Paul Johnson to Ravens mini-camp

beej67

new around here
Joined
Oct 18, 2002
Messages
56,552
No way we had a 20% success rate drawing them offsides. 10% tops.
I think 20% is completely reasonable. I remember it happening three or four times. There may be more I don't remember.

We got Clemson once on it in the first half of the ACCCG, and then ran a play out of it for a first down in the second half of the same damn game.
 

Deke

Everybody relax, I'm here.
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
6,758
I think 20% is completely reasonable. I remember it happening three or four times. There may be more I don't remember.

We got Clemson once on it in the first half of the ACCCG, and then ran a play out of it for a first down in the second half of the same damn game.
I'm pretty sure we got NC State with it twice in the same game. Weirdly, I feel like it worked more often the back half of CPJ's tenure than it did early on.
 

Flywheel

Wait, what year is it?
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
17,891
I'm pretty sure we got NC State with it twice in the same game. Weirdly, I feel like it worked more often the back half of CPJ's tenure than it did early on.
I agree with this. In the last few years I recall going "FFS not this ag... oh wow it worked".
 

swampsting

Now with incredulous facial expression
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
8,352
I'd say it only worked once per season and then everyone in the stands and watching TV would LOLZ and wonder if the other team had watched any film for the past 10 years?
PJ ran the no play at Southern for his five years there. It might have worked once in that time (he also had the QB throwback, the one Qua didn't throw against Georgia, in his second game as GSU head coach. I remember afterward he was beating himself up about that play. "I had the wrong guy in. If we have the right guy in, that's a f---in' touchdown"). Don't know how many times he ran at Navy in six seasons there.
 

User 10337

Guest
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
0
I have always thought that if you implemented CPJ's offense with superior athletes that it would be impossible to stop.

Pretty sure Bill Belichick met with Johnson a few years before he came to GT.

This is from an article written in 2005



So all the guys bitching about the triple option offense are apparently smarter than Bill Belichick.
Your football knowledge is inadequate and your premise is wrong.
Go Jackets
 

User 10337

Guest
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
0
I don’t know how much TO they discussed, but our power running game (not option) was excellent the past few years. It is what killed Miss St and UK in the bowls. It worked fairly well under TM.

Getting some advice on blocking schemes for a single back set wouldn’t be a bad idea.
Please post videos of us running power.
 

rghoae

Banhammer'd
Ban Hammer'd
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
927
I have always thought that if you implemented CPJ's offense with superior athletes that it would be impossible to stop.

Pretty sure Bill Belichick met with Johnson a few years before he came to GT.

This is from an article written in 2005



So all the guys bitching about the triple option offense are apparently smarter than Bill Belichick.
Or rather Bill belichik met with CPJ, took the stuff that was useful and incorporated it into a much more comprehensive offensive system.

Anyways the biggest problem with CPJ was never the TO or even the offense. It was the defense. And 4 or so DCs in the buck had to stop with the head coach.

Edit: Talking solely about offense though, my feeling is that CPJ was unable to adjust to the rule changes which made downfield blocking much more difficult, if not impossible, in our system. As a result, the number of 40yards and a cloud of dust plays reduced, which increased the average number of plays we needed to get a score, making the impact of a single negative yard play, or turnover that much greater.
 
Last edited:

CoachTech

Flats Noob
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
544
That’s nice and all but not power. Powerful, yes. Power, no.

If you mean 'Power" by the pulling of O-linemen and a lead blocker then YES the TO was a power run system. We constantly had a pulling guard and tackle in CPJ system with the B-back lead for the QB.
 

FatJacket

Helluva Engineer
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
2,205
Or rather Bill belichik met with CPJ, took the stuff that was useful and incorporated it into a much more comprehensive offensive system.

Anyways the biggest problem with CPJ was never the TO or even the offense. It was the defense. And 4 or so DCs in the buck had to stop with the head coach.

Edit: Talking solely about offense though, my feeling is that CPJ was unable to adjust to the rule changes which made downfield blocking much more difficult, if not impossible, in our system. As a result, the number of 40yards and a cloud of dust plays reduced, which increased the average number of plays we needed to get a score, making the impact of a single negative yard play, or turnover that much greater.

I’m down with that. Paul Johnson, the mighty competitor, who never quit anything, not evening a ping pong game, quit his dream of a National Champion Coach, because the rules got too tough. Laugh at you idiot.
 

gt2690b

PB time!
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
9,511
I’m down with that. Paul Johnson, the mighty competitor, who never quit anything, not evening a ping pong game, quit his dream of a National Champion Coach, because the rules got too tough. Laugh at you idiot.
Too complicated agree or disagree?
 

WracerX

Dr. Dunkingstein
Joined
Feb 24, 2004
Messages
24,950
If you mean 'Power" by the pulling of O-linemen and a lead blocker then YES the TO was a power run system. We constantly had a pulling guard and tackle in CPJ system with the B-back lead for the QB.
Power, as in hat on hat don’t shed your block just drive them down field. We did it a lot against msu, uk, and ut. SEC teams not named georgia just didn’t handle it well. We did the same against VT the past 4 years. Very little option and a lot of zone blocking.
 

User 10337

Guest
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
0
Power, as in hat on hat don’t shed your block just drive them down field. We did it a lot against msu, uk, and ut. SEC teams not named georgia just didn’t handle it well. We did the same against VT the past 4 years. Very little option and a lot of zone blocking.
No.

Power as in the specific play. In the same realm but different, “Iso” or “dive”.

I haven’t seen power since Gailey
 

WracerX

Dr. Dunkingstein
Joined
Feb 24, 2004
Messages
24,950
No.

Power as in the specific play. In the same realm but different, “Iso” or “dive”.

I haven’t seen power since Gailey
When someone says “power running game”, it does not refer to a specific play. You either have no idea what you’re talking about or being intentionally dense.
 
Top