Triple Option

FlatsLander

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
829
No matter how good the scheme, you have to have players willing and able to execute. From reading this board, it appears recruits felt like TO skills wouldn’t take them to the next level. A lot of folks think the TO is boring but I think it’s a thing of beauty when it’s working. I know it’s gone and it’s probably never coming back but I do miss those death marches.
I miss having any type of "bread and butter", "go-to" plays that are our signature. It was especially apparent with Mason in 2014. We need 3 yards? Mason will move his guy and the B-Back can dive forward and get it. Now, I don't know that we have anything like that. Maybe the zone read that we ran well against UNC? It seemed like we didn't run anything like that against Pitt.
 

GT_05

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,370
I miss having any type of "bread and butter", "go-to" plays that are our signature. It was especially apparent with Mason in 2014. We need 3 yards? Mason will move his guy and the B-Back can dive forward and get it. Now, I don't know that we have anything like that. Maybe the zone read that we ran well against UNC? It seemed like we didn't run anything like that against Pitt.
Yes! I also miss being a major PITA to some teams. It gave me pleasure to know that Kirby was setting aside a little bit of practice each day to stay fresh on the TO. I guess I’m a bit of a sadist. It looks like he’s replaced that time with extra prep for his best chance at a Natty yet.
 

cthenrys

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
942
Location
Highland Village, TX
Yes! I also miss being a major PITA to some teams. It gave me pleasure to know that Kirby was setting aside a little bit of practice each day to stay fresh on the TO. I guess I’m a bit of a sadist. It looks like he’s replaced that time with extra prep for his best chance at a Natty yet.
Teams used to hate playing us. Now we’re an easy out. IIWII
 

danny daniel

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,494
I miss having any type of "bread and butter", "go-to" plays that are our signature. It was especially apparent with Mason in 2014. We need 3 yards? Mason will move his guy and the B-Back can dive forward and get it. Now, I don't know that we have anything like that. Maybe the zone read that we ran well against UNC? It seemed like we didn't run anything like that against Pitt.
Stopping the zone read is a matter of deciding to use your unblocked D player to play the QB or chase the RB. If you want to stop the QB its a matter of telling your player his responsibility. Easy to stop the QB if that is your priority. If I were coaching I would stop the QB every time and tell my D that the RB has the ball, hence no option at all.
 

JG3

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
7
This has probably been discussed ad nauseum but quite a few teams employed the triple option at one point in the past and moved away from it. How long did it take them to “rebuild”? I’ve been on this board for quite a while and the triple option has been blamed as the root of nearly all of our current woes on offense and defense. I’m not hung up on wins and losses at year three but I am hung up on wanting to see steady progress and I want to get away from this Jekyll and Hyde nonsense. When can we stop blaming the triple option? It’s hard to drive looking in the rear view mirror.
Bob Stoops took over an Oklahoma program that the year before was a 5 win team running the wishbone. Two years later won a national title by moving the A backs to slot recievers and recruiting a Jr College qb named Josh Heupel.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,898
Teams used to hate playing us. Now we’re an easy out. IIWII
They also hated playing Tech because - and many said it - we were the most physical team on the schedule. Why? No "grab and dance" blocking; Tech actually, you know, hit people. On every play. All over the field. I used to especially feel for the DBs; was <your favorite big Tech WR here> going to go for a pass or clean your clock with a block? Oh, the suspense!
 

motynes

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
240
Location
Ocean Springs, Mississippi
Yeah, this is going to sound a-holey of me, but it boils down to the fact that fans and donors are a combination of arrogant and ignorant.

Ignorant because they don't really know what they're talking about. 99% of fans don't really understand college football to any appreciable degree. I consider myself more knowledgeable than most (lol, although who doesn't?) and I know enough to know that I only understand college football xs and os well enough to describe it, but not well enough to coach it. Hell, I can barely coach it at the high school level :)

The bigger problem is the arrogance. Fans at schools like kansas, and yukon, and frankly Georgia Tech think that they're one great recruiter away from recruiting like Georgia and Clemson. They're not. The reason these schools are in the position they are in is because they are not Clemson or Georgia, and their school is not willing to do what it takes to be Clemson or georgia.

Kansas hired landslie uphold instead of Lane kiffin or Lincoln Riley because they're Kansas and they're going to stay kansas.

Once in a blue moons Blue Moon it works out, but the 51% play is to hire a guy with a schematic advantage because realistically you are who you are recruiting wise. You can be at the top of your bracket or the bottom of your bracket depending upon your coach and his recruiting skills, but you're going to stay in your bracket.

Fans never believe that though, and honestly they never will. Matt Campbell happens just often enough to skew people's expectations of what is possible and reasonable.

That's the reason the bad hatter goes to Lawrence and suddenly sucks. That's the reason Jeff Collins is going to be blah at Georgia tech.

Apologies for the rant and the typos, I'm using speech to text while I'm driving around on Monday morning trying to motivate to go into the office cuz my 55-year-old boss thinks it's important for all of us to be in a building so we can all sit in our offices and work on our computers and never talk to each other.
Man, you’ve put into words what I’ve been thinking since I was a student and the reason Gailey was never really successful here. To win at GT you have to out scheme the other side. You will never out recruit the other side. Plain and simple. You will never out recruit Georgia or Alabama or FSU. We win 1 out of 40 battles with them. A good recruiter will win 1 out of 30. A great recruiter 1 out of 20. Still getting creamed on recruiting. When we’ve one, it is because we put schemes the other side. It is why O’Leary got real average when Ralph got a HC gig. While O’Brien was better than average, he was no Ralph. So we did good. Then Gailey had an eye for talent (when that was easier to do before the social media/internet recruiting explosions) and he kept us above average on a talent level. But he had horrible offensive schemes. Thank god for Tenuta who used lots of different schemes to keep us relevant. As much as people hate it CPJ was brilliant and he is solely responsible for keeping us good. While recruiting took a hit, it just shows you how brilliant he was that he kept winning with regularity with what people now refer to as very inferior talent. I’m really worried we are never going to win more than 3-4 games until we can find someone that tries and is able to out-scheme the other side. It’s like we don’t even try now. I agree with you so much.
 

jgtengineer

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,742
I’m confused. I thought it took 5-7 years to convert a wishbone system into a winning program.

It does if you are completely changing things. Stoops embraced the run an shoot concepts the receivers already knew and just got a QB that could throw intermediate routes. And he didn't abandoned what the line was designed to do.
 

jgtengineer

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,742
So you don't think our opponents are practicing against our current scheme before they play us?

Actually this is the downside of basically running what everyone else does. Pretty much everyoen doesn't have to change much to practice for us. Just go to the cards and run the plays the line is the same as they've been seeing and that they do. The prep time for a team that does something very close to what you do is a lot less than one that does the polar opposite.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
10,800
You mold your offense and defense to the talent on hand. Not the other way around.
If we look at Urban Meyer when he started at Florida, he started with a ton of talent because he followed an epic recruiter. He still had gaps in a few skill positions. He made adjustments so he could make his system work, but it was clearly his desired system with minor allowances. I’d say that’s tailoring and not designing or molding your scheme around your players.
Saban brought in his system with few to no allowances.
I think you can probably find more successful coaches fitting players to their scheme than the other way around. Belichick certainly fits players to his scheme more than the other way around
 

GT_05

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,370
If we look at Urban Meyer when he started at Florida, he started with a ton of talent because he followed an epic recruiter. He still had gaps in a few skill positions. He made adjustments so he could make his system work, but it was clearly his desired system with minor allowances. I’d say that’s tailoring and not designing or molding your scheme around your players.
Saban brought in his system with few to no allowances.
I think you can probably find more successful coaches fitting players to their scheme than the other way around. Belichick certainly fits players to his scheme more than the other way around
It seems to me that when you are going drastically different with a scheme and without the ability to replace all of your players at once that it would be prudent to morph into the new scheme. It would’ve taken a little extra work but the transition would’ve gone smoother. Maybe CGC has done this and I’m too football ignorant to recognize it.

Edit: I know the TO isn’t sexy to many but it could’ve come in handy on our red zone attempts last weekend.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,672
It does if you are completely changing things. Stoops embraced the run an shoot concepts the receivers already knew and just got a QB that could throw intermediate routes. And he didn't abandoned what the line was designed to do.
Interesting that some of our best plays are called quarterback runs that look like they are straight out of the CPJ playbook.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,390
There’s maybe 2-3 coaches in America who can call enough plays that are perfect playcalls for success enough times in a game to win with subpar talent. I’m not sure if Paul was ever in the category, if not he was close. The problem with bringing in Monken or someone else is you’re not bringing in Paul Johnson, you’re just bringing in a little bit of his scheme. Look at how many programs have hired from Saban coaching tree, sometimes it’s just not the same. Paul was the last of the hard, there will never be another P5 Triple Option coach. We were lucky to have him, but at this point all we can do is look back and realize outside of 2 great seasons and 2 bad seasons he was historically on par with every other coach we have had and pretty much averaged a 7-5 season. Maybe the issues at Tech aren’t based on the head coaches as much as we’d like to think. There’s only been 2-3 in history that sustained elite success.
Damn 7-5 sounds SO good right now 😭
 

Ash

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
766
You mold your offense and defense to the talent on hand. Not the other way around.

The most disappointing thing about the current coahing staff's approach to The Transition is they didn't seem to do that. They chose the other path: install your system and bring in guys to fit it. find out if any players on the roster can adapt, and treat the games played up until the point you have the right guys as "practice".
 

Augusta_Jacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
7,895
Location
Augusta, Georgia
Bob Stoops took over an Oklahoma program that the year before was a 5 win team running the wishbone. Two years later won a national title by moving the A backs to slot recievers and recruiting a Jr College qb named Josh Heupel.

I’m confused. I thought it took 5-7 years to convert a wishbone system into a winning program.

This requires some context. The sooners moved away from the wishbone when Switzer left in the late 80's. There were some good to mediocre years in the early 90's before OU fell apart. Oklahoma under John Blake was a mess, and in 1999, he tried to reinstall the wishbone in a desperation move. Stoops wasn't exactly replacing an entrenched system.
 

stech81

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,725
Location
Woodstock Georgia
So you don't think our opponents are practicing against our current scheme before they play us?
No , what scheme do we have ? We look like most teams It's not like we run something other teams don't see but once a year.

fact : and I hate it but every team we play looks at there schedule sees our name and they say there is a win.

My belief : I liked the 3O but we can't go back now , why ? because of the new transfer portal , I would hate to see how many we would lose if we tried now.

The really sad part it looks Dave Braine may have been right
 

GT_05

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,370
No , what scheme do we have ? We look like most teams It's not like we run something other teams don't see but once a year.

fact : and I hate it but every team we play looks at there schedule sees our name and they say there is a win.

My belief : I liked the 3O but we can't go back now , why ? because of the new transfer portal , I would hate to see how many we would lose if we tried now.

The really sad part it looks Dave Braine may have been right
What was Braine right about?
 
Top