Will we be able to recruit with Chadwell O?

He runs the ball 58% of the time vs Longs 51% of the time this year. PJ ran the ball over 80% of the time. There will be a significant difference compared to what we did under PJ. With that said, I believe PJ recruited about the same overall as Collins.
 
Chadwell’s offense more closely resembles where the NFL is headed than a scheme that would turn off an NFL-aspiring high schooler. He’s running lots of RPO. The scheme doesn’t have cutting defenders to the ground as a cornerstone - which was the second-biggest recruiting obstacle CPJ had. I don’t think it’s an issue whatsoever. In fact an offensive identity like this could help recruiting.
 
gtrower said:
Shotgun cures all baby. Doesn’t matter if it’s effective if it looks sexy.
Click to expand...
They don't think it be like it is but it do.

CGsmCP3.png
 
There are so many factors that go into recruiting that it's difficult to say exactly.

I don't think CPJ was necessarily a phenomenal recruiter, but he was certainly hampered by a lack of budget and support from the administration.

Any coach that runs anything at all unique, whether it's just a gimmick or truly innovative, will face negative recruiting. However, that can be overcome with success both in terms of wins and getting players drafted.

Overall, I'm not too concerned about a potential CJC regime. Comparisons will certainly be made to CPJ's offense, but just watching a few plays makes the difference clear. Hopefully anyone with any football knowledge (ie recruits) will see that pretty clearly.
 
Wait...you are saying the RPO is just an option offense......so that is what the "O" stands for....who knew?
 
MACHETE said:
Real concern that people will just label his offense another triple option offense and we don't get high caliber recruits. I know he runs an RPO out of the shotgun but basically this is a dressed up option offense.
Click to expand...
The risk is there. And the parsing of what his offense really is has nothing to do with it - its what "people" say - that's what all the other schools will say, the SEC will say it and the SEC will tell ESPN to say it and so on.

J Batt best do his homework.
 
The other guys will always find reasons to negative recruit against us. Calculus, no girls, you name it. Well, we got girls now, and we can show a really good highlight reel of JChad’s offense. Negative recruit THAT, other guys.
 
Before any of you guys jump off the cliff because we might run the ball and (gasp) run the option or an RPO, check the stats of some of these high octane offenses - Ole Miss, Tennessee, Ohio State, USC., TCU for starters. I think you will find they run the ball quite effectively.
 
MACHETE said:
Real concern that people will just label his offense another triple option offense and we don't get high caliber recruits. I know he runs an RPO out of the shotgun but basically this is a dressed up option offense.
Click to expand...
I think winning will bring in recruits. Kids want to be part of winning programs. That's why Ugag, Bama, OSU and such reload every year. Let's put the money the kids are given aside. It's harder to draw interest, while losing over and over. I don't think the system matters as much as producing results. I could care less if we ran it 99% of the time and won 10 games a year. As long as we are winning, who cares???
 
The Wasp said:
Before any of you guys jump off the cliff because we might run the ball and (gasp) run the option or an RPO, check the stats of some of these high octane offenses - Ole Miss, Tennessee, Ohio State, USC., TCU for starters. I think you will find they run the ball quite effectively.
Click to expand...
Hardly anyone cares or is talking about this issue other than the option fanboys who are pushing an issue that isn’t really an issue.

But keep pushing the option ball stuff and it will become an issue and resistance to it will build.
 
Jmonty71 said:
I think winning will bring in recruits. Kids want to be part of winning programs. That's why Ugag, Bama, OSU and such reload every year. Let's put the money the kids are given aside. It's harder to draw interest, while losing over and over. I don't think the system matters as much as producing results. I could care less if we ran it 99% of the time and won 10 games a year. As long as we are winning, who cares???
Click to expand...

Lots of recruits would care if we really ran it 99 percent of the time. A good chunk of them have aspirations of making the NFL -- even most 3 and 4 star recruits want a shot at developing during college and making it to the league. Playing college ball in an offense that doesn't pass at all would work heavily against that.

Winning is important, and it is the only thing that matters to fans, but it's not the only thing that matters to recruits.
 
savbandjacket said:
Hardly anyone cares or is talking about this issue other than the option fanboys who are pushing an issue that isn’t really an issue.

But keep pushing the option ball stuff and it will become an issue and resistance to it will build.
Click to expand...
What do you mean pushing option ball?
 
I was definitely soured on the CPJ option at the end and I would be against hiring anyone from his tree. I am not against Chadwell. I just don't think it's going to be the same deal at all in regards to recruiting. I could be wrong. I was certainly wrong about Collins.
 
andrew said:
Lots of recruits would care if we really ran it 99 percent of the time. A good chunk of them have aspirations of making the NFL -- even most 3 and 4 star recruits want a shot at developing during college and making it to the league. Playing college ball in an offense that doesn't pass at all would work heavily against that.

Winning is important, and it is the only thing that matters to fans, but it's not the only thing that matters to recruits.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I think recruits are attracted to teams that know who they are, can put points on the board or defend and produce Ws. Would we miss out on pass happy QBs and WRs that care only about stats? Yes. Even CPJs run happy offense produce talent at the WR level. We could focus on monster RBs, nasty O and D linemen and good defenders in the backfield and be just fine. Now, with that 99%, I was exaggerating. However; I do remain in my stance. Winning produces the ability to recruit better. Recruits could care less about losing programs, as a rule. It's hard to show development to any NFL team, on a losing team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top