out of pistol, one to Smelter, one to Godhigh. Both were on the passing concept "Switch," where the A-Back and WR replace each other (you'll recognize it - the WR bows in and then gets vertical, the a-back wheels outward and gets vertical) and then have a few options based on coverage. This was an extremely common play for us from the under-center look. Interestingly, on the pass to Smelter, the A-Back was aligned like a traditional slot, while the pass to Godhigh was off the "triangle" pistol backfield that was our more standard pistol look. The downside of that triangle loaded backfield was you don't have 4 immediate vertical threats to dictate coverage, but we clearly made it work well enough.





Our running game out of pistol was based off of a frontside read of the end-man-on-line-of-scrimmage ("EMLOS"), where the QB can give to the A-back coming across his face or keep it into the B-gap. In one sense, it was like an inverted veer read; very Cam Newtonish. There was a backside guard pulling around that one. It was a nice dumb powerful play. I don't know how many counters we had drawn up for it, given the short shelf life of the thing. We didn't show a bunch.

Did Vad leave because we went away from the pistol? I don't know. It seems unlikely to me. Rewatching the 2013 Duke game (and some of what he did v. Georgia that year), I am reminded of how talented Vad was when he was on. The guy had a big arm and really great touch (again, when he was on). But I don't think he was going to beat out JT in 2014. And JT in 2014 clearly didn't need the pistol look to thrive.

The "what might have been" part of 2014 for me isn't the shotgun or pistol stuff or whatnot. JT was perfect from under center. It's that it would have been cool to throw it 15-17 times a game with that WR duo, rather than 10-12. But we had such a deep roster of A-Backs, B-Backs, and JT running the ball, so it's hard to say WHEN we should have been throwing it.

In 2017 and 2018, I wouldn't have thrown more. Heck, one could argue we threw too much in 2018, given our limitations. I don't know if going back to the 2013 pistol would have done much for recruiting, given the fact that we weren't equipped to really throw the ball out of any formation. That strikes me as less about recruiting QBs than it does really bad luck at the position.

Back to present. I would obviously love to see Monken or Bohannon, but I bet Chadwell could do good things with Pyron, who I love already. He's got "it."

 

[SoMsJacket]

Chadwell fans: please note that this guy is an unknown name amongst high level recruits; he's not going to be able to move the needle on recruiting period. He might spread option, but better athletes with some basic understanding of assignment football will stop this (sound familiar from when you ran off CPJ?). Deion or a bigger name is all we should aim for. If we can't get that (probably can't), then maybe we stick with Key and get lucky like we did with oleary.

I have significant reservations whether Chadwell can recruit to compete with Clemson and FSU. Negative recruiting will play a significant role as opposing coaches will utilize the "Triple Option" "High School Offense" No Path to the NFL" argument to sway recruits. The level of recruiting required can not be sustained, which will leave us with the end of the CPJ era roster.

BTW: The Pro Set, RPO, Air Raid, Triple Option, Wishbone, Veer, etc. are all "schemes". Some have positive connotations with recruits and some do not.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Maybe counterintuitive, but the 2013 pistol stuff was far more elementary than our base flexbone offense. It was easier to "figure out" in the sense that there was less going on in the running game. The passing game was pretty much the same - at Duke, Vad had two touchdown passes out of pistol, one to Smelter, one to Godhigh. Both were on the passing concept "Switch," where the A-Back and WR replace each other (you'll recognize it - the WR bows in and then gets vertical, the a-back wheels outward and gets vertical) and then have a few options based on coverage. This was an extremely common play for us from the under-center look. Interestingly, on the pass to Smelter, the A-Back was aligned like a traditional slot, while the pass to Godhigh was off the "triangle" pistol backfield that was our more standard pistol look. The downside of that triangle loaded backfield was you don't have 4 immediate vertical threats to dictate coverage, but we clearly made it work well enough.





Our running game out of pistol was based off of a frontside read of the end-man-on-line-of-scrimmage ("EMLOS"), where the QB can give to the A-back coming across his face or keep it into the B-gap. In one sense, it was like an inverted veer read; very Cam Newtonish. There was a backside guard pulling around that one. It was a nice dumb powerful play. I don't know how many counters we had drawn up for it, given the short shelf life of the thing. We didn't show a bunch.

Did Vad leave because we went away from the pistol? I don't know. It seems unlikely to me. Rewatching the 2013 Duke game (and some of what he did v. Georgia that year), I am reminded of how talented Vad was when he was on. The guy had a big arm and really great touch (again, when he was on). But I don't think he was going to beat out JT in 2014. And JT in 2014 clearly didn't need the pistol look to thrive.

The "what might have been" part of 2014 for me isn't the shotgun or pistol stuff or whatnot. JT was perfect from under center. It's that it would have been cool to throw it 15-17 times a game with that WR duo, rather than 10-12. But we had such a deep roster of A-Backs, B-Backs, and JT running the ball, so it's hard to say WHEN we should have been throwing it.

In 2017 and 2018, I wouldn't have thrown more. Heck, one could argue we threw too much in 2018, given our limitations. I don't know if going back to the 2013 pistol would have done much for recruiting, given the fact that we weren't equipped to really throw the ball out of any formation. That strikes me as less about recruiting QBs than it does really bad luck at the position.

Back to present. I would obviously love to see Monken or Bohannon, but I bet Chadwell could do good things with Pyron, who I love already. He's got "it."

Watching that reminds me how much I LOVED Robert Godhigh as a player.

 

[Deleted member 6494]

Maybe counterintuitive, but the 2013 pistol stuff was far more elementary than our base flexbone offense. It was easier to "figure out" in the sense that there was less going on in the running game. The passing game was pretty much the same - at Duke, Vad had two touchdown passes out of pistol, one to Smelter, one to Godhigh. Both were on the passing concept "Switch," where the A-Back and WR replace each other (you'll recognize it - the WR bows in and then gets vertical, the a-back wheels outward and gets vertical) and then have a few options based on coverage. This was an extremely common play for us from the under-center look. Interestingly, on the pass to Smelter, the A-Back was aligned like a traditional slot, while the pass to Godhigh was off the "triangle" pistol backfield that was our more standard pistol look. The downside of that triangle loaded backfield was you don't have 4 immediate vertical threats to dictate coverage, but we clearly made it work well enough.





Our running game out of pistol was based off of a frontside read of the end-man-on-line-of-scrimmage ("EMLOS"), where the QB can give to the A-back coming across his face or keep it into the B-gap. In one sense, it was like an inverted veer read; very Cam Newtonish. There was a backside guard pulling around that one. It was a nice dumb powerful play. I don't know how many counters we had drawn up for it, given the short shelf life of the thing. We didn't show a bunch.

Did Vad leave because we went away from the pistol? I don't know. It seems unlikely to me. Rewatching the 2013 Duke game (and some of what he did v. Georgia that year), I am reminded of how talented Vad was when he was on. The guy had a big arm and really great touch (again, when he was on). But I don't think he was going to beat out JT in 2014. And JT in 2014 clearly didn't need the pistol look to thrive.

The "what might have been" part of 2014 for me isn't the shotgun or pistol stuff or whatnot. JT was perfect from under center. It's that it would have been cool to throw it 15-17 times a game with that WR duo, rather than 10-12. But we had such a deep roster of A-Backs, B-Backs, and JT running the ball, so it's hard to say WHEN we should have been throwing it.

In 2017 and 2018, I wouldn't have thrown more. Heck, one could argue we threw too much in 2018, given our limitations. I don't know if going back to the 2013 pistol would have done much for recruiting, given the fact that we weren't equipped to really throw the ball out of any formation. That strikes me as less about recruiting QBs than it does really bad luck at the position.

Back to present. I would obviously love to see Monken or Bohannon, but I bet Chadwell could do good things with Pyron, who I love already. He's got "it."

I just made research on the internet regarding all of those who state they know the possible candidates (?). Here is the consensus of all the topics found: the number one candidate appears to be Jamey Chadwell of Coastal Carolina, the number two is Bill Clark of UAB, the number three is Mike Houston of East Carolina, the number four (also possible 1) is to make him say no or cannot afford him is Dave Clawson of Wake Forest.

The fifth candidate appears to be Mullen. The fallback candidate with the most experience is Bill O'Brien. These were not fans of Tech, but various analyst who have been following the search and claim to know the potential candidate listing of the Tech research. There were others, but further down the list.

 

[slugboy]

I have significant reservations whether Chadwell can recruit to compete with Clemson and FSU. Negative recruiting will play a significant role as opposing coaches will utilize the "Triple Option" "High School Offense" No Path to the NFL" argument to sway recruits. The level of recruiting required can not be sustained, which will leave us with the end of the CPJ era roster.

BTW: The Pro Set, RPO, Air Raid, Triple Option, Wishbone, Veer, etc. are all "schemes". Some have positive connotations with recruits and some do not.

How would you negative recruit that Chadwell runs the flexbone?

He doesn’t

 

[yeti92]

I have significant reservations whether Chadwell can recruit to compete with Clemson and FSU. Negative recruiting will play a significant role as opposing coaches will utilize the "Triple Option" "High School Offense" No Path to the NFL" argument to sway recruits. The level of recruiting required can not be sustained, which will leave us with the end of the CPJ era roster.

BTW: The Pro Set, RPO, Air Raid, Triple Option, Wishbone, Veer, etc. are all "schemes". Some have positive connotations with recruits and some do not.

Tell me you've never watched Chadwell's offense without telling me you've never watched Chadwell's offense.

 

[JacketFan137]

How would you negative recruit that Chadwell runs the flexbone?

He doesn’t

aside from the fact that user did not say that to begin with, you have to understand that recruits will just get told this offense doesn’t present a path to the nfl, they aren’t gonna get enough touches cause the love is too spread out and plenty of other negative slants. whether it is true or fair unfortunately does not matter. perception is everything