Paul Johnson visiting the Ravens today

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jacket Bracket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
209
ah yes, the ol' "Scheduling Conspiracy". :rolleyes: Right up there beside the "Refs Hate Us" conspiracy. What I've always wondered is why: Why would the ACC schedule makers go out of their way to screw us over? Why would the refs do the same? Why did these 2 factions apparently hate us so much, according to the conspiracy folks? Why did these conspiracies only seem to start when PJ got hired?

Did we get some bad scheduling breaks at times? Yes.

Some horrible officiating? (like every other fanbase thinks about their team?) Yes.

Was it intentional? :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

I do believe the scheduling of bye weeks by our opponents WAS intentional. Teams wanted an extra week to prep for an unusual offense and, when possible, the ACC gave in.

Do you believe it’s just a coincidence that as soon as we change offenses we got a good schedule? Related question, would we have this same schedule if we would not have changed offenses?
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,086
Ah yes, the ol' thinly-veiled personal attack. Always the first sign of a lost debate.
And speaking of "move the goalposts!", not once have I said that it isn't used, as you clearly imply above. Rather (and I provided a link to one NFL OL coach who agrees) that it's dirty football.

https://www.chron.com/sports/solomon/article/Cut-blocking-is-legal-but-is-it-ethical-2254311.php



So not sure where I'm wrong? Or is a SB-winning OL coach's opinion not worth as much as a GT forum poster? Your PJ bias is showing here.
Fortunately, it appears that it's only a matter of time before this dirty technique is relegated to the land of the Horse Collar Tackle, now also an illegal play that was also considered to be dirty football before the rule change occurred that made it illegal.
Here's what you said to my original post and it is completely unresponsive:

"not sure where I said "it's not used at all"? No one is gonna be running the mighty TO in the NFL though, no matter how many people post to the contrary. At best, it'd be a single-play gimmick, like that stupid Wildcat a few years ago that got quickly *****-slapped by NFL defenses. It's too easy to complete passes in the NFL to risk injury to high paid QBs the way the TO would. And as our own dwindling attendance showed, ultimately people don't want to pay money to watch it as a primary offensive scheme. It can still be seen at West Point and Annapolis but for the rest of football, the TO is dead."

That's what I meant by moving the goalposts: you didn't have an argument (I never said what you have in quotes) so you made a response that you thought you could defend more effectively without actually addressing the original post.

I wasn't responding to you saying cut blocking wasn't used; you never did and I never even implied that you did (see above). I was responding to the idea that NFL guys a) didn't want to cut block and b) that the NFL players are all "co-workers" (I laughed out loud when I read that) and want to spare each other from cut blocking.

Actually, I don't think my response was so "thinly-veiled". What I said was that you don't know what you are talking about. The opinion of one NFL OL coach, no matter how "legendary", doesn't change that one bit. Especially in the face of multiple teams that used cut blocking all the way to the Super Bowl.

Like I said, stop it.
 

RickStromFan

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
899
I do believe the scheduling of bye weeks by our opponents WAS intentional. Teams wanted an extra week to prep for an unusual offense and, when possible, the ACC gave in.

Do you believe it’s just a coincidence that as soon as we change offenses we got a good schedule? Related question, would we have this same schedule if we would not have changed offenses?

I don't believe in ACC scheduling conspiracies. If true, then perhaps we should've been asking for a break prior to playing Clemson, VPI, Miami.

Yes, I do believe it's a coincidence esp. since most of the commentary I've seen thinks our schedule is difficult!
 

RickStromFan

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
899
Here's what you said to my original post and it is completely unresponsive:

"not sure where I said "it's not used at all"? No one is gonna be running the mighty TO in the NFL though, no matter how many people post to the contrary. At best, it'd be a single-play gimmick, like that stupid Wildcat a few years ago that got quickly *****-slapped by NFL defenses. It's too easy to complete passes in the NFL to risk injury to high paid QBs the way the TO would. And as our own dwindling attendance showed, ultimately people don't want to pay money to watch it as a primary offensive scheme. It can still be seen at West Point and Annapolis but for the rest of football, the TO is dead."

That's what I meant by moving the goalposts: you didn't have an argument (I never said what you have in quotes) so you made a response that you thought you could defend more effectively without actually addressing the original post.

I wasn't responding to you saying cut blocking wasn't used; you never did and I never even implied that you did (see above). I was responding to the idea that NFL guys a) didn't want to cut block and b) that the NFL players are all "co-workers" (I laughed out loud when I read that) and want to spare each other from cut blocking.

Actually, I don't think my response was so "thinly-veiled". What I said was that you don't know what you are talking about. The opinion of one NFL OL coach, no matter how "legendary", doesn't change that one bit. Especially in the face of multiple teams that used cut blocking all the way to the Super Bowl.

Like I said, stop it.

Stop what? There's more than just one coach who believes cut blocking is dirty and plenty of players agree. Your PJ bias is making you turn this into something personal, but this is what happens 100% of the time when PJ enthusiasts are engaged: Always resorting to attacking the messenger. Not even sure what the argument is at this point.

Is it "Cut blocking is dirty!"? If so, that's an opinion that's shared by many and disagreed by as-many so nothing really there to argue.

Is it "The TO won't be seen in the NFL"? If so, that one is fact at the moment. Again, nothing to debate here.

If you can respond without the BS "don't know what you're talking about" crap that too-many PJ enthusiasts throw out, that'd be nice. It's a laughable assumption that only people who are fans of running the ball 65 times/game "know football".

If you are unable to respond civilly, then just don't.
 

RickStromFan

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
899
Even Saban didn't call it dirty.

But I'm confused. Some people didn't like CPJ's offense because the linemen flopped around hopelessly on the ground and others didn't like it because the line play was vicious and cruel. Which is it?

Saban is clearly against it though. Not sure about the rest of your post. The 'flopping around' was Sewak's coaching. The rest? I've literally never seen anyone describe any aspect of PJ's offense as "vicious and cruel". Citation?
 

Jacket Bracket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
209
I don't believe in ACC scheduling conspiracies. If true, then perhaps we should've been asking for a break prior to playing Clemson, VPI, Miami.

Yes, I do believe it's a coincidence esp. since most of the commentary I've seen thinks our schedule is difficult!

There is a difference between a difficult schedule because we play tough teams and a difficult schedule because teams we play get a timely bye right before us.

So yes, it’s a difficult schedule this year because of the teams we play. You are, however, kidding yourself if you think that the change in opponent byes scheduling isn’t related to our offensive change.
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,547
Are we the only team that cuts? I thought the argument was that everyone cuts because it's legal (which is true). So do players I've already listed that played for other schools and got injured by cut blocks just not count? Does the injury to Hand not count against cut-blocking's reputation because it didn't happen under a PJ-coached player?

Obviously, not every single cut block results in an injury. Nor does every horse-collar tackle.

Nor does every knee-to-the-groin in an NFL pileup. Does that make such an action "not dirty"? You seem to define "dirty" as only that sort of play/action that results in an injury. I disagree.

Look, You think it's "not dirty". I think it is. We're a microcosm of the debate.

Cut blocks were used extensively by Georgia Tech for eleven years, and you cannot name a single player who was injured by them. You also have not identified a single player who was injured by a cut block any time, any where. I'm done here.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,711
Saban is clearly against it though. Not sure about the rest of your post. The 'flopping around' was Sewak's coaching. The rest? I've literally never seen anyone describe any aspect of PJ's offense as "vicious and cruel". Citation?
Sorry, thought someone on here kept calling it dirty play. I guess we all agree now that it is not dirty.
 

RickStromFan

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
899
Cut blocks were used extensively by Georgia Tech for eleven years, and you cannot name a single player who was injured by them. You also have not identified a single player who was injured by a cut block any time, any where. I'm done here.

I named 1 (DaShawn Hand at Alabama) and provided a link which mentioned another (Donta Hightower). The belief that intentionally diving at people's knees to block has never caused an injury anytime, anywhere is laughably naive so I understand why you are "done here".
 

RickStromFan

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
899
Sorry, thought someone on here kept calling it dirty play. I guess we all agree now that it is not dirty.

no it's dirty IMO (and many other players and coaches I've already linked to multiple times lol). It's a lot like the horse collar tackle, another now-illegal play that was once legal and considered dirty at the same time.
 

RickStromFan

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
899
There is a difference between a difficult schedule because we play tough teams and a difficult schedule because teams we play get a timely bye right before us.

So yes, it’s a difficult schedule this year because of the teams we play. You are, however, kidding yourself if you think that the change in opponent byes scheduling isn’t related to our offensive change.

Why was the ACC seemingly out to screw us over with this Scheduling Conspiracy? I've seen a lot of paranoia on behalf of some of our fans but never anything substantial to back up those feelings. Any hard evidence that we were intentionally being screwed over?
Seems like a good example of coincidence to me. We all know PJ disliked most of the media but I never heard anything about him and the ACC brass not getting along. So again, why would we get intentionally screwed over??
 

LibertyTurns

Banned
Messages
6,216
Cut blocks were used extensively by Georgia Tech for eleven years, and you cannot name a single player who was injured by them. You also have not identified a single player who was injured by a cut block any time, any where. I'm done here.
There’s way more knees blown out in the NFL from OL & DL being out of shape causing their knee to give out and/or a top heavy lineman getting tossed aside, tripped etc and crashing into the side of another lineman’s knee.

I’d actually like to see some video of someone getting injured by a cut block. I’m not sure I’ve ever watched a game where a guy got cut blocked and ended up injured outside of their ego. I’m more inclined to believe whoever was interviewed doesn’t know the damn difference between a cut and a chop block. We’ve only suffered thru 11 seasons of idiots on tv who are so called experts trying to BS their way trying to explain basic football techniques they should know like the back of their hand and using proper terminology but can’t because they’re ignorant.
 

ScGold

Banned
Messages
532
You’re going to hate the next 2 seasons.
Not hardly my friend. Being tired of knowing we aren't going to be able to block well enough or have a qb that can complete enough passes is a thing of the past. I am not foolish enough to think we are going to be a finished product for a couple of seasons but we aren't going to be a bad as you might think. I appreciate what Paul did and I also see that his unwillingness to tweek his offense was a downfall. Slice the apple any way you want but a change was needed.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,711
no it's dirty IMO (and many other players and coaches I've already linked to multiple times lol). It's a lot like the horse collar tackle, another now-illegal play that was once legal and considered dirty at the same time.

If it is legal then it is not dirty. It can't be both legal and dirty. By definition.

If it fulfills any of the following criteria then it would be considered cruel and vicious:
Causing excessive pain beyond what is normal to the game.
Causing on a regular basis the ending of a sports career.
Causing a permanent change in physical functionality due to bodily damage.
Done to purposely remove a player from the field of play.

So calling it dirty is illogical but calling it cruel or vicious would be a matter of data collection, which so far has yielded no results.

Coaches have long lobbied for rule changes. Rarely has it been because a play is dangerous. Usually there is some strategic value they hope to gain. Hence coaches didn't seem to much care about the flying wedge even though it literally killed some players. Outside pressure ended it. Spearing was also eliminated more because of outside pressures than coaches being up in arms about it. But "legalizing" holding on pass plays was wildly popular though safety was not the motivating factor.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,086
Stop what? There's more than just one coach who believes cut blocking is dirty and plenty of players agree. Your PJ bias is making you turn this into something personal, but this is what happens 100% of the time when PJ enthusiasts are engaged: Always resorting to attacking the messenger. Not even sure what the argument is at this point.

Is it "Cut blocking is dirty!"? If so, that's an opinion that's shared by many and disagreed by as-many so nothing really there to argue.

Is it "The TO won't be seen in the NFL"? If so, that one is fact at the moment. Again, nothing to debate here.

If you can respond without the BS "don't know what you're talking about" crap that too-many PJ enthusiasts throw out, that'd be nice. It's a laughable assumption that only people who are fans of running the ball 65 times/game "know football".

If you are unable to respond civilly, then just don't.
Here's what I was originally responding to:

"There aren't many NFL guys who even want to cut, outside of smallish RBs facing a blitzing LB. It's known as 'dirty football' for good reason and I suspect was probably used against our OL recruiting during PJ's tenure. At the end of the day, these guys are all co-workers (with a few exceptions) and aren't interested in diving at knees unless absolutely necessary (again, see RB picking up blitz)"

I responded:

"The San Francisco 49ers, Houston Oilers, Denver Broncos, and Atlanta Falcons all say hello. See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut_blocking

Needless to say, the colleges have been using this technique for eons."

What you were saying is that "NFL guys" don't want to cut block. I pointed out that not only do they cut block but that multiple NFL teams have made cut blocking their usual blocking method. That doesn't have anything to do with "dirty football" or whether the NFL uses the spread option. Again, these were attempts to get away from your original argument.

On another note, you are mistaking civility for "being polite", a common error. You were mistaken. I could have hemmed and hawed around that, treating you with kid gloves. But think a minute what that actually says: that you aren't worth a straightforward argument because you can't stand being contradicted. I don't think that at all; you seem like a person who likes to argue, sure, but you don't seem completely unreasonable. I treated you accordingly. That, my friend, is being civil.
 

LibertyTurns

Banned
Messages
6,216
Not hardly my friend. Being tired of knowing we aren't going to be able to block well enough or have a qb that can complete enough passes is a thing of the past. I am not foolish enough to think we are going to be a finished product for a couple of seasons but we aren't going to be a bad as you might think. I appreciate what Paul did and I also see that his unwillingness to tweek his offense was a downfall. Slice the apple any way you want but a change was needed.
We’ve only lost 2 games or less in 3 seasons spanning 4+ decades of me being a GT fan. 2 of those seasons I wasn’t even in the country to see it happen. I hope to hell we landed the next coming of head football coaches but realistically it may take a decade of consistent program support (Institute, Big Donors & fans) to get to levels where 2 losses per season or less is anything short of extremely irregular. Not many consistent Top 25 teams can string together runs of 3 loss or less seasons. Now I hope I live to see a stretch like ‘51-‘56, but the odds against it are very long indeed.

CPJ lost too much because he couldn’t muster a defense. Chan couldn’t find an offense to save his life. O’Leary couldn’t buy a defense. Then there was that guy previous that apparently couldn’t muster anything. Ross caught lightning in a bottle 1 year. Curry had some of the most frustrating offenses. The beat goes on. We’ve either had a good offense & and bad defense or vice versa or sometimes bad both. Back to ‘51-‘56 I think that’s the last years we had both for any stretch. That guy has a stadium & awards named after him. We’re hoping for a lot with CGC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top