Stephen Hill just declared for the NFL draft.

[ncjacket]

Good points. I wonder if anyone regrets firing CCG, now that it's been four years with CPJ. Since CCG seemed to hit his recruiting stride near the end of his tenure, would he have been able to do the same thing that CPJ did (ie. finally beat ugag in '08 and win the ACC in '09) with his own players? And would that have spurred more success for these last two seasons? I'm just applying my own logic to the what-if scenario of CCG still being here. Personally, I wanted CCG fired; however, I also realize that new coaches every 5-7 years is no way to build a program back to national prominence, so, at some point, we have to stick with someone. Just my thoughts.

Chan had one good year recruiting...every other one, including his last few, are right in line with what we've always done.

 

[stinger78]

A coach should get six years to show what they can do. So far, I'm optimistic about Johnson.

But six years is generous, appropriate, and more than enough time.

Generally agree. You can also usually tell the trajectory of a program by year 5. Very, very few coaches change that trajectory after the first 5 years. This is mostly because very few get the opportunity. IMHO, 8-9 wins per year will keep a coach at Tech for a long time.

 

[GT1992]

Chan had one good year recruiting...every other one, including his last few, are right in line with what we've always done.

His last class was one of the best we've had in decades. They were the ones that Johnson used to win an ACC title (Burnett, Morgan, Dwyer, Nesbitt, Claytor, Tarrant, Melton, Jones). See the attached because to say that his last few recruiting classes were mediocre ignores a lot of facts.

http://dev.chuckoliver.net/2011/03/re-ranking-georgia-techs-2007-recruiting-class/

 

[ncjacket]

His last class was one of the best we've had in decades. They were the ones that Johnson used to win an ACC title (Burnett, Morgan, Dwyer, Nesbitt, Claytor, Tarrant, Melton, Jones). See the attached because to say that his last few recruiting classes were mediocre ignores a lot of facts.

http://dev.chuckoliver.net/2011/03/re-ranking-georgia-techs-2007-recruiting-class/

Let me restate then, Chan had 1 class that was better than our normal recruiting level. So maybe TechPreacher has a point that he finally figured it out, but there was no trend with Chan, it was one good year. The 2006 class was rated 49 on Scout and the 2005 group 48. None of PJ's classes have been ranked that high, although to be fair last year's was 44.

 

[AE 87]

Let me restate then, Chan had 1 class that was better than our normal recruiting level. So maybe TechPreacher has a point that he finally figured it out, but there was no trend with Chan, it was one good year. The 2006 class was rated 49 on Scout and the 2005 group 48. None of PJ's classes have been ranked that high, although to be fair last year's was 44.

What? Scout had 2008 class at 37, 2009 class at 32, 2010 class at 41 and 2011 at 44.

Rivals also has each of CPJ's recruiting classes in top 50 while only 2007 was in top 50 for Chan, iirc.

EDIT: After re-reading your post, perhaps you meant "high" as in number of ranking rather than quality of ranking. If so, I agree with you.

 

[GT1992]

Let me restate then, Chan had 1 class that was better than our normal recruiting level. So maybe TechPreacher has a point that he finally figured it out, but there was no trend with Chan, it was one good year. The 2006 class was rated 49 on Scout and the 2005 group 48. None of PJ's classes have been ranked that high, although to be fair last year's was 44.

That's fair. I think TechPreacher has a good point there too because Chan had systematically fixed the recruiting problem with new people and I would have expected improved recruiting going forward. That being said, he didn't get to see the results because he didn't beat Georgia or win bowl games. That's the lesson that CPJ will learn if the status quo is maintained.

 

[spandex]

Insanity is what Dave Braine, who kept Beamer and saddled us with Hewitt's contract, is all about. Dooley left VT under a cloud of controversy and Beamer (a popular VT alum) was given time, like Gailey was, to fix it. The real question is whether this offense can work at a BCS school without the recruiting. Chan eventually figured it out and I think Johnson will too, but so far, we haven't seen his players (which were on the field this year) be able to physically compete with strong/big teams.

I don't think any of us are calling for his head, but if we can't win pissant bowl games and compete with Georgia over the next couple of years, the logical conclusion will be that he isn't the right fit given both his own recruiting and on field performance. Six years is enough to determine whether it is working. So far, we're beating the teams that Chan did, having one or two big wins per year, and losing games at the end of the year just like Chan. The difference being that we've had Mississippi State and Kansas as our big OOC opponents instead of Auburn and Notre Dame.

In the meantime, our best players seem to be leaving as soon as they can, even when they aren't predicted to be drafted. That's the downside of CPJ's system, on offense, it doesn't help the players looking at the NFL.

We're not his enemies, we're the canary in the mine. If the problems don't get fixed in the next couple of years, it will be time to move on. That's a lot more time than Gill, Neuheisel, and a host of other coaches have been given. What more do you want? Blind faith will only take you so far.

Thanks for the thoughtful and lucid post that captures what many of us believe. With a few key playmakers, CPJ's offense can be superb.

 

[AE 87]

Insanity is what Dave Braine, who kept Beamer and saddled us with Hewitt's contract, is all about. Dooley left VT under a cloud of controversy and Beamer (a popular VT alum) was given time, like Gailey was, to fix it. The real question is whether this offense can work at a BCS school without the recruiting. Chan eventually figured it out and I think Johnson will too, but so far, we haven't seen his players (which were on the field this year) be able to physically compete with strong/big teams.

I don't think any of us are calling for his head, but if we can't win pissant bowl games and compete with Georgia over the next couple of years, the logical conclusion will be that he isn't the right fit given both his own recruiting and on field performance. Six years is enough to determine whether it is working. So far, we're beating the teams that Chan did, having one or two big wins per year, and losing games at the end of the year just like Chan. The difference being that we've had Mississippi State and Kansas as our big OOC opponents instead of Auburn and Notre Dame.

In the meantime, our best players seem to be leaving as soon as they can, even when they aren't predicted to be drafted. That's the downside of CPJ's system, on offense, it doesn't help the players looking at the NFL.

We're not his enemies, we're the canary in the mine. If the problems don't get fixed in the next couple of years, it will be time to move on. That's a lot more time than Gill, Neuheisel, and a host of other coaches have been given. What more do you want? Blind faith will only take you so far.

I'm not sure if the "We're not his enemies" is to be taken seriously.

First of all, the offense did fine this past year without a lot of the talent. That's seriously not a question. I will grant you that you often need playmakers to win close games, and we've lacked those the last couple of years, but that's not an issue of the offense. The fact that you frame it as whether "the offense can work" suggests that you don't really know what you're talking about.

Also, to boil Chan's problems down to U[sic]Ga and Bowl games misses the point. Mentioning Au and ND as our OOC foes may sound like a big deal, but we were 2-0 vs Auburn and 1-1 vs. ND between 2002 and 2007.

Here are our OOC opponents from 2002-2007 and final records from ESPN.com:

2002 Vandy, UConn, BYU - all wins (finished 7-6, 4-4)
2003 Vandy, Auburn, BYU - L to BYU (finished 7-6,4-4)
2004 Samford, UConn - both wins (finished 7-5, 4-4)
2005 Auburn, UConn - both wins (finished 7-5, 5-3)
2006 ND, Samford, Troy - L to ND (finished 9-5, 7-2)
2007 ND, Samford, Army - all wins (finished 7-6, 4-4)

For 4 of these 6 seasons we did not have a winning conference record. Under CPJ, we've failed to have a winning conference record in 1 of 4.

 

[slugboy]

I'm not sure if the "We're not his enemies" is to be taken seriously.

First of all, the offense did fine this past year without a lot of the talent. That's seriously not a question. I will grant you that you often need playmakers to win close games, and we've lacked those the last couple of years, but that's not an issue of the offense. The fact that you frame it as whether "the offense can work" suggests that you don't really know what you're talking about.

Also, to boil Chan's problems down to U[sic]Ga and Bowl games misses the point. Mentioning Au and ND as our OOC foes may sound like a big deal, but we were 2-0 vs Auburn and 1-1 vs. ND between 2002 and 2007.

Here are our OOC opponents from 2002-2007 and final records from ESPN.com:

2002 Vandy, UConn, BYU - all wins (finished 7-6, 4-4)
2003 Vandy, Auburn, BYU - L to BYU (finished 7-6,4-4)
2004 Samford, UConn - both wins (finished 7-5, 4-4)
2005 Auburn, UConn - both wins (finished 7-5, 5-3)
2006 ND, Samford, Troy - L to ND (finished 9-5, 7-2)
2007 ND, Samford, Army - all wins (finished 7-6, 4-4)

For 4 of these 6 seasons we did not have a winning conference record. Under CPJ, we've failed to have a winning conference record in 1 of 4.

Good analysis--especially the in-conference record, which probably gives a more accurate picture than anything.

 

[GT1992]

I'm not sure if the "We're not his enemies" is to be taken seriously.

First of all, the offense did fine this past year without a lot of the talent. That's seriously not a question. I will grant you that you often need playmakers to win close games, and we've lacked those the last couple of years, but that's not an issue of the offense. The fact that you frame it as whether "the offense can work" suggests that you don't really know what you're talking about.

Also, to boil Chan's problems down to U[sic]Ga and Bowl games misses the point. Mentioning Au and ND as our OOC foes may sound like a big deal, but we were 2-0 vs Auburn and 1-1 vs. ND between 2002 and 2007.

Here are our OOC opponents from 2002-2007 and final records from ESPN.com:

2002 Vandy, UConn, BYU - all wins (finished 7-6, 4-4)
2003 Vandy, Auburn, BYU - L to BYU (finished 7-6,4-4)
2004 Samford, UConn - both wins (finished 7-5, 4-4)
2005 Auburn, UConn - both wins (finished 7-5, 5-3)
2006 ND, Samford, Troy - L to ND (finished 9-5, 7-2)
2007 ND, Samford, Army - all wins (finished 7-6, 4-4)

For 4 of these 6 seasons we did not have a winning conference record. Under CPJ, we've failed to have a winning conference record in 1 of 4.

I think we know that the offense works against weaker competition, but it dissappeared at crucial times against VT, UGA, Utah, UVA, and Miami. I agree that the right players (i.e. Nesbitt, Dwyer, and Thomas) can make it work much better as they did 2 years ago. However, they were all Chan recruits and the Johnson recruits haven't played to the same level, yet. Perhaps the correct question is can the offense work with Johnson recruits against upper level competition, which you highlighted and ignored, so don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about when the last two years certainly should cast a doubt unless you're looking through rose colored glasses.

The mention of Auburn and Notre Dame was only to point out that we have made our OOC schedule easier to navigate for CPJ. Kansas and Mississippi State just don't generate the same excitement. And I know he had nothing to do with it.

I have yet to see anybody call for his head at this time. The defense has improved and the offense is still ok, but ending the season on such a down note year after year is what sent Chan packing and I would expect the same result IF we are barely over .500 in the next couple of years.

You chose to ignore large portions of my post so that you could make some non-sensical point. One way or another CPJ has to make it over the hump more than once every six seasons. Do you remember Air Coryell or the Houston run and shoot? How many Super Bowls did they win putting up big numbers? It takes more than just an offense and that's a head coach's responsibility.

 

[ncjacket]

What? Scout had 2008 class at 37, 2009 class at 32, 2010 class at 41 and 2011 at 44.

Rivals also has each of CPJ's recruiting classes in top 50 while only 2007 was in top 50 for Chan, iirc.

EDIT: After re-reading your post, perhaps you meant "high" as in number of ranking rather than quality of ranking. If so, I agree with you.

Not exactly. What I was saying is that Chan had one good year, but the rest of his classes were no better than anything PJ has done. Chan's last one was 2007, the two you refer to are Paul's.

 

[TechPreacher]

That's fair. I think TechPreacher has a good point there too because Chan had systematically fixed the recruiting problem with new people and I would have expected improved recruiting going forward. That being said, he didn't get to see the results because he didn't beat Georgia or win bowl games. That's the lesson that CPJ will learn if the status quo is maintained.

I think you stated my point better than I did. If you are correct, then it is obvious to me that the litmus test of "beat ugag and win a bowl or else" is destructive to the future of the program. Do I want to beat ugag and win a bowl game, preferably the OB? You bet I do. However, am I ready to fire CPJ if he doesn't do it in the next two years? Nope. Why not? Because of the CCG case study. I don't want to repeat this with a new coach, and say in 6 years from now, "Wow. Looking back, it seems that CPJ had finally gotten the team to a point to start winning. If we had only kept him, we would be farther along than this right now." Haste makes waste; patience is a virtue; good things come to those who wait.

 

[GT1992]

I think you stated my point better than I did. If you are correct, then it is obvious to me that the litmus test of "beat ugag and win a bowl or else" is destructive to the future of the program. Do I want to beat ugag and win a bowl game, preferably the OB? You bet I do. However, am I ready to fire CPJ if he doesn't do it in the next two years? Nope. Why not? Because of the CCG case study. I don't want to repeat this with a new coach, and say in 6 years from now, "Wow. Looking back, it seems that CPJ had finally gotten the team to a point to start winning. If we had only kept him, we would be farther along than this right now." Haste makes waste; patience is a virtue; good things come to those who wait.

By the same token, if there really is a mismatch where he can't get the right players for his system, waiting only prolongs the inevitable. To me, the season after next is the key. We get the favorable home schedule and Tevin will be gone. The questions of whether he restocked the cupboard and got them game experience will be answered. Have you ever thought that maybe this offense with inferior talent works best in the military academy setting due to the precision that is drilled into them vs. the average college athlete's discipline?

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Chan had poorly rated classes until his sixth year. Maybe we should give CPJ the same time frame before we say he can't recruit on par with Chan. Also, The fab 4 were all upperclassmen when they won the ACC in '09. Let's see what happens when CPJ's first full class (not his 5th) gets to the same point in their careers.

Let's rate CPJ's 5th full class to Chan's and then we can compare body of work.

 

[GT1992]

Chan had poorly rated classes until his sixth year. Maybe we should give CPJ the same time frame before we say he can't recruit on par with Chan. Also, The fab 4 were all upperclassmen when they won the ACC in '09. Let's see what happens when CPJ's first full class (not his 5th) gets to the same point in their careers.

Let's rate CPJ's 5th full class to Chan's and then we can compare body of work.

That would be year 6, which is what the debate was about. Tech Preacher predicted year 7 to be the big year and most of us have said that he better show something in the next 2 years to get to year 7.

 

[Diseqc]

That would be year 6, which is what the debate was about. Tech Preacher predicted year 7 to be the big year and most of us have said that he better show something in the next 2 years to get to year 7.

He gets year 7 just about no matter what. Can't afford to fire him.

 

[TechPreacher]

By the same token, if there really is a mismatch where he can't get the right players for his system, waiting only prolongs the inevitable. To me, the season after next is the key. We get the favorable home schedule and Tevin will be gone. The questions of whether he restocked the cupboard and got them game experience will be answered. Have you ever thought that maybe this offense with inferior talent works best in the military academy setting due to the precision that is drilled into them vs. the average college athlete's discipline?

OK. What will you say if, in 2013, the team doesn't perform like you expected? Will you call for CPJ's head? Remember that, potentially, Tech could have a QB starting his first college game ever that season, and, the schedule for 2013 and 2014 will be the toughest possible ACC schedule in the conference, with FSU in the rotation those two years. Would you be willing to fire a good coach after one year with a new QB? To me, at that point, there is too much potential in the future with the development of VL and JT at QB, an even more experienced OL the next year, an ever-improving defense, and improvement in the quality of the recruiting classes to scrap everything and start over. Overall, I think we agree in principle; we just disagree on the amount of patience we are willing to show. Thanks for the discussion.

 

[TechPreacher]

That would be year 6, which is what the debate was about. Tech Preacher predicted year 7 to be the big year and most of us have said that he better show something in the next 2 years to get to year 7.

Actually, if I understand what dcs said, it would be year 8, because he said that CCG's players (the big 4) won the ACC in '09, which would have been CCG's 8th season, recruited from his 5th class. Hence, my apprehension for firing CPJ after year 6.

 

[ncjacket]

He gets year 7 just about no matter what. Can't afford to fire him.

True, but the nativfes will really be restless.

 

[ncjacket]

OK. What will you say if, in 2013, the team doesn't perform like you expected? Will you call for CPJ's head? Remember that, potentially, Tech could have a QB starting his first college game ever that season, and, the schedule for 2013 and 2014 will be the toughest possible ACC schedule in the conference, with FSU in the rotation those two years. Would you be willing to fire a good coach after one year with a new QB? To me, at that point, there is too much potential in the future with the development of VL and JT at QB, an even more experienced OL the next year, an ever-improving defense, and improvement in the quality of the recruiting classes to scrap everything and start over. Overall, I think we agree in principle; we just disagree on the amount of patience we are willing to show. Thanks for the discussion.

Depends on how we are playing. You can be a very good team and still lose a big game. What I want to see is a team that isn't being outmatched struggling to hang on and hit some big plays. I think we will get there, but I'm not going to make any statements about how I will react to any hypothetical situation. I'll have to see where we are.

Oh, and I don't care about where we play who. Our schedule is our schedule. We can't make excuses in advance or assume we won't compete in a given year because of where we play. Somehow it doesn't seem to bother VT so it shouldn't bother us.