When Kelly leaves, we should get a Paul Johnson type
- Thread starter Johnny Fairplay
- Start date
ND would not be able to recruit those athletes in the Triple option, elite players want to play in a pro set or spread. That's part of the reason ND ran off Lou Holtz.
well, the only flaw in Scubasteves argument is we don't get elite players so we need a gimmick offense so I agree with the OP. Kind of what Purple Face is running now but has an identity.
Unfortunately, no one will take the politician off our hands and as these 8-4 or 7-5 seasons become the norm after 10 years, any moderately successful season like 9-3 will buy this fraud another 10 years because the fans who were around in the 70's, late 80's and early 90's will be long gone.
Unfortunately, no one will take the politician off our hands and as these 8-4 or 7-5 seasons become the norm after 10 years, any moderately successful season like 9-3 will buy this fraud another 10 years because the fans who were around in the 70's, late 80's and early 90's will be long gone.
ND's elite athletes would be elite athletes at other schools. No 4 or 5 star elite Offensive player wants to play in a 50 year old passe offense. And to the board jack ass. Brian Kelly is averaging 9 wins a season, so take your 8-4 remarks and stick them up your ass. You're a moron.
Exclude the 12-1 season and then do the math. I can believe some of the idiots on this board. They can't even calculate and average!!! uneducated, ignorant ass
I would think elite o linemen, running backs, TEs, and WRs (GT has several in the NFL) could be recruited. The only position would be QB and there coach Kelly has put as many in the NFL as coach Johnson since his time at ND.
How did that work out in Nebraska?
3 8-5 seasons in five years is what it is. the 12 -1 and 9 -4 mixed in without a major bowl victory takes some of the shine off the total average.
See how I can do that w/o the slanderous insults!
You missed a bunch of letters in the team name. That's not how you spell Indiana.
As much as I love the triple option, I'd rather not. Paul will stay at GT forever, he's their best coach since Ross and has taken the program to heights it hadn't seen in the longest time.
LOOL!
You cannot reliably win enough in today's game against top competition playing Johnson's game.
1) You have to play perfectly (no holding or chop blocks or fumbles at all) and if you do, you'll be difficult to defeat BUT if you don't, you will not consistently defeat elite teams that have greater room for error, more paths to victory, and greater variation toleration and can hedge better against bad luck.
2) if you get down in the game, coming back is so difficult. A team that can throw the ball has more paths to victory. If you're running this option, your path to victory is to play well throughout and play with the lead. There is NO stealing games (in which you do nothing most if the game but get hot for a quarter) with this offense and hence, fewer paths to victory. Why limit your paths to victory? This offense doesn't allow for much adversity, bad luck, etc. An offense that can throw the ball can hedge against bad luck better.
3) it is very difficult to run a two minute offense with this offense. At the end of the first half, ND didn't worry at all about throwing incomplete passes and having to punt back to GT with about a minute left on the clock because GT cannot throw it. ND could be very aggressive with the ball without fear of stopping he clock and having to punt. GT's inability to throw took pressure off of ND in that situation at the end of the half; sure, Jones fumbled in that situation but that was a player error and had nothing to do with system.
You cannot reliably win enough in today's game against top competition playing Johnson's game.
1) You have to play perfectly (no holding or chop blocks or fumbles at all) and if you do, you'll be difficult to defeat BUT if you don't, you will not consistently defeat elite teams that have greater room for error, more paths to victory, and greater variation toleration and can hedge better against bad luck.
2) if you get down in the game, coming back is so difficult. A team that can throw the ball has more paths to victory. If you're running this option, your path to victory is to play well throughout and play with the lead. There is NO stealing games (in which you do nothing most if the game but get hot for a quarter) with this offense and hence, fewer paths to victory. Why limit your paths to victory? This offense doesn't allow for much adversity, bad luck, etc. An offense that can throw the ball can hedge against bad luck better.
3) it is very difficult to run a two minute offense with this offense. At the end of the first half, ND didn't worry at all about throwing incomplete passes and having to punt back to GT with about a minute left on the clock because GT cannot throw it. ND could be very aggressive with the ball without fear of stopping he clock and having to punt. GT's inability to throw took pressure off of ND in that situation at the end of the half; sure, Jones fumbled in that situation but that was a player error and had nothing to do with system.
