With Cincy being in the top 10...

[puc86]

1 minute ago, CousinRicky said:

Don't think Scott was hired to run the option. You would hire a guy that knows that system

That’s the thing I don’t get about the hiring of college football coaches, CJS should not have been hired to run his system here any more than an option coach should have been and things typically go better for coaches when they adapt to the situation that they are in more so than when they try to adapt the situation to them and yet teams continue to hire bad fits that hang onto what they have known even when it takes themselves down more often than it lifts up any programs. It’s just a giant wheel of excuses, mistakes and accomplishing nothing until it’s the next guys turn to bring in his system that will fail until his guys get in and he is fired for the next guy that can’t accomplish anything because the guys are once again wrong; it puts the us government and polling to shame in it’s wasted money and institutionalized failure.

[Bull94]

8 hours ago, puc86 said:

That’s the thing I don’t get about the hiring of college football coaches, CJS should not have been hired to run his system here any more than an option coach should have been and things typically go better for coaches when they adapt to the situation that they are in more so than when they try to adapt the situation to them and yet teams continue to hire bad fits that hang onto what they have known even when it takes themselves down more often than it lifts up any programs. It’s just a giant wheel of excuses, mistakes and accomplishing nothing until it’s the next guys turn to bring in his system that will fail until his guys get in and he is fired for the next guy that can’t accomplish anything because the guys are once again wrong; it puts the us government and polling to shame in it’s wasted money and institutionalized failure.

it doesn't matter what system you run if you don't have  top rated recruits  to run it.

funny that you would even suggest running the option. it would take years to recruit and develop the personnel to run that offense successfully. completely different skill sets. you don't just magically say "alright guys I know you weren't recruited or developed to run this offense and I know most of you weren't top rated option recruits but I know we can run it with perfection like Tommy Frazier and the 1995 Nebraska team"

I guess what you are suggesting is that we should just continue to run Strong's offense because that is what these players have been recruited and trained to run.

Edited November 5, 2020 by Bull94

[puc86]

9 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

it doesn't matter what system you run if you don't have  top rated recruits  to run it.

funny that you would even suggest running the option. it would take years to recruit and develop the personnel to run that offense successfully. completely different skill sets. you don't just magically say "alright guys I know you weren't recruited or developed to run this offense and I know most of you weren't top rated option recruits but I know we can run it with perfection like Tommy Frazier and the 1995 Nebraska team"

I guess what you are suggesting is that we should just continue to run Strong's offense because that is what these players have been recruited and trained to run.

I don’t think we would be the best at running the option I just think that’s where are current skill sets points so it would seem to be the one we would have the best shot at running (yes there is a difference). I think it’s funny that people act like implementing it would be some impossible hurdle to overcome when we currently are working with an unserviceable offense that also isn’t successfully implemented. I’m not sure that I would say that I believe these recruits were successfully recruited and trained to run Strong’s offense or else he would still be here, as a matter of fact the only two things I would rule out trying to run with them are KB’s offense and Weis’s offense.

[Bull94]

7 minutes ago, puc86 said:

I don’t think we would be the best at running the option I just think that’s where are current skill sets points so it would seem to be the one we would have the best shot at running (yes there is a difference). I think it’s funny that people act like implementing it would be some impossible hurdle to overcome when we currently are working with an unserviceable offense that also isn’t successfully implemented. I’m not sure that I would say that I believe these recruits were successfully recruited and trained to run Strong’s offense or else he would still be here, as a matter of fact the only two things I would rule out trying to run with them are KB’s offense and Weis’s offense.

running the option requires a completely different skill set especially with the linemen. you don't just come in and run it even half way successfully. It would look just as bad as when an option teams tries to convert to a pro-style offense. Our players weren't recruited or trained to do it. Look at georgia Tech last year.

They lost to Citadel.

Of course they did beat Charlie Strong's mighty USF team

[puc86]

8 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

running the option requires a completely different skill set especially with the linemen. you don't just come in and run it even half way successfully. It would look just as bad as when an option teams tries to convert to a pro-style offense. Our players weren't recruited or trained to do it. Look at georgia Tech last year.

They lost to Citadel.

Of course they did beat Charlie Strong's mighty USF team

Our players have demonstrated, particularly at the line level that they are not capable of running a pro style offense. Their performance directly drives me to my conclusion which is the opposite of what college coaches seem to do. 

[CousinRicky]

9 hours ago, puc86 said:

That’s the thing I don’t get about the hiring of college football coaches, CJS should not have been hired to run his system here any more than an option coach should have been and things typically go better for coaches when they adapt to the situation that they are in more so than when they try to adapt the situation to them and yet teams continue to hire bad fits that hang onto what they have known even when it takes themselves down more often than it lifts up any programs. It’s just a giant wheel of excuses, mistakes and accomplishing nothing until it’s the next guys turn to bring in his system that will fail until his guys get in and he is fired for the next guy that can’t accomplish anything because the guys are once again wrong; it puts the us government and polling to shame in it’s wasted money and institutionalized failure.

One sentence?  Nice job.  Two sentence total.  That second sentence wasn't nearly long enough.  

You hire a coach usually because he's had some success somewhere.  A person might think you'd let him try to do the things that made him successful. 

Hey Bob, I know we hired you because you're a whiz at engineering.  But we're going to transfer you to Sales.  

Edited November 5, 2020 by CousinRicky

[puc86]

9 minutes ago, CousinRicky said:

One sentence?  Nice job.  Two sentence total.  That second sentence wasn't nearly long enough.  

You hire a coach usually because he's had some success somewhere.  A person might think you'd let him try to do the things that made him successful. 

Hey Bob, I know we hired you because you're a whiz at engineering.  But we're going to transfer you to Sales.  

Not exactly the same thing as he would still be a coach but yes I do agree that my issue is more with who we hire than with the people that get hired, that the only successful coach since CJL left completely pivoted from their career long strategy in order to finally find success probably skews my opinion about how to be successful here.

[Bull94]

21 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Our players have demonstrated, particularly at the line level that they are not capable of running a pro style offense. Their performance directly drives me to my conclusion which is the opposite of what college coaches seem to do. 

just because they aren't good at running our current system does not mean they will be any better at running any other system. Option linemen are more athletic and are better run blockers. They use a completely different blocking technique. You don't take subpar guys that were developed and recruited as pass blockers and turn them into serviceable option linemen.

What you are suggesting is that our coaches should come in and run an offensive system that they have never had any experience with. They should be able to teach our players who don't have the right set of skills to run this offense and they should be able to do it in less than a year while quarantined. It's beyond ridiculous that you even suggest this.

[CousinRicky]

22 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Not exactly the same thing as he would still be a coach but yes I do agree that my issue is more with who we hire than with the people that get hired, that the only successful coach since CJL left completely pivoted from their career long strategy in order to finally find success probably skews my opinion about how to be successful here.

Okay, I couldn't even get through this one.  You must be getting better (or worse?)

[CousinRicky]

19 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

just because they aren't good at running our current system does not mean they will be any better at running any other system. Option linemen are more athletic and are better run blockers. They use a completely different blocking technique. You don't take subpar guys that were developed and recruited as pass blockers and turn them into serviceable option linemen.

What you are suggesting is that our coaches should come in and run an offensive system that they have never had any experience with. They should be able to teach our players who don't have the right set of skills to run this offense and they should be able to do it in less than a year while quarantined. It's beyond ridiculous that you even suggest this.

You are now entering The Puclight Zone