Paul Johnson time frame.

[RamblinWreck92]

Point by point:

1. The schematic advantage only works when you have your best players on the field. As I said above, we have lost our starting BB for two years in a row. This has not helped one little bit. Nor have the OL injuries. Nor has losing Johnson before the year started. We have had trouble getting our best on the field. Shoot, with Kirvontae out there, I'm betting we'd be 4 - 3 or (more likely) 5-2 right now. As I keep saying, if we hadn't fired Mills, nobody would be complaining about our recruiting. I think we'll do fine next year, especially if Benson comes back. I understand frustration about losing, but not seeing the big picture here doesn't make sense.

1. EVERY scheme has an advantage with its best players on the field. EVERY scheme thrives when it's got talented players on the field. Really good schemes do well when that condition isn't present. Ours seems to be very fragile and possibly the only scheme in the country that is so reliant on a FB, if your claim is true.

We don't have OL injuries of note this year - not sure what you're referring to there. We have a single OL whose status is ? right now.
http://www.donbest.com/ncaaf/injuries/

Also, Injuries are a part of football. We need to have better depth and this scheme doesn't seem to help that.

2. Sure. Problem = we also get some quality players - I mention them above - that came to Tech because we would let them play the positions they wanted. And you are right not to swallow the "changing the coach will change everything" mindset. Especially when we haven't given the present staff the resources they need. Let's do that, then see. Btw, I've been thinking about this.

There is no evidence that increasing resources (what type of resources?) will increase the desire of 4-5 star HS talent to play for CPJ.

3. We have had trouble in 2015 and 2017. In both years we had extenuating circumstances. In 2015 the worse injury tsunami in recent Tech history. I don't know why anyone cites that year. Look at any list of the players out and be amazed that we did as well as we did. In 2017, we had several very close games where we came up short. Check the stats and you'll see that we played well in most games. I think everybody looks at Duke and Ugag and thinks we were truly bad that year. What we were was discouraged. I've played on teams like that and it's hard to overcome. If we hold on 4th and 12 against Miami, we win at least 7. This kind of thing happens. If you want a good idea of what we can do with the present system, look at 2016. I heard a lot of the same stuff before that season and from pretty much the same crowd of boo-birds. I don't think anyone thought we'd win 9 games and curb-stomp an SEC team in our bowl. But we did. And we can do it again, without a coaching change.

2016, we finished 4-4 in the ACC, which was tied for 5th place. In the Coastal. I'd like a system that does better than that, thanks.

4. "I have no idea how the next coach will do." Then what, exactly, are you asking for? And I have to disagree about the results metric you are using. If you know why you are having trouble, then leaping into the unknown before you try to fix the problems that led to the situation makes no sense at all. See bankruptcy, Sears, Roebuck and co. for a recent example of what abandoning methods that have worked for new, "disruptive" management styles can lead to. Or see the dumpster fire that is the Tennessee football program.

Sears also failed because it didn't adapt to a changing marketplace. Kinda like the way our offense isn't adapting to defenses that have figured out how to stop it.

I don't know what the next coach will do either but I do know what this coach will do: Continue to recruit poorly, continue to run a boring offense that cannot beat the upper tier of the ACC anymore, continue to refuse to adapt his offense to the early 21st century, and fire the DC instead of taking responsibility.

Of course, if we have a losing season this year and can't turn it around next year - even with more resources - we'll have a reason to look at the program again. Frankly, I doubt that will happen and I think that's what is motivating many here who have been waiting for a chance to chase CPJ for years.

I actually agree with you here: CPJ will be our head coach in 2019. I continue to hope he opens up our offense, as that - more than anything related to resources or $$$ - will improve recruiting, which will generate more wins in the future. He's got a possible generational guy in James Graham at QB. Graham did ALL of his damage from the shotgun in high school. A smart coach will tailor the offense to that type of talent rather than forcing that talent to his offense. If CPJ puts Graham under center, he'll be wasting this kid's talent and potential;

 

[RamblinWreck92]

I read your post above and in a way, the Aback is like a slot WR and definitely opens up the pass when we have someone who is capable of throwing it well. If a LB is to cover an Aback and we can hit an AB with a pass consistently then it does not allow the LB to crash down as fast as he would when we can’t hit a pass. It basically gives a pause to the LB or safety depending on what his assignment is. That’s why over the years we have seen Abacks down the seem with no one around, the LB or Safety crashed down to stop the run and we were able to go over the top. When you do that the LB or Safety are more likely to not crash as often.

When the play starts, all the LB has to do is watch his assigned RB. If the RB gets the carry, LB plays him else he plays coverage on the ball-less RB. If the RB stays in the backfield, the LB knows it's pass-protection time and can just blitz - it's not like we've got a TE dragging across the middle or running the seam for him to cover!!

Over the years, it's why you only see that wheel route to the RB work once/game. It's a play that relies on busted coverage rather than just talent vs talent (Thomas throwing to Waller/Smelter in 2014, JFN to Thomas in 2009, etc.).

 

[RamblinWreck92]

Everything you speak of is common sense, and it's also correct. Who in the world that actually knows football doesn't realize that the seams open up the run? I'm super confused right now after hearing from '92.

Note: We're talking about when we play defenses that are worth a crap. That such plays work and open anything up against Loserville and BG and excite some of the fans around here is pointless when these same plays get throttled by the Dukes and PITTs of the conference. Case in point: 1 single completion to a RB vs Duke last week. Didn't open up the run one bit.

No need to even have Clemson in the discussion anymore.

 

[tech_wreck47]

When the play starts, all the LB has to do is watch his assigned RB. If the RB gets the carry, LB plays him else he plays coverage on the ball-less RB. If the RB stays in the backfield, the LB knows it's pass-protection time and can just blitz - it's not like we've got a TE dragging across the middle or running the seam for him to cover!!

Over the years, it's why you only see that wheel route to the RB work once/game. It's a play that relies on busted coverage rather than just talent vs talent (Thomas throwing to Waller/Smelter in 2014, JFN to Thomas in 2009, etc.).

I think you are missing the point, if the LB or S has the Aback in coverage and we are able to consistently hit him in passing routes then that causes the LB or S to hold up just for a split second on other plays to make sure the Aback is not going out for a pass. That spilt second allows the running game to open up. If we are not able to hit the Aback on a pass then the LB and or S can be more aggressive and fill gaps up quicker than if they have to worry about the pass to the Aback. For instance, Duke plays us super aggressive and flys down hill against us, however if we were able to hit the Abacks on some passing routes that would cause them to worry more about the Aback so they couldn’t be as aggressive which would open up the run. Also you said it’s not like him covering a TE running a seam but that’s exactly what it’s like, just a really small TE lol.

 

[tech_wreck47]

Note: We're talking about when we play defenses that are worth a crap. That such plays work and open anything up against Loserville and BG and excite some of the fans around here is pointless when these same plays get throttled by the Dukes and PITTs of the conference. Case in point: 1 single completion to a RB vs Duke last week. Didn't open up the run one bit.

No need to even have Clemson in the discussion anymore.

I don’t think anyone is saying that 1 pass opens up the run game. If you notice, I said if we can hit the Aback consistently I never said 1 time. Also you said that it does not open up the run, you never mentioned how many times, you just said it doesn’t open up the run, unless I missed something. But I’m pretty confident in saying if we hit the Aback consistently it will open up the run. And that goes for every offensive system imo.

 

[GT_EE78]

You may be right but how much worse can we get? we are headed for 4-8 now MAYBE and bad recruiting for the future.

MAYBE bad recruiting for the future??? don't we already have a decade of bad recruiting " under our belt" ?

 

[MikeJackets1967]

MAYBE bad recruiting for the future??? don't we already have a decade of bad recruiting " under our belt" ?

Yeah recruiting has been piss poor since 2008

 

[takethepoints]

I get that there have been injuries, but we still have a senior qb in his 2nd year starting, a couple of very good senior A backs and were supposed to have one of the better O lines we have had recently, even if a couple of guys got banged up.

As for the close losses, those look worse in retrospect with the way we have played this year. It is a trend now that we just don't know how to win. I suspect it is poor coaching.

You seem to look at change as always being disastrous when there are plenty of cases where new leadership has let to positive results, too.

I just think that you and I have different assessments of where we are right now. You think we are a couple of tweaks away from another 2014. I don't see it.

I am grateful for CPJ's leadership and decade of contributions to Tech football. I will support the team no matter what and am sure you will too. But my preference would be for both CPJ and us to move on.

Point by point:

1. But our OL never jelled due to those very injuries. And not having Benson made TaQuon less effective. Your problem seems to be that you don't want to face the conclusions raised by your immediate premise.

2. Look. Except for our QB and our ABs, the team has little experience and that means varying results. Look at the OL. Lee has had 6 starts at center. After two years at OT. Hansen is on his 3rd start. Quinney is on his 6th. And we're starting all new DBs and a new D scheme. Throw in the injuries - Cooper, Bryan, Marshall, Benson, Camp, and the list goes on. I suspect we could do a lot better with just Benson back. You can coach until you are blue in the face and not overcome some of these problems.

3. No, I do't think we'll be back to 2014 next year. Or the next. It takes a lot of talent, experience, and pure bum luck to win 11 games. Back to 8 - 9, yes, I think we'll be back to that pretty soon.

4. So am I. And I don't think we need to change now. Stan seems to agree with me, so the point is moot for the time being.

 

[tmhunter52]

It is now official: My wife, a wonderfully positive counterweight to my pessimistic, masochistic relationship with Tech football, has dropped the mic. Despite going with me to Tech games for more than 40 years, she never seemed to know much about football, in general, and Tech football, in particular. Today, she asked me what time Tech was going to lose and, when I told her we had a bye, she smiled and seemed genuinely relieved. Then, she said she couldn't believe Tech extended the coach’s contract (I don’t think she knows his name) and commented that Tech really needed another coach and a different offense. I wonder what else she knows that I thought was getting past her...

 

[smokey_wasp]

Point by point:

4. So am I. And I don't think we need to change now. Stan seems to agree with me, so the point is moot for the time being.

I don't doubt that TStan's preference would be to wait and raise money so that the next coach is set up for success. Depending on how the remainder of the season goes, he may have to change his mind. AD's often have to do that when attendance drops and donors make their contributions contingent on a change.

Then, there is always the chance CPJ sees the writing on the wall and retires. That would be my preference, actually.

So, it may be a moot point today, but let's see where we are at the end of the year. A win in Blacksburg would certainly help.

 

[takethepoints]

I don't doubt that TStan's preference would be to wait and raise money so that the next coach is set up for success. Depending on how the remainder of the season goes, he may have to change his mind. AD's often have to do that when attendance drops and donors make their contributions contingent on a change.

I doubt that he'll do that after this season, no matter what the results. If you let your alums run the program - that's what you are saying - then you are a fool and you'll pay for it long term. After next year is another story, but I don't think that'll actually come up.

 

[MikeJackets1967]

I doubt that he'll do that after this season, no matter what the results. If you let your alums run the program - that's what you are saying - then you are a fool and you'll pay for it long term. After next year is another story, but I don't think that'll actually come up.

Next season's home attendance will be very ugly if CPJ is doing his 2019 Farewell Tour

 

[RamblinWreck92]

I don’t think anyone is saying that 1 pass opens up the run game. If you notice, I said if we can hit the Aback consistently I never said 1 time. Also you said that it does not open up the run, you never mentioned how many times, you just said it doesn’t open up the run, unless I missed something. But I’m pretty confident in saying if we hit the Aback consistently it will open up the run. And that goes for every offensive system imo.

More "if if if"s from you again. Passing to WRs opens up the run. Passing to RBs won't because the D still has no reason to not cheat the LOS pre-snap. based on a RB lining up in his regular spot beside the QB. Formations are what the D react to pre-snap, not implied threats. A RB lining up in his regular spot 10 plays in a row doesn't open up the run if he runs wheel routes 3 of those 10 plays. He'll have special treatment from a LB after the first wheel route.

Plus, we don't pass consistently to a RB out of the backfield so how can you be so sure? We don't pass consistently AT ALL so you don't really have an idea what effect running a bunch of wheel routes would have on a defense.

This isn't rocket science.

 

[RamblinWreck92]

I think you are missing the point, if the LB or S has the Aback in coverage and we are able to consistently hit him in passing routes then that causes the LB or S to hold up just for a split second on other plays to make sure the Aback is not going out for a pass. That spilt second allows the running game to open up. If we are not able to hit the Aback on a pass then the LB and or S can be more aggressive and fill gaps up quicker than if they have to worry about the pass to the Aback. For instance, Duke plays us super aggressive and flys down hill against us, however if we were able to hit the Abacks on some passing routes that would cause them to worry more about the Aback so they couldn’t be as aggressive which would open up the run. Also you said it’s not like him covering a TE running a seam but that’s exactly what it’s like, just a really small TE lol.

LOL - a good LB isn't going to "hold up for just a split second". Watch the Clemson game. Hell, watch Duke. No one is getting fooled by our Johnsonian tricks anymore.

Defenses react pre-snap to formations. A RB in the same spot 10 plays in a row isn't going to open up the running game by running a wheel route 3 of those plays. And after the first one, a LB/SS will spy him and prevent any big plays from occurring.

 

[smokey_wasp]

I doubt that he'll do that after this season, no matter what the results. If you let your alums run the program - that's what you are saying - then you are a fool and you'll pay for it long term. After next year is another story, but I don't think that'll actually come up.

Fans don't run the program but on some level, you are selling a product and people have to buy it. Tech fans' expectations are extremely reasonable compared to other fanbases. We are pretty patient, too. How bad must things be if we are turning on CPJ?

 

[takethepoints]

Fans don't run the program but on some level, you are selling a product and people have to buy it. Tech fans' expectations are extremely reasonable compared to other fanbases. We are pretty patient, too. How bad must things be if we are turning on CPJ?

Pardon me, I must have water in my ear. Did you say that "Tech fans' expectations are extremely reasonable compared to other fanbases. We are pretty patient, too."? Yes, I see that you did.

Now I have to ask what part of Neptune are you writing from? I've seen nothing but impatience with our football situation from many of our fans here and at other sites for years. And the argument has always been the same: they want Tech to either a) become another Clemson or b) recruit like Clemson without changing anything else. This almost defines the term "unrealistic expectations" but it keeps going on, in the face of years of experience that should have convinced people that they are talking nonsense.

You keep saying that we don't differ that much and in most areas you are right. Not here.

 

[stech81]

Next season's home attendance will be very ugly if CPJ is doing his 2019 Farewell Tour

I would hope if they are true Tech fans they would come to see the players. And I would guess some on here who have said they would not come are not season ticket holders.

 

[stech81]

More "if if if"s from you again. Passing to WRs opens up the run. Passing to RBs won't because the D still has no reason to not cheat the LOS pre-snap. based on a RB lining up in his regular spot beside the QB. Formations are what the D react to pre-snap, not implied threats. A RB lining up in his regular spot 10 plays in a row doesn't open up the run if he runs wheel routes 3 of those 10 plays. He'll have special treatment from a LB after the first wheel route.

Plus, we don't pass consistently to a RB out of the backfield so how can you be so sure? We don't pass consistently AT ALL so you don't really have an idea what effect running a bunch of wheel routes would have on a defense.

This isn't rocket science.

You are correct it is not rocket science . If you don't think passing to a RB holds the LB's then I really hope when Clemson who loses their defensive coordinator that you get the job.

 

[tech_wreck47]

More "if if if"s from you again. Passing to WRs opens up the run. Passing to RBs won't because the D still has no reason to not cheat the LOS pre-snap. based on a RB lining up in his regular spot beside the QB. Formations are what the D react to pre-snap, not implied threats. A RB lining up in his regular spot 10 plays in a row doesn't open up the run if he runs wheel routes 3 of those 10 plays. He'll have special treatment from a LB after the first wheel route.

Plus, we don't pass consistently to a RB out of the backfield so how can you be so sure? We don't pass consistently AT ALL so you don't really have an idea what effect running a bunch of wheel routes would have on a defense.

This isn't rocket science.

Let me brake it down, when a LB or S has to worry about an A back in coverage it can cause a split second delay in their read, therefore opening up the run. The reason I said if is because that’s what it’s predicated upon, however your agreement is that it doesn’t open up the run no matter what. In that case it doesn’t matter if we do it a lot or not, it’s does it have the ability to open up the run is certain circumstances, and it does. Hitting the Aback on a pass also helps keep the S from moving closer to the LOS when in the box, which also helps open up the run. Maybe I’m wrong though @Ibeeballin or @bikeseat can help?

And for the record we have been talking about a seam route, not a wheel route which our Abacks rarely run if at all. And what does special treatment from th LB mean?BTW I respect your opinion because we are all entitled to that, so please don’t think I’m coming across as being rude, not my intention at all.

 

[tech_wreck47]

LOL - a good LB isn't going to "hold up for just a split second". Watch the Clemson game. Hell, watch Duke. No one is getting fooled by our Johnsonian tricks anymore.

Defenses react pre-snap to formations. A RB in the same spot 10 plays in a row isn't going to open up the running game by running a wheel route 3 of those plays. And after the first one, a LB/SS will spy him and prevent any big plays from occurring.

If an LB or S is “spying” an Aback do you not think that is opening up the run? At that point their eyes are on him and worried about him, therefore they are not playing downhill as hard.