Before I start.... This is not meant to be a pro GS thread.
A big argument against the option is that it can be stopped with time to prepare. GT finally had a capable qb and they are shredding a team that was ranked number 1 for 8 weeks. They are also putting up crazy numbers.
So my question..... If a coach like PJ was available would you want your school to go after him and run his offense? Why or why not?
Again..... Please.... No GS reference. Only offense discussion.
If GS v UL trash talk starts, I will find you, and I will make you wish you never followed college football.
Mississippi State was a fraud. They were anointed number 1 because they beat #8 LSU, #6 TAMU, and #2 Auburn in consecutive weeks. Well guess what . . . those three SEC West teams were way overrated. Hell, Ole Miss beat the Bullies, and they are terrible.
So BFD. And go Georgia Tech!
And hell no I would NEVER want an option coach @ Arkansas State. Why in the hell would anyone want that? Too many skill players @ WR would be under-utilized.
That said, I love watching GT's offense.
We did have a lot of fun with an option coach at stAte in the eighties.
You flexbone people are unbearable.
Guy wins his second bowl game in seven years and you come out of the woodworks.
Triple Option is fun to watch, but I dont think I could put up with it at AState...It'd drive me insane. Though our most successful coach ran the triple option, so I guess you never know.
Watching GT, Navy and even GaSo run the triple option is a lot of fun, and when done properly its great, but at the end of the day I don't think A State has now or could easily acquire the right cogs to make the engine run smoothly. Yes they did in the 80's when EVERYONE was running something similar. Correct me if I'm wrong but a majority of our recruiting base plays spread HUNH with the read option. Which can be considered a triple option of sorts, but not what GT and the like run.
I have been watching the triple option for a looooooong time now and I love it, although I can understand why someone wouldn't. It's not for every school. However, I am tired of the high school offense references. It just won the Orange Bowl, deal with it.
I appreciate a well run offense no matter what type it is. The flex is fun to watch because it is a lot of the same things over and over and over. Discipline is key.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm a Georgia State fan, so...hell, if that's what it would take for us to become competitive...even if it means "copying" the school down south...go for it. I certainly don't think it's what our current personnel are cut out for, though, and I like watching Nick Arbuckle and the style he's brought us. I think we've got our offense, we just have to pull the right strings to get the rest of our program over the hump.
With that said, as far as the TO goes, I enjoy watching it. Not sure if I'd like it as much if I saw it every game, but it's fun. Even with GT's successes, I'm not convinced that it would be the best option (no pun intended) at the highest level of FBS play, where the top goals depend on getting past Nick Saban with a team full of the best athletes in the country and a month to prepare. But one year of GS data in the Sun Belt is all I need to see that it can make a huge impact on our neck of the FBS woods, and that can make some ripples through college football as a whole, which is cool.
By the way, you'll probably never catch me trying to insult the TO by calling it a high school offense. I might call it a Tecmo Bowl offense, but I don't consider that an insult. I love Tecmo Bowl. (Although I run the option a lot more on NES Play Action Football. Just pitch to Roger Craig every play. It's worked since I was 12.)
PJ would dominate with the flex at a school with more resources/recruiting advantages. Wouldn't be fair.
(12-31-2014 11:28 PM)NCeagle Wrote: [ -> ]Before I start.... This is not meant to be a pro GS thread.
A big argument against the option is that it can be stopped with time to prepare. GT finally had a capable qb and they are shredding a team that was ranked number 1 for 8 weeks. They are also putting up crazy numbers.
So my question..... If a coach like PJ was available would you want your school to go after him and run his offense? Why or why not?
Again..... Please.... No GS reference. Only offense discussion.
If GS v UL trash talk starts, I will find you, and I will make you wish you never followed college football.
No, because 1) when the TO is working it works REAL well. But when things go bad they go REAL bad. 2) a coach like PJ is too arrogant to realize point number 1 and adapt his offense.
When Paul Johnson gets talent he dominates. Go back and look at GS offensive stats in 1999 for a reference.... best college offense I've ever seen in person. The 1986 version with Tracy Ham was pretty incredible during their playoff run, too.
(01-01-2015 12:42 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote: [ -> ]I have been watching the triple option for a looooooong time now and I love it, although I can understand why someone wouldn't. It's not for every school. However, I am tired of the high school offense references. It just won the Orange Bowl, deal with it.
It also lost the ACC championship. But that's just football.
You can win with any offense.
I enjoyed it last night because it was gashing an SEC defense and the speed of the QB was fun.
You need the right personnel for any offense.
When David Elson took us into FBS we were attempting to become a spread offense with little success mainly due to personnel.
When Willie Taggart took over he brought the Jim Harbaugh Stanford offense which was run the ball, control the clock, use your tight ends. We were pretty successful with it.
In comes Petrino/Brohm and we're back to a hurry up spread type. Some success the first year but tremendous success this year.
To me, and I know this is obvious, it doesn't matter which offense you run, you just need really good offensive linemen. We've been pretty good and stable at that position and it has let us win 7 or more games 4 years in a row. That's a smaller group than you think too.
But kudos to Tech. They ran it well last night.
(01-01-2015 08:28 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2014 11:28 PM)NCeagle Wrote: [ -> ]Before I start.... This is not meant to be a pro GS thread.
A big argument against the option is that it can be stopped with time to prepare. GT finally had a capable qb and they are shredding a team that was ranked number 1 for 8 weeks. They are also putting up crazy numbers.
So my question..... If a coach like PJ was available would you want your school to go after him and run his offense? Why or why not?
Again..... Please.... No GS reference. Only offense discussion.
If GS v UL trash talk starts, I will find you, and I will make you wish you never followed college football.
No, because 1) when the TO is working it works REAL well. But when things go bad they go REAL bad. 2) a coach like PJ is too arrogant to realize point number 1 and adapt his offense.
Is that not the same for any offense? Couldn't a different type of offense go so bad that it puts up less than 100 yards in a game?
(01-01-2015 08:56 AM)NCeagle Wrote: [ -> ] (01-01-2015 08:28 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2014 11:28 PM)NCeagle Wrote: [ -> ]Before I start.... This is not meant to be a pro GS thread.
A big argument against the option is that it can be stopped with time to prepare. GT finally had a capable qb and they are shredding a team that was ranked number 1 for 8 weeks. They are also putting up crazy numbers.
So my question..... If a coach like PJ was available would you want your school to go after him and run his offense? Why or why not?
Again..... Please.... No GS reference. Only offense discussion.
If GS v UL trash talk starts, I will find you, and I will make you wish you never followed college football.
No, because 1) when the TO is working it works REAL well. But when things go bad they go REAL bad. 2) a coach like PJ is too arrogant to realize point number 1 and adapt his offense.
Is that not the same for any offense? Couldn't a different type of offense go so bad that it puts up less than 100 yards in a game?
PJ is having himself a year but I have watched 7 years of his offense falling behind and then not being able to throw their way out of a wet paper sack. It's an old argument but there is a reason only 4 schools in FBS and zero in the NFL run it. And don't get me wrong, I love the running game.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
contrarian offense = advantage
mainstream offense = advantage if you have to most talented players
hail southern
Quote: (01-01-2015 08:56 AM)NCeagle Wrote: [ -> ] (01-01-2015 08:28 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2014 11:28 PM)NCeagle Wrote: [ -> ]Before I start.... This is not meant to be a pro GS thread.
A big argument against the option is that it can be stopped with time to prepare. GT finally had a capable qb and they are shredding a team that was ranked number 1 for 8 weeks. They are also putting up crazy numbers.
So my question..... If a coach like PJ was available would you want your school to go after him and run his offense? Why or why not?
Again..... Please.... No GS reference. Only offense discussion.
If GS v UL trash talk starts, I will find you, and I will make you wish you never followed college football.
No, because 1) when the TO is working it works REAL well. But when things go bad they go REAL bad. 2) a coach like PJ is too arrogant to realize point number 1 and adapt his offense.
Is that not the same for any offense? Couldn't a different type of offense go so bad that it puts up less than 100 yards in a game?
Yeah, see Texas Vs. Arkansas a few nights ago . . . Sips racked up a whooping 59 yards of total O.
This one is kind of a split answer between two threads, but here goes. Of course, Tech would beat us by a lot today. Our guys haven't practiced since Thanksgiving, and that makes a difference!
Now, to this string, my thoughts on the TO as run by Tech, Navy, and GS before this year... It's an offense that allows a team to be competitive with a slight disadvantage in talent. No, an NAIA team can't move to FBS and compete, but it does allow smart, disciplined play to offset some athleticism. I would say that, for most of Johnson's time at GT and all of his time at Navy, that was the case.
In order to win at a very high level, you must have the explosive quarterback, and Thomas is the first one of that sort out that Tech has had in quite a while. Monken's first two semifinal teams (with Jaybo Shaw at QB) were comparable to what Tech's been working with (but at a different level), and ended the year being beat badly once (Delaware) and just ground into the turf once (NDSU). The next year, with a far more athletic QB, they took NDSU to the wire and should've won. Nope, not the officials, but dumb, undisciplined play.
If you want to win consistently and be competitive, run the TO with Johnson or one of his disciples. For at least half the teams in America, that would be an improvement. If you want to consistently win championships, then you'd better make sure you have the explosive athlete at QB.
I am a fan of whatever coach (or offense) wins us the most games.
So, if PJ was available, and my current coach was winning, I wouldn't want him.
If PJ was available, and my current coach wasn't winning, I would want him in a heartbeat.
Seriously, the offense being run by a winning coach could be called the "pink and purple fairy offense" and I wouldn't care.