Official Option maggots vs No-option maggots Battleground Thread

[daBuzz]

Throwing the baby out with the bath water = ignoring candidates like Monken (or even Chadwell) because “MuH oPtIoN.” Nobody forced us to undergo the Greatest Transformation of All-Time. It’s obvious that we prioritized getting away from the option at all costs, and here we are.

That's where I think I disagree with you. While GC's statements were definitely hyperbole, the change over from the option to a non-option offense was going to be immense and painful, whenever it was undertaken.

Why all the love and desire for Monken? He has done well at Army but it isn't like he has shown some magic ability to recruit high level talent to the option. If he came here, there is zero evidence that our recruiting would have improved...as there are no P5 teams running the option. Are you guys suggesting that he is as good an offensive mind as Paul and also better at recruiting? If so, where's the evidence of that?

So if you aren't suggesting that, then you're just kicking the inevitable talent can down the road to a later point in time where someone else would have had to do what Collins is doing right now...and that is rebuilding a roster with talent.

 

[RamblinWreck92]

What stats am I ignoring? I posted a few because I get pretty tired of people basing their entire argument on their personal opinion or a strawman that they have created to represent the other side.

I’ve never suggested that the TO or any other scheme is a panacea. It’s foolish to suggest that, just like it’s foolish to suggest that it “doesn’t work” despite 11 years of it “working” pretty damn well given our talent level. Like @daBuzz said, it’s perfectly possible to acknowledge that CPJ was an offensive genius for us, but also didn’t recruit well or field a defense worth a damn.

I’ll admit that the CPJ era was by far my favorite at GT (I’m too young to count 1990), but it’s not like I’m option or bust. I’d be happy with any scheme if our players ran it well and we used it to take advantage of our opponents’ weaknesses.

It worked as well at generating victories against all opponents as Gailey's scheme did.

The Fridge O was my personal favorite but I freely admit to Ross Bias, as I watched every game of the rebuild and natty as an undergrad.

 

[Liberty]

Ironically, that's the first requirement for entrance into the PJ Fan Club.

We were as-good or better than all but maybe 3 teams in 2009. The scheme was nice but isn't the panacea you and others pretend it to be.

It's funny how you ignore stats that fly in the face of "The TO Is God" but then expect me to worship the ones you cited. By "funny", I mean "hypocritical".

There’s plenty of good offenses. We’ve had 2 in my lifetime- Fridge & Johnson. Other teams have had good offenses, we could try one of theirs.

We need a good defense. I’ve seen 2- O’Leary (DC) and Tenuta. Other teams have good defenses.

We’ve won before in the last 30 years- Ross, O’Leary & Johnson. Coach like them, coach like someone else, frankly I don’t care. A win is a win is a win. Losing sucks. Just win.

 

[johncu]

That's where I think I disagree with you. While GC's statements were definitely hyperbole, the change over from the option to a non-option offense was going to be immense and painful, whenever it was undertaken.

Why all the love and desire for Monken? He has done well at Army but it isn't like he has shown some magic ability to recruit high level talent to the option. If he came here, there is zero evidence that our recruiting would have improved...as there are no P5 teams running the option. Are you guys suggesting that he is as good an offensive mind as Paul and also better at recruiting? If so, where's the evidence of that?

So if you aren't suggesting that, then you're just kicking the inevitable talent can down the road to a later point in time where someone else would have had to do what Collins is doing right now...and that is rebuilding a roster with talent.

I’m not disputing the challenge of the transition, only that we chose that path.

Monken may not have been the guy, but we didn’t even interview him, despite him being one of the most successful G5 coaches out there and him actually having experience at GT, winning an ACC title, no less. Instead, we hired a guy with an extremely limited track record and underwhelming results as a HC. It was quite obvious that our admin was anti-option, both in word and deed.

I don’t think running the option should preclude one from coaching at GT, nor should it be a requirement. I’m not sure why that’s a controversial position to take.

 

[daBuzz]

I’m not disputing the challenge of the transition, only that we chose that path.

Monken may not have been the guy, but we didn’t even interview him, despite him being one of the most successful G5 coaches out there and him actually having experience at GT, winning an ACC title, no less. Instead, we hired a guy with an extremely limited track record and underwhelming results as a HC. It was quite obvious that our admin was anti-option, both in word and deed.

I don’t think running the option should be a red flag to coach at GT, nor should it be a requirement. I’m not sure why that’s a controversial position to take.

I'll ask you to do me a favor and set aside your feelings for GC for a moment and answer one question for me:

At the end of the upcoming season, do you believe that WHOMEVER is the GT coach for the following year will have more or less talent available to them than Geoff Collins had available on the Tech roster when he took over?

If the answer is more talent, then I submit the simplest thing to do is sit back and ride out the next season with a "I cannot lose" mentality. If Collins succeeds and we start winning, that's awesome for all of us GT fans. If he doesn't, then he will be sent packing and the person hired to replace him will be starting from a situation much more akin to what Paul Johnson inherited.

If you answered that you think there will be less talent there, then you & I see things so polar opposite from each other that it's probably useless to even continue this conversation.

 

[RamblinWreck92]

I’m not disputing the challenge of the transition, only that we chose that path.

Monken may not have been the guy, but we didn’t even interview him, despite him being one of the most successful G5 coaches out there and him actually having experience at GT, winning an ACC title, no less. Instead, we hired a guy with an extremely limited track record and underwhelming results as a HC. It was quite obvious that our admin was anti-option, both in word and deed.

I don’t think running the option should preclude one from coaching at GT, nor should it be a requirement. I’m not sure why that’s a controversial position to take.

Running the option should preclude one from coaching at GT, given what we've seen re: difficulty in moving away from it, as well as its relative success vs other schemes and difficulty in recruiting. I guess fans of the option have just forgotten how badly we were getting beaten the last two years that PJ was here by the mutts and Clemson and the difficulty even the Master of the TO had getting a QB to run it on the Flats.

I was recruited by Army in 1986 and love West Point. My dad was in the Corps of Engineers.

GO ARMY. BEAT NAVY.

But Monken hadn't beaten a P5 team since 2017 and lost to a pretty bad Navy team this year. He should get a bronze statue up there for what he's done in rebuilding that team but belief that success at Army translates to success here is as foolish as believing that Temple success equates to wins here.

 

[Liberty]

Running the option should preclude one from coaching at GT, given what we've seen re: difficulty in moving away from it, as well as its relative success vs other schemes and difficulty in recruiting.

A competent staff would have not had as much trouble as we had. We chose a bad path. Had we decided to “transition” our offense not obliterate the basic functional pieces we had in place, we wouldn‘t have ended up 3-3-3. That’s just my opinion though.

You all will have answer how we took a below average defense & completely destroyed that as well. Only thing I have to offer is poor coaching & lack of discipline. Truly remarkable how fast the imbecile destroyed the defense seeing as we have better players now.

 

[RamblinWreck92]

A competent staff would have not had as much trouble as we had. We chose a bad path. Had we decided to “transition” our offense not obliterate the basic functional pieces we had in place, we wouldn‘t have ended up 3-3-3. That’s just my opinion though.

You all will have answer how we took a below average defense & completely destroyed that as well. Only thing I have to offer is poor coaching & lack of discipline. Truly remarkable how fast the imbecile destroyed the defense seeing as we have better players now.

I don't think anyone is arguing these points, fwiw

 

[johncu]

I'll ask you to do me a favor and set aside your feelings for GC for a moment and answer one question for me:

At the end of the upcoming season, do you believe that WHOMEVER is the GT coach for the following year will have more or less talent available to them than Geoff Collins had available on the Tech roster when he took over?

If the answer is more talent, then I submit the simplest thing to do is sit back and ride out the next season with a "I cannot lose" mentality. If Collins succeeds and we start winning, that's awesome for all of us GT fans. If he doesn't, then he will be sent packing and the person hired to replace him will be starting from a situation much more akin to what Paul Johnson inherited.

If you answered that you think there will be less talent there, then you & I see things so polar opposite from each other that it's probably useless to even continue this conversation.

I’m not really sure we disagree. We absolutely have more talent than we did in 2018. That’s why the pathetic performance is even more frustrating.

But yeah, we’re stuck with him for another year so I’m not going to whine about how much CGC sucks. Like you said, either he wins and we’re happy or he doesn’t and we find someone who can.

 

[Liberty]

I don't think anyone is arguing these points, fwiw

Sorry, I forgot you weren‘t a sack cupper. No doubt they’ll be here momentarily to stand by their man.

 

[aeromech]

I really respect you but come on. It wasn't just a level of risk. Johnson literally recruited a different size and body type for his offensive linemen. Mason was an anomaly.

He might have wanted to recruit the 6'7" 315 pound guys who could run of the world but we simply did not while Paul was here (and there ain't a lot of them anyway). Either he didn't want them or they didn't want to play in that type offense...one of the 2 must be true.

But there is no conspiracy theory on the part of the NFL. Just didn't happen.

Who are the 6'7" 315 pound OL that CGC or CBK have recruited? Or do they not want them either.

 

[THWG247]

the ad hominem attack. Always the first sign of a lost debate. This is Rule #4 in the "How To Defend The TO", as published by the PJ Fan Club.

Rule #1: Mention Rushing stats.
Rule #2: Point again to those damn rushing stats!!!
Rule #3: ORANGE BOWL GODDAMNIT!!!
Rule #4: Ad Hominem attack.

You forgot ”Muh Death March”

 

[Liberty]

Who are the 6'7" 315 pound OL that CGC or CBK have recruited? Or do they not want them either.

Wing Green Jr.

 

[THWG247]

I’m not disputing the challenge of the transition, only that we chose that path.

Monken may not have been the guy, but we didn’t even interview him, despite him being one of the most successful G5 coaches out there and him actually having experience at GT, winning an ACC title, no less. Instead, we hired a guy with an extremely limited track record and underwhelming results as a HC. It was quite obvious that our admin was anti-option, both in word and deed.

I don’t think running the option should preclude one from coaching at GT, nor should it be a requirement. I’m not sure why that’s a controversial position to take.

Who made this decision? Big money booster types?

 

[johncu]

Running the option should preclude one from coaching at GT, given what we've seen re: difficulty in moving away from it, as well as its relative success vs other schemes and difficulty in recruiting. I guess fans of the option have just forgotten how badly we were getting beaten the last two years that PJ was here by the mutts and Clemson and the difficulty even the Master of the TO had getting a QB to run it on the Flats.

I was recruited by Army in 1986 and love West Point. My dad was in the Corps of Engineers.

GO ARMY. BEAT NAVY.

But Monken hadn't beaten a P5 team since 2017 and lost to a pretty bad Navy team this year. He should get a bronze statue up there for what he's done in rebuilding that team but belief that success at Army translates to success here is as foolish as believing that Temple success equates to wins here.

That’s like saying O’Leary sucked when FSU kicked his ass. Those teams kick everyone ass.

Using PJ’s last 2 years against UGA as a measuring stick is especially strange since we actually beat them in Athens only 1 year prior. As long as we’re cherry-picking stats, CPJ beat UGA twice in a row in Athens. How many times has that happened since Dodd?

Attitudes like yours regarding the option are why we DIDN’T EVEN INTERVIEW a guy with arguably the best resume on the coaching market in favor of a guy with very little HC resume at all. Again, look where it’s got us.

 

[smokey_wasp]

Throwing the baby out with the bath water = ignoring candidates like Monken (or even Chadwell) because “MuH oPtIoN.” Nobody forced us to undergo the Greatest Transformation of All-Time. It’s obvious that we prioritized getting away from the option at all costs, and here we are.

I don't think Chadwell was a realistic P5 candidate yet in 2018. I would be interested to see how his offense would be viewed, comparatively. Certainly, no CPJ QB has ever put up numbers like Chadwell's have.

But I think you are right that a conscious decision was made to get away from the Option. TStan has said as much on many occasions. I still think it was the right call regardless of what happens with Collins. There are many schemes that could work, so to me, it is the height of stubbornness to insist on running the only one that tanks recruiting and perception. Nobody is calling Monken, including Vandy and Duke, who probably should think about it.

 

[ibeeballin]

I get your point, but it’s also a coach’s job to do exactly that. PJ came in and took guys who had no idea how to run the option and won 20 games in his first 2 seasons. GC won 6 and our guys looked like they had no idea wtf to do far too often. The “historic transformation” thing is a weak excuse by Year 3.

It’s not even remotely the same. All those guys knew how to drive and scoop block along with how to get in a 3pt stance. Oh & they were really good. 2 of the guys started gms in the NFL (Cord & Gardner)

2019 was Quinney first time pass setting in 6-7yrs minimum.

 

[ibeeballin]

Clemson - No
Miami- ehh
FSU- probable
VT- hell no
UGA- not that year
Clemson- no
Iowa- hindsight probably yes especially on defense

Based on talent level calculated using composite recruiting rankings, we should have lost 7 games in 2009. Games like UNC, Miss St, and UVA were more in our “league” but we beat the öööö out of them. 2014 was even more extreme - recruiting rankings suggest that we only out-talented a few teams that season. Future NFL talent on those teams backs it up.

I loved that 2009 team and those players, but teams like the ones I listed above have talent like that every year.

Here

 

[johncu]

I don't think Chadwell was a realistic P5 candidate yet in 2018. I would be interested to see how his offense would be viewed, comparatively. Certainly, no CPJ QB has ever put up numbers like Chadwell's have.

But I think you are right that a conscious decision was made to get away from the Option. TStan has said as much on many occasions. I still think it was the right call regardless of what happens with Collins. There are many schemes that could work, so to me, it is the height of stubbornness to insist on running the only one that tanks recruiting and perception. Nobody is calling Monken, including Vandy and Duke, who probably should think about it.

Not in 2018, but when Willy Korn was mentioned as an OC candidate recently, some people immediately ruled him out because “option.” That’s literally crazy to me. He may or may not have been the right guy, but that type of reaction is illogical.

 

[johncu]

Here

I won’t argue with you since you were on that team, and I meant no offense in the comparison. I’m not really interested in downplaying the talent or achievement of past GT teams, anyway. Like I said, that team was fun as hell to watch. That and 2014 were my favorite GT teams I ever saw.