Discussion in 'Football' started by coit, Dec 22, 2018.
We definitely should’ve gone at least 2-1 against USF, Duke, and Pitt. If we had it would’ve been a really good year. We are probably in the top 20. Very disappointing but by no means unacceptable. Going 5-3 in a P-5 conference when your cross division opponent is a national title contender is not bad.
No sidewalk fans were coming to watch option football and around half of the fan base was over it by the time the last regime retired. It’s not that Monken would not have won games here. TStan made the right decision.
UVA absolutely stuffed us. 1 single TD is a stuffing. Duke bitch-slapped it the whole game - the same Duke team that gave up 56 to mighty Wake Forest, the same Duke team that lost to miserable VPI.
The offense was good vs cupcakes and crap against non-cupcakes. It was downright embarrassing vs elite teams. The lack of an actual passing threat was another recruiting failure by CPJ. The Option lovers will bigcry that but it doesn't change the truth.
thank the gods it's gone!
This argument actually makes sense. RW92 trying to argue that the offense wasn't successful is just dumb.
It wasn't as great as you are claiming and was both extremely predictable and one-dimensional. It wasn't that successful vs Pitt, Duke, UVA, Clemson, nor mutts. None of that's debatable.
wow, what an interesting thought.btw--it might be 7 yrs (long contracr)
Many years ago, I was in PJ's office and asked him who he thought on his staff would make a good head coach one day. I got an answer I wasn't expecting.
He said Monken. I asked why. Because Jeff understands organization.
That was 1998-99.
Wow, what a great run. CFB – heck, the US of A – is so much better when the service academies are playing competitive football.
Thanks for sharing that. Happy to hear your son is happy.
PS. That final comment probably belongs in a separate post and/or thread. Then again, there's nothing you should expect more on ST than a non sequitur.
Some of us did and let TStan know.
I've known Jeff a long time and he is an absolute class act.
Where did I claim it was great? It was amazing when we could dominate at the LOS and decent even when we couldn't. The lack of a passing game kept us from being great.
FWIW this isn't just my opinion. Football Outsiders FEI ranked our offense 17th. Don't even start with the "cupcakes" thing, because it takes opponent defensive strength into account and doesn't even count scores in blowout games.
"Branding" that's all you need to know about why we didn't go with Monken and why it was the correct decision.
The only time I can remember us truly having an identity and a "brand" that's nationally recognized (besides "the place Calvin Johnson plays" or "the answer to an AFLAC trivia question") is under CPJ, where we were nationally known as a hard-nosed, throwback running team. That brought along with it the identity as an academically impressive school, as that was one of the reasons we ended up running CPJ's offense anyway. It was good to be recognized and name checked occasionally, even when we weren't in the top 25.
I'm curious to see if we will have a "brand" will be under CGC. Hopefully it's not "nondescript middle of the pack ACC team" like NC State or somebody.
The option offense had absolutely nothing to do with our identity as an academically impressive school. CPJ deserves credit for getting our academic house in order in terms of raising grad rates, but he or another coach could have run an air raid or pro style or any other kind of offense and accomplished that independent of the option offense.
You could by the same reasoning say the option offense was a part of an identity as a school with a poorly funded athletic department, but that would be an equally erroneous conclusion drawn from an insignificant correlation.
It was amazing vs Loserville, VPI, and SF. It wasn't decent vs Duke nor Pitt. It was good vs UNC and ok vs UVA. Forget Clemson and the mutts. How's that?
You're an idiot. And I didn't even like the option.