" We are gonnna run the ball." Paul Johnson

[GTRX7]

How about we just focus on moving the ball and if we can do it by running great. If it requires the forward pass I hope we're more ready to do that this week than last.

I hope we have less than 10 passing attempts. Iv20gt, I know this is a crusade for you and something you bring up with extreme regularity, but I just don't agree with you. I have posted statistics before on this. If you look at GTs biggest wins since PJ has been here, the biggest wins virtually all involve us attempting 10 or fewer passes. Now, I grant you that we tend to have more pass attempts when the rush is not working, which goes to your argument, but it is very notable that the opposite is not true. We have very few major wins where we even attempted 10 or more passes. We are simply best when we are running effectively and nothing shows that lots of passing attempts necessarily help us do that or that lots of success in the passing game correlates with big victories at GT. We attempted 24 passes last week, and I thought that was way too many.

The UGA and FSU games last year are interesting studies. Last year, we went 6 for 14 passing in the first half against UGA and scored 7 points. In the second half, we attempted only 2 passes, and scored 17 points. FSU was the reverse. We scored 21 points in the first half while only throwing a single pass (with 2 more pass attempts coming at the end of the half in the 1-minute drill). In the second half, we went 6 for 11 and scored only 14 pts, including a costly pick.

Now, if your argument is that the coaching staff should just make sure the team is one of the best rushing offenses and passing offenses in the nation, sure, I agree. However, I also think that is unrealistic and believe that the effort/practice time it would take to make us significantly better in passing would not be worth the trade-off of less effort/practice time focused on our bread and butter run offense.

I just see zero evidence that passing for the sake of passing helps us win. Running our base offense and making our blocking assignments is what we need to focus on most.

 

[Yaller Jacket]

I don't think he was irritated, I thought he was making a joke. Others seemed to be laughing along with him.

Maybe irritated isn't the right word. More like determined, emphatic. And yes, gtg, I think you got the quote right. I couldn't remember exactly how he expressed it.

 

[lv20gt]

I just see zero evidence that passing for the sake of passing helps us win. Running our base offense and making our blocking assignments is what we need to focus on most.

It's not passing for the sake of passing. It's having a competent passing game for the sake of being able to have success on offense even when opponents limit the running game, because every year we have a game, or sometimes more, where that happens. Where we can't win just running it, and need a passing game, and more often than not we lose those games because our passing game is woefully underdeveloped.

And your stats come straight from the no duh vault. Our passing game sucks. Of course then our success comes when we have success running the ball, and when we have to pass a lot we struggle. That's not support that we shouldn't be passing. It's support that we should develop a better passing game.

We didn't lose because we passed the ball 24 times against ND. We lost because we couldn't pass the ball competently. Same as Duke last year. Against FSU your stats are misleading. 8 of our 11 passes came when we were down 2 scores with under 5 to go, forcing us to pass, and 6 came on the final drive that ended up in a TD. The other 3 passes that half were 3rd and 8 incompletion, a 4th and 5 incompletion, and a first down catch. Passing too much in the second half was not why we only scored 14. And of course that game demonstrates the problem that we never really pass much until our offense is struggling and we're not in good positions to begin with, which is why so many of our big wins have us passing less.

 

[GTRX7]

It's not passing for the sake of passing. It's having a competent passing game for the sake of being able to have success on offense even when opponents limit the running game, because every year we have a game, or sometimes more, where that happens. Where we can't win just running it, and need a passing game, and more often than not we lose those games because our passing game is woefully underdeveloped.

And your stats come straight from the no duh vault. Our passing game sucks. Of course then our success comes when we have success running the ball, and when we have to pass a lot we struggle. That's not support that we shouldn't be passing. It's support that we should develop a better passing game.

We didn't lose because we passed the ball 24 times against ND. We lost because we couldn't pass the ball competently. Same as Duke last year. Against FSU your stats are misleading. 8 of our 11 passes came when we were down 2 scores with under 5 to go, forcing us to pass, and 6 came on the final drive that ended up in a TD. The other 3 passes that half were 3rd and 8 incompletion, a 4th and 5 incompletion, and a first down catch. Passing too much in the second half was not why we only scored 14. And of course that game demonstrates the problem that we never really pass much until our offense is struggling and we're not in good positions to begin with, which is why so many of our big wins have us passing less.

We may not have lost last week because we threw the ball 24 times, but I am 100% convinced we would have done better had we passed it less. Same for UGA first half. As soon as we cut the crap out and stuck to our base offense, we improved. We need some sort of passing threat, but I don't think that means passing more. As others have said, just work on the efficiency. I think our scheme does that (shown by us near the national lead in efficiency most years).

To say that we would have done better against ND had we passed better is to miss the point. It would have been tough for us to pass well against ND with our young receivers vs. their secondary even if we ran UGA's offense. The real point is that we would have done better against ND had we kept our assignments and made our blocks. That is the correction that needs to be made, not restructuring the passing game.

Would it be better if we had a better passing game when the rushing game isn't working? Sure. Would it be great if we were a top passing team in the country? Absolutely. However, to do that, we would need to divert effort/practice time from our bread and butter rushing offense. That is a trade-off, and I don't see it being worth while. We have proven we can win the biggest games when the rushing game is working and that is what we should aim for. The old phrase "a team that has two quarterbacks has zero quarterbacks" comes to mind. Try to do too much well and we may end up doing nothing well.

 

[lv20gt]

You don't just work on efficiency. Efficiency comes from repetition, both in practice and in games, and a well designed passing attack, something we don't do/have. We will never have an efficient passing game capable of winning the ND type of games on a consistent basis until our staff changes it's approach to that aspect of the game. And as long as that is true, we will never play in the real biggest game.

Your underlines point again is a no duh moment. Might as well say we'd have done better if we could have run the ball. WHAT IS YOUR PLAN WHEN THE RUNNING GAME DOES NOT WORK? It's a simple question and right now the answer is we lose because we either run well, or we don't win the vast majority of the time. And if our running game requires so much time and repetition that we don't have enough left to develop a competent passing game then we will continue to lose at least one, and probably more, games per year because of the subpar passing game.

Maybe eventually we'll recruit well enough that those type of games never happen or we'll have Bama's defense. But until that happens, and I'm not holding my breath, we will continue to lose games every year because of a lack of even an average passing game.

 

[Boomergump]

It is amazing to me that we are prattling on about we need to do this more, or that more, or this better, or that better, considering we just set an all time record for offensive efficiency last season. No team in the history of the game (since the stat was invented a decade or so ago) even came close. Man, those teams who throw better must be miserable that they can't move the ball as well as we do. Look, I am not going to say we can't do any phase of offensive football better. ANYTHING can be improved upon. But let's at least acknowledge how prolific our offense has become. One sloppy game in South Bend doesn't change that.

 

[LarryMunson]

I've listened to a "few" shows. IMHO, this was CPJ laughing at all the callers over the years who ask "what are yall gonna do against X Saturday?"

 

[Captain killem]

Passing well, It's kinda like whooping youngins if you do it right you don't have to often

 

[Eastman]

I never have been too concerned about our offense and our defense certainly appears superior to last year. My concern is things out of our control such as injuries, refs and ball bounces. Let's stomp Dook!

 

[awbuzz]

After listening to the recording I came away with the impression that he was just "having some fun" with the comment.

Passing for passing's sake is just BS.

If we execute - especially blocking - properly, then things will fall into place. That includes both the RUNNING and PASSING game.

 

[Declinometer]

Wow! Déjà u !

 

[GTRX7]

You don't just work on efficiency. Efficiency comes from repetition, both in practice and in games, and a well designed passing attack, something we don't do/have. We will never have an efficient passing game capable of winning the ND type of games on a consistent basis until our staff changes it's approach to that aspect of the game. And as long as that is true, we will never play in the real biggest game.

Your underlines point again is a no duh moment. Might as well say we'd have done better if we could have run the ball. WHAT IS YOUR PLAN WHEN THE RUNNING GAME DOES NOT WORK? It's a simple question and right now the answer is we lose because we either run well, or we don't win the vast majority of the time. And if our running game requires so much time and repetition that we don't have enough left to develop a competent passing game then we will continue to lose at least one, and probably more, games per year because of the subpar passing game.

Maybe eventually we'll recruit well enough that those type of games never happen or we'll have Bama's defense. But until that happens, and I'm not holding my breath, we will continue to lose games every year because of a lack of even an average passing game.

You are clearly missing my point, so I will try one more time. You ask, what is my plan when the running game does not work?

The answer: work on the running game to get it to work. That is the point. Clearly, our offensive scheme is capable of beating ANYBODY. Period. The system works. If executed, it works. If it is not being executed well, you don't throw the baby out with the bath water and try something new. You figure out why it is not working and you fix it. You don't waste your time overhauling a passing game. You focus on your system, fix the missed assignments and the missed blocks and get the running game working. We beat Clemson, UGA, Miss St. and almost FSU within a single five week period last year with the system. The system works. What is keeping us from "the real biggest game" is not more passing, it is: (1a) minimizing mistakes and (1b) closing the large talent gap with all the other programs that regularly compete in the "real biggest game."

If there was evidence that there was a fatal flaw in the system (as opposed to poor execution and lack of talent), I would agree that we need the type of overhaul that you describe. But that isn't the case. It is beyond argument at this point to anyone objective that the system works. We have beaten all of the top teams with it and are winning at near historic rates for GT. Sorry that we are not Alabama and don't win by 30pts every week. Wait, Alabama lost last week? Saban's system is flawed. Change it!!!!

 

[iceeater1969]

NFL -- megaton, d Thomas, steven hill , smelter, etc in past.

By way at Orange bowl we needed the pass threat to get the space to run.

NOW - We just don't have the WR potion up and running to be much of a threat.

We need to give the WR some time and hope by end of year we are back to having a threat ( not loose single coverage on WR)

 

[thwgjacket]

**** em, run it. Shove it down Cutcliffe's throat.

 

[GTBandit22]

PJ:

 

[PBR549]

Our receivers and A backs were out manned in the passing game on Saturday which caused us issues in the running game. We knew coming in that we were young and inexperienced there and it really hurts loosing Summers. Give the other guys some time. Most secondaries will not be as talented as ND. Hopefully we can develop as we go along.

 

[Yaller Jacket]

I've listened to a "few" shows. IMHO, this was CPJ laughing at all the callers over the years who ask "what are yall gonna do against X Saturday?"

I think this is probably it. I have listened to almost all of them, and thinking about PJ and the audience and how the show goes and everything, this just seems right.

 

[lv20gt]

You are clearly missing my point, so I will try one more time. You ask, what is my plan when the running game does not work?

The answer: work on the running game to get it to work.

So what work on the running game more than we have in the past? Because that much work didn't prevent the ND game from happening. And it hasn't prevented the games like it that happen every year. Making the running game better doesn't help in those cases that the running game isn't working. And unfortunately those games don't look like they are going away.

 

[PBR549]

So what work on the running game more than we have in the past? Because that much work didn't prevent the ND game from happening. And it hasn't prevented the games like it that happen every year. Making the running game better doesn't help in those cases that the running game isn't working. And unfortunately those games don't look like they are going away.

Those games were here when we passed alot more also. The difference is we have a system that has been more successful for us than any in recent history. So you want to scrap this system for a passing offense? That doesn't make much sense to me. Every coach has their system and it's hard to argue with the success CPJ has had with this one. Did it look good last week, no, but neither did many passing offenses across the country. No offense looks great when you don't execute. We'll move on and hope to get better like we did last year. CPJ is not going to change nor should he!

 

[lv20gt]

So you want to scrap this system for a passing offense?

The rest of your post isn't worth responding to with such a blatant strawman.