A Positive Spread Option Article?!?!

Thanks for sharing. Not sure the article is going to change any minds though, kind of the same arguments heard before. I want CPJ to do well because I want GT to do well.
 
Article assumes that the type of player that will make our offense successful is different than the player that makes the other teams listed successful. May have been true in 2008, but it neglects the paradigm shift that has occurred since that time. Running a "pro" type offense would probably be a better differentiator nowadays.
 
I'm all in favor of CPJ's offense, but that article lacks credibility in several respects. For example, in the so-called facilities arms race... we had an indoor practice facility long before a lot of big-time programs did. And it's not like operating revenue for athletics associations = increased football spending. Title IX, overhead, other men's sports, etc. all have to get paid. For that matter, it is actually quite difficult to determine what percentage of AA revenue is actually spent "on football," since schools calculate their expenditures in different ways, and many expenses are shared. So I would like to see the data to support this statement, "Virginia Tech pours money into football at an ungodly rate, ranking second in FBS in terms of percentage of athletic budget spent on football."
 
18in32 said:
I appreciate the effort to be serious and not sarcastic about everything. But they gotta do a better job to earn it.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how you'd propose they do a better job of being serious about Georgia Tech football at this precise point in time. No matter what they want to say, they are either too late to the party or too early. Novel analysis doesn't really seem like a sustainable objective given that they have committed themselves, for whatever reason, to posting an opinion-a-day, and analysis takes time even for the superior brains of Tech Men. Seems like something humorous, perhaps, and there's more to that than just sarcasm, I posit, might serve everyone better.
 
Our offense is what it is. I have no problem believing that, if it were ran with the guys that Urban, Dabo, Saban, etc. get to run their stuff, no one would be complaining about it. But we're not getting those guys. Some might say that's because of the offensive system and some might say we could never get those guys anyway. I'm not really sure. But I don't think that Paul is going to magically become a different coach. So, a different defensive scheme, better facilities, more recruiting/analyst budget, better PR from the AD, etc. will have to be the avenues for any sustained improvement. We are in a spot, I think, where we can certainly compete for ACC titles and 10+ win seasons, but not consistently, and not national titles. Should we accept that? I think, playing the odds, replacing CPJ is likely to put is in worse shape.
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
I'm not sure how you'd propose they do a better job of being serious about Georgia Tech football at this precise point in time. No matter what they want to say, they are either too late to the party or too early. Novel analysis doesn't really seem like a sustainable objective given that they have committed themselves, for whatever reason, to posting an opinion-a-day, and analysis takes time even for the superior brains of Tech Men. Seems like something humorous, perhaps, and there's more to that than just sarcasm, I posit, might serve everyone better.
Click to expand...
I don't really know how many people work in that project. But as for what should be better, based on the article I read, I would say better research and better writing are good places to start.
 
This is sort of like reading a positive article on Donald Trump that was written by Sean Hannity.
 
18in32 said:
I don't really know how many people work in that project. But as for what should be better, based on the article I read, I would say better research and better writing are good places to start.
Click to expand...

I looked into writing for SBNation once. It's pretty much all unpaid, unless you write for one of the most popular blogs, I guess.

I say let whoever runs the NotCoachJohnson twitter account and sportsbroad write all the articles at FTRS. I'd be more inclined to visit the site more often.
 
I absolutely agree with CPJ that GT needs to runs unique offenses and defenses to take advantage of “tweeters”. However, does it have to be the 3O. There are plenty of unique offenses out there that do not carry the baggage that the 3O does.
 
BackstreetBuzz said:
I absolutely agree with CPJ that GT needs to runs unique offenses and defenses to take advantage of “tweeters”. However, does it have to be the 3O. There are plenty of unique offenses out there that do not carry the baggage that the 3O does.
Click to expand...
There are? I don't think there are that many unique offenses out there. Or at least not that are (1) still legal and (2) proven to work.
 
18in32 said:
There are? I don't think there are that many unique offenses out there. Or at least not that are (1) still legal and (2) proven to work.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on what one means by unique? I suppose a Mike Leach style Air Raid would be unique to the ACC, as would a June Jones style run and shoot. Otherwise, yeah, you're just going to get variations and tweaks of spread option, West Coast, pro style, etc. Can't think of too many true system head coaches/offensive gurus off the top of my head that are analogous to CPJ.
 
“Unique Defense”? Would that be like one that knows how to rush the passer, or tackle, or cover receivers?

What about “Unique ST”?
 
BackstreetBuzz said:
I absolutely agree with CPJ that GT needs to runs unique offenses and defenses to take advantage of “tweeters”. However, does it have to be the 3O. There are plenty of unique offenses out there that do not carry the baggage that the 3O does.
Click to expand...
did you mean "tweeners"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top