UVA vs. Navy

[steebu]

Air Raid passing concepts has probably been one of the most influential offensive concepts in the last decade on every level of football. From HS to the NFL.

Very true.

Honestly, I don't care if no other P5 team runs what we do. What does it matter? We've shown we can win 11 games with this system, why can't we win 11 games again? We just have to work harder at it - mostly behind the scenes on the recruiting front, which is why I like this letter from T-Stan.

If people really want to play that game, name another P5 team that runs Stanford's offense. I don't see any other team that lines up with 2-inch splits, 3 TE's, and short-pitches it to the tailback. ON EVERY PLAY.

As an aside, and this is not directed at you, Techster, but honestly, when some of us grouse about, "Sophisticated Air Raid Concepts! DROOOOOOL ... LINCOLN RILEY SO HAWT ... PAWL JOHNSON SO DUMB ... " ...

How many of you actually know what you're talking about?

We use some of the core concepts from both the RnS and Air Raid. Things like Mesh, Y-Corner and 4-verts are all in our playbook. We scored on a mesh route when Tevin tied it up against VT a few years ago. Y-Corner was our TD against UGA this year (with a great rub run by our WRs). And we see 4-verts all the time. Other concepts like Smash have also been run by us. Stylee put up a nice set of vids a while back showing them.

Maybe since we don't run it out of shotgun it doesn't count.

The bottom line is we've shown we can win with this offense. We just need the horses to do it. It's the same for every other offense out there. Someone explain to me why the Mad Pirate (more like Angry Pirate now) got WAXED by MSU in their bowl game. Furthermore, a few weeks ago I flipped on the Apple Cup and it was 42-0 in the 4th quarter (Washington was destroying Washington State). Clearly an offense that's supposed to be so high-powered and run by a brilliant mind getting shut down in two straight games proves that it's an outdated, useless offense. Or maybe both Washington and Michigan State's D-Line was just WAAAAAAY better than Washington State's O-Line. Hmm.

Now if you want to turn the conversation to, "We need to recruit better on the lines" then I'm all for it. But all this talk of, "this offense is so much better, that offense is so much better ... this offense will bring fans ... that offense won't bring NFL recruits ..." it's just pointless. Any system will work, given the right prep and the right players. We need to improve both.

 

[Techster]

Very true.

Honestly, I don't care if no other P5 team runs what we do. What does it matter? We've shown we can win 11 games with this system, why can't we win 11 games again? We just have to work harder at it - mostly behind the scenes on the recruiting front, which is why I like this letter from T-Stan.

If people really want to play that game, name another P5 team that runs Stanford's offense. I don't see any other team that lines up with 2-inch splits, 3 TE's, and short-pitches it to the tailback. ON EVERY PLAY.

As an aside, and this is not directed at you, Techster, but honestly, when some of us grouse about, "Sophisticated Air Raid Concepts! DROOOOOOL ... LINCOLN RILEY SO HAWT ... PAWL JOHNSON SO DUMB ... " ...

How many of you actually know what you're talking about?

We use some of the core concepts from both the RnS and Air Raid. Things like Mesh, Y-Corner and 4-verts are all in our playbook. We scored on a mesh route when Tevin tied it up against VT a few years ago. Y-Corner was our TD against UGA this year (with a great rub run by our WRs). And we see 4-verts all the time. Other concepts like Smash have also been run by us. Stylee put up a nice set of vids a while back showing them.

Maybe since we don't run it out of shotgun it doesn't count.

The bottom line is we've shown we can win with this offense. We just need the horses to do it. It's the same for every other offense out there. Someone explain to me why the Mad Pirate (more like Angry Pirate now) got WAXED by MSU in their bowl game. Furthermore, a few weeks ago I flipped on the Apple Cup and it was 42-0 in the 4th quarter (Washington was destroying Washington State). Clearly an offense that's supposed to be so high-powered and run by a brilliant mind getting shut down in two straight games proves that it's an outdated, useless offense. Or maybe both Washington and Michigan State's D-Line was just WAAAAAAY better than Washington State's O-Line. Hmm.

Now if you want to turn the conversation to, "We need to recruit better on the lines" then I'm all for it. But all this talk of, "this offense is so much better, that offense is so much better ... this offense will bring fans ... that offense won't bring NFL recruits ..." it's just pointless. Any system will work, given the right prep and the right players. We need to improve both.

Bottom line for me is winning is greater than any offensive or defensive system. If GT ran the single wing and won the ACC or National Championship, I'd be ecstatic.

I'll make no bones about it, I like CPJ's system, but it would not be my first choice if we hired someone else. I enjoy the passing game, and I enjoy the option game. When CPJ first got here, and I got to study the offense, what excited me was the passing game...or as I've come to find out a decade later, the POTENTIAL of the passing game. I mean, you couple some of the most devastating passing concepts with CPJ's already devastating option concepts?!! Oh boy!

I really thought CPJ would get high level dual threat guys, and WRs to buy into his vision of the POTENTIAL of this offense. In a way he did: he out recruited David Cutcliffe for Vad Lee, and he out recruited Nick Saban and Jimbo Fisher for Justin Thomas. He signed Stephen Hill who was a highly rated WR prospect. We had defenses spinning their heads in 2008 and 2009 with Nesbitt, who we all would agree is probably the toughest SOB to play QB in this system, but was not the greatest of passers. What could CPJ do with Vad Lee and JeT?! We all know what happened with Vad. With JeT, our offense ROLLED in 2014 and 2016, but the ground game was still 80% of our attack in 2014, and 23% of our attack in 2016. (Let's also mention, if GT had a defense in 2011 and 2012, the narrative of Tevin Washington would be totally different today. Those offenses were actually REALLY good according to Offensive FEI rankings).

It all goes back to preference. Anyone who argues with the results of CPJ's system is pretty much not very well attuned to football. CPJ's system works, and it has worked everywhere CPJ has been. At the same time, it's not for everyone. I made this analogy in another thread: Eating steak, potatos and salad gets the job done, and if you ate it every day there would be nothing wrong with it. It would serve its purpose. But the thing is, not everyone wants to eat steak, potatos, and salad every day. We hear the argument a lot that "Well, if you don't like CPJ's offense, you can always go back to Chan Gailey's pro style offense." The problem with that is the choices are not binary. It's not just Flex Option or "Pro Style".

You brought up Lincoln Riley (well, actually I did orginally, but...). Lincoln Riley is an Air Raid guy. He played for Mike Leach as a walk on at Texas Tech, and he was actually the back up to Kliff Kingsbury (now the HC at TXTech) before transitioning to a student assistant. But the one thing Riley learned after leaving Leach and coaching at other places is Air Raid in itself is only going to get you so far. If you REALLY want to get DC's heads spinning, mix in sound running principles with the Air Raid and watch the offense take off. Take off it did. Riley actually runs the ball more than he passes, but he also has stable of RBs Leach could only dream of. You look at what Scott Frost did with Chip Kelly's offense. https://blogs.usafootball.com/blog/...olved-chip-kelly-s-offense-at-central-florida

Today's football is the Cambrian Explosion in terms of all these new offenses taking off, old concepts being reinvigorated with new ideas and being applied in exciting ways. In 20-30 years, football historians will look at this period of football as probably the most innovative period of football.

Good offenses evolve over time, because defenses evolve over time as well. It was much easier running the Flex Option in 2008 and 2009 than it is now. We're no longer an exotic offense, defenses in the ACC have seen us for 10 years now. Even CPJ's disciples have changed things up to throw defenses off balance. As a GT fan, we're pretty simple: Does it work, and if it does, keep doing what we're doing. Don't make it complicated. CPJ echoes that "We've been doing for 30 years, and it's been working, so why change it up?" And he has a point.

The counter point is this: Football is entertainment. Once someone stops being entertained, they move on to something else. Personally, I quit paying attention to the NFL because it's the same offenses every week. GT can continue to win with the flex option, but if no one shows up to watch it, it doesn't hurt anyone but GT. You can say "Well, offense X crapped the bad against Team Y", but all offenses crap the bed at some point. When our offense is humming, it's beautiful...but the flex option has been unwatchable more times than I care to recall as well.

So I just took the LOOONG way to say: Just win. For those that like the offense, it's going to be the same no matter what. But for those that are not fans of this offense, winning makes it easier. Just win.

 

[ATL1]

"GT can continue to win with the flex option, but if no one shows up to watch it, it doesn't hurt anyone but GT. "

As someone that worked in education in high school, no question it hurts more than helps.

 

[MikeJackets1967]

"GT can continue to win with the flex option, but if no one shows up to watch it, it doesn't hurt anyone but GT. "

As someone that worked in education in high school, no question it hurts more than helps.

I'd rather GT be a boring 7-9 win team than an exciting 3-4 win team

 

[Techster]

I'd rather GT be a boring 7-9 win team than an exciting 3-4 win team

I'd rather GT be exciting AND a 9-11 win team!

 

[MikeJackets1967]

I'd rather GT be exciting AND a 9-11 win team!

GT with how tough it is to get admitted I think can only do that around once a decade or so

 

[ATL1]

GT with how tough it is to get admitted I think can only do that around once a decade or so

Side eyes.

 

[ATL1]

I'd rather GT be a boring 7-9 win team than an exciting 3-4 win team

Had that with Chan Gailey.

 

[MountainBuzzMan]

Had that with Chan Gailey.

Yep will take the 3O and its ups and downs every time of Chan's bore you to death offense. At least CPJ can beat the mutts more often the CCG. The 3O does help when playing teams with better talent.

 

[vamosjackets]

Bottom line for me is winning is greater than any offensive or defensive system. If GT ran the single wing and won the ACC or National Championship, I'd be ecstatic.

I'll make no bones about it, I like CPJ's system, but it would not be my first choice if we hired someone else. I enjoy the passing game, and I enjoy the option game. When CPJ first got here, and I got to study the offense, what excited me was the passing game...or as I've come to find out a decade later, the POTENTIAL of the passing game. I mean, you couple some of the most devastating passing concepts with CPJ's already devastating option concepts?!! Oh boy!

I really thought CPJ would get high level dual threat guys, and WRs to buy into his vision of the POTENTIAL of this offense. In a way he did: he out recruited David Cutcliffe for Vad Lee, and he out recruited Nick Saban and Jimbo Fisher for Justin Thomas. He signed Stephen Hill who was a highly rated WR prospect. We had defenses spinning their heads in 2008 and 2009 with Nesbitt, who we all would agree is probably the toughest SOB to play QB in this system, but was not the greatest of passers. What could CPJ do with Vad Lee and JeT?! We all know what happened with Vad. With JeT, our offense ROLLED in 2014 and 2016, but the ground game was still 80% of our attack in 2014, and 23% of our attack in 2016. (Let's also mention, if GT had a defense in 2011 and 2012, the narrative of Tevin Washington would be totally different today. Those offenses were actually REALLY good according to Offensive FEI rankings).

It all goes back to preference. Anyone who argues with the results of CPJ's system is pretty much not very well attuned to football. CPJ's system works, and it has worked everywhere CPJ has been. At the same time, it's not for everyone. I made this analogy in another thread: Eating steak, potatos and salad gets the job done, and if you ate it every day there would be nothing wrong with it. It would serve its purpose. But the thing is, not everyone wants to eat steak, potatos, and salad every day. We hear the argument a lot that "Well, if you don't like CPJ's offense, you can always go back to Chan Gailey's pro style offense." The problem with that is the choices are not binary. It's not just Flex Option or "Pro Style".

You brought up Lincoln Riley (well, actually I did orginally, but...). Lincoln Riley is an Air Raid guy. He played for Mike Leach as a walk on at Texas Tech, and he was actually the back up to Kliff Kingsbury (now the HC at TXTech) before transitioning to a student assistant. But the one thing Riley learned after leaving Leach and coaching at other places is Air Raid in itself is only going to get you so far. If you REALLY want to get DC's heads spinning, mix in sound running principles with the Air Raid and watch the offense take off. Take off it did. Riley actually runs the ball more than he passes, but he also has stable of RBs Leach could only dream of. You look at what Scott Frost did with Chip Kelly's offense. https://blogs.usafootball.com/blog/...olved-chip-kelly-s-offense-at-central-florida

Today's football is the Cambrian Explosion in terms of all these new offenses taking off, old concepts being reinvigorated with new ideas and being applied in exciting ways. In 20-30 years, football historians will look at this period of football as probably the most innovative period of football.

Good offenses evolve over time, because defenses evolve over time as well. It was much easier running the Flex Option in 2008 and 2009 than it is now. We're no longer an exotic offense, defenses in the ACC have seen us for 10 years now. Even CPJ's disciples have changed things up to throw defenses off balance. As a GT fan, we're pretty simple: Does it work, and if it does, keep doing what we're doing. Don't make it complicated. CPJ echoes that "We've been doing for 30 years, and it's been working, so why change it up?" And he has a point.

The counter point is this: Football is entertainment. Once someone stops being entertained, they move on to something else. Personally, I quit paying attention to the NFL because it's the same offenses every week. GT can continue to win with the flex option, but if no one shows up to watch it, it doesn't hurt anyone but GT. You can say "Well, offense X crapped the bad against Team Y", but all offenses crap the bed at some point. When our offense is humming, it's beautiful...but the flex option has been unwatchable more times than I care to recall as well.

So I just took the LOOONG way to say: Just win. For those that like the offense, it's going to be the same no matter what. But for those that are not fans of this offense, winning makes it easier. Just win.

I'm not sure how you got there, but I agree with your conclusion.
Actually, I agree with a lot of what you said with a one major disagreement. Entertainment should play 0% into the decision making of football!! And, your final statement seems to bear that out, but it seems to contradict a little of what you wrote earlier about football being entertainment. Football is not entertainment. It's competition. The game existed before fans decided to gather around and watch it. The only reason fans decided to gather and watch in higher and higher numbers is because of the incredible competition. The competition didn't decide to happen because there was a gathering of fans. That HAS to be kept in mind. The second we (meaning T.Stan or CPJ) start making decisions for the sake of fans is the second we completely self-destruct. Every decision should be made for a singular purpose: WIN. (With an undergirding foundation of morality that won't be compromised for anything)
And, you said it in the end. Just win!

I feel like the CPJ detractors use losing as an excuse to argue for what they really want: entertainment, self-pride, recruiting warm-fuzzies, self-importance, outside perception, etc. I think there may be exceptions to this, but this is the general feeling I get from that crowd. Usually logical progression of argument and stats to support it are not present in those arguments. It all seems to be mostly emotional, which is driven from some form of self-pleasing.

In general the CPJ supporters are arguing from the standpoint of winning. Recruiting, entertainment, outside perception are all secondary factors to just plain winning. The only time they enter the conversation is when it can help support the bottom line - winning. We have seen the offense kill it, we have seen it be as consistent or more consistent in doing so than any other offense out there - and that's with GT's student-driven personnel. That's why we want it. Because it's just plain good, and the stats and logic are on our side. And, I should admit that this side is self-pleasing as well, it is just pleased more by winning than these other factors. And, that's why, in general, we just want to change what we're not good at, and haven't been good at yet with CPJ - our defense. Don't get rid of an offense that has already shown it can be in the elite levels of success at GT with the personnel GT already gets. If we get a defense that is as good as our offense, we're there; we're at the top of college football - maybe the very top. That's all that matters.

To echo your words. All that to come to your same conclusion: Just win.

 

[steebu]

Riley actually runs the ball more than he passes, but he also has stable of RBs Leach could only dream of. You look at what Scott Frost did with Chip Kelly's offense.

I've been a Sooner for 35+ years so I've kept a very close eye on Lincoln Riley since he got hired.

It's interesting to see how these "Power Spread" (I guess I'll call it that) teams line up in the shotgun and spread you out to run it. People in Oregon went crazy over Chip Kelly's offenses, but his offense was predicated on the run and even running the triple option and midline out of the gun. Those plays set up the play action pass so all you ever saw on SportsCenter was long passes hauled in for a TD leading one to think that Kelly's offense was all about throwing it all over the yard. Check out the FishDuck's videos on youtube of the "Straddled Triple Option". Neat stuff.

Funny how at the end of the day the principles from a hundred years ago still stand: run the ball, stop the run.

And you're right: the bottom line, just win.

 

[Techster]

I'm not sure how you got there, but I agree with your conclusion.
Actually, I agree with a lot of what you said with a one major disagreement. Entertainment should play 0% into the decision making of football!! And, your final statement seems to bear that out, but it seems to contradict a little of what you wrote earlier about football being entertainment. Football is not entertainment. It's competition. The game existed before fans decided to gather around and watch it. The only reason fans decided to gather and watch in higher and higher numbers is because of the incredible competition. The competition didn't decide to happen because there was a gathering of fans. That HAS to be kept in mind. The second we (meaning T.Stan or CPJ) start making decisions for the sake of fans is the second we completely self-destruct. Every decision should be made for a singular purpose: WIN. (With an undergirding foundation of morality that won't be compromised for anything)
And, you said it in the end. Just win!

I feel like the CPJ detractors use losing as an excuse to argue for what they really want: entertainment, self-pride, recruiting warm-fuzzies, self-importance, outside perception, etc. I think there may be exceptions to this, but this is the general feeling I get from that crowd. Usually logical progression of argument and stats to support it are not present in those arguments. It all seems to be mostly emotional, which is driven from some form of self-pleasing.

In general the CPJ supporters are arguing from the standpoint of winning. Recruiting, entertainment, outside perception are all secondary factors to just plain winning. The only time they enter the conversation is when it can help support the bottom line - winning. We have seen the offense kill it, we have seen it be as consistent or more consistent in doing so than any other offense out there - and that's with GT's student-driven personnel. That's why we want it. Because it's just plain good, and the stats and logic are on our side. And, I should admit that this side is self-pleasing as well, it is just pleased more by winning than these other factors. And, that's why, in general, we just want to change what we're not good at, and haven't been good at yet with CPJ - our defense. Don't get rid of an offense that has already shown it can be in the elite levels of success at GT with the personnel GT already gets. If we get a defense that is as good as our offense, we're there; we're at the top of college football - maybe the very top. That's all that matters.

To echo your words. All that to come to your same conclusion: Just win.

I think you're being idealistic about the motives behind "competition". If "competition" is all that matters, college wrestling, which is the purist form of competition would easily outpace college football. But it doesn't. Competition IS entertainment, and entertainment is content. Sports content is why ESPN, Fox, CBS, etc. pay BILLIONS of dollars for the rights to broadcast sports. Entertainment is also why that trash Kardashian show gets tens of millions of dollars...because it's content that entertains (unfortunately, there are people who get entertained by that). If competition in itself is why people watch sports, then why don't regular season games match the ratings of the Super Bowl? Because the Super Bowl is a spectacle that mixes sports with pop culture that has non sports fans tuning in to watch commercials and the half time show. For 4 hours, it's the premiere form of entertainment when it's on, and it's a cultural moment that can be shared at the office the next day. There are more articles written about the commercials and half time show after the Super Bowl than there are articles about the actual game itself.

Winning is important...it's very important, but it's not the only thing that matters. GT didn't miss a bowl game for almost 2 decades, and we've won 9 games twice, 11 games twice, and eight games once in a period of a decade. GT has been consistently winning more than the Falcons, Hawks, and Braves during that time period. Why does GT still struggle to bring in fans? Because Atlanta has so many other options to entertain the metro area, and that goes outside of sports as well. By your definition of competition, why isn't GT uniting the city of Atlanta like the Falcons, or Braves, or Hawks, or the new soccer team when they're winning? Because it's much more complicated than just "competition".

Let's look at it from this angle: CPJ, George O'Leary, and Bobby Ross were all successful winning at GT. Winning at GT is difficult. Similar to the saying "If you can make it in New York, you can make it anywhere". If you can win at GT, chances are VERY good you're going to win pretty much anywhere else. Bobby Ross proved that when he moved on to San Diego, O'Leary proved that at UCF (and he would have at ND if not for the whole resume flap). CPJ has had more sustained success at GT than both of those coaches. Yet there's no one knocking down the doors to get CPJ to coach them. There's no one knocking down the doors to get Navy's coach, or Army's coach to coach them. Heck, BYU only wanted Navy's coach if he was willing to change his offense, and that killed the deal. It's been widely agreed that the flex option is a system that will have schools winning faster than normal, but why is it more schools don't adopt the flex option system? It's because the winning isn't the only thing that matters. Recruiting matters. How you win matters. If there are other systems that are less difficult to recruit to, and is more palatable to fans, and that system can win just as much....why choose a system with the baggage that comes with the flex option?

Your line of reasoning that winning is paramount, and everything else should be secondary excludes one very important fact: Choice. Fans have a choice. Recruits have a choice. Decision makers have a choice. Despite our winning, sidewalk fans are choosing other forms of entertainment besides GT, recruits are choosing to play in other winning systems besides GT's, and decision makers often choose other schools besides GT (ever wonder why GT gets all those noon games?). As GT fans, I think it's myopic for us to say "Well, as long as GT wins, we shouldn't factor in anything else." Here's the other thing. What happens when the winning stops? 2 losing seasons in the last 3 years is the worst stretch of football since the early 90's...since the name who shouldn't be spoken.

The idealism of "winning is the only thing that matters" is commendable, but in the sports world (which is really the business world now) it gets you in trouble. Idealism cost GT 3 decades of wandering the sports desert because Bobby Dodd cut GT's nose to spite its face. In some ways, we are still paying for that decision. The irony is, the reason for Dodd leaving (scholarship limits) was later instituted by SEC members a few years later. Bobby Dodd was a winner...but winning didn't help too much after that decision, did it? Instead of working within the SEC to get changes passed, Bobby Dodd and his idealism took his ball home and hurt GT in the process.

 

[UgaBlows]

"GT can continue to win with the flex option, but if no one shows up to watch it, it doesn't hurt anyone but GT. "

As someone that worked in education in high school, no question it hurts more than helps.

How is our attendence now vs. the Gailey years? Winning brings the fans, not the style of offense. In my opinion, GT's inability to follow up good seasons with anything other than bad to mediocre seasons is a bigger factor in our attendence.

 

[vamosjackets]

I think you're being idealistic about the motives behind "competition". If "competition" is all that matters, college wrestling, which is the purist form of competition would easily outpace college football. But it doesn't. Competition IS entertainment, and entertainment is content. Sports content is why ESPN, Fox, CBS, etc. pay BILLIONS of dollars for the rights to broadcast sports. Entertainment is also why that trash Kardashian show gets tens of millions of dollars...because it's content that entertains (unfortunately, there are people who get entertained by that). If competition in itself is why people watch sports, then why don't regular season games match the ratings of the Super Bowl? Because the Super Bowl is a spectacle that mixes sports with pop culture that has non sports fans tuning in to watch commercials and the half time show. For 4 hours, it's the premiere form of entertainment when it's on, and it's a cultural moment that can be shared at the office the next day. There are more articles written about the commercials and half time show after the Super Bowl than there are articles about the actual game itself.

Winning is important...it's very important, but it's not the only thing that matters. GT didn't miss a bowl game for almost 2 decades, and we've won 9 games twice, 11 games twice, and eight games once in a period of a decade. GT has been consistently winning more than the Falcons, Hawks, and Braves during that time period. Why does GT still struggle to bring in fans? Because Atlanta has so many other options to entertain the metro area, and that goes outside of sports as well. By your definition of competition, why isn't GT uniting the city of Atlanta like the Falcons, or Braves, or Hawks, or the new soccer team when they're winning? Because it's much more complicated than just "competition".

Let's look at it from this angle: CPJ, George O'Leary, and Bobby Ross were all successful winning at GT. Winning at GT is difficult. Similar to the saying "If you can make it in New York, you can make it anywhere". If you can win at GT, chances are VERY good you're going to win pretty much anywhere else. Bobby Ross proved that when he moved on to San Diego, O'Leary proved that at UCF (and he would have at ND if not for the whole resume flap). CPJ has had more sustained success at GT than both of those coaches. Yet there's no one knocking down the doors to get CPJ to coach them. There's no one knocking down the doors to get Navy's coach, or Army's coach to coach them. Heck, BYU only wanted Navy's coach if he was willing to change his offense, and that killed the deal. It's been widely agreed that the flex option is a system that will have schools winning faster than normal, but why is it more schools don't adopt the flex option system? It's because the winning isn't the only thing that matters. Recruiting matters. How you win matters. If there are other systems that are less difficult to recruit to, and is more palatable to fans, and that system can win just as much....why choose a system with the baggage that comes with the flex option?

Your line of reasoning that winning is paramount, and everything else should be secondary excludes one very important fact: Choice. Fans have a choice. Recruits have a choice. Decision makers have a choice. Despite our winning, sidewalk fans are choosing other forms of entertainment besides GT, recruits are choosing to play in other winning systems besides GT's, and decision makers often choose other schools besides GT (ever wonder why GT gets all those noon games?). As GT fans, I think it's myopic for us to say "Well, as long as GT wins, we shouldn't factor in anything else." Here's the other thing. What happens when the winning stops? 2 losing seasons in the last 3 years is the worst stretch of football since the early 90's...since the name who shouldn't be spoken.

The idealism of "winning is the only thing that matters" is commendable, but in the sports world (which is really the business world now) it gets you in trouble. Idealism cost GT 3 decades of wandering the sports desert because Bobby Dodd cut GT's nose to spite its face. In some ways, we are still paying for that decision. The irony is, the reason for Dodd leaving (scholarship limits) was later instituted by SEC members a few years later. Bobby Dodd was a winner...but winning didn't help too much after that decision, did it? Instead of working within the SEC to get changes passed, Bobby Dodd and his idealism took his ball home and hurt GT in the process.

I like the effort and eloquence. But, the point is much simpler than all of this. Here's the simple question:
Do you hope we win more in order to bring in more fans?
OR, do you hope we bring in more fans so that we win more?

All that other crap is part of the reason why I have already lost (and continue to lose) a lot of my taste for college football. Honestly, if not for GT (or another place like it, like an Academy or the like), I would have already moved on from it like I have from the NFL. But, it's also what makes every stinkin' yard GT earns on the field or every tackle for loss they get feel like justice.

Oh, BTW, I love college wrestling too. I also wrestled in college for GT's club team my first two years. But, football is my first love because of the team, the camaraderie, the uses of all kinds of athletic talent, and all of the complex team-oriented strategy involved, that it has stars but it's bigger than any one person. I think that may be why people in general like it more. Wrestling IS more pure, but football is more magical.

 

[iceeater1969]

How is our attendence now vs. the Gailey years? Winning brings the fans, not the style of offense. In my opinion, GT's inability to follow up good seasons with anything other than bad to mediocre seasons is a bigger factor in our attendence.

If we have a 17 season in 18, that would be 3 out of 4 bad seasons. How do you think that would that affect fan support.?

 

[UgaBlows]

If we have a 17 season in 18, that would be 3 out of 4 bad seasons. How do you think that would that affect fan support.?

I think you know the answer, and i think CPJ would be gone

 

[RamblinWreck92]

Yep will take the 3O and its ups and downs every time of Chan's bore you to death offense. At least CPJ can beat the mutts more often the CCG. The 3O does help when playing teams with better talent.

That's a myth. The 3O hasn't helped against Clemson in several years nor did it help against the mutts this year nor Miami most years nor Iowa in the OB nor LSU in 2008.

This year's version was the most boring offense I've ever seen in college football that wasn't a service academy.

 

[RamblinWreck92]

If we have a 17 season in 18, that would be 3 out of 4 bad seasons. How do you think that would that affect fan support.?

I think we'll see the affected fan support in 2018, esp. if TQ is named the starter. Not much room for optimism if that happens.

 

[RonJohn]

You are correct. The Coastal was much much much stronger than it has been recently.

The ACC and Coastal teams in particular had as many good coaches, as many facilities, and as much financial support before 2000 as they do now?

 

[RonJohn]

I don't understand the arguments that GT's spread option is boring. High school teams that run the tight formation wing-t are boring. They try to get 4 yards every play for the whole game. I watched an entire game where a high school offense didn't make more than 7-8 yards on any play. They ran 13-20 play drives of 3-4 yards per play constantly. It was incredibly boring. That isn't GT's offense. GT gets 20-30-40-50 yard plays on QB keeps, pitches, passes, and even on BBack up the middle plays. Come up with almost any objective definition of exciting offense based on production and big plays and GT's offense meets it.