Willie Fritz and the spread option

[vamosjackets]

He was talking about decent recruiting results, and a lot of the results you did talk about were during 08-09 on the back of recruits that were recruited by others. No matter how many different ways you say it, 08, 09, and 14 were just 3 years. We had one notable year with Johnson having his own recruits. It was a great year. It was also a fluke.



You listed a ton of names of people who hadn't proven anything. We weren't set up to be great on offense again. We were closer to being set up for another 2015. Also, Braun was gone regardless.

To say 2014 was a fluke is a logic-less, unprovable statement. So, when we won 9 games and beat UGA in 16, was that a "semi-fluke"? Don't you hate it when that happens?

Braun wasn't gone regardless. He decided and announced his decision to leave a few weeks after our new coach came in. You can believe he was gone regardless, and there's no way he would ever say differently because he's a classy guy from a classy family, but there is no way he leaves for his senior year after starting 3 years in this offense.

 

[lv20gt]

To say 2014 was a fluke is a logic-less, unprovable statement. So, when we won 9 games and beat UGA in 16, was that a "semi-fluke"? I bet you hated that didn't you?

Braun wasn't gone regardless. He decided and announced his decision to leave a few weeks after our new coach came in. You can believe he was gone regardless, and there's no way he would ever say differently because he's a classy guy from a classy family, but there is no way he leaves for his senior year after starting 3 years in this offense.

Logicless and unprovable is your statement about us being set up for a monster year with the option had it returned. 2014 was a clear outlier. No other year under Johnson outside of 09 was close to it and it took a convergence of several lucky breaks to make that year what it was including an injury forcing a better running back to play turning around a season that was headed for mediocrity. That's a fluke and wasn't going to happen again.

2016 wasn't a fluke. It was just a normal up year like 06 was for Gailey. Beating a 7-5 UGA team doesn't make it special just because you have a little brother syndrome. It wasn't close to 2014.

 

[TheTechGuy]

He was talking about decent recruiting results, and a lot of the results you did talk about were during 08-09 on the back of recruits that were recruited by others. No matter how many different ways you say it, 08, 09, and 14 were just 3 years. We had one notable year with Johnson having his own recruits. It was a great year. It was also a fluke.



You listed a ton of names of people who hadn't proven anything. We weren't set up to be great on offense again. We were closer to being set up for another 2015. Also, Braun was gone regardless.

A GT fan calls one of the greatest years in program history a "fluke" - peak GT fandom.

If you're not going to give credit to Johnson for 08 or 09, how do you credit Collins for his experience/successes when he has rarely been at the same school/position for more than a couple of years? If you can't fully credit Collins for those successes, what is the foundation for hiring him?

 

[Pointer]

Logicless and unprovable is your statement about us being set up for a monster year with the option had it returned. 2014 was a clear outlier. No other year under Johnson outside of 09 was close to it and it took a convergence of several lucky breaks to make that year what it was including an injury forcing a better running back to play turning around a season that was headed for mediocrity. That's a fluke and wasn't going to happen again.

2016 wasn't a fluke. It was just a normal up year like 06 was for Gailey. Beating a 7-5 UGA team doesn't make it special just because you have a little brother syndrome. It wasn't close to 2014.

I'm sorry but this whole post is a joke.

 

[Pointer]

A GT fan calls one of the greatest years in program history a "fluke" - peak GT fandom.

If you're not going to give credit to Johnson for 08 or 09, how do you credit Collins for his experience/successes when he has rarely been at the same school/position for more than a couple of years? If you can't fully credit Collins for those successes, what is the foundation for hiring him?

Great question!

 

[lv20gt]

If you're not going to give credit to Johnson for 08 or 09, how do you credit Collins for his experience/successes when he has rarely been at the same school/position for more than a couple of years? If you can't fully credit Collins for those successes, what is the foundation for hiring him?

I didn't say I don't give him credit. I said he did it with others recruits. He got the most out of a great class, but he wasn't the one who brought in that great class, and he didn't bring in one close to it. 08-09 is not support for the claim of getting good recruiting results with the option.

 

[LongforDodd]

As much as I hate to say it, I think we are going to be begging for a coach to get 9 wins in 2 years...

You and a few others don't seem to hate it as much as you think.

 

[smokey_wasp]

I don't think of myself as an "option-loyalist", though I can see why you would think of me that way. I do think that it has indisputable schematic/mathematical advantages, which is why I really like it. But, if there was a scheme that produced the same or better with equal talent, I'd like that scheme just as much. If someone wanted to bring Mike Leach or a Mike Leach protege here because they felt it gave us a scheme that would be to our advantage, I'd be completely on board with that. I certainly wouldn't be able to argue against it because the data back up that argument. (Side note: This was also why I really liked the Nate Woody hire - his scheme is extremely different than any other out there in college football and it had proven to be extremely effective over a long period of time, which is why I think it could've been very good here. That doesn't make me a "Slant-50 loyalist".)

If we're going to try to win by out-recruiting everyone (and I would love it if we could do that) I would have to question the sense in that approach.

Genuine question with hope for fruitful discussion: Do you think we're going to be able to win by out-recruiting everyone?

Loyalist was probably the wrong term for you. Option enthusiast, perhaps?

I think there is a lot of extreme thinking around here. Are we going to out-recruit "everyone"? No, but there are plenty of teams we should be out-recruiting, but haven't been. Nor are we going to out-scheme everyone. Recent results vs Clemson and uga bear that out.

I think the plan is get some top 25-ish classes in here, innovate with player development, and hopefully get our baseline back to what it was during the O'Leary years with the potential for a special year here and there if the stars align.

 

[MWBATL]

If we're going to try to win by out-recruiting everyone (and I would love it if we could do that) I would have to question the sense in that approach.

Genuine question with hope for fruitful discussion: Do you think we're going to be able to win by out-recruiting everyone?

No, nope, never gonna happen. GT Admin prides itself too much in the academic glory to ever allow us to make the type of exceptions it would take to compete for the best recruits.

Our only hope is some combination of good recruiting (not great, but good) and very good coaching (both to develop the recruits we do get, and schematically) in order to compete with the big boys. We can hope that the big boys hire coaches who rely solely on the talent of their highly rated recruits without also leveraging their development and better schemes. But BOTH will be necessary for us to really win big.

 

[vamosjackets]

including an injury forcing a better running back to play turning around a season that was headed for mediocrity. That's a fluke and wasn't going to happen again.

Are you talking about when Synjyn Days was injured in the Ugag game forcing Zach Laskey to come in and rush for 140 yds and 3 TD's mostly in the 2nd half? Yep, talk about a lucky break for CPJ. Where would we have been without that guy???

And, you think it's logic-less to think that a couple of 4* QB's would'be been an improvement at the QB position over Taquan Marshall? (If so, that contradicts your whole recruiting-centric argument against the option.) and logic-less to think that 21 year old Benson/Mason/Howard would've been an improvement over 19 year old Benson/Mason/Howard and the same said for the 5 OL guys and the WR's?

Do you think we're going to win by out-recruiting everyone?

 

[gthxxxx]

No, nope, never gonna happen. GT Admin prides itself too much in the academic glory to ever allow us to make the type of exceptions it would take to compete for the best recruits.

Our only hope is some combination of good recruiting (not great, but good) and very good coaching (both to develop the recruits we do get, and schematically) in order to compete with the big boys. We can hope that the big boys hire coaches who rely solely on the talent of their highly rated recruits without also leveraging their development and better schemes. But BOTH will be necessary for us to really win big.

I'm reading that the big boys means the football factories. So you're hoping that the football factories do a half job at what they've prioritize, while you expect GT whose priority is academics (funny that for a university) to beat them at their game?

 

[vamosjackets]

Loyalist was probably the wrong term for you. Option enthusiast, perhaps?

I think there is a lot of extreme thinking around here. Are we going to out-recruit "everyone"? No, but there are plenty of teams we should be out-recruiting, but haven't been. Nor are we going to out-scheme everyone. Recent results vs Clemson and uga bear that out.

I think the plan is get some top 25-ish classes in here, innovate with player development, and hopefully get our baseline back to what it was during the O'Leary years with the potential for a special year here and there if the stars align.

O'Leary's # of yearly wins at GT: 6, 5, 7, 10, 8, 9, 7. I would see the O'Leary years as very similar to the CPJ years. Do you see them as being very different "baseline and potential-special year" wise?

We're not going to out-recruit UGA and Clemson, nor are we going to out-spend, out-develop, or out-coach them. With CPJ/Monken, again, if we have a couple of key pieces, we could out-scheme and out-play them ... because we could "out-recruit" them for what we do ... for a special option-QB and a drive-blocking OG and backs that could excel at their specialized positions and 6'5" WRs that somehow CPJ was able to grow in a lab. And, the option play-calling could neutralize a lot of their uber-talented defensive personnel. It was about out-scheming, but not just that, it was about getting players who could do what they do better than the other guys trying to stop it.

With a couple of top-25 classes, where does that take us? Are our coaches that much better than others to be able to get to the top? Or, are we just shooting for top-25?

 

[Jim Prather]

You and a few others don't seem to hate it as much as you think.

I hate it enough that I have had to quit watching our games and am not watching another game this season - it will be the only way (other than venting here) that I will keep my sanity.
I'll try plugging back in next year and hope it will be better...

 

[vamosjackets]

No, nope, never gonna happen. GT Admin prides itself too much in the academic glory to ever allow us to make the type of exceptions it would take to compete for the best recruits.

Our only hope is some combination of good recruiting (not great, but good) and very good coaching (both to develop the recruits we do get, and schematically) in order to compete with the big boys. We can hope that the big boys hire coaches who rely solely on the talent of their highly rated recruits without also leveraging their development and better schemes. But BOTH will be necessary for us to really win big.

I agree BOTH are necessary in some way. But, to base our plan of success on the "hope that the big boys hire coaches who rely solely oon the talent of their highly rated recruits without also leveraging their development and better schemes" seems like a really terrible hope. We're running the same exact schemes they are. And, we're doing the same work-out schedules they are (but they have better facilities ... though I don't think that makes much difference in player development, otherwise Rocky never would've beaten Ivan Drago).

 

[smokey_wasp]

O'Leary's # of yearly wins at GT: 6, 5, 7, 10, 8, 9, 7. I would see the O'Leary years as very similar to the CPJ years. Do you see them as being very different "baseline and potential-special year" wise?

We're not going to out-recruit UGA and Clemson, nor are we going to out-spend, out-develop, or out-coach them. With CPJ/Monken, again, if we have a couple of key pieces, we could out-scheme and out-play them ... because we could "out-recruit" them for what we do ... for a special option-QB and a drive-blocking OG and backs that could excel at their specialized positions and 6'5" WRs that somehow CPJ was able to grow in a lab. And, the option play-calling could neutralize a lot of their uber-talented defensive personnel. It was about out-scheming, but not just that, it was about getting players who could do what they do better than the other guys trying to stop it.

With a couple of top-25 classes, where does that take us? Are our coaches that much better than others to be able to get to the top? Or, are we just shooting for top-25?

I'd take out those first 2 years (transition) and say, yeah, 7, 10, 8, 9, 7 and all 5 years being ranked in the top 25 in at least one poll is a superior run, IMO.

I think you and I have a different idea of just how much of a talent disparity the option could overcome. I just don't think CPJ was ever going to consistently get the players he would need to make your dream scenario work. Case in point: the dual threat QB's who could have dominated in his system had no interest in playing in it.

I think our potential upside with improved recruiting is unknown. Top 25 classes are the starting point, but if we get this thing rolling, top 15 classes are possible. At that point, we'd only need a slight edge in coaching or development to go over the top.

You mentioned Leach earlier, and I have to say he was my first choice as an offensive innovator whose pass-heavy scheme is not anathema to recruits. But that's not the direction we went. And I am actually fine with that, because his defenses are also atrocious, and I like the fact that we are focusing on that side of the ball.

 

[JacketOff]

B

To say 2014 was a fluke is a logic-less, unprovable statement. So, when we won 9 games and beat UGA in 16, was that a "semi-fluke"? Don't you hate it when that happens?

Braun wasn't gone regardless. He decided and announced his decision to leave a few weeks after our new coach came in. You can believe he was gone regardless, and there's no way he would ever say differently because he's a classy guy from a classy family, but there is no way he leaves for his senior year after starting 3 years in this offense.

Braun is a potential NFL lineman who already got his degree from GT that will set him up for life regardless of how his football career ends up. Do you actually believe that he would have 100% stayed if CPJ was back in an offense that wouldn’t show any of his ability to play on Sundays? On a team that might’ve been in the middle of the pack in the ACC, with basically no national media attention? Or do you think he would rather go to a nationally recognized program with a legitimate shot to play in the CFP or a NY6 bowl game, and have NFL scouts lining up at the door. Choose to believe what you want, but if you don’t think he would’ve even considered going elsewhere you’re full of it.

 

[lv20gt]

And, you think it's logic-less to think that a couple of 4* QB's would'be been an improvement at the QB position over Taquan Marshall?

It's logicless to assume that a 4* freshman will automatically be better than a multi year starter.

(If so, that contradicts your whole recruiting-centric argument against the option.)

No it doesn't. 4*s in general will be better than 3* with the same amount of experience. That doesn't mean a team of 4*s but all freshmen will be better than a team of all 3*s who are seniors. But eventually those 4*s will also have the experience. I would expect Graham to be better than Marshall once he got experience. He didn't have it though.

that 21 year old Benson/Mason/Howard would've been an improvement over 19 year old Benson/Mason/Howard

They will be better. It's logicless to assume that means we would have been enough to make a monster season when factoring in the rest.

e same said for the 5 OL guys and the WR's?

The OL had issues last year, and had a couple departures, including it's best member. I know you want to have your head in the sand about Braun, but he was gone regardless.

WRs did all of nothing last year and there is no logic to think they would be any different this year with the option.

We also lost a lot of experience at Aback.

The offense would have been servicible, unless it had the same OL injury luck in which case it would be 2015 again, but it wasn't going to be a monster year..

 

[Madison Grant]

B

Braun is a potential NFL lineman who already got his degree from GT that will set him up for life regardless of how his football career ends up. Do you actually believe that he would have 100% stayed if CPJ was back in an offense that wouldn’t show any of his ability to play on Sundays? On a team that might’ve been in the middle of the pack in the ACC, with basically no national media attention? Or do you think he would rather go to a nationally recognized program with a legitimate shot to play in the CFP or a NY6 bowl game, and have NFL scouts lining up at the door. Choose to believe what you want, but if you don’t think he would’ve even considered going elsewhere you’re full of it.

I think where his brother's committed speaks louder than words.

 

[JacketOff]

I think where his brother's committed speaks louder than words.

100%. Once again, choosing not to play for a middling ACC team with a mediocre fan base and average to below average facilities, and instead going somewhere with a rabid (literally) fan base that’s nationally recognized and is competing for championships. I wish he would’ve chosen Tech, but there’s really no reason he should.

 

[pbrown520]

I'd take out those first 2 years (transition) and say, yeah, 7, 10, 8, 9, 7 and all 5 years being ranked in the top 25 in at least one poll is a superior run, IMO.

I think you and I have a different idea of just how much of a talent disparity the option could overcome. I just don't think CPJ was ever going to consistently get the players he would need to make your dream scenario work. Case in point: the dual threat QB's who could have dominated in his system had no interest in playing in it.

I think our potential upside with improved recruiting is unknown. Top 25 classes are the starting point, but if we get this thing rolling, top 15 classes are possible. At that point, we'd only need a slight edge in coaching or development to go over the top.

You mentioned Leach earlier, and I have to say he was my first choice as an offensive innovator whose pass-heavy scheme is not anathema to recruits. But that's not the direction we went. And I am actually fine with that, because his defenses are also atrocious, and I like the fact that we are focusing on that side of the ball.

I'm sorry, but we should never have been ranked as a 7 win team - it's why the polls are garbage, by the same token 2016 should have been ranked as a 9 win team.