Paul Johnson visiting the Ravens today

[Animal02]

GOL had some pretty bad defenses himself. probably cost JHam a Heismen. and he was a defensive person

But that does not fit the narrative of the CPJ hate club.

 

[Coloradojacket]

We seemed to field some pretty good defenses before Paul arrived. Funny how it declined when he got here. Also funny how tech people give a man a place in Hof for being slightly better than avg. BTW Chan got fired for his short comings. He was held accountable for the success and failure of the TEAM.

And under CPJ we had some pretty good defenses, 2008 part of 2009, 2011. But Defense has always been our issue, for the last 40 years

 

[LibertyTurns]

And under CPJ we had some pretty good defenses, 2008 part of 2009, 2011. But Defense has always been our issue, for the last 40 years

I don’t know if I’d go back 40 years. Our Black Watch defenses were either pretty good or I was drinking too much to remember correctly.

 

[knoxjacket]

Ok, so CPJ should have been held accountable for Defense.....As should have George O'Leary for his poor defense in 1999....and Chan for his poor offense for much of his tenure. We could go on and on. Which brings me to the point I always make about Tech football. We rarely have a very good defense with a lot of depth because the front 7 players we might want to recruit, can't get into Tech or stay at Tech. Or to be blunt. Most are dumber than a box of rocks and thus end up at Alabama, UGA etc.

I wonder if those players who are “dumber than a box of rocks” know that 8/13 < 7/10 and 7/11.

We’ve had some Georgia Tech elites struggle with that in this thread.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

It’s funny how some of us choose to measure success. They look at winning percentage alone and ignore all else. I bet those same folks don’t treat Ross that way.

 

[ScGold]

Ok, so CPJ should have been held accountable for Defense.....As should have George O'Leary for his poor defense in 1999....and Chan for his poor offense for much of his tenure. We could go on and on. Which brings me to the point I always make about Tech football. We rarely have a very good defense with

It’s funny how some of us choose to measure success. They look at winning percentage alone and ignore all else. I bet those same folks don’t treat Ross that way.

I believe he won a Natty, so yeah he's viewed a little differently. And yeah coaches for the most part are viewed based on their winning percentage. How else can you? Just like my job. My success in the job is based off my winning percentage. That's life.

 

[ScGold]

And under CPJ we had some pretty good defenses, 2008 part of 2009, 2011. But Defense has always been our issue, for the last 40 years

So when he had his own players the d sucked? Thank you for proving the point that he was a glorified OC and a mediocre HC.

 

[ScGold]

GOL had some pretty bad defenses himself. probably cost JHam a Heismen. and he was a defensive person

In my life we've never had run of this many bad defenses. We've been up and down but this stretch of dismissal defenses has been embarrassing. For the record my first tech game was tech vs Duke in 78 watching Eddie Lee, so I've seen a few tech defenses.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I believe he won a Natty, so yeah he's viewed a little differently. And yeah coaches for the most part are viewed based on their winning percentage. How else can you? Just like my job. My success in the job is based off my winning percentage. That's life.

Of course it’s a little different. But to a lesser degree so are ACC championships, Coastal Championships and COFH wins. Yet those accomplishments are completely ignored by some.

If you’re going to view one coach strictly through a % lens, you must do the same for all coaches.

 

[Pointer]

So when he had his own players the d sucked? Thank you for proving the point that he was a glorified OC and a mediocre HC.

He never had his choice of DC. Not until Nate and that was a budget hire. Get that through your head.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

We seemed to field some pretty good defenses before Paul arrived. Funny how it declined when he got here. Also funny how tech people give a man a place in Hof for being slightly better than avg. BTW Chan got fired for his short comings. He was held accountable for the success and failure of the TEAM.

A few years down the road, CPJ will be enshrined in the CFB HOF. When that day comes, the only people likely to question the merit of his inclusion are mutt trolls and the section of the GT fanbase that has decided the TO was the worst thing ever.

Hint, it's not just Tech people who think he deserves the honor...

 

[knoxjacket]

A few years down the road, CPJ will be enshrined in the CFB HOF. When that day comes, the only people likely to question the merit of his inclusion are mutt trolls and the section of the GT fanbase that has decided the TO was the worst thing ever.

Hint, it's not just Tech people who think he deserves the honor...

Right alongside Jim Donnan.

 

[knoxjacket]

It’s funny how some of us choose to measure success. They look at winning percentage alone and ignore all else. I bet those same folks don’t treat Ross that way.

There’s no reason to doubt that if the NFL didn’t come calling that Bobby Ross’ winning percentage wouldn’t have also been higher than Johnson’s. If Bill Lewis could win 5 in 93/94 there’s no way Ross isn’t winning 7 or 8.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

There’s no reason to doubt that if the NFL didn’t come calling that Bobby Ross’ winning percentage wouldn’t have also been higher than Johnson’s. If Bill Lewis could win 5 in 93/94 there’s no way Ross isn’t winning 7 or 8.

Ahhhh, now you're banking on hypotheticals. Nice. A whole lot of what if's can go a long way to win an argument.

Getting back to the main topic, why do you suppose the Ravens invited CPJ to their camp? Does CPJ deserve any praise in your fan view?

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Right alongside Jim Donnan.

You fall squarely into the second category I mentioned: "...the section of the GT fanbase that has decided the TO was the worst thing ever."

It's evident from your posting history you are not capable of having an honest dialogue about the former regime. If CPJ said water was wet you'd be leading the charge insisting it's not.

 

[RickStromFan]

It was a generic statement based on more than one quote. But you clearly must have felt guilty that it was close to home with your on-going comments.

Seeing as how I was the only one to use the phrase 'ad hominem' that you 'generically' quoted, your attempts to deflect here are amusing.

 

[stech81]

Guys there are 3 people who hate CPJ so much they you are wasting time talking to them.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Seeing as how I was the only one to use the phrase 'ad hominem' that you 'generically' quoted, your attempts to deflect here are amusing.

In fairness, you are the only one to use it in this thread. Several posters have bandied it about across these boards, and in all honesty, the arguments are the same no matter what the thread topic. I mean, there could be a thread titled "Georgia Tech Football pre 1928" and it will immediately become a treatise on CGC vs CPJ. It's easy for a third party to see how it could be used generically.

 

[RickStromFan]

Thank-you for your reply, but you have the field after this. You have won in driving me away from more active participation.

You say, "True but if it worked, it'd still be in usage somewhere on some team." That is the opinion I am disputing. Stomping your foot and repeating it doesn't make it any more or less true.

But that's the truth. The NFL loves things-that-work and quickly tosses out things-that-don't. That's why versions of Bill Walsh's 30+ year old West Coast Offense are still used, as are versions of Dungy's Cover-2 defense and the CHI 52.....as well as why we don't see much of the old HOU Oiler Run & Shoot nor Chip Kelly's hurry-up offense.

Not sure why this is in dispute.

You say, "Again, not sure where I've questioned the efficacy of the offense in general over PJ's tenure here." However, my post to which this responds was in direct and explicit response to you saying, "Anyone who watched the Clemson and mutt games of the past few years and wanted to keep running that offense against 'em is a masochist." Read what you said again and again until it becomes clear that you are challenging appreciation of our offensive scheme based on its performance against two teams over the last few years. Now read my post again and again until you see that I only raised data reflecting our offense against those two teams over the last few years. I am saying that your position is irrational and so nonsensical that it is easily disproved by the fact that most teams aren't changing their offensive scheme every few years because of their failure to be more effective against the best teams in the country.

Believing that running our former offensive scheme against Clemson and the mutts is the irrational belief. Those teams literally squashed us completely on both sides of the ball. Doesn't mean the Entire Scheme was inefficient but, like my quote directly says "Running it against THOSE 2 TEAMS" is masochistic.

Actually, I'm incorrect. It's insanity to do the same thing over and over and expect different results, which is what the poster advocated by wanting us to continue running the prior scheme at those 2 teams. But long ago I noticed that far too many GT fans were more fans of PJ and his scheme than they were the school.

Not sure why someone simply disagreeing with you in a fairly polite and civil fashion has you so frustrated that you're being driven away from participation though. You don't come across as a guy who needs to be in an echo chamber.

 

[RickStromFan]

Ok, so CPJ should have been held accountable for Defense.....As should have George O'Leary for his poor defense in 1999....and Chan for his poor offense for much of his tenure. We could go on and on. Which brings me to the point I always make about Tech football. We rarely have a very good defense with a lot of depth because the front 7 players we might want to recruit, can't get into Tech or stay at Tech. Or to be blunt. Most are dumber than a box of rocks and thus end up at Alabama, UGA etc.

Totally agree about the coaching and would point out that Chan was held accountable - and fired - for his crappy offense.

I don't have any info on the intelligence of DL recruits, as compared to other positions. Are they more or less stupid than the same-sized guys on the OL? Are talented WRs smarter than Linemen, since we seem to get those.
Citations?