Previous Offense and Recruiting

[RickStromFan]

Agreed. I was addressing the poster who said the O was no longer an equalizer for us. That's simply inaccurate.

But it wasn't. When teams of equal or lesser talent are stopping it (Duke, Pitt), how can it be considered an equalizer? When the elite teams are blowing it off the field, how can it be considered an equalizer? When PJ's offense first got started, the only team to destroy us was LSU in 2008 and obviously Iowa stymied it in 2009. Back then, the O was truly an equalizer: It equalized the talent differential we'd face against elite teams. But when the Dukes and Pitts are stopping it annually and the elite teams are stuffing it too, it's no longer an equalizer. Doesn't mean it stunk or didn't have success - just means it's not a true 'equalizer', the way it first was in 2008-09. Thumping teams like VPI with it was hilarious but FCS ODU blasted them too.

I think the effect of having a better defense will mitigate any effects of a drop in offensive production, if that even occurs.

 

[RickStromFan]

This is a classic example of redefining the argument. Your original assertion was that "It's been a few years since the previous regime offense was much of an equalizer." Now, when I point out otherwise, you point merely to two specific games. Everyone has a bad game or two, and only two teams managed to beat uga and Clemson last year, so I'm pretty sure that, considering how atrocious our D has been, it's the O that's been winning games for us.

Also, in the Pitt game, down 21-0 at half, CPJ adjusts and brings us right back into it. The interception cost us that game, but our O was charging back in the second half.

Re: Pitt - what adjustments did PJ make? Play by play clearly shows we just kept running QB Keepers by Marshall with some Mason thrown in. And down 21-0, the D gets no credit for giving up a FG for the entire 2nd half to allow us a chance to make a comeback, which fell just short. Similarly against Duke, Woody's D completely shut down Duke for most of the game - can't fault them for those Duke scores, which were due to untimely TOs.

No one is redefining anything. Not sure how you can claim it's the O doing all the winning though. It wasn't the Offense recovering 3 fumbles by MIA, giving us some short-field scores. 53 rushes for 230 yards vs MIA isn't exactly an offensive equalization. Good thing the D showed up and good thing we got what would be PJ's last Death March at the end of the game. Same for UVA - a game actually won by our ST (I know - stunning!), though both sides of the ball played solidly too.

The D and ST lost USF for us. The O should get the blame for Duke and Pitt (though PJ's bizarre fake punt vs Pitt deserves to be called out), the rest are team victories and team losses.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

The great Bobby Dodd only averaged 5 wins (4.5 losses and .75 ties) from 1957 to 1960. And in that period won as many as 6 games only once. I guess you would have been ready to fire coach Dodd by 1960?

Yep. In a biography about Coach Dodd, his wife Alice remarked that he was depressed about a number of things during that time, not the least of which were recruiting problems. Coach Dodd was despondent to the point of almost accepting an offer to go to Texas. He was able to right the ship with Billy Lothridge and company in the early 1960s winning three straight against UGA, beating a number one ranked Alabama, and absolutely wearing out Auburn, Clemson, Tulane, and Duke. Not incidentally, those early 1960s teams had fine linemen like Rufus Guthrie and Dave Watson. Let me tell you those boys came to play. Joe Namath said the hardest he ever got hit, college or pro, was by Rufus Guthrie. Lothridge was a highly regarded quarterback, good place kicker, and punter and had speed on the outside to work with in Auer and Brussels but the cornerstone was those linemen. The history lesson is clear: if we want to compete with UGA and Clemson now then the way to do it is to recruit better linemen on both sides of the ball.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

Re: Pitt - what adjustments did PJ make? Play by play clearly shows we just kept running QB Keepers by Marshall with some Mason thrown in. And down 21-0, the D gets no credit for giving up a FG for the entire 2nd half to allow us a chance to make a comeback, which fell just short. Similarly against Duke, Woody's D completely shut down Duke for most of the game - can't fault them for those Duke scores, which were due to untimely TOs.

No one is redefining anything. Not sure how you can claim it's the O doing all the winning though. It wasn't the Offense recovering 3 fumbles by MIA, giving us some short-field scores. 53 rushes for 230 yards vs MIA isn't exactly an offensive equalization. Good thing the D showed up and good thing we got what would be PJ's last Death March at the end of the game. Same for UVA - a game actually won by our ST (I know - stunning!), though both sides of the ball played solidly too.

The D and ST lost USF for us. The O should get the blame for Duke and Pitt (though PJ's bizarre fake punt vs Pitt deserves to be called out), the rest are team victories and team losses.

I loved watching Marshall play, and the passion he brought to the game is undeniable but he was extremely limited in what he could do. He was a marginal passer and seemed to have trouble making the right reads at times on the various option plays. It should be noted that most teams had begun to sell out in flooding the lanes to take away the pitch. We were reduced to a fullback dive and quarterback keeper team and that is NOT what option football is about. By then the offense was not an equalizer. Teams were run blitzing with safeties and outside backers with impunity knowing we could not get separation and take advantage of a wide open middle of the field. Teams that tried that strategy with JT5 soon found out that corners matched against Smelter and Waller were bound to get burned. Coach Johnson's offense worked best when there was at least one wide receiver that could repeatedly beat one on one coverage and had A backs like Orwin, Roddy, and AA who could break arm tackles and explode into the secondary. Last year we did not have either of those attributes and teams could take away the pitch and the deep throws.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

But it wasn't. When teams of equal or lesser talent are stopping it (Duke, Pitt), how can it be considered an equalizer? When the elite teams are blowing it off the field, how can it be considered an equalizer? When PJ's offense first got started, the only team to destroy us was LSU in 2008 and obviously Iowa stymied it in 2009. Back then, the O was truly an equalizer: It equalized the talent differential we'd face against elite teams. But when the Dukes and Pitts are stopping it annually and the elite teams are stuffing it too, it's no longer an equalizer. Doesn't mean it stunk or didn't have success - just means it's not a true 'equalizer', the way it first was in 2008-09. Thumping teams like VPI with it was hilarious but FCS ODU blasted them too.

I think the effect of having a better defense will mitigate any effects of a drop in offensive production, if that even occurs.

It better because Coach Key has his work cut out for him. The offensive line will be a work in progress. I am encouraged by the enthusiasm and zeal displayed by coaches and players alike but the specter of losing our two best linemen, one on each side of the line, is ever looming. The two places we could ill afford losses were the two affected by departures, one understandable and the other truly tragic.

 

[iceeater1969]

It better because Coach Key has his work cut out for him. The offensive line will be a work in progress. I am encouraged by the enthusiasm and zeal displayed by coaches and players alike but the specter of losing our two best linemen, one on each side of the line, is ever looming. The two places we could ill afford losses were the two affected by departures, one understandable and the other truly tragic.

Very prescient post.

It is mandentory that Key take these guys and do well.

I think he will do very well .


Brad morgans has graduated. On the football twitter they show lots of more smiles. Scott may not have graduated.
I have mixed emotions about the grad portals and 5th year senior. I like growing our own 5th year guys .


The reports show that cgc and key are testing every one of the ol guys in practice. This week they will divide up and go at it in the spring game. Hope we see the ol shine against the younger and new dl guys.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

But it wasn't. When teams of equal or lesser talent are stopping it (Duke, Pitt), how can it be considered an equalizer? When the elite teams are blowing it off the field, how can it be considered an equalizer? When PJ's offense first got started, the only team to destroy us was LSU in 2008 and obviously Iowa stymied it in 2009. Back then, the O was truly an equalizer: It equalized the talent differential we'd face against elite teams. But when the Dukes and Pitts are stopping it annually and the elite teams are stuffing it too, it's no longer an equalizer. Doesn't mean it stunk or didn't have success - just means it's not a true 'equalizer', the way it first was in 2008-09. Thumping teams like VPI with it was hilarious but FCS ODU blasted them too.

I think the effect of having a better defense will mitigate any effects of a drop in offensive production, if that even occurs.

You might as well go whole hog and claim CPJs offense was never an equalizer if you're going to use this logic.

2008 Loss to UVA and 3 point wins vs BC and Gardner-Webb
2009 Barely beat WF in OT
2010 L to Kansas and AF

Every team has a couple bad games a year, and there is a strong tendency to play down to the level of your opponent.

Re: Pitt - what adjustments did PJ make? Play by play clearly shows we just kept running QB Keepers by Marshall with some Mason thrown in. And down 21-0, the D gets no credit for giving up a FG for the entire 2nd half to allow us a chance to make a comeback, which fell just short. Similarly against Duke, Woody's D completely shut down Duke for most of the game - can't fault them for those Duke scores, which were due to untimely TOs.

No one is redefining anything. Not sure how you can claim it's the O doing all the winning though. It wasn't the Offense recovering 3 fumbles by MIA, giving us some short-field scores. 53 rushes for 230 yards vs MIA isn't exactly an offensive equalization. Good thing the D showed up and good thing we got what would be PJ's last Death March at the end of the game. Same for UVA - a game actually won by our ST (I know - stunning!), though both sides of the ball played solidly too.

The D and ST lost USF for us. The O should get the blame for Duke and Pitt (though PJ's bizarre fake punt vs Pitt deserves to be called out), the rest are team victories and team losses.

Adjustments aren't always different play calls. Sometimes it's as simple as who blocks who to open up a lane. And no one is discrediting the D in this game. They did a fair job.

All of this, however, goes to make my broader point. We have no business looking down on schools like Duke and Pitt as inferior when they have outspent us on football for the last decade or so. The thing that most excites me about CGC is that TStan has finally opened up the pocketbook for football. It's been long overdue.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

But it wasn't. When teams of equal or lesser talent are stopping it (Duke, Pitt), how can it be considered an equalizer? When the elite teams are blowing it off the field, how can it be considered an equalizer? When PJ's offense first got started, the only team to destroy us was LSU in 2008 and obviously Iowa stymied it in 2009. Back then, the O was truly an equalizer: It equalized the talent differential we'd face against elite teams. But when the Dukes and Pitts are stopping it annually and the elite teams are stuffing it too, it's no longer an equalizer. Doesn't mean it stunk or didn't have success - just means it's not a true 'equalizer', the way it first was in 2008-09. Thumping teams like VPI with it was hilarious but FCS ODU blasted them too.

I think the effect of having a better defense will mitigate any effects of a drop in offensive production, if that even occurs.

Duke and Virginia Tech were the first teams to sell out using their absolute best athlete, usually a strong safety, to blitz the wide gaps and go after the quarterback. The intent was not only to physically punish the quarterback but also to disrupt the timing of the mesh and create havoc in the backfield that would make the quarterback hesitate on his reads. Of course, there are always downsides to a stratagem. Virginia Tech came to grief several times using that strategy and got burned on deep balls. Duke had a strong safety that was especially good at this.

 

[forensicbuzz]

But it wasn't. When teams of equal or lesser talent are stopping it (Duke, Pitt), how can it be considered an equalizer? When the elite teams are blowing it off the field, how can it be considered an equalizer? When PJ's offense first got started, the only team to destroy us was LSU in 2008 and obviously Iowa stymied it in 2009. Back then, the O was truly an equalizer: It equalized the talent differential we'd face against elite teams. But when the Dukes and Pitts are stopping it annually and the elite teams are stuffing it too, it's no longer an equalizer. Doesn't mean it stunk or didn't have success - just means it's not a true 'equalizer', the way it first was in 2008-09. Thumping teams like VPI with it was hilarious but FCS ODU blasted them too.

I think the effect of having a better defense will mitigate any effects of a drop in offensive production, if that even occurs.

Maybe you need to rethink your argument...I'm not sure that's an accurate statement.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Maybe you need to rethink your argument...I'm not sure that's an accurate statement.

Nah....Rick loved CPJ and his offense. I distinctly remember him saying that one time.

 

[TechPreacher]

Johnson was 53-53 against FBS in the last 9 years. If Collins is .500 vs FBS post year 2....

I'll be happy when the 2020 season is finally over so that I will stop being confused about what CPJ's record at Tech actually was.


If CGC leaves before 2021, will his resume show a 2-year gap, since tbe first two years don't count?


So obviously that means that CGC has never been a head coach.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I'll be happy when the 2020 season is finally over so that I will stop being confused about what CPJ's record at Tech actually was.


If CGC leaves before 2021, will his resume show a 2-year gap, since tbe first two years don't count?


So obviously that means that CGC has never been a head coach.

I tip my hat to you. You packed an amazing amount of sarcasm into this post. Excellent work!!!

 

[RickStromFan]

You might as well go whole hog and claim CPJs offense was never an equalizer if you're going to use this logic.

2008 Loss to UVA and 3 point wins vs BC and Gardner-Webb
2009 Barely beat WF in OT
2010 L to Kansas and AF

Every team has a couple bad games a year, and there is a strong tendency to play down to the level of your opponent

We clearly have different definitions of "Equalizer". To me, that's the term applied to how a scheme performs against teams of more talent. I.E. How well it "equalizes" the talent differential. So your example games above, all against schools that are not more-talented than we are are poor examples.
I already said - and stand by - that the offense WAS a true equalizer early in PJ's career at GT, though perhaps that's questionable, given how talented the team that PJ inherited was. Clearly by the end of PJ's career, the scheme was no longer remotely effective against teams of greater talent (Clemson, mutts) and worst of all, similar talent (Duke, Pitt). In short, it no longer provided the advantage that it had previously.

Adjustments aren't always different play calls. Sometimes it's as simple as who blocks who to open up a lane. And no one is discrediting the D in this game. They did a fair job.

All of this, however, goes to make my broader point. We have no business looking down on schools like Duke and Pitt as inferior when they have outspent us on football for the last decade or so. The thing that most excites me about CGC is that TStan has finally opened up the pocketbook for football. It's been long overdue.

Problem is, we aren't looking down at Pitt and Duke. We're now looking UP at them, even though we are of similar talent. They've not only outspent us, they've outcoached us.

 

[buzzmaniac]

We clearly have different definitions of "Equalizer". To me, that's the term applied to how a scheme performs against teams of more talent. I.E. How well it "equalizes" the talent differential. So your example games above, all against schools that are not more-talented than we are are poor examples.
I already said - and stand by - that the offense WAS a true equalizer early in PJ's career at GT, though perhaps that's questionable, given how talented the team that PJ inherited was. Clearly by the end of PJ's career, the scheme was no longer remotely effective against teams of greater talent (Clemson, mutts) and worst of all, similar talent (Duke, Pitt). In short, it no longer provided the advantage that it had previously.




Problem is, we aren't looking down at Pitt and Duke. We're now looking UP at them, even though we are of similar talent. They've not only outspent us, they've outcoached us.

The past 11 years, we finished below Duke exactly 2 times in the final ACC standings (not once the last 3 years). Cut may have our number as of late, but he's still only had 2 ACC winning seasons in 11 years (last one in 2014). As for Pitt, we've finished below them 3 times and above them 3 times.

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

The past 11 years, we finished below Duke exactly 2 times in the final ACC standings (not once the last 3 years). Cut may have our number as of late, but he's still only had 2 ACC winning seasons in 11 years (last one in 2014). As for Pitt, we've finished below them 3 times and above them 3 times.

There has GOT to be much more to college foitball life (a ton more) than where we finish in the ACC if it isn’t 1, 2 or 3 place. And I understand you are responding to a direct puke & Pitt post.

In the last 10 to 15 years, I am willing to venture puke has finished in the final top 25 poll MAYBE once. And I bet zero times in top 15 to 20.

 

[1BearJACKET]

Actually, that's exactly what you said when you said all his offense takes is enough practice time to be unstoppable. Even in 2014, Duke stopped it . . . because the top Jimmy and Joe was playing injured. And you were accusing someone else of saying stupid things.

The top JimmyJoe was turning the ball over, Duke's Jeremy Cash had a lot to do with that. PJ's reluctance to put in the backup until it was too late was also a factor. The backup came in midway through the 3th quarter scoring 2 TDs and bringing us within 6 points but time ran out.

 

[RickStromFan]

Maybe you need to rethink your argument...I'm not sure that's an accurate statement.

All we have quantitatively are recruiting rankings and those 2 rarely out-rank us by much. The idea that our talent level has sunk below those 2 is enough of an indictment by itself. I don't care how many recruiting assistants Duke has on its staff - a kid should never choose 4 years in Durham playing at a literal high-school field/stadium over living in Atlanta. The fact that they out-recruited us at-all is proof itself of the deleterious effects the previous offense had on recruiting. The fact that far too many of our fans shrugged their shoulders and said "It is what it is" in regards to now looking up at Duke is proof of how irrelevant we'd become. Thankfully, it looks like Coach Collins doesn't seek to make excuses and has us moving in the right direction.

 

[RickStromFan]

Nah....Rick loved CPJ and his offense. I distinctly remember him saying that one time.

huge fan!

 

[RickStromFan]

The past 11 years, we finished below Duke exactly 2 times in the final ACC standings (not once the last 3 years). Cut may have our number as of late, but he's still only had 2 ACC winning seasons in 11 years (last one in 2014). As for Pitt, we've finished below them 3 times and above them 3 times.

The past 11 years, we beat Clemson a few times too but no one puts us on their level now. It's not terribly relevant today (esp. to a recruit, who was around 8 yrs old then) what we did in 2011. Hell, we won the ACC and beat Clemson twice in 2009! How does that translate to getting recruits today or beating Clemson in August?
We're 3 of 6 vs Pitt but have lost 3 of the last 4. It's a similar trend vs Duke. If we're not winning the Coastal, who cares where we finish in regards to any team? Absolutely no one is paying attention to that stat.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

The past 11 years, we beat Clemson a few times too but no one puts us on their level now. It's not terribly relevant today (esp. to a recruit, who was around 8 yrs old then) what we did in 2011. Hell, we won the ACC and beat Clemson twice in 2009! How does that translate to getting recruits today or beating Clemson in August?
We're 3 of 6 vs Pitt but have lost 3 of the last 4. It's a similar trend vs Duke. If we're not winning the Coastal, who cares where we finish in regards to any team? Absolutely no one is paying attention to that stat.

CGC better win the coastal in 2 years I guess.