Question for johnson fans

[gtzulu]

The better question than "Can we do better than Johnson?" is "Are we likely to do better than Johnson?" There is almost surely someone out there who could do better, and you can always point to one or two coaches (Art Briles is the favorite this year it seems) having a lot of success at lesser schools. But there are a lot of coaches out there. I think Johnson is a really good coach in a tough situation, and we'd likely do worse. I also don't think this is Johnson's ceiling, because we saw how the offense ran in 2009. The offense was great in 2010 and 2011 as well. Our team has not been in sync as far as having both a good defense and offense. Contrast this with Chan--Do you really ever see us achieving great success with his vanilla everyone-runs-it pro-style offense? I lost hope with Chan, but I haven't with Johnson.

If you think Johnson is not a good coach, what specific things do you think he is doing wrong? When you listen to him he has seemed pretty cognizant of the problems--recruiting, defense, etc. You might say he's stubborn about his offensive scheme, but it's worked pretty well in other years he's been here. If you think the problem is recruiting, do you think some other coach is going to come into Tech and do a magic dance and suddenly get 5* recruits?

 

[PasadenaJacket]

The better question than "Can we do better than Johnson?" is "Are we likely to do better than Johnson?" There is almost surely someone out there who could do better, and you can always point to one or two coaches (Art Briles is the favorite this year it seems) having a lot of success at lesser schools. But there are a lot of coaches out there. I think Johnson is a really good coach in a tough situation, and we'd likely do worse. I also don't think this is Johnson's ceiling, because we saw how the offense ran in 2009. The offense was great in 2010 and 2011 as well. Our team has not been in sync as far as having both a good defense and offense. Contrast this with Chan--Do you really ever see us achieving great success with his vanilla everyone-runs-it pro-style offense? I lost hope with Chan, but I haven't with Johnson.

This, this, and so much this. Do you PJ haters remember the list of candidates we considered when he was hired? Here's a refresher:

- Chris Hatcher
- Rick Neuheisel
- Randy Edsall
- Charlie Strong
- Will Muschamp
- Turner Gill

Most on this list would have been disasters. When you hire a coach, you're rolling the dice. If you want to run Paul Johnson out of town, at least admit that there's a better than even chance that the the next coach does worse.

 

[jdubjacket]

You might say he's stubborn about his offensive scheme, but it's worked pretty well in other years he's been here.

I disagree here. It worked the first two years he was here with NFL-caliber players running it. People are always quick to point out that the offense is fine since we either lead the nation or are in the top 5+/- in rushing. But then they don't want to address passing efficiency. Take for instance right now: according to ESPN, we're #4 in the nation in rushing but #119 in passing. That's quite an imbalance.

While we've obviously won games with the offense since 2008 & 2009, it's not as clutch as it used to be. Obviously that ties in with talent/recruiting etc., which we all know is difficult at GT.

But I think that's what people are most frustrated about. CPJ was supposed to come in make us competitive against the big boys by utilizing his scheme rather than the talent at his disposal. And in the last four years, we are 1-14 against VT, Miami, Clemson & UGA and 1-4 in bowl games overall.

To top if off, now he's got this athletic QB but CPJ isn't changing his system to suit Vad's needs, which is doubly frustrating since we've all seen how athletic Vad was in 2012. It doesn't help that CPJ used to answer critics of his one-sided offense by referring to his days at Hawaii, when his offense was pass happy. Why has that offense not been installed here? Why is Vad still running the current offense, despite how he is obviously uncomfortable running it?

Those are my thoughts on it anyway. When he was hired, we were expecting one thing, and got it and more for a couple of years, but have gotten something else these past four years.

 

[PM Gold]

I disagree here. It worked the first two years he was here with NFL-caliber players running it.

Yes...and many of those players were academic exceptions in Gailey's single decent year of recruiting.

Look...PJ is a good coach...we have had some good coaches since Dodd...the one constant is the Hill limiting who we can recruit.

What if Gailey was allowed to recruit every year like he was allowed in 2006? He would have had a much better record and would probably still be here.

PJ hasn't been allowed to recruit like that since he arrived...so who do you want to blame?

The coach who is doing the best he can with what he has...OR...the crummy administration that is hamstringing recruiting???

 

[jdubjacket]

I disagree here. It worked the first two years he was here with NFL-caliber players running it.

Yes...and many of those players were academic exceptions in Gailey's single decent year of recruiting.

Look...PJ is a good coach...we have had some good coaches since Dodd...the one constant is the Hill limiting who we can recruit.

What if Gailey was allowed to recruit every year like he was allowed in 2006? He would have had a much better record and would probably still be here.

PJ hasn't been allowed to recruit like that since he arrived...so who do you want to blame?

The coach who is doing the best he can with what he has...OR...the crummy administration that is hamstringing recruiting???

Did you read the rest of my post or did you just stop after that once sentence?

 

[AE 87]

Jdub, according to the opponent adjusted stats from footballoutsiders, our offense was
#15 SnP plus, #16 FEI in 2011
#13 SnP plus, #26 FEI in 2012
#16 SnP plus, #28 FEI in 2013 (before Clemson)
According to ESPNs efficiency stat, we were the #8 offense before the CU game.

What's your basis for saying it only worked the first couple years?

 

[GTLiebs]

I disagree here. It worked the first two years he was here with NFL-caliber players running it. People are always quick to point out that the offense is fine since we either lead the nation or are in the top 5+/- in rushing. But then they don't want to address passing efficiency. Take for instance right now: according to ESPN, we're #4 in the nation in rushing but #119 in passing. That's quite an imbalance.

That's a poor way of looking at it though, we are definitely much higher in passing yards per attempt and way higher in yards per catch. Probably lower in rushing yards per attempt though too.

But I think that's what people are most frustrated about. CPJ was supposed to come in make us competitive against the big boys by utilizing his scheme rather than the talent at his disposal. And in the last four years, we are 1-14 against VT, Miami, Clemson & UGA and 1-4 in bowl games overall.

To top if off, now he's got this athletic QB but CPJ isn't changing his system to suit Vad's needs, which is doubly frustrating since we've all seen how athletic Vad was in 2012. It doesn't help that CPJ used to answer critics of his one-sided offense by referring to his days at Hawaii, when his offense was pass happy. Why has that offense not been installed here? Why is Vad still running the current offense, despite how he is obviously uncomfortable running it?

Those are my thoughts on it anyway. When he was hired, we were expecting one thing, and got it and more for a couple of years, but have gotten something else these past four years.

So we brought Johnson in so we could win games with strategy and scheme, but now we have to do that less just because we got a player we believe is more talented? I think Johnson adding a bit a shotgun and the diamond stuff, ect, was a bad idea because it's like a golden mean fallacy. We didn't practice the old stuff as much so we aren't as good at it, but we also do not practice the new stuff full time either, plus that stuff is maybe not as easy for Johnson to make great strategy/scheme advantages with cause it is new. All one way or the other probably would of worked better.