(10-16-2017 06:26 PM)asuwon Wrote:  IMO, as long as Georgia Southern insists on running the triple option, I don't see them winning in the FBS, at anywhere close to the same clip they did in the FCS.

We went 14-2 in conference the first two years, and Navy wins in the AAC, but we somehow can't win now? Why?

(10-16-2017 06:26 PM)asuwon Wrote:  IMO, as long as Georgia Southern insists on running the triple option, I don't see them winning in the FBS, at anywhere close to the same clip they did in the FCS.

Lmao I love this argument

(10-16-2017 06:37 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 06:26 PM)asuwon Wrote:  IMO, as long as Georgia Southern insists on running the triple option, I don't see them winning in the FBS, at anywhere close to the same clip they did in the FCS.

We went 14-2 in conference the first two years, and Navy wins in the AAC, but we somehow can't win now? Why?

First, let me say that I love watching well executed triple option football. stAte ran the TO for years, but there's a reason so few teams run it now. Football has evolved past the triple option days of football.

To answer your question, I believe that FBS teams have more team speed on defense, allowing them to string the play out to the sideline. FBS teams also have better defensive coaching. It's not an offense that allows for quick comeback capability when a team gets down early.

And, Georgia Southern isn't Navy.

(10-16-2017 06:50 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 06:26 PM)asuwon Wrote:  IMO, as long as Georgia Southern insists on running the triple option, I don't see them winning in the FBS, at anywhere close to the same clip they did in the FCS.

Lmao I love this argument

I know.

I felt the same way when stAte ran the TO.

I wouldn't trade what we have now, to go back to the TO for anything.

(10-16-2017 06:54 PM)asuwon Wrote:  First, let me say that I love watching well executed triple option football. stAte ran the TO for years, but there's a reason so few teams run it now. Football has evolved past the triple option days of football.

To answer your question, I believe that FBS teams have more team speed on defense, allowing them to string the play out to the sideline. FBS teams also have better defensive coaching. It's not an offense that allows for quick comeback capability when a team gets down early.

[quote='asuwon' pid='14685154' dateline='1508198054']
And, Georgia Southern isn't Navy.

Want to know why so few teams run it?

First, there's not a whole lot of coaches out there that run it...it's a fairly small network of coaches, though it's gradually getting larger. Back in 2009 Jeff Monken was the only coach that could run the offense we had to choose from. Now there's a pipeline of coaches at several FCS schools to choose from.

Second, most fan bases don't want to see it, because they're the exact opposite of our fan base....dogmatic and believing that somehow it can't work because defenses are too fast (is there some kind of rule that you can't put fast players on offense?) or whatever dumb cliche they're parroting from some sports pundit who likely knows nothing about the offense. Even the vast majority of FCS schools don't run it.

And like I said, somehow despite the supposed "evolution" of college football we led the country in rushing yards and produced one of the top offenses in the Sun Belt.

And what makes Navy so special, anyways? Are there athletes so amazingly above the rest of the AAC that despite the fact that the game has "evolved beyond it" they can still win most of their games like they have?

(10-16-2017 07:22 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 06:54 PM)asuwon Wrote:  First, let me say that I love watching well executed triple option football. stAte ran the TO for years, but there's a reason so few teams run it now. Football has evolved past the triple option days of football.

To answer your question, I believe that FBS teams have more team speed on defense, allowing them to string the play out to the sideline. FBS teams also have better defensive coaching. It's not an offense that allows for quick comeback capability when a team gets down early.

[quote='asuwon' pid='14685154' dateline='1508198054']
And, Georgia Southern isn't Navy.

Want to know why so few teams run it?

First, there's not a whole lot of coaches out there that run it...it's a fairly small network of coaches, though it's gradually getting larger. Back in 2009 Jeff Monken was the only coach that could run the offense we had to choose from. Now there's a pipeline of coaches at several FCS schools to choose from.

Second, most fan bases don't want to see it, because they're the exact opposite of our fan base....dogmatic and believing that somehow it can't work because defenses are too fast (is there some kind of rule that you can't put fast players on offense?) or whatever dumb cliche they're parroting from some sports pundit who likely knows nothing about the offense. Even the vast majority of FCS schools don't run it.

And like I said, somehow despite the supposed "evolution" of college football we led the country in rushing yards and produced one of the top offenses in the Sun Belt.

And what makes Navy so special, anyways? Are there athletes so amazingly above the rest of the AAC that despite the fact that the game has "evolved beyond it" they can still win most of their games like they have?

I have little doubt we'd become a force again, at least worthy of consistently cracking the 7 win mark (and bowl eligibility) with our brand of the T/O.

The service academies benefit from having disciplined squads, and when they get equivalent talent they can really put it together.

If there is ONE thing that we have virtually NONE of right now it is discipline. Our better teams oozed it out of every single pore. I put that squarely on the coaching.

I'd rather us be in a position of being bowl eligible and wondering if a specific yearly edition of the team is a 8,9,10 or 11 win candidate ... than wondering if we can hold a lead for an entire quarter or be poised to win a half, etc, etc.

As for being in position to come from behind, for the better part of the last 30+ years our teams were front running and being behind was the exception, not the norm. Maybe the law of averages or some completely unrelated quirk is causing us to be 0-5 with wins scarce on the horizon ... or maybe it is just bad coaching.

(10-16-2017 01:51 PM)panama Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 07:08 AM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 12:24 AM)SBEagle Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 12:02 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-14-2017 10:38 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  So, you're basically chalking it up to luck? I guess we just didn't realize how the planets were aligned in our favor what with all of our SoCon players and 10+ scholarship differential with the other teams in the Belt.

I guess our Sun Belt peer school App State's 23-4 (?) conference record is also a huge fluke. Both teams just got really lucky.

AState is 22-4 in league since 2014. I am fairly confident App is basically right at the same number. Not sure.

In that time period, no other team has come close to challenging those two. Georgia Southern had a couple good years, and Troy has had a couple good years, but no one has been consistently as good.

The wolves record has nothing to do with the transition to FBS of App and Southern. Not sure why you bring this up? We know what you've done.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

But youre not App. Just like we arent USA or UTSA or any of those schools that we came up with. Cam Southern bounce back? Sure. When will they? Could be next year.... could be 20...
We have our 1st winning record in October since 2010. I'm not wishing that upon anyone, but it isn't just the right coach. It is the right AD and coach. Just the right coach and you have a Fritz situation.

Right President, AD, coach and Foundation Trustees. Everyone has to work in concert and agree on how much time and money to invest. Can have the best HC in the world but someone needs to agree to write the checks and it works vice versa.

Also comparisons do not work. GS is its own school with its own institutional support located in its own part of it's own state with its own problems.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

We certainly have our own problems right now and I wouldn't wish this on anyone. Well, except maybe App :)

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

(10-16-2017 07:22 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 06:54 PM)asuwon Wrote:  First, let me say that I love watching well executed triple option football. stAte ran the TO for years, but there's a reason so few teams run it now. Football has evolved past the triple option days of football.

To answer your question, I believe that FBS teams have more team speed on defense, allowing them to string the play out to the sideline. FBS teams also have better defensive coaching. It's not an offense that allows for quick comeback capability when a team gets down early.

[quote='asuwon' pid='14685154' dateline='1508198054']
And, Georgia Southern isn't Navy.

Want to know why so few teams run it?

First, there's not a whole lot of coaches out there that run it...it's a fairly small network of coaches, though it's gradually getting larger. Back in 2009 Jeff Monken was the only coach that could run the offense we had to choose from. Now there's a pipeline of coaches at several FCS schools to choose from.

Second, most fan bases don't want to see it, because they're the exact opposite of our fan base....dogmatic and believing that somehow it can't work because defenses are too fast (is there some kind of rule that you can't put fast players on offense?) or whatever dumb cliche they're parroting from some sports pundit who likely knows nothing about the offense. Even the vast majority of FCS schools don't run it.

And like I said, somehow despite the supposed "evolution" of college football we led the country in rushing yards and produced one of the top offenses in the Sun Belt.

And what makes Navy so special, anyways? Are there athletes so amazingly above the rest of the AAC that despite the fact that the game has "evolved beyond it" they can still win most of their games like they have?

Speaking of dogmatic . . . good luck recruiting in FBS with that craptastic offense.

(10-16-2017 08:56 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 07:22 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 06:54 PM)asuwon Wrote:  First, let me say that I love watching well executed triple option football. stAte ran the TO for years, but there's a reason so few teams run it now. Football has evolved past the triple option days of football.

To answer your question, I believe that FBS teams have more team speed on defense, allowing them to string the play out to the sideline. FBS teams also have better defensive coaching. It's not an offense that allows for quick comeback capability when a team gets down early.

[quote='asuwon' pid='14685154' dateline='1508198054']
And, Georgia Southern isn't Navy.

Want to know why so few teams run it?

First, there's not a whole lot of coaches out there that run it...it's a fairly small network of coaches, though it's gradually getting larger. Back in 2009 Jeff Monken was the only coach that could run the offense we had to choose from. Now there's a pipeline of coaches at several FCS schools to choose from.

Second, most fan bases don't want to see it, because they're the exact opposite of our fan base....dogmatic and believing that somehow it can't work because defenses are too fast (is there some kind of rule that you can't put fast players on offense?) or whatever dumb cliche they're parroting from some sports pundit who likely knows nothing about the offense. Even the vast majority of FCS schools don't run it.

And like I said, somehow despite the supposed "evolution" of college football we led the country in rushing yards and produced one of the top offenses in the Sun Belt.

And what makes Navy so special, anyways? Are there athletes so amazingly above the rest of the AAC that despite the fact that the game has "evolved beyond it" they can still win most of their games like they have?

Speaking of dogmatic . . . good luck recruiting in FBS with that craptastic offense.

Catch 22

New coach will never be given 5 years for an overhaul.

Nobody will ever be allowed to change the offense

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(10-16-2017 01:27 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 01:06 PM)The4thOption Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 07:50 AM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  I have a question. Why does the new coach HAVE to run triple option? only so few programs and coaches run it. I suppose GT does make it work, but they will never win the National Championship with triple option.

Maybe steal the coach from Kennesaw State. He seems like a good program builder

Imagine that offense turned lose on the FBS stage WITHOUT the recruiting restrictions of a service academy or academic restraints of keeping players eligible while passing "rocket surgery" at GA Tech....

Since 2015 Tech hasn't had the 20% exemption restriction. The president gave him the green light to recruit whoever he wants as long as they pass the NCAA's requirement. So technically it is easier to be accepted and play at Tech than our 2 schools.

Try keeping them eligible, take a look at the required courses for all Tech students.

(10-16-2017 01:52 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 01:06 PM)The4thOption Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 07:50 AM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  I have a question. Why does the new coach HAVE to run triple option? only so few programs and coaches run it. I suppose GT does make it work, but they will never win the National Championship with triple option.

Maybe steal the coach from Kennesaw State. He seems like a good program builder

Well that's a big pile of you have no idea.
Lots of schools will never win a national championship.
If GT doesn't, it won't be because the offense didn't score enough points. You are way too sure for such a guess.

GT is a hair and a toenail from being 5&0 and a top 10 ranking. When/if they win the ACC and get into a playoff, they are going to be hell to rekon with on a week or two notice. My money would be on PJ and company. But what do I know, I've only followed that offensive tree and all it's branches for thirty years.

You want to talk about consistently winning?
There is your answer. And if not winning a national championship is your main argument against it then I'd ask you who from the Sunbelt had won that title with a different offense? It's a our BEST path to constantly winning period. How many G5 programs can claim the winning percentage of Navy since PJ installed it there?
What is PJs winning percentage at GT versus his modern era counter parts?

Imagine that offense turned lose on the FBS stage WITHOUT the recruiting restrictions of a service academy or academic restraints of keeping players eligible while passing "rocket surgery" at GA Tech....

That's why. I'm willing to try it, you're welcome to think it won't work.

We might get Bohannon, he is a GA Southern guy.

I simply meant something like a shotgun spread air raid is easier to recruit, install, and win consistently at the G5 level. I only mentioned GT because they don't win consistently even with the best triple option recruits in the nation.

Tech doesn't win constantly? Ok.
Everybody has an off year it two or a few when injuries are stacked up. But I'll take Tech's off years to get their good ones. They are probably the best two loss team in the country. They win pretty consistently.

Does anybody here think Navy just has better athletes than the rest of the AAC? They lost on Saturday, I haven't seen that many penalties against a Navy team in a long time. Memphis narrowly escaped, my money is still on them (Navy) winning the AAC.

It's a great offense. At least as good as any other and better than most. I don't care what the rest of you run.
It isn't the only way to win, but I know of only one G5 running anything else with the winning % I know we could have with our triple. That's Boise.

I want OUR offense back. Jasper? Bohannon? I'd take Sewak back. http://www.ramblinwreck.com/sports/m-foo...39338.html
Mike Ayers is a thought although not from the family tree.

I get it, y'all don't want us to run it. That in itself is a good reason or indicator to do just that.

We'd have no problem recruiting players to run the flex triple option. We recruited well enough while in the FCS to stand toe to toe with power five programs. FBS recruiting power will only help. I figure an FBS defense was really the biggest recruiting boost we needed.

It would also pad us from losing our coach to a large degree. Considering all the service academies have their guy and Tech was the exception willing to run it. Seems the rest of the country thinks like the rest of you and that is FINE with me. You won't hear me trying to convince other teams to run it either.

Jasper should have got the job in the last two times it was open.

(10-16-2017 05:21 PM)HerdZoned Wrote:  GA Southern will never get a good hire or even a decent hire that will stay as long as they are only offering 1 year contracts with stipulations on the contract.

See Willie Fritz....

That (one year contracts) was a Georgia BOR requirement in the past. It apparently changed during Fritz's tenure and he was offered a true four year contract before he left for more money.

Also, it is a little bit of Fritz playing "poor little me". He had a four year guarantee through the school and the booster association, just like every other coach in the state of Georgia had before him. They apparently didn't mind it, but he said he didn't like the lack of "job security".

(10-17-2017 01:00 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  Jasper should have got the job in the last two times it was open.

I wonder if the coaching staff at the service Academies and their families are covered through the military for health and medical like military families.

With Jasper's son needing a heart transplant ( if I heard that right during the Memphis game), that could play an important role in Jasper's decision to stay or leave.
I pray his son will recover fully and he is able to have his operation soon. IJ may not be an option right now. Though I believe he'd be a good one.

(10-16-2017 11:10 PM)The4thOption Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 01:27 PM)StanMolsonMan Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 01:06 PM)The4thOption Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 07:50 AM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  I have a question. Why does the new coach HAVE to run triple option? only so few programs and coaches run it. I suppose GT does make it work, but they will never win the National Championship with triple option.

Maybe steal the coach from Kennesaw State. He seems like a good program builder

Imagine that offense turned lose on the FBS stage WITHOUT the recruiting restrictions of a service academy or academic restraints of keeping players eligible while passing "rocket surgery" at GA Tech....

Since 2015 Tech hasn't had the 20% exemption restriction. The president gave him the green light to recruit whoever he wants as long as they pass the NCAA's requirement. So technically it is easier to be accepted and play at Tech than our 2 schools.

Try keeping them eligible, take a look at the required courses for all Tech students.

My best friend was a tutor at Tech and another one in administration. If you think what is required of all Tech students is required of Basketball & Football players, I have some ocean front property in Arizona you might be interested in.

(10-16-2017 11:26 PM)The4thOption Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 01:52 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  

(10-16-2017 01:06 PM)The4thOption Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 07:50 AM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  I have a question. Why does the new coach HAVE to run triple option? only so few programs and coaches run it. I suppose GT does make it work, but they will never win the National Championship with triple option.

Maybe steal the coach from Kennesaw State. He seems like a good program builder

Well that's a big pile of you have no idea.
Lots of schools will never win a national championship.
If GT doesn't, it won't be because the offense didn't score enough points. You are way too sure for such a guess.

GT is a hair and a toenail from being 5&0 and a top 10 ranking. When/if they win the ACC and get into a playoff, they are going to be hell to rekon with on a week or two notice. My money would be on PJ and company. But what do I know, I've only followed that offensive tree and all it's branches for thirty years.

You want to talk about consistently winning?
There is your answer. And if not winning a national championship is your main argument against it then I'd ask you who from the Sunbelt had won that title with a different offense? It's a our BEST path to constantly winning period. How many G5 programs can claim the winning percentage of Navy since PJ installed it there?
What is PJs winning percentage at GT versus his modern era counter parts?

Imagine that offense turned lose on the FBS stage WITHOUT the recruiting restrictions of a service academy or academic restraints of keeping players eligible while passing "rocket surgery" at GA Tech....

That's why. I'm willing to try it, you're welcome to think it won't work.

We might get Bohannon, he is a GA Southern guy.

I simply meant something like a shotgun spread air raid is easier to recruit, install, and win consistently at the G5 level. I only mentioned GT because they don't win consistently even with the best triple option recruits in the nation.

Tech doesn't win constantly? Ok.
Everybody has an off year it two or a few when injuries are stacked up. But I'll take Tech's off years to get their good ones. They are probably the best two loss team in the country. They win pretty consistently.

Does anybody here think Navy just has better athletes than the rest of the AAC? They lost on Saturday, I haven't seen that many penalties against a Navy team in a long time. Memphis narrowly escaped, my money is still on them (Navy) winning the AAC.

It's a great offense. At least as good as any other and better than most. I don't care what the rest of you run.
It isn't the only way to win, but I know of only one G5 running anything else with the winning % I know we could have with our triple. That's Boise.

I want OUR offense back. Jasper? Bohannon? I'd take Sewak back. http://www.ramblinwreck.com/sports/m-foo...39338.html
Mike Ayers is a thought although not from the family tree.

I get it, y'all don't want us to run it. That in itself is a good reason or indicator to do just that.

We can agree to disagree how successful TO is. No I don't think tech wins enough every year. Other service academies suck. I would take Memphis over navy anytime.

I really understand that TO is endearing for sentimental reasons. It is also probably associated with Southern's brand as a football program. By all means keep triple option. It's actually better for my school. GSU's mantra is to have a vanilla but disciplined defense... that will do just fine against triple option.

I think most here are empathetic and honestly thinking of ways for GS to turn things around quickly by switching to something that might have a quick success within a year or two (on a side note, I don't understand the intense hatred from Southern fans about Georgia State because I and other Georgia St. alums/football fans I know certainly don't share the same degree of animosity toward your school) regardless of whatever happens, I hope Southern turns it around soon

(10-17-2017 10:25 AM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  We can agree to disagree how successful TO is. No I don't think tech wins enough every year. Other service academies suck. I would take Memphis over navy anytime.

I really understand that TO is endearing for sentimental reasons. It is also probably associated with Southern's brand as a football program. By all means keep triple option. It's actually better for my school. GSU's mantra is to have a vanilla but disciplined defense... that will do just fine against triple option.

I think most here are empathetic and honestly thinking of ways for GS to turn things around quickly by switching to something that might have a quick success within a year or two (on a side note, I don't understand the intense hatred from Southern fans about Georgia State because I and other Georgia St. alums/football fans I know certainly don't share the same degree of animosity toward your school) regardless of whatever happens, I hope Southern turns it around soon

Paul Johnson has a higher win percentage than Bobby Ross, George O'Leary, Bill Curry, Bill Lewis, and maybe every coach they've had for a long time. What more do you want?

What's crazy is that PJ hasn't even really recruited that great. Just for reference, Georgia Southern has two running backs in the NFL. Tech has none. That's not an indictment of the system, just the recruiting. No reason not to be able to recruit a good back in that system.

(10-17-2017 10:39 AM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(10-17-2017 10:25 AM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  We can agree to disagree how successful TO is. No I don't think tech wins enough every year. Other service academies suck. I would take Memphis over navy anytime.

I really understand that TO is endearing for sentimental reasons. It is also probably associated with Southern's brand as a football program. By all means keep triple option. It's actually better for my school. GSU's mantra is to have a vanilla but disciplined defense... that will do just fine against triple option.

I think most here are empathetic and honestly thinking of ways for GS to turn things around quickly by switching to something that might have a quick success within a year or two (on a side note, I don't understand the intense hatred from Southern fans about Georgia State because I and other Georgia St. alums/football fans I know certainly don't share the same degree of animosity toward your school) regardless of whatever happens, I hope Southern turns it around soon

Paul Johnson has a higher win percentage than Bobby Ross, George O'Leary, Bill Curry, Bill Lewis, and maybe every coach they've had for a long time. What more do you want?

What's crazy is that PJ hasn't even really recruited that great. Just for reference, Georgia Southern has two running backs in the NFL. Tech has none. That's not an indictment of the system, just the recruiting. No reason not to be able to recruit a good back in that system.

Paul Johnson 59% one conference title, 3-6 vs Georgia
George Oleary 61% one conference titl , 3-5 vs Georgia
Bobby Ross 54% Won NC, 2-3 vs Georgia
Bill Curry 41% 2-5 vs Georgia
Pepper Rodgers 52%, 2-4 vs Georgia
Bobby Dodd, 72%, 2 conference championships, one NC, 12-10 vs. Georgia (Includes 8 in a row)

(10-17-2017 10:39 AM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(10-17-2017 10:25 AM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  We can agree to disagree how successful TO is. No I don't think tech wins enough every year. Other service academies suck. I would take Memphis over navy anytime.

I really understand that TO is endearing for sentimental reasons. It is also probably associated with Southern's brand as a football program. By all means keep triple option. It's actually better for my school. GSU's mantra is to have a vanilla but disciplined defense... that will do just fine against triple option.

I think most here are empathetic and honestly thinking of ways for GS to turn things around quickly by switching to something that might have a quick success within a year or two (on a side note, I don't understand the intense hatred from Southern fans about Georgia State because I and other Georgia St. alums/football fans I know certainly don't share the same degree of animosity toward your school) regardless of whatever happens, I hope Southern turns it around soon

Paul Johnson has a higher win percentage than Bobby Ross, George O'Leary, Bill Curry, Bill Lewis, and maybe every coach they've had for a long time. What more do you want?

What's crazy is that PJ hasn't even really recruited that great. Just for reference, Georgia Southern has two running backs in the NFL. Tech has none. That's not an indictment of the system, just the recruiting. No reason not to be able to recruit a good back in that system.

And both of those RB's were recruited by Monken for the TO.

The greatest RB from a statistical standpoint in division 1 history, Adrian Peterson, was a product of this offense, with over 9000 career yards and about 120 TD's from 1998-2001.

That offense has put two players in the college football HOF (Tracy Ham is the other inductee). There aren't that many G5 programs that can say that, let alone both coming from the same offensive system.

In addition to Peterson, GS had another RB with over 5000 career yards from 2002-2005 in Jermaine Austin.

Here is what Nick Saban thought about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-9BRWf9Jws