Straw poll on Bond...

ContactBuzz

ContactBuzz

Probably Drinks Cosmopolitans
Joined
Jul 23, 2002
Messages
15,219
Is anyone disappointed with the hire? From what I've read, it looks like most are at least cautiously optimistic which seems strange because our message board fanbase is usually divided on just about every issue.
 
Realistically, an unknown commodity. He hasnt been around the big boys and was able to play an all or nothing gameplan from what I gather. Time will tell, but I wasnt a huge fan of Nix (nor did I think he was terrible) so its more of a "we'll see" thing with me.
 
Happy and excited. I think this change is good. Got tons of weapons running the ball and a more accurate QB to toss it around.
Chan has stated that he likes 007's formula and that he has some things that he thinks are very innovative. So, wait and see.....
(He may have even said "revolutionary" or along those lines)
 
I'm not going to judge the man until I see what he can do. Every new hire should get a fair shake.
 
I don't really have an opinion one way or the other. I do think we will see marked improvement solely because I thought Pat Nix was a complete joke.
 
Hearing who was hired did not really excite me. But, what would have been exciting was for a well known "name" to have been hired. Who's to say a big name would outperform Bond. I wish him well and look forward to judging him based on a season's performance.
 
ContactBuzz said:
Is anyone disappointed with the hire? From what I've read, it looks like most are at least cautiously optimistic which seems strange because our message board fanbase is usually divided on just about every issue.
Click to expand...

i think it's a very good hire. He's the perfect fit from a cehmistry, style, and philosophy perspective. I think we win 10 regular season games next season with this hire IF we can find 2-3 WRs who can catch the ball.
 
I think it's a very good hire. He's the perfect fit from a cehmistry, style, and philosophy perspective.
Click to expand...
It's also probably a good fit from a budget perspective.


Okay, so I've looked around, and I haven't seen what sort of plays he likes to call. All I saw was he likes to use a single-back rushing attack. What kind of stuff is it? Anybody know?
 
I think it is a great hire! Never really heard about him before this but the more I read the more I like! Hopefully he can put up huge numbers!!!
 
Nix's play calling was poor. We were better on offense this year because our players were better than the rest of the conference.
None of Nix's gimmick plays worked all year. He was 0 for about 15.
He couldn't get Ball in the pocket (only part Nix's fault). He couldn't sustain drives late. And the Wake game was embarrasing play calling, and he had multile series to correct it.

Bond looks like an improvement. The one back offense sounds like a good supplement to the existing offense. It is not either or. You can have multiple formations. It is not rocket science. You probably go with one more than the other, but the best choice will be made. I'm looking forward.
 
I'm like you said "cautiously optimistic." From everything I've read, Bond seems like a good offensive mind who will best use the talent that we have available. I think it's important to note that many other schools have made great strides by hiring a relatively unknown OC.

I can't complain that he hasn't played against the "big boys" yet - he hasn't had the chance. However, he doesn't run a gimmick offense, so I'm apt to believe that his offense will work anywhere given good athletes and his apparently good coaching.

Here's to 2-007!
 
I'm very excited about Bond. He looks like a great hire.

And what is this "hasn't played with the big boys" crap?

Total offense against Ohio State this year:
#1 Michigan, 397 yards
#2 Florida, 370 yards
#3 Northern Illinois, 343 yards

That's more total offense than Texas, Penn State, Michigan State, etc.

In 2005, 411 yards total offense against Michigan (practically the same as Ohio State and Penn State), 539 yards against Northwestern (2nd best against them, better than Michigan, Penn State, Ohio State, etc.).

In 2004, 337 yards against Maryland (better than GT and NC State), 402 yards against Iowa St. (#4 performance of the season against them).

Looks like Bond has already been successful against almost all the BCS-conference opponents he has faced, and that was with MAC-level talent.
 
Really - I was excited about anyone who might even make an ATTEMPT at a half time adjustment.

Nix always had great game plans going into each game - which I suspect were created with the help of Uncle Chan - but his half time adjustments simply weren't.

"Weren't" as in, not good, not even bad, he just didn't make any. He was an absolute deer in the headlights any time we got very behind at all.

And he called the spike on 3rd down, as well, and somehow still thought it was ok to continue to lack humility in front of anyone.

He's not even decent to be around. When you are not any good, you at least need to be cordial to the ones that pay your salary.

ANYTHING is an improvement.

On top of that, I think John Bond has been doing a lot with a little for a long time. The worst I could see him being is acceptably decent. I've read enough to (cautiously) think he's gonna be pretty dang good.

He most certainly is an upgrade.

His offense, with not near the talent as ours, put up 12 on Ohio State. We put up 12 on UGA.

He put up 14 on Iowa, who was pretty dang good last year. We put up 6 on Wake.

He didn't have Calvin or our line, but did have a very strong tailback (#1 in the country - 170 yards against Ohio State last year). The question is who made who? I'd say Bond made the tailback, because he put up similar production, although not #1, with another NFL tailback just a couple of years before - at Northern Illinois of all places.

He's been productive everywhere he's been. I see him as solid and respectable - and an upgrade from Patrick Nix at worst. But a 'possible' next level talent at OC.

It's a good hire for sure. A great hire can't be said yet.
 
I am excited for sure. He has stated Cox will be used so he will probably design a 2-back offense. I see this guy probably as a 60-40 run/pass without ever looking at statistics from just what I have read about him. He DID train some under Lou Holtz....so he is probably conservative with lots of runs and short passes.
 
Wait and see. Sometimes the step up in competition works out (Urban Meyer), other times it doesn't (Skip Holtz at South Carolina). Hopefully, this will prove to be a good hire, but I'm still on the fence on him as I am with Chan.
 
None of Nix's gimmick plays worked all year.
Click to expand...

That's entirely and completely untrue. We had a TD pass from Cox to Ball. We had the Calvin throw-back-to-reggie middle screen. We had numerous reverses to Grant out of the slot.

To be sure some didn't work, like the flea flicker vs VT, and using Calvin as the pitch man on speed option vs Clemson, but there were a pretty good percentage of gimmick plays that did work this year.

I think Nix would have looked like an absolute genius if Reggie hadn't been the QB.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top