Paul Johnson and retirement

BigDanT

J. Batt Fan
Joined
Jul 1, 2015
Messages
11,643
The argument about the system hurting recruiting is probably valid to an extent. He would probably argue that the trade off is that you sign some really good athletes that don't fit into other schools' systems. A while back, CPJ made some comment about Tech's current recruiting that indicated he was offended by the notion that he didn't work hard to recruit. I think he and his staff worked as hard as anybody; they just weren't very good at it. Salesmanship is a talent that not everyone has, and CGC has it.
With a top 25 class Johnson would have won the acc every year. Collins is proving that possible. I’ve never said a bad word about Johnson but now I’ll say that it was all just a bunch of excuses.
 

GEETEELEE

We suck this much.
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
37,130
With a top 25 class Johnson would have won the acc every year. Collins is proving that possible. I’ve never said a bad word about Johnson but now I’ll say that it was all just a bunch of excuses.
It was real, not excuses. And I'm not privy to any internal discussions, but I'm sure various guarantees of support, from funding to staff to academic exceptions, were promised to Collins as part of his deal.

Of course Pepper got similar promises which were never fulfilled, but he managed to pissoff certain influential people.
 

johncu

Dodd-Like
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
9,557
Yes, but honestly even with DRad (and maybe Todd? the overlap was so brief) CPJ not infrequently noted the structural disadvantages against him. Sometimes he referred to funding, plain and simple, but other times he would be a lot more ambiguous about what he was referring to. "[Clemson's] just a whole 'nother deal. You're comparing apples to oranges." or "I mean, nobody's going to confuse the way we do it here and they way they do it there [in Tuscaloosa]."

In those moments he gave the impression that he was hamstrung not just by inadequate fundraising and poor administration, but by the entire culture of Tech football – smaller stadium or smaller fanbase or urban campus or fewer hot co-eds or who knows.

I've definitely gotten the impression that CPJ thought that his success at Navy – which in some respects has a lot of the limitations of Tech football without many of its advantages – would mean he would do even better at Tech. Then he was frustrated and surprised when he started turning in mediocre performances. And his explanations for the mediocrity (things like: "Recruiting is a two way street. They have to want to come here.") began to sound very resigned and Braine-like.
All very true. CPJ was definitely not his fiery self by the end of his tenure. I think after 2008 and 2009, everyone (including him) thought he would take the ACC (and the nation) by storm. It didn't happen, and it seemed like we started creating even more self-inflicted disadvantages on top of the structural ones we already had. All in all, CPJ had a very good tenure at GT, but damn if it didn't seem like the ball always bounced the other way.
 

johncu

Dodd-Like
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
9,557
He’s quick to point out the obvious, which is GT is a tougher gig to win because of academics and budget limitations. But I’ve never heard him admit that the TO system hurt his ability to recruit better players— which is just as obvious.
No offense, but did you think this through? We were already struggling in recruiting, and you want the coach to come out publicly and say his offense is antiquated and drives away recruits?

What we should have done is the exact opposite - sell, sell, sell our offense to recruits and the media. Our offense this past season was horrifically bad, yet players are excited to play in it. Why? Marketing. It seemed like CPJ's mindset was that winning would silence the haters, but it didn't happen that way. Despite the fact that our offense was 2nd only to Clemson in the ACC for most of his tenure, people still didn't see that. We really missed an opportunity, in hindsight.
 

GTCrew

Patrick Henry
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
49,873
It was real, not excuses. And I'm not privy to any internal discussions, but I'm sure various guarantees of support, from funding to staff to academic exceptions, were promised to Collins as part of his deal.

Of course Pepper got similar promises which were never fulfilled, but he managed to pissoff certain influential people.
I would believe that except for it costs zero resources to go visit 404 high schools, which is recruiting 101. By all accounts we were not really even visiting high schools regularly.
 

GTCrew

Patrick Henry
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
49,873
No offense, but did you think this through? We were already struggling in recruiting, and you want the coach to come out publicly and say his offense is antiquated and drives away recruits?

What we should have done is the exact opposite - sell, sell, sell our offense to recruits and the media. Our offense this past season was horrifically bad, yet players are excited to play in it. Why? Marketing. It seemed like CPJ's mindset was that winning would silence the haters, but it didn't happen that way. Despite the fact that our offense was 2nd only to Clemson in the ACC for most of his tenure, people still didn't see that. We really missed an opportunity, in hindsight.
I think he's talking post tenure. CPJ doesnt seem to mind criticizing the external to him reasons recruiting spiraled down while self criticism seems notably absent.
 

savbandjacket

Dr. SBJ
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
29,101
No offense, but did you think this through? We were already struggling in recruiting, and you want the coach to come out publicly and say his offense is antiquated and drives away recruits?

What we should have done is the exact opposite - sell, sell, sell our offense to recruits and the media. Our offense this past season was horrifically bad, yet players are excited to play in it. Why? Marketing. It seemed like CPJ's mindset was that winning would silence the haters, but it didn't happen that way. Despite the fact that our offense was 2nd only to Clemson in the ACC for most of his tenure, people still didn't see that. We really missed an opportunity, in hindsight.
No, but he certainly could have done things different to market the program and offense differently. It would not have taken all that much to put some extra bells and whistles on the offense to give it the appearance of not being the high school dinosaur everyone thought it was. The biggest thing that needed to be done was getting rid of Sewak and teaching o linemen how to block. Instead it seemed that Johnson was hell bent on proving that this old system would work rather than showing he could adapt it and rule the world. The closest we ever got to change was the diamond formation with Vad Lee and that was a flash in the pan.

I genuinely wanted him to succeed but he just seemed too set in his ways to adapt and it ended up hurting recruiting over time.
 
Last edited:

ElCidBUZZingFAN

Dodd-Like
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
24,540
Have we had a coach who hasn't "complained" (use remarked if complain is too strong a word for you) that Tech can eat you up and spit you out as a head coach after awhile?
 

18in32

Petard Hoister
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
27,979
He’s quick to point out the obvious, which is GT is a tougher gig to win because of academics and budget limitations. But I’ve never heard him admit that the TO system hurt his ability to recruit better players— which is just as obvious.
I don't know if CPJ agrees with that in his heart of hearts. When pressed on recruiting failures, he would return to his favorite rationalization – "That's kinda the deal around here before we got here." Meaning that prior Tech coaches usually had recruiting classes at about the same rank as his. And apart from that one shining moment that was the Jonathan Dwyer class (which even then wasn't *that* highly ranked), he's correct.

Perhaps CGC is about to prove that it wasn't the scheme, it wasn't the school, it wasn't the co-eds... it was just that we needed the *right* coaches?
 

txsting

Elite level sh*tposting
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
1,305
I don't know if CPJ agrees with that in his heart of hearts. When pressed on recruiting failures, he would return to his favorite rationalization – "That's kinda the deal around here before we got here." Meaning that prior Tech coaches usually had recruiting classes at about the same rank as his. And apart from that one shining moment that was the Jonathan Dwyer class (which even then wasn't *that* highly ranked), he's correct.

Perhaps CGC is about to prove that it wasn't the scheme, it wasn't the school, it wasn't the co-eds... it was just that we needed the *right* coaches?
That's the best thing about the CGC hire, regardless of what results he comes up with. He's going to either disprove the theory that Tech can't recruit in the top 25, or he will die trying. We're going to find out what is possible, and that can be a new bar for other staffs.
 

GTLiebs

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
10,233
No offense, but did you think this through? We were already struggling in recruiting, and you want the coach to come out publicly and say his offense is antiquated and drives away recruits?

What we should have done is the exact opposite - sell, sell, sell our offense to recruits and the media. Our offense this past season was horrifically bad, yet players are excited to play in it. Why? Marketing. It seemed like CPJ's mindset was that winning would silence the haters, but it didn't happen that way. Despite the fact that our offense was 2nd only to Clemson in the ACC for most of his tenure, people still didn't see that. We really missed an opportunity, in hindsight.
The one comment I would have against is that it was a much tougher thing to sell by anyone because it got such a bad reputation before we ever played a game with it. With better marketing the recruiting prolly would of been better sure, but I don't know how much more so in the end. Along what savband said, probably the only way to save that offense from a marketing standpoint was to change it in some way. Then the question is, would that changed Paul Johnson offense of been as successful still, even if he was willing to change it?
 

18in32

Petard Hoister
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
27,979
That's the best thing about the CGC hire, regardless of what results he comes up with. He's going to either disprove the theory that Tech can't recruit in the top 25, or he will die trying. We're going to find out what is possible, and that can be a new bar for other staffs.
Yes, it's an interesting thought experiment that I know none of us want to engage in... but if CGC fails to recruit at a high level, and as a result fails to win at a high level, are we convinced that it just can't be done? and return to a guru/scheme coach the next time around?

Let's not talk about that, because that's not going to happen. In a few years everyone will say, "GT has so many built in advantages... all the best academics, in fields that dominate the 21st century, with all the cultural and career attractions of Atlanta, and a packed, intimate stadium unlike anything else in P5 football."
 

daBuzz

Dodd-Like
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
35,005
I don't know that many people had to badmouth it at all. The truth is that the NFL has become a passing league and, despite what many might think, high school players are at least intelligent enough to realize as much. When your offense is predicated on running the ball 80 - 90% of the time, I don't care how much marketing and spin you do, it's a pretty hard sell to convince an elite player that a running offense is going to set up him for an NFL future.

I actually think the biggest downfall in recruiting for CPJ was the insistence on the B-back starting with his hand on the ground like an NFL fullback would do. Had we just simply let our B-backs start from a standing position, we MAY have been able to convince more running backs that this offense would indeed benefit them. But when that B-back starts with his hand on the ground and the television announcer who isn't familiar with the A-back/B-back terminology calls him a fullback....that's not the message you want to send.
 

Walton

Damn Good Rat
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
1,178
It was likely a combination of things, a little bit GT, a lot of the AD and his lack of support, and a little bit Johnson's recruiting style. I'm sure he worked very hard at recruiting but he also worked very hard at coaching and his defenses typically sucked and his special teams were usually mediocre or worse.

I can tell you this: if Collins had the 2008 & 2009 seasons and player success to sale, he would have marketed and sold the öööö out of it. He would have likely changed the perception of option offense. He would have had good angles to offset any negative recruiting.
 

savbandjacket

Dr. SBJ
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
29,101
I don't know that many people had to badmouth it at all. The truth is that the NFL has become a passing league and, despite what many might think, high school players are at least intelligent enough to realize as much. When your offense is predicated on running the ball 80 - 90% of the time, I don't care how much marketing and spin you do, it's a pretty hard sell to convince an elite player that a running offense is going to set up him for an NFL future.

I actually think the biggest downfall in recruiting for CPJ was the insistence on the B-back starting with his hand on the ground like an NFL fullback would do. Had we just simply let our B-backs start from a standing position, we MAY have been able to convince more running backs that this offense would indeed benefit them. But when that B-back starts with his hand on the ground and the television announcer who isn't familiar with the A-back/B-back terminology calls him a fullback....that's not the message you want to send.
All of that could have been fixed by:
1. Eliminating the goofy flip step that QBs did when passing
2. Two point stance for the RB (b back)
3. A lot more drop passes to the RBs (b and a backs)
4. Some shotgun or pistol sets.

seriously. Uga’s offense since 1980 has been built around running backs catching the ball at or around the LOS.
 

txsting

Elite level sh*tposting
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
1,305
All of that could have been fixed by:
1. Eliminating the goofy flip step that QBs did when passing
2. Two point stance for the RB (b back)
3. A lot more drop passes to the RBs (b and a backs)
4. Some shotgun or pistol sets.

seriously. Uga’s offense since 1980 has been built around running backs catching the ball at or around the LOS.
An honest to goodness hybrid of veer option concepts with a legit pass game would be hard to stop. Even if George Godsey is running it. Let's not pretend we haven't already proven the concept 20 years ago.
 

Yukonwreck

Dodd-Like
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
6,599
The argument about the system hurting recruiting is probably valid to an extent. He would probably argue that the trade off is that you sign some really good athletes that don't fit into other schools' systems. A while back, CPJ made some comment about Tech's current recruiting that indicated he was offended by the notion that he didn't work hard to recruit. I think he and his staff worked as hard as anybody; they just weren't very good at it. Salesmanship is a talent that not everyone has, and CGC has it.
probably valid?
 

Yukonwreck

Dodd-Like
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
6,599
It was real, not excuses. And I'm not privy to any internal discussions, but I'm sure various guarantees of support, from funding to staff to academic exceptions, were promised to Collins as part of his deal.

Of course Pepper got similar promises which were never fulfilled, but he managed to pissoff certain influential people.
Is the assumption that Collins will not be capable of pissing off certain big hitters?
 

txsting

Elite level sh*tposting
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
1,305
Yes, it's an interesting thought experiment that I know none of us want to engage in... but if CGC fails to recruit at a high level, and as a result fails to win at a high level, are we convinced that it just can't be done? and return to a guru/scheme coach the next time around?

Let's not talk about that, because that's not going to happen. In a few years everyone will say, "GT has so many built in advantages... all the best academics, in fields that dominate the 21st century, with all the cultural and career attractions of Atlanta, and a packed, intimate stadium unlike anything else in P5 football."
Of course you are correct. We will fight them in the living rooms. We will fight them in the helicopters. We will fight them with brown paper bags. We will never surrender!
 
Top