Jeff Monken to Army

[Bisonwinagn]

Army: Sources tell us that Jeff Monken will be Army's next head coach. Monken has served as the head coach at Georgia Southern since November of 2009, compiling a 38-16 record.

http://www.footballscoop.com/the-scoop

[Bogus Megapardus]

Yes - several sources reporting this. Obviously the triple option will continue at West Point.

[centennial]

O noes... I was going to root G Southern to win the Sun Belt next year. One of my ex-coworkers was from Savannah and went there..

[IBleedYellow]

Goodluck on your FBS transition, GaGo. I really do hope you guys succeed, but this will make it that much more difficult.

Also, Army? Man that'd be a hell of a place to recruit for I'd believe.

[Bogus Megapardus]

Also, best of luck to (now former) Army HC Rich Ellerson and his family. An excellent coach and an even better person. Any FCS program in need of a coach right now would be lucky to land him.

[DFW HOYA]

Unfortunately, doesn't seem to change the dynamic at West Point.

Perhaps USMA sees him as the next Paul Johnson, but that's what they saw in Rich Ellerson, too.

[Bisonwinagn]

For the old timers..Why don't Army and Nave play FCS football and be in the Patriot league like the basketball teams? There must be a valid reason, but they never compete at the FBS level.

[eaglewraith]

F.
M.
L.

Ugh.

[frozennorth]

For the old timers..Why don't Army and Nave play FCS football and be in the Patriot league like the basketball teams? There must be a valid reason, but they never compete at the FBS level.

because they want to play at the highest level, where they belong.

[Professor Chaos]

I hope all the Bison fans clamoring for a move to the FBS after Bohl's departure was announced take note of this.

[DFW HOYA]

For the old timers..Why don't Army and Nave play FCS football and be in the Patriot league like the basketball teams? There must be a valid reason, but they never compete at the FBS level.

Because the academies have higher ambitions than to play at Multi-Sport Field.

Come to think of it, a few PL teams do, too...

[Sandlapper Spike]

SI's Pete Thamel is now tweeting that Army has yet to make a decision.

[Bogus Megapardus]

SI's Pete Thamel is now tweeting that Army has yet to make a decision.

Could be that the contract is still under negotiation, or could be that Army is still waiting on someone else to decide. Is Monken's agent pushing this????

[Sandlapper Spike]

Maybe it's the negotiation that's holding it up. The beat writer for Army also says it's Monken, but it may not be official until Thursday or Friday for contractual reasons.

[Go...gate]

For the old timers..Why don't Army and Nave play FCS football and be in the Patriot league like the basketball teams? There must be a valid reason, but they never compete at the FBS level.

From your lips to the ears of God and the Supes at Annapolis and West Point....

[UNHWildcat18]

Ugh i feel bad for people having to watch army now do that triple option ****. I'm not trying to say it doesn't work ect.... but god to me its not football if you pass attempt an average of 5 times a game... That and it's just so boring to watch unless the guy pulls off a huge run. Not to be a hater but **** the triple option style of play.

[Baldy]

Ugh i feel bad for people having to watch army now do that triple option ****. I'm not trying to say it doesn't work ect.... but god to me its not football if you pass attempt an average of 5 times a game... That and it's just so boring to watch unless the guy pulls off a huge run. Not to be a hater but **** the triple option style of play.
Noob xlolx

[BisonBacker]

Ugh i feel bad for people having to watch army now do that triple option ****. I'm not trying to say it doesn't work ect.... but god to me its not football if you pass attempt an average of 5 times a game... That and it's just so boring to watch unless the guy pulls off a huge run. Not to be a hater but **** the triple option style of play.

If you truly believe that then you have no appreciation for real football. The triple option run correctly is a thing of beauty!

[clenz]

If you truly believe that then you have no appreciation for real football. The triple option run correctly is a thing of beauty!

This.

I feel bad for any UNH fan that has to watch whatever it is they try to do....

Sent from my S4 using Tapatalk

[eaglewraith]

Ugh i feel bad for people having to watch army now do that triple option ****. I'm not trying to say it doesn't work ect.... but god to me its not football if you pass attempt an average of 5 times a game... That and it's just so boring to watch unless the guy pulls off a huge run. Not to be a hater but **** the triple option style of play.

Hate to burst your bubble, but they've been running an option offense already.

- - - Updated - - -


If you truly believe that then you have no appreciation for real football. The triple option run correctly is a thing of beauty!

Had you guys a little worried last year for sure.

I think we were the last team to really play a game that forced ya'll to work for it too (minus Kansas State).

[clenz]

Hate to burst your bubble, but they've been running an option offense already.

- - - Updated - - -



Had you guys a little worried last year for sure.

I think we were the last team to really play a game that forced ya'll to work for it too (minus Kansas State).

Um....UNI lead ndsu for 57 minutes this year

Sent from my S4 using Tapatalk

[IBleedYellow]

Hate to burst your bubble, but they've been running an option offense already.

- - - Updated - - -



Had you guys a little worried last year for sure.

I think we were the last team to really play a game that forced ya'll to work for it too (minus Kansas State).


A LITTLE?! Dear Lord I probably lost 20 years of my life that day. That was an flipping intense game. I love watching option football, just not when it's being played against us (if you are Wofford or GSU, I should add)!

[UNHWildcat18]

If you truly believe that then you have no appreciation for real football. The triple option run correctly is a thing of beauty!

Not true at all I love football and yes it can be truly clean and effective when ran properly, doesn't mean anyone has to enjoy watching it or care for it for that matter...

[UNHWildcat18]

This.

I feel bad for any UNH fan that has to watch whatever it is they try to do....

Sent from my S4 using Tapatalk

I mean besides a few play calls a game UNH moves the ball really well... while I disagree with some calls the style of play is fine. I only feel bad for UNI fans because not that I care that they make the playoffs but god(I know its unfortunate with injuries) but every year you guys don't make it all you guys do(not you necessarily) is complain about the deservingness of other teams in the field especially UNH(check the espn playoff conversations). So do us a favor and for the love of god make the playoffs next year. Hopefully we will win the CAA or get a significant at large so we dont have to listen to your fans complain when we make it as a "bubble" team.

[Tribal]

I have a good friend who's a huge GSU fan. He sees the triple-o as football in its truest form and, historically, he's correct. While I prefer a mix of run/pass, the triple o is great for teams that normally don't face it (ask Alabama). I don't think it's the best offense for the FBS unless you mix in more passing like GT, though. Athletes are just too fast and conference-mates obviously practice for it.

[PaladinFan]

This creates an interesting question for Georgia Southern. Their fan base is vehemently opposed to any offense but the triple option. They tried something different under other coaches, which failed miserably.

Will be interesting to see whether GSU strikes out for another option coach, or tries to modernize with their move to the FBS. We can all easily assume that there's not a plethora of head coaching candidates out there who are "option guys."

[blueballs]

This creates an interesting question for Georgia Southern. Their fan base is vehemently opposed to any offense but the triple option. They tried something different under other coaches, which failed miserably.

Will be interesting to see whether GSU strikes out for another option coach, or tries to modernize with their move to the FBS. We can all easily assume that there's not a plethora of head coaching candidates out there who are "option guys."

That's the great unknown at this point. GSU has changed the president and AD since Monken was hired.

[centennial]

That's the great unknown at this point. GSU has changed the president and AD since Monken was hired.
I think GSU can be successful with TO. They will have to open the playbook up more and throw a little more.

[GABison]

How many times a game did we throw when Bentrim/Simdorn were running the option? I think Simdorn had 3 TD's throws in the 1990 title game, correct?

[eaglewraith]

Um....UNI lead ndsu for 57 minutes this year

Sent from my S4 using Tapatalk

Your team is purple right?

You know what that means....

[WM2001]

The real question is how many coaches know the flexbone option? Then, how many of them would want to go to GSU as most coach at high-profile programs (i.e. Georgia Tech).

[walliver]

The real question is how many coaches know the flexbone option? Then, how many of them would want to go to GSU as most coach at high-profile programs (i.e. Georgia Tech).

I would imagine that a Georgia Tech assistant could could easily go to GSU as head coach. It's not like Paul Johnson is getting great offers from other schools.

I also don't know how long the option will be welcome at Georgia Tech.

[PaladinFan]

I would imagine that a Georgia Tech assistant could could easily go to GSU as head coach. It's not like Paul Johnson is getting great offers from other schools.

I also don't know how long the option will be welcome at Georgia Tech.

The downside for GSU is that if they change to a more conventional offense, they will be awful for years. This is a fan base that truly thinks they will be in the SunBelt championship conversation next year.

Moving to a conventional offense would be painful to watch. They tried it in 2005, and took one of the nation's most prolific offenses and turned it to garbage. In 2006 and 2007 they were equally as bad, they just happened to have the nation's best offensive player running around back there.

You get away from the option now, with their personnel, you won't see a winning season in Statesboro for 10 years.

[eaglewraith]

The downside for GSU is that if they change to a more conventional offense, they will be awful for years. This is a fan base that truly thinks they will be in the SunBelt championship conversation next year.


If we play to potential, that's not a crazy statement. We have the most favorable schedule in the conference, and one of our opponents is already a known quantity. The several newer teams and the 2 weakest additions (3 if you count Ga State) are on there as well. Not a definite, but definitely possible.

We have the the personnel to run a shotgun read option offense, but other than that and the flexbone we're really limited in what we can run right away.

2007's offense was actually really good, the problem that year was no defense. We were averaging over 30 points a game, had an 1800 yard rusher/almost 1000 yard passer and a 1000 yard RB that would have had a lot more yards had he not had a nagging injury. We just couldn't stop anyone. 2008 we were pretty good on offense as well, although not as dynamic but with a poor defense. In 2009 the wheels just fell off HOWEVER Hatcher left with a lot of very talented players on the roster.

We could potentially switch to something "modern" but I don't know if the locals could put away their pitchforks long enough to give it a shot.

[Sader87]

Army board saying it isn't a done deal....my gut feeling, he's staying in Statesboro. It's Statesboro right? Statesborough?

[Mr. C]

The downside for GSU is that if they change to a more conventional offense, they will be awful for years. This is a fan base that truly thinks they will be in the SunBelt championship conversation next year.

Moving to a conventional offense would be painful to watch. They tried it in 2005, and took one of the nation's most prolific offenses and turned it to garbage. In 2006 and 2007 they were equally as bad, they just happened to have the nation's best offensive player running around back there.

You get away from the option now, with their personnel, you won't see a winning season in Statesboro for 10 years.
For the record, Mike Sewak was the coach in 2005 and Georgia Southern was still running the triple option. The name that shall remain unwritten, and hopefully unspoken can in for the 2006 season with the slogan "There is no option." That was the genius that moved a future Payton Award quarterback, Jayson Foster, to wide receiver. In 2007, Chris Hatcher arrived on the scene and installed the Hal Mumme "Air Raid" or "Hatch Attack" passing offense.

If my man, Jeff Monken, moves on, I don't see Georgia Southern making the same mistake of jettisoning its traditional offense again, even though the Eagles have gotten rid of their FCS tradition with the move to FBS.

[PaladinFan]

For the record, Mike Sewak was the coach in 2005 and Georgia Southern was still running the triple option. The name that shall remain unwritten, and hopefully unspoken can in for the 2006 season with the slogan "There is no option." That was the genius that moved a future Payton Award quarterback, Jayson Foster, to wide receiver. In 2007, Chris Hatcher arrived on the scene and installed the Hal Mumme "Air Raid" or "Hatch Attack" passing offense.

If my man, Jeff Monken, moves on, I don't see Georgia Southern making the same mistake of jettisoning its traditional offense again, even though the Eagles have gotten rid of their FCS tradition with the move to FBS.

Right. I meant 2006. GSU's admin pulled a quick trigger, fired Sewak, made an awful hire in Van Gorder.

I never minded the Hatcher hiring. I think he could have been successful in Statesboro. As I've said before, he was handed a team built to run the option and told to run the air raid and win within two years.

After that debacle, I think the GSU folks will be highly skeptical of any move away from the option. Even then, there simply cannot be that many candidates that are (a) head coaching quality, and (b) understand that offense. I mean, you are essentially looking just at GT assistants.

[eaglewraith]

Right. I meant 2006. GSU's admin pulled a quick trigger, fired Sewak, made an awful hire in Van Gorder.

I never minded the Hatcher hiring. I think he could have been successful in Statesboro. As I've said before, he was handed a team built to run the option and told to run the air raid and win within two years.

After that debacle, I think the GSU folks will be highly skeptical of any move away from the option. Even then, there simply cannot be that many candidates that are (a) head coaching quality, and (b) understand that offense. I mean, you are essentially looking just at GT assistants.

Hatcher ran a read option offense that first year with minimal air raid concepts and was really successful. The OL we had adapted to it really quick which made a big difference. He went full bore starting to install the Air Raid over the next 2 years and it didn't really work. His DC and S&C guy were both morons so it made his job a lot harder as well.

[PaladinFan]

Hatcher ran a read option offense that first year with minimal air raid concepts and was really successful. The OL we had adapted to it really quick which made a big difference. He went full bore starting to install the Air Raid over the next 2 years and it didn't really work. His DC and S&C guy were both morons so it made his job a lot harder as well.

I don't disagree the offense "worked." I do think it is important to note that GSU was fortunate to have perhaps one of the most electric players in SoCon history touch the ball every play. I think Hatcher ran the read option because he had to put the ball in Jayson Foster's hands (something Van Gorder never grasped). The offense was (from my view) highly simplistic and not terribly unlike a lot of high school teams in Georgia. Essentially - Jayson Foster left, Jayson Foster right, Jayson Foster draw, and occasionally we'll hand it to the running back.

[Eagle22]

I don't disagree the offense "worked." I do think it is important to note that GSU was fortunate to have perhaps one of the most electric players in SoCon history touch the ball every play. I think Hatcher ran the read option because he had to put the ball in Jayson Foster's hands (something Van Gorder never grasped). The offense was (from my view) highly simplistic and not terribly unlike a lot of high school teams in Georgia. Essentially - Jayson Foster left, Jayson Foster right, Jayson Foster draw, and occasionally we'll hand it to the running back.

Funny, that isn't exactly how I remember it.

That "occasional" handoff to Lamar Lewis resulted in just a few yards short of 1000 for Lewis, in just nine games. He missed a couple due to injury, and his contributions were severely unrecognized and continue to be to this day. He was probably one of the most productive GSU transfers we've ever had at the running back position.

What we lacked in that offense was a true passing threat, which has pretty much been the issue since J.R. Revere graduated ... with occasional exception. We had some elements of a passing threat with Billy Lowe, a southpaw who played his best game in his injury-shortened career in Boone in 2007. Had he not gotten hurt, I think it was pretty clear he'd be the odds on favorite to be the starter in 2008.

Who knows then what would have happened.

[Sandlapper Spike]

Army board saying it isn't a done deal....my gut feeling, he's staying in Statesboro. It's Statesboro right? Statesborough?

Army makes it official. Monken is the new coach. He is getting a six-year deal.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20131224/army-hires-georgia-southerns-jeff-monken-as-new-head-coach/

[Franks Tanks]

Right. I meant 2006. GSU's admin pulled a quick trigger, fired Sewak, made an awful hire in Van Gorder.

I never minded the Hatcher hiring. I think he could have been successful in Statesboro. As I've said before, he was handed a team built to run the option and told to run the air raid and win within two years.

After that debacle, I think the GSU folks will be highly skeptical of any move away from the option. Even then, there simply cannot be that many candidates that are (a) head coaching quality, and (b) understand that offense. I mean, you are essentially looking just at GT assistants.

Houston at Lenoir-Rhyne would be a good choice if he doesn't go to the Citadel. He led a school with 1,000 students and limited funding to the D-II title game this year running the triple option. Any school that wishes to run the TO would be foolish not to hire him.

[PaladinFan]

Funny, that isn't exactly how I remember it.

That "occasional" handoff to Lamar Lewis resulted in just a few yards short of 1000 for Lewis, in just nine games. He missed a couple due to injury, and his contributions were severely unrecognized and continue to be to this day. He was probably one of the most productive GSU transfers we've ever had at the running back position.

What we lacked in that offense was a true passing threat, which has pretty much been the issue since J.R. Revere graduated ... with occasional exception. We had some elements of a passing threat with Billy Lowe, a southpaw who played his best game in his injury-shortened career in Boone in 2007. Had he not gotten hurt, I think it was pretty clear he'd be the odds on favorite to be the starter in 2008.

Who knows then what would have happened.

I am oversimplifying the situation, but in 2007 GSU was primarily a one man show. Foster alone rushing accounted for over 36% of GSU scores. Throwing and running he accounted for 60% of every point GSU scored that season.

To put that in perspective, Armanti Edwards found the endzone enough to account of just 19% of App's points, and that was one of the great offenses in SoCon history.

[seantaylor]

Right. I meant 2006. GSU's admin pulled a quick trigger, fired Sewak, made an awful hire in Van Gorder.

I never minded the Hatcher hiring. I think he could have been successful in Statesboro. As I've said before, he was handed a team built to run the option and told to run the air raid and win within two years.

After that debacle, I think the GSU folks will be highly skeptical of any move away from the option. Even then, there simply cannot be that many candidates that are (a) head coaching quality, and (b) understand that offense. I mean, you are essentially looking just at GT assistants.

Hatcher was an awful coach. Did more damage than Van Gorder.

[Ivytalk]

Monken needs to beat Navy by year 3 at the latest. Those Army alums are getting tired of the annual beatdown.

[LehighU11]

For the old timers..Why don't Army and Nave play FCS football and be in the Patriot league like the basketball teams? There must be a valid reason, but they never compete at the FBS level.

Army may not be competitive, but Navy frequently has a pretty solid team. 8+ wins 10 of the past 11 years, with 10-2 in 2004 and 10-4 in 2009 (including a bowl win over Mizzou). They certainly belong at the FBS level.

[blueballs]

Monken needs to beat Navy by year 3 at the latest. Those Army alums are getting tired of the annual beatdown.

Good luck with that... Reynolds has two more years, right?

Hope he saves his money...

[Wilson16]

So much respect for coach Monken and the GSU program. Hope this won't set them back. Good news is I'm an Army fan and this should help turn the tables on Navy.

[CitadelGrad]

For the old timers..Why don't Army and Nave play FCS football and be in the Patriot league like the basketball teams? There must be a valid reason, but they never compete at the FBS level.

I have a lot of West Point friends and most of them are delusional enough to think they can be a big player in the FBS. Nobody has told them that the 1950s were a long time ago.

[ngineer]

For the old timers..Why don't Army and Nave play FCS football and be in the Patriot league like the basketball teams? There must be a valid reason, but they never compete at the FBS level.

It's all political. The major brass in the Pentagon will never allow their Academy teams to be viewed as less than "big time" football. It's an ego sort of thing.

[Seawolf97]

I was at Army last year and they are or were a small team for FBS. No 300lbs plus O lineman running around or 6'5 wide receivers with 4.3 speed. Recruiting has to improve and they need a real passing game. I know the regs are tough on size for the academies but Navy and Air Force seem to do ok with winning games. I wish them luck with their new coach.

[Wilson16]

Listening to an analyst on the radio recently and he said to win you either have to be good (talented) or different with something that teams don't normally prepare for (and do it we'll). I think Monken will be competitive with less talent by creating a team that's hard to prepare for.

[walliver]

Houston at Lenoir-Rhyne would be a good choice if he doesn't go to the Citadel. He led a school with 1,000 students and limited funding to the D-II title game this year running the triple option. Any school that wishes to run the TO would be foolish not to hire him.

I don't see a FBS program hiring a D-2 coach. He might do a great job, but I think it would be an ego thing.

[eaglewraith]

I don't see a FBS program hiring a D-2 coach. He might do a great job, but I think it would be an ego thing.

My issue with him is he has 0 experience at the D1 level whether it's playing or coaching. That means he's never dealt with recruiting or the academic requirements on the FCS level, much less the FBS level where we're headed. I'd be ok if he came in as an assistant, so he could learn the ropes under an experienced coach, but it's quite a leap to put him in the top position.

[longtimemocfan]

It just doesn't seem Like Ga.Southern football without the triple option. Never got used to what VanGorder and Hatcher were trying to do with the program.

[clenz]

It just doesn't seem Like Ga.Southern football without the triple option. Never got used to what VanGorder and Hatcher were trying to do with the program.
Makes me think of a question for GSU fans....


Would you rather keep the triple option and have Army like results (I don't know if your ceiling is much higher with the TO at the FBS level. The fact GT does what they do with it is amazing...maybe you get to 6-7 wins a season....maybe.


OR

Transition to a newer option offense (see Oregon or what not) and try to get to 8, or more, wins.

[Bronco]

-
58 second clip of GSU TD against Alabama
Great blocking and check out the job #23 does in this option play




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orQ0vbYBvEw

[Go Green]

It's all political. The major brass in the Pentagon will never allow their Academy teams to be viewed as less than "big time" football. It's an ego sort of thing.

To put it more bluntly, the Army & Navy brass don't want the Air Force generals going around saying, "well, OUR boys can play real football."

But put me in the camp as believing that if things don't turn around soon at Army, they may give up the ghosts and give FCS a good look.

[DFW HOYA]

(#1) To put it more bluntly, the Army & Navy brass don't want the Air Force generals going around saying, "well, OUR boys can play real football."

(#2) But put me in the camp as believing that if things don't turn around soon at Army, they may give up the ghosts and give FCS a good look.

#1 is always going to weigh over #2. Besides, can anyone envision the derision of the Army 3-star who would trade in games with Notre Dame and Boston College for the scenario of march-ins at Georgetown and Bucknell?

[FCS_pwns_FBS]

Makes me think of a question for GSU fans....


Would you rather keep the triple option and have Army like results (I don't know if your ceiling is much higher with the TO at the FBS level. The fact GT does what they do with it is amazing...maybe you get to 6-7 wins a season....maybe.


OR

Transition to a newer option offense (see Oregon or what not) and try to get to 8, or more, wins.

Let me put it this way....if there are two candidates for HC, and coach A will run the option and coach B will run some other offense, coach B will have to be a good bit more qualified than coach A in order for me to choose him.

Otherwise you are intentionally forgoing an advantage, which is not smart.

[Hammerhead]

#23 looked like the fastest guy on the field.

That's a good contrast to one play I was from Towson at EWU where the play went a few yards dowfield and the Towson defender just stood there instead of hustling after the play because you never know when there will be a fumble or some crazy play where the runner spins out of a tackle.


-
58 second clip of GSU TD against Alabama
Great blocking and check out the job #23 does in this option play




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orQ0vbYBvEw

[Go Green]

#1 is always going to weigh over #2. Besides, can anyone envision the derision of the Army 3-star who would trade in games with Notre Dame and Boston College for the scenario of march-ins at Georgetown and Bucknell?

They're still free to play BC or ND they want if they join the PL.

They'd be dumping the Western Kentuckys and the Eastern Michigans of the world.

[Sader87]

Good luck to the service academies in FBS football but I think the day is dawning when they won't be able to compete (or maybe be not even allowed to compete) at that level much longer.

In the final analysis, it's really probably too much for a team of football players to both train as a military officer and train as an FBS-level player simultaneously in the 21st Century.

[CID1990]

Good luck to the service academies in FBS football but I think the day is dawning when they won't be able to compete (or maybe be not even allowed to compete) at that level much longer.

In the final analysis, it's really probably too much for a team of football players to both train as a military officer and train as an FBS-level player simultaneously in the 21st Century.

Two things-

This has all been said before, like in the late 80s. Then Navy got good. The USAFA has always been competitive off and on- so given Navy's recent success and AFA's relatively consistent success, I think we would have to see a major restructuring to see the service academies not playing at the top level.

Secondly, for this to happen, the military academy boosters would have to be on board with it, and they are not. They are very influential.

[Sader87]

Air Force really hasn't been that good for a few years. Navy puts up decent records but their record is inflated from playing lower third FBS schools, bad (for the most part) BCS programs and a FCS game sprinkled in here and there and we know about Army.

Time is not on the service academies side in FBS football.

[GATA_Eagles]

Just an update on our coaching search. It looks like we've narrowed the search down to 4 candidates. Brent Pry (Vanderbilt Co-defensive coordinator/assistant head coach) seems to be the favorite for the job. Rhett Lashlee (Auburn Offensive Coordinator) and Zach Azzanni (Tennessee Wide Receivers) have both interviewed. Ivan Jasper (Navy Offensive Coordinator) has an interview schedule for tomorrow and we should know who our head coach is within the week.

[clenz]

Let me put it this way....if there are two candidates for HC, and coach A will run the option and coach B will run some other offense, coach B will have to be a good bit more qualified than coach A in order for me to choose him.

Otherwise you are intentionally forgoing an advantage, which is not smart.

What advantage?

The TO isn't an advantage, especially at the FBS level.

But it sounds like GSU would rather be bad and run the triple option than win with a offense more recent than electricity.

Sounds like a Army...enjoy being terrible

Sent from my S4 using Tapatalk

[matfu]

I am surprised a military school would take a coach who can't control his own anger and has a character problem. Oh well, hopefully he will change.

[Sader87]

I am surprised a military school would take a coach who can't control his own anger and has a character problem. Oh well, hopefully he will change.

Passive-aggressive post of the year!!!

I really don't know much about Monken, I wish him luck but I don't see this ending well. Vince Lombardi or Nick Saban couldn't win consistently at Army in the world of FBS now.

[CropDuster]

What advantage?

The TO isn't an advantage, especially at the FBS level.

But it sounds like GSU would rather be bad and run the triple option than win with a offense more recent than electricity.

Sounds like a Army...enjoy being terrible

Sent from my S4 using Tapatalk

And you know this how? xrolleyesx

[clenz]

And you know this how? xrolleyesx
Answer my question - what huge advantage would any coach not running the TO at GSU give up?

Here's some thought....

Teams that run the true triple option in the FBS (wing/flex like GSU as a ton of teams run a triple option from the pistol/gun formation) the last 10 years or so of each program (most recent year first)

Army:



1997

Bob Sutton





4


7


0


0.36364


221


311


-90




1998

Bob Sutton





3


8


0


0.27273


257


325


-68




1999

Bob Sutton





3


8


0


0.27273


225


317


-92




2000

Todd Berry





1


10


0


0.09091


224


372


-148




2001

Todd Berry





3


8


0


0.27273


229


365


-136




2002

Todd Berry





1


11


0


0.08333


226


491


-265




2003

Todd Berry
John Mumford




0


13


0


0.00000


206


476


-270




2004

Bobby Ross





2


9


0


0.18182


260


388


-128




2005

Bobby Ross





4


7


0


0.36364


220


294


-74




2006

Bobby Ross





3


9


0


0.25000


232


335


-103




2007

Stan Brock





3


9


0


0.25000


203


364


-161




2008

Stan Brock





3


9


0


0.25000


177


284


-107




2009

Rich Ellerson





5


7


0


0.41667


184


263


-79




2010

Rich Ellerson





7


6


0


0.53846


346


316


30




2011

Rich Ellerson





3


9


0


0.25000


298


339


-41




2012

Rich Ellerson





2


10


0


0.16667


291


424


-133




2013

Rich Ellerson





3


9


0


0.25000


293


379


-86





Georgia Tech - I don't know if they ran this prior to Paul Johnson. If you take FCS and bad FBS teams like Duke, Virginia, and MTSU off the schedule (so against true FBS opponents) You take 3-4 wins a season away from GT. Not just that, GT has the premire TO talent in the nation, and outside of a very nice run behind a GREAT QB in 08-09 they've been average. Both 08 and 09 for GT featured multiple FCS games - and the 09 season had games forfeited due to eligibility issues. The 08/09 seasons were great because they had Demarious Thomas left over and hit with Jon Dwyer and Josh Nesbit.



2008

Paul Johnson





9


4


0


0.69231


317


264


53




2009

Paul Johnson





10


3


0


0.76923


473


347


126




2010

Paul Johnson





6


7


0


0.46154


338


328


10




2011

Paul Johnson





8


5


0


0.61538


446


339


107




2012

Paul Johnson





7


7


0


0.50000


470


396


74




2013

Paul Johnson





7


5


0


0.58333


439


272


167





Navy: As has been pointed out, they have had a GREAT W/L boost from having a very week schedule yearly. Seriously - go back and look at their schedule, who they beat, and how that team finished the season.



2002

Paul Johnson





2


10


0


0.16667


290


436


-146




2003

Paul Johnson





8


5


0


0.61538


396


283


113




2004

Paul Johnson





10


2


0


0.83333


334


238


96




2005

Paul Johnson





8


4


0


0.66667


410


313


97




2006

Paul Johnson





9


4


0


0.69231


367


261


106




2007

Paul Johnson
Ken Niumatalolo




8


5


0


0.61538


511


473


38




2008

Ken Niumatalolo





8


5


0


0.61538


353


286


67




2009

Ken Niumatalolo





10


4


0


0.71429


392


272


120




2010

Ken Niumatalolo





9


4


0


0.69231


386


303


83




2011

Ken Niumatalolo





5


7


0


0.41667


356


347


9




2012

Ken Niumatalolo





8


5


0


0.61538


325


334


-9




2013

Ken Niumatalolo





8


4


0


0.66667


412


311


101






Prior to Paul Johnson Navy had just 7 winning seasons since 1962....


Air Force: See Navy and looking at who they actually beat....seriously...



1999

Fisher DeBerry





6


5


0


0.54545


264


218


46




2000

Fisher DeBerry





9


3


0


0.75000


421


312


109




2001

Fisher DeBerry





6


6


0


0.50000


337


386


-49




2002

Fisher DeBerry





8


5


0


0.61538


440


303


137




2003

Fisher DeBerry





7


5


0


0.58333


322


242


80




2004

Fisher DeBerry





5


6


0


0.45455


326


342


-16




2005

Fisher DeBerry





4


7


0


0.36364


330


349


-19




2006

Fisher DeBerry





4


8


0


0.33333


279


298


-19




2007

Troy Calhoun





9


4


0


0.69231


389


274


115




2008

Troy Calhoun





8


5


0


0.61538


348


289


59




2009

Troy Calhoun





8


5


0


0.61538


386


204


182




2010

Troy Calhoun





9


4


0


0.69231


401


274


127




2011

Troy Calhoun





7


6


0


0.53846


454


369


85




2012

Troy Calhoun





6


7


0


0.46154


356


377


-21




2013

Troy Calhoun





2


10


0


0.16667


296


480


-184








What advantage?

It's clear that GSU, administration and fans, would rather be a 4-7 (on the high end) win squad yearly running the wing/flex TO than a 7+ win squad running a more modern offense.

That is the exact same type of thinking that has lead Army, Air Force, Citadel and honestly Navy for the better part of the last 50 years to be 4 win schools, on average.

What advantage are you going to have?

[Sader87]

In fairness to both the service academies and the triple option as an offense, it's really the only offense they can run and stay somewhat competitive with other FBS teams. If executed correctly, it shortens the game, takes less athleticism (or masks disadvantages in athleticism) etc etc.

The problem is that its success can only take them so far...Army, Air Force and Navy can continue to run this but their ceiling (making a minor bowl) is only so high. Ultimately they are going to have to decide if playing in the Beef O'Brady bowls of the world is more important to them than winning an FCS championship. So far they are of the belief that playing in the minor bowls is better than playing for an FCS title.

[Franks Tanks]

Answer my question - what huge advantage would any coach not running the TO at GSU give up?

Here's some thought....

Teams that run the true triple option in the FBS (wing/flex like GSU as a ton of teams run a triple option from the pistol/gun formation) the last 10 years or so of each program (most recent year first)

Army:




1997

Bob Sutton






4



7



0



0.36364



221



311



-90





1998

Bob Sutton






3



8



0



0.27273



257



325



-68





1999

Bob Sutton






3



8



0



0.27273



225



317



-92





2000

Todd Berry






1



10



0



0.09091



224



372



-148





2001

Todd Berry






3



8



0



0.27273



229



365



-136





2002

Todd Berry






1



11



0



0.08333



226



491



-265





2003

Todd Berry
John Mumford





0



13



0



0.00000



206



476



-270





2004

Bobby Ross






2



9



0



0.18182



260



388



-128





2005

Bobby Ross






4



7



0



0.36364



220



294



-74





2006

Bobby Ross






3



9



0



0.25000



232



335



-103





2007

Stan Brock






3



9



0



0.25000



203



364



-161





2008

Stan Brock






3



9



0



0.25000



177



284



-107





2009

Rich Ellerson






5



7



0



0.41667



184



263



-79





2010

Rich Ellerson






7



6



0



0.53846



346



316



30





2011

Rich Ellerson






3



9



0



0.25000



298



339



-41





2012

Rich Ellerson






2



10



0



0.16667



291



424



-133





2013

Rich Ellerson






3



9



0



0.25000



293



379



-86





Georgia Tech - I don't know if they ran this prior to Paul Johnson. If you take FCS and bad FBS teams like Duke, Virginia, and MTSU off the schedule (so against true FBS opponents) You take 3-4 wins a season away from GT. Not just that, GT has the premire TO talent in the nation, and outside of a very nice run behind a GREAT QB in 08-09 they've been average. Both 08 and 09 for GT featured multiple FCS games - and the 09 season had games forfeited due to eligibility issues. The 08/09 seasons were great because they had Demarious Thomas left over and hit with Jon Dwyer and Josh Nesbit.




2008

Paul Johnson






9



4



0



0.69231



317



264



53





2009

Paul Johnson






10



3



0



0.76923



473



347



126





2010

Paul Johnson






6



7



0



0.46154



338



328



10





2011

Paul Johnson






8



5



0



0.61538



446



339



107





2012

Paul Johnson






7



7



0



0.50000



470



396



74





2013

Paul Johnson






7



5



0



0.58333



439



272



167





Navy: As has been pointed out, they have had a GREAT W/L boost from having a very week schedule yearly. Seriously - go back and look at their schedule, who they beat, and how that team finished the season.




2002

Paul Johnson






2



10



0



0.16667



290



436



-146





2003

Paul Johnson






8



5



0



0.61538



396



283



113





2004

Paul Johnson






10



2



0



0.83333



334



238



96





2005

Paul Johnson






8



4



0



0.66667



410



313



97





2006

Paul Johnson






9



4



0



0.69231



367



261



106





2007

Paul Johnson
Ken Niumatalolo





8



5



0



0.61538



511



473



38





2008

Ken Niumatalolo






8



5



0



0.61538



353



286



67





2009

Ken Niumatalolo






10



4



0



0.71429



392



272



120





2010

Ken Niumatalolo






9



4



0



0.69231



386



303



83





2011

Ken Niumatalolo






5



7



0



0.41667



356



347



9





2012

Ken Niumatalolo






8



5



0



0.61538



325



334



-9





2013

Ken Niumatalolo






8



4



0



0.66667



412



311



101






Prior to Paul Johnson Navy had just 7 winning seasons since 1962....


Air Force: See Navy and looking at who they actually beat....seriously...




1999

Fisher DeBerry






6



5



0



0.54545



264



218



46





2000

Fisher DeBerry






9



3



0



0.75000



421



312



109





2001

Fisher DeBerry






6



6



0



0.50000



337



386



-49





2002

Fisher DeBerry






8



5



0



0.61538



440



303



137





2003

Fisher DeBerry






7



5



0



0.58333



322



242



80





2004

Fisher DeBerry






5



6



0



0.45455



326



342



-16





2005

Fisher DeBerry






4



7



0



0.36364



330



349



-19





2006

Fisher DeBerry






4



8



0



0.33333



279



298



-19





2007

Troy Calhoun






9



4



0



0.69231



389



274



115





2008

Troy Calhoun






8



5



0



0.61538



348



289



59





2009

Troy Calhoun






8



5



0



0.61538



386



204



182





2010

Troy Calhoun






9



4



0



0.69231



401



274



127





2011

Troy Calhoun






7



6



0



0.53846



454



369



85





2012

Troy Calhoun






6



7



0



0.46154



356



377



-21





2013

Troy Calhoun






2



10



0



0.16667



296



480



-184








What advantage?

It's clear that GSU, administration and fans, would rather be a 4-7 (on the high end) win squad yearly running the wing/flex TO than a 7+ win squad running a more modern offense.

That is the exact same type of thinking that has lead Army, Air Force, Citadel and honestly Navy for the better part of the last 50 years to be 4 win schools, on average.

What advantage are you going to have?

Bobby Ross and Stan Brock did not run the TO at Army. Same with the Citadel who went away from the TO for a while.

What is your point? Army and Citadel stink regardless of the use of the TO. GT has been medicore regardless of the offense they ran. You did not prove a correlation between use of the TO and losing football. In fact poor or medicore football at the schools mentioned above is likely due to other variables.

[clenz]

In fairness to both the service academies and the triple option as an offense, it's really the only offense they can run and stay somewhat competitive with other FBS teams. If executed correctly, it shortens the game, takes less athleticism (or masks disadvantages in athleticism) etc etc.

The problem is that its success can only take them so far...Army, Air Force and Navy can continue to run this but their ceiling (making a minor bowl) is only so high. Ultimately they are going to have to decide if playing in the Beef O'Brady bowls of the world is more important to them than winning an FCS championship. So far they are of the belief that playing in the minor bowls is better than playing for an FCS title.
Their ceiling is where they are right now...The only reason Navy and Army are "relevant" to college football is the Army/Navy game each year. Army football is 100% irrelevant 364 days per year and Navy football 363 days (the other day for them is Notre Dame). Air Force is irrelevant 365 days per year.

The triple option may hide lack of talent better than the spread...but eventually lack of overall talent will keep them from winning at the level they could if they attempted to move to an offense that would allow the defense to not put 8 in the box and run a cover 1 man to man defense.

The days of beating up on WCU, Cit, Samford, and Elon are gone.

The Sun Belt isn't a great FBS conference but it is a lot better than WCU, Elon, Cit, etc...

[Franks Tanks]

Their ceiling is where they are right now...The only reason Navy and Army are "relevant" to college football is the Army/Navy game each year. Army football is 100% irrelevant 364 days per year and Navy football 363 days (the other day for them is Notre Dame). Air Force is irrelevant 365 days per year.

The triple option may hide lack of talent better than the spread...but eventually lack of overall talent will keep them from winning at the level they could if they attempted to move to an offense that would allow the defense to not put 8 in the box and run a cover 1 man to man defense.

The days of beating up on WCU, Cit, Samford, and Elon are gone.

The Sun Belt isn't a great FBS conference but it is a lot better than WCU, Elon, Cit, etc...

Not true. Army and Navy have a better following than many FBS schools, and are often a very good draw on the road. Service academy football still means smething even if the football isn't very good.

[clenz]

Not true. Army and Navy have a better following than many FBS schools, and are often a very good draw on the road. Service academy football still means smething even if the football isn't very good.
Maybe to fans over 40-45.

Army, Navy, and Air Force are very close, if not completely, irrelevant to 90+% of CFB fans that are under the age of 35ish.

[Sader87]

I think they are relevant to college football in general, too much history much like Notre Dame not to be, the problem is that unlike ND (and others), they can't "fake" the fact that their purpose as an institution is to educate/train their players above and beyond football.

[Franks Tanks]

Maybe to fans over 40-45.

Army, Navy, and Air Force are very close, if not completely, irrelevant to 90+% of CFB fans that are under the age of 35ish.

Enlisted military members often root for the academies.

90% of FBS teams are irrelevant to people other than their fans using your criteria.

[Skjellyfetti]

I have a lot of West Point friends and most of them are delusional enough to think they can be a big player in the FBS. Nobody has told them that the 1950s were a long time ago.

Ironic coming from a Citadel fan with a Micah Jenkins avatar and that's still fighting the Civil War. xwhistlex

[seantaylor]

Why that bum from Tennessee is even getting a look is beyond me. This is a two man race for my liking. Jasper and Giff Smith. I wanted Jasper over Monken in 2009

[danefan]

Somewhat related.....Brian Van Gorder will be named defensive coordinator at Notre Dame.

[Ivytalk]

Maybe to fans over 40-45.

Army, Navy, and Air Force are very close, if not completely, irrelevant to 90+% of CFB fans that are under the age of 35ish.

Well, 90%+ of CFB fans are over 40, so...

[Eaglesrus]

What advantage?

The TO isn't an advantage, especially at the FBS level.

But it sounds like GSU would rather be bad and run the triple option than win with a offense more recent than electricity.

Sounds like a Army...enjoy being terrible

Sent from my S4 using Tapatalk

I don't see it as giving up an advantage per se, but as moving from an offense that suits the skill-/mind-sets of the players you've recruited more than other offenses do, examples being WRs who are (almost) as happy to block as catch passes, generally smaller quicker OL, etc.

[blueballs]

Well, 90%+ of CFB fans are over 40, so...

... and more importantly 90%+ of money donated to institutions and athletic departments are from individuals over 40.

[blueballs]

Blaming the offensive system for Georgia Tech's recent mediocrity is ignorant and completely overlooks how poor they have been defensively and how much defensive recruiting dropped off after Gifford Smith went to the NFL. But for gosh sakes don't let the facts get in the way of a rant.

BTW, didn't Auburn win the best conference in college football this year running an option based offense with a QB who was so far down the QB depth chart at UGA he changed position?

[Ivytalk]

... and more importantly 90%+ of money donated to institutions and athletic departments are from individuals over 40.
xthumbsupxxnodxxsmileyclapxxsalutex

Exactly!

[clenz]

BTW, didn't Auburn win the best conference in college football this year running an option based offense with a QB who was so far down the QB depth chart at UGA he changed position?
Completely my point.

The triple option, read option, zone option, hell the bone/veer/flex option has taken college football over, again. HOWEVER, to run that offense from under center, unwilling to to throw the ball, unable to consistently throw the ball is not an advantage.

Auburn, Florida, Ohio State, Oregon, etc...all run a triple option offense. However, running it from a pistol/gun set with a qb who can throw the ball is completely different.

I know GSU fans dont want to hear it because the 1904 triple option is the only thing they know. The thing is defenses are a lot faster, smarter, and complex than they were 50 years ago...hell 20 years ago.

That's why I asked...would GSU rather force the triple option as they know it and struggle/be average on their best year....OR...move to a modern offense that will allow the same type of player to be used but put into a better position to make plays in space.

It's clear that GSU fans would rather be like Army than use a system that has proven to work in today's game with the same concept behind it.


Sent from my S4 using Tapatalk

[Baldy]

Completely my point.

The triple option, read option, zone option, hell the bone/veer/flex option has taken college football over, again. HOWEVER, to run that offense from under center, unwilling to to throw the ball, unable to consistently throw the ball is not an advantage.

Auburn, Florida, Ohio State, Oregon, etc...all run a triple option offense. However, running it from a pistol/gun set with a qb who can throw the ball is completely different.

I know GSU fans dont want to hear it because the 1904 triple option is the only thing they know. The thing is defenses are a lot faster, smarter, and complex than they were 50 years ago...hell 20 years ago.

That's why I asked...would GSU rather force the triple option as they know it and struggle/be average on their best year....OR...move to a modern offense that will allow the same type of player to be used but put into a better position to make plays in space.

It's clear that GSU fans would rather be like Army than use a system that has proven to work in today's game with the same concept behind it.


Sent from my S4 using Tapatalk
You have no point.

The whole premise of your "argument" is that it's an either/or situation. It isn't.

[Go...gate]

Maybe to fans over 40-45.

Army, Navy, and Air Force are very close, if not completely, irrelevant to 90+% of CFB fans that are under the age of 35ish.

Even though they are rarely nationally ranked any more, Army, Navy and Air Force remain among the very few "national" college football programs. They have history, tradition and name recognition like few others, save Alabama, Michigan, Tennessee, Texas, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Southern California, Nebraska, UCLA, Penn State (though I would argue the Nittany Lions have lost a great deal of ground) and a handful of other schools. They are an attractive draw and money-maker anywhere they play.

[seantaylor]

Auburns QB can't throw the ball at all.

[FCS_pwns_FBS]

What advantage?

The TO isn't an advantage, especially at the FBS level.

But it sounds like GSU would rather be bad and run the triple option than win with a offense more recent than electricity.

Sounds like a Army...enjoy being terrible

Sent from my S4 using Tapatalk

It's so terrible that we have difficulty getting weaker FBS teams to schedule us...it's so terrible that we can get more rushing yards on Bama than just about every team got total offense on them. So terrible that we beat Florida without completing a single pass with 400+ rushing yards on a defense that was top 5 FBS before playing us and Florida State. So terrible that we have more IAA/FCS national championships than any other team and probably will for a long time. So terrible that for a while Navy wasn't able to consistently muster winning seasons until they used it.

The service academies keep running it because they know with their recruiting disadvantages that it gives them an advantage. As far as Georgia Tech goes, talent wise they are nowhere close to what they were in 2008 and 2009. They haven't recruited particularly well on either side of the ball. If Jerick McKinnon and Lavelle Westbrooks make NFL rosters I'm fairly sure we will have had a better track record of producing NFL players than Tech over the last several years.

[PaladinFan]

It's so terrible that we have difficulty getting weaker FBS teams to schedule us...it's so terrible that we can get more rushing yards on Bama than just about every team got total offense on them. So terrible that we beat Florida without completing a single pass with 400+ rushing yards on a defense that was top 5 FBS before playing us and Florida State. So terrible that we have more IAA/FCS national championships than any other team and probably will for a long time. So terrible that for a while Navy wasn't able to consistently muster winning seasons until they used it.

The service academies keep running it because they know with their recruiting disadvantages that it gives them an advantage. As far as Georgia Tech goes, talent wise they are nowhere close to what they were in 2008 and 2009. They haven't recruited particularly well on either side of the ball. If Jerick McKinnon and Lavelle Westbrooks make NFL rosters I'm fairly sure we will have had a better track record of producing NFL players than Tech over the last several years.

I like the offense. I think even stalwart GSU fans would admit that there is an element of novelty that helps out. Teams don't see it, so it becomes extremely difficult to prepare for in the course of a week. I think given time, you see teams figure it out (see Navy and GT's bowl record). Furman has probably played against the offense more than any other team in division 1 football the last 30 years (playing GSU prior to coming to the SoCon, every year for 20 years plus Wofford and the Citadel). Even the great Furman defenses would take two weeks to prepare.

I don't look so much at the FBS games. Most FBS teams (Bama and UF included) don't spend any significant time preparing to stop a novel offense. It takes too long to prepare for correctly, and why bother when you should have better athletes at every position. That's not to say GSU doesn't play well in those games or doesn't earn what they get, but I don't think for one second those FBS teams commit a substantial amount of time trying to defense an offense they will see once in a decade against a team with inferior athletes and a 2/3 of the scholarships. That said, they do so at their peril.

Option teams will never have a substantive number of NFL players. I mean, GSU has been significantly better than Furman the past several seasons, and I'd wager Furman has had more in NFL camps than the Eagles (9 last season and Dozier a likely mid-round draft pick this year). Not a criticism of the offense, that's just the collateral damage.

[FCS_pwns_FBS]

I like the offense. I think even stalwart GSU fans would admit that there is an element of novelty that helps out. Teams don't see it, so it becomes extremely difficult to prepare for in the course of a week. I think given time, you see teams figure it out (see Navy and GT's bowl record). Furman has probably played against the offense more than any other team in division 1 football the last 30 years (playing GSU prior to coming to the SoCon, every year for 20 years plus Wofford and the Citadel). Even the great Furman defenses would take two weeks to prepare.

I don't look so much at the FBS games. Most FBS teams (Bama and UF included) don't spend any significant time preparing to stop a novel offense. It takes too long to prepare for correctly, and why bother when you should have better athletes at every position. That's not to say GSU doesn't play well in those games or doesn't earn what they get, but I don't think for one second those FBS teams commit a substantial amount of time trying to defense an offense they will see once in a decade against a team with inferior athletes and a 2/3 of the scholarships. That said, they do so at their peril.

Option teams will never have a substantive number of NFL players. I mean, GSU has been significantly better than Furman the past several seasons, and I'd wager Furman has had more in NFL camps than the Eagles (9 last season and Dozier a likely mid-round draft pick this year). Not a criticism of the offense, that's just the collateral damage.

You overlook a couple of things.

First off, we have had and will continue to have in the Sun Belt better athletes relative to our competition than either Navy or Georgia Tech. That's not me being a homer, that's the truth. It's not like every team we play is going to be a North Dakota State. Far from it.

Second, while you may be correct that we will not produce as many offensive NFL players running the option, but so what? A good thing about this offense is that you can wreak havoc with players who may not have a niche in more conventional offenses. Players like Jayson Foster, Greg Hill, and Bennie Cunningham come to mind. If we can produce offenses anything close to what we had in the late 90s, we can absolutely torch most FBS defenses and never produce an offensive NFL player other than linemen or running backs.

[PaladinFan]

You overlook a couple of things.

First off, we have had and will continue to have in the Sun Belt better athletes relative to our competition than either Navy or Georgia Tech. That's not me being a homer, that's the truth. It's not like every team we play is going to be a North Dakota State. Far from it.

Second, while you may be correct that we will not produce as many offensive NFL players running the option, but so what? A good thing about this offense is that you can wreak havoc with players who may not have a niche in more conventional offenses. Players like Jayson Foster, Greg Hill, and Bennie Cunningham come to mind. If we can produce offenses anything close to what we had in the late 90s, we can absolutely torch most FBS defenses and never produce an offensive NFL player other than linemen or running backs.

It's entirely irrelevant to me which offense produces more NFL talent. I was merely responding to your statement that GSU produced more NFL talent than GT.

GSU's athletic talent is a matter of perception. This year's SoCon season proved that.

[walliver]

GSU's TO at the FCS level was very successful because GSU was able to recruit lower-level FBS level athletes. For a TO team to dominate playing against an equal talent level requires an effective passing game. The difficulty is finding an option quarterback with an arm, and even more difficult, finding good wide receivers who can also block. IF GSU can find both of those and establish a stingy defense, they will be successful.

More likely, GSU will need to run the option more often out of the pistol and shotgun (which I suspect Monken was planning for GSU and will do at Army).

[PaladinFan]

GSU's TO at the FCS level was very successful because GSU was able to recruit lower-level FBS level athletes. For a TO team to dominate playing against an equal talent level requires an effective passing game. The difficulty is finding an option quarterback with an arm, and even more difficult, finding good wide receivers who can also block. IF GSU can find both of those and establish a stingy defense, they will be successful.

More likely, GSU will need to run the option more often out of the pistol and shotgun (which I suspect Monken was planning for GSU and will do at Army).

That's my impression as well. I have long believed the true difference (scholarships aside) between FBS and FCS schools is along the defensive line. That's just one area, I think, where the talent gap is the widest. Good defensive linemen can wreck havoc on an option game.

A good example was Furman's playoff game against SCSU. SCSU was an athletic team that utilized a lot of backfield motion and option game. Furman's All-SoCon DE Gary Wilkins singlehandedly shut down a large portion of the Bulldog playbook as he was big enough and quick enough to cover both the QB and the pitchman. The Dogs either had to abandon the triple option or exclusively run away from him.

That's more or less what I think GSU will see at the next level. Bigger, faster DLs who are quick enough to cover inside and still keep contain. If you don't pass, that's going to make life really tough. There were maybe only two DL's in the SoCon of that caliber (Tull and Wilkins). I imagine every team in the SunBelt has one or two.

[EKU-n-GSU]

GSU's TO at the FCS level was very successful because GSU was able to recruit lower-level FBS level athletes. For a TO team to dominate playing against an equal talent level requires an effective passing game. The difficulty is finding an option quarterback with an arm, and even more difficult, finding good wide receivers who can also block. IF GSU can find both of those and establish a stingy defense, they will be successful.

More likely, GSU will need to run the option more often out of the pistol and shotgun (which I suspect Monken was planning for GSU and will do at Army).

Everyone is entitled to their opinion - the problem usually arises when their opinion is proven to be wrong. Say what you want about the ineffectiveness of the TO at the FBS level, but Navy is putting it all over MTSU in the Armed Services Bowl. Navy's OL is very similar in size to ours, their QB looks to be about the same size as McKinnon, and for the better part of the 4th quarter I've only seen them attempt two passes.

To be sure - we're going to have to become more than one-dimensional to succeed 'big-time' at the next level. And, I don't really think anyone truly learned in the game of football believes we went to FL knowing we weren't going to pass the ball...we simply adjusted to what their defense gave us. We'll have the success we need to continue to move up the ranks in FBS - maybe not out of the starting gate but soon enough - especially when recruits see that running the TO at the FBS level is not a fluke.

[GATA_OneMoreTime]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion - the problem usually arises when their opinion is proven to be wrong. Say what you want about the ineffectiveness of the TO at the FBS level, but Navy is putting it all over MTSU in the Armed Services Bowl. Navy's OL is very similar in size to ours, their QB looks to be about the same size as McKinnon, and for the better part of the 4th quarter I've only seen them attempt two passes.

To be sure - we're going to have to become more than one-dimensional to succeed 'big-time' at the next level. And, I don't really think anyone truly learned in the game of football believes we went to FL knowing we weren't going to pass the ball...we simply adjusted to what their defense gave us. We'll have the success we need to continue to move up the ranks in FBS - maybe not out of the starting gate but soon enough - especially when recruits see that running the TO at the FBS level is not a fluke.
Navy's QB is a couple inches taller than JMac, but not as bulky. Listed at 199, but I heard a commentator mention somewhere in the 185-190 range. Option offense is all about numbers and angles. One reason I think we are successful with it when we play FBS power schools (Bama, UGA, UF) is because those teams don't play a true team defense. The majority of the guys on the defenses at those schools are going on to cash in NFL paychecks, and are only concerned about playing for themselves, not their entire team. If an individual tries to do too much against the option they will get caught out and embarrassed against a 3-O offense. Team defense is the key to stopping the option (see NDSU) and I don't think you see as much of it at the higher levels of college football.

[PaladinFan]

Navy's QB is a couple inches taller than JMac, but not as bulky. Listed at 199, but I heard a commentator mention somewhere in the 185-190 range. Option offense is all about numbers and angles. One reason I think we are successful with it when we play FBS power schools (Bama, UGA, UF) is because those teams don't play a true team defense. The majority of the guys on the defenses at those schools are going on to cash in NFL paychecks, and are only concerned about playing for themselves, not their entire team. If an individual tries to do too much against the option they will get caught out and embarrassed against a 3-O offense. Team defense is the key to stopping the option (see NDSU) and I don't think you see as much of it at the higher levels of college football.

I just think you guys are reading way too much into the FBS games against Bama and UF. Furman went to Gainseville two years ago and racked up more yards (446 to 429), more points (32 to 26), and more time of possession (36:42 to 30:23) against a much better Florida team than the group GSU faced this season. Do I think that equates to success at the FBS level in conference play? Not at all. Heck, we lost to Elon that season.

You are successful with the offense because teams don't care about Georgia Southern (like they don't care about Furman). Do I think that if Florida treated Furman like they did UGA we'd have put up 450+ yards of offense? If LSU took Furman seriously would we have been down four at halftime? At the end of the day, we were better than they thought we were, and it surprised them. That does not, in my opinion, equate to week in, week out success in a conference situation.

I agree with your sentiment that you need a team defense to beat the option. I think the flaw in the argument, though, is that teams are not going to adjust at the FBS level. I think the UGA/GT series is a good example. GT ran UGA out of the stadium in 2008 (Johnson's first season). UGA looked lost on defense, poor tackling, missed assignments, the whole nine yards. GT hasn't won another game in the series. UGA figured it out what it took to stop (or at least slow down) the offense.

[GATA_OneMoreTime]

I just think you guys are reading way too much into the FBS games against Bama and UF. Furman went to Gainseville two years ago and racked up more yards (446 to 429), more points (32 to 26), and more time of possession (36:42 to 30:23) against a much better Florida team than the group GSU faced this season. Do I think that equates to success at the FBS level in conference play? Not at all. Heck, we lost to Elon that season.

You are successful with the offense because teams don't care about Georgia Southern (like they don't care about Furman). Do I think that if Florida treated Furman like they did UGA we'd have put up 450+ yards of offense?

I agree with your sentiment that you need a team defense to beat the option. I think the flaw in the argument, though, is that teams are not going to adjust at the FBS level. I think the UGA/GT series is a good example. GT ran UGA out of the stadium in 2008 (Johnson's first season). UGA looked lost on defense, poor tackling, missed assignments, the whole nine yards. GT hasn't won another game in the series. UGA figured it out what it took to stop (or at least slow down) the offense.
But on the same coin, UGA is athletically at much more of an advantage than GT. Therefore illustrating that the TO can if not eliminate, at least reduce the disparity between athletic ability of two teams.

[FCS_pwns_FBS]

GSU's TO at the FCS level was very successful because GSU was able to recruit lower-level FBS level athletes. For a TO team to dominate playing against an equal talent level requires an effective passing game. The difficulty is finding an option quarterback with an arm, and even more difficult, finding good wide receivers who can also block. IF GSU can find both of those and establish a stingy defense, they will be successful.

More likely, GSU will need to run the option more often out of the pistol and shotgun (which I suspect Monken was planning for GSU and will do at Army).

I don't buy that. Navy doesn't have an overly great passing game and they can still beat teams with better athletes.

[FCS_pwns_FBS]

I just think you guys are reading way too much into the FBS games against Bama and UF. Furman went to Gainseville two years ago and racked up more yards (446 to 429), more points (32 to 26), and more time of possession (36:42 to 30:23) against a much better Florida team than the group GSU faced this season. Do I think that equates to success at the FBS level in conference play? Not at all. Heck, we lost to Elon that season.

You are successful with the offense because teams don't care about Georgia Southern (like they don't care about Furman). Do I think that if Florida treated Furman like they did UGA we'd have put up 450+ yards of offense? If LSU took Furman seriously would we have been down four at halftime? At the end of the day, we were better than they thought we were, and it surprised them. That does not, in my opinion, equate to week in, week out success in a conference situation.

I agree with your sentiment that you need a team defense to beat the option. I think the flaw in the argument, though, is that teams are not going to adjust at the FBS level. I think the UGA/GT series is a good example. GT ran UGA out of the stadium in 2008 (Johnson's first season). UGA looked lost on defense, poor tackling, missed assignments, the whole nine yards. GT hasn't won another game in the series. UGA figured it out what it took to stop (or at least slow down) the offense.

Defensively, Florida was a solid team this year - top 5 before the games with GSU and Florida State. You are talking about one game with them whereas I am talking about several - UGA in 2004, Bama in 2011, and Florida for 2013. In the first two games we had more points on them than any SEC opponent.

Also, as far as UGA-Tech goes, you have to keep in mind that first game in 2008 was with Willie Martinez being UGA's DC. After 2009 Todd Grantham became their DC and they were a good bit better on defense after that. That, and Tech hasn't had a QB/FB tandem anywhere near as good as Josh Nesbitt and Jonathan Dwyer.

[eaglewraith]

Auburns QB can't throw the ball at all.

He's at 60% completion with ~130 passing yards a game. That's numbers I would love to see in our option offense, like seriously.

That kind of passing threat would cause us to be absolutely deadly.

[Go...gate]

Navy and GA Tech looked like they could compete today.

[CID1990]

Air Force really hasn't been that good for a few years. Navy puts up decent records but their record is inflated from playing lower third FBS schools, bad (for the most part) BCS programs and a FCS game sprinkled in here and there and we know about Army.

Time is not on the service academies side in FBS football.

And you're not describing 75% of all FBS teams how?

[Sader87]

And you're not describing 75% of all FBS teams how?

The service academies are all FBS but they aren't close to being at a BCS-level week in, week out.

Air Force can continue losing in the MWC, Navy can go to bowls and beat Middle Tennessee St and Army can be Army but they really aren't on the same level as Alabama or Ohio St though they will continue to think they are for the time being.

[CID1990]

The service academies are all FBS but they aren't close to being at a BCS-level week in, week out.

Air Force can continue losing in the MWC, Navy can go to bowls and beat Middle Tennessee St and Army can be Army but they really aren't on the same level as Alabama or Ohio St though they will continue to think they are for the time being.

Exactly. They aren't Alabama or Ohio State, and they don't hang consistently with BCS level competition.

Like 75% of all of FBS

[Go...gate]

The service academies are all FBS but they aren't close to being at a BCS-level week in, week out.

Air Force can continue losing in the MWC, Navy can go to bowls and beat Middle Tennessee St and Army can be Army but they really aren't on the same level as Alabama or Ohio St though they will continue to think they are for the time being.

Army, Navy, and Air Force never look bad on anybody's schedule - they add a touch of class.

[Sader87]

Army, Navy, and Air Force never look bad on anybody's schedule - they add a touch of class.

They do, but ultimately both Navy and Army should be playing in the Patriot League, at the FCS-level....which they will be before the decade's out probably.

[Go...gate]

They do, but ultimately both Navy and Army should be playing in the Patriot League, at the FCS-level....which they will be before the decade's out probably.

I hope you are right, but I am doubtful.

P.S. What a league that would be!

[seantaylor]

I just think you guys are reading way too much into the FBS games against Bama and UF. Furman went to Gainseville two years ago and racked up more yards (446 to 429), more points (32 to 26), and more time of possession (36:42 to 30:23) against a much better Florida team than the group GSU faced this season. Do I think that equates to success at the FBS level in conference play? Not at all. Heck, we lost to Elon that season.

You are successful with the offense because teams don't care about Georgia Southern (like they don't care about Furman). Do I think that if Florida treated Furman like they did UGA we'd have put up 450+ yards of offense? If LSU took Furman seriously would we have been down four at halftime? At the end of the day, we were better than they thought we were, and it surprised them. That does not, in my opinion, equate to week in, week out success in a conference situation.

I agree with your sentiment that you need a team defense to beat the option. I think the flaw in the argument, though, is that teams are not going to adjust at the FBS level. I think the UGA/GT series is a good example. GT ran UGA out of the stadium in 2008 (Johnson's first season). UGA looked lost on defense, poor tackling, missed assignments, the whole nine yards. GT hasn't won another game in the series. UGA figured it out what it took to stop (or at least slow down) the offense.


Lol. Furman was stomped in that game.

[PaladinFan]

Lol. Furman was stomped in that game.

Totally. Up 22-7 after the first quarter. It was 37-32 at the end of the third quarter. The game wasn't decided until a pick six midway through the fourth quarter. I guess that's getting stomped.

[seantaylor]

Furman. The team that never was

[IBleedYellow]

They do, but ultimately both Navy and Army should be playing in the Patriot League, at the FCS-level....which they will be before the decade's out probably.

No they won't, there are way too many general officers that would die before they saw their precious academy drop from the FBS. The FCS may come up to them, but they won't drop down, no way in hell.

[PaladinFan]

Furman. The team that never was

Given your track record for being constantly wrong, I'll take that as a compliment.

[CID1990]

Furman. The team that never was

Why don't you be a nice Marshall fan and fade off into obscurity?

[Baldy]

I just think you guys are reading way too much into the FBS games against Bama and UF. Furman went to Gainseville two years ago and racked up more yards (446 to 429), more points (32 to 26), and more time of possession (36:42 to 30:23) against a much better Florida team than the group GSU faced this season. Do I think that equates to success at the FBS level in conference play? Not at all. Heck, we lost to Elon that season.

You are successful with the offense because teams don't care about Georgia Southern (like they don't care about Furman). Do I think that if Florida treated Furman like they did UGA we'd have put up 450+ yards of offense? If LSU took Furman seriously would we have been down four at halftime? At the end of the day, we were better than they thought we were, and it surprised them. That does not, in my opinion, equate to week in, week out success in a conference situation.

I agree with your sentiment that you need a team defense to beat the option. I think the flaw in the argument, though, is that teams are not going to adjust at the FBS level. I think the UGA/GT series is a good example. GT ran UGA out of the stadium in 2008 (Johnson's first season). UGA looked lost on defense, poor tackling, missed assignments, the whole nine yards. GT hasn't won another game in the series. UGA figured it out what it took to stop (or at least slow down) the offense.
There's no argument that Florida was a better team in 2011 when they defeated Furman by 3TD's, but they were also a 7-6 team that season with an easier schedule to boot. It's not like GSU got lucky and squeezed out a victory against the Gators. The fact is Georgia Southern DOMINATED Florida on both sides of the ball that day. If it weren't for a fumbled punt snap, 2 turnovers, and 2 missed extra points, we would have easily beaten them by 3 TD's. Hell, they had no turnovers and didn't commit their first penalty of the game until their last drive. They were horrible, but they played a clean game and didn't give us anything.

Just because Georgia has defeated Tech 5 years in a row doesn't mean they've "figured out" anything. The only constant with the series is that Tech's defense has been horrible. Three out of the last 4 years Tech has out gained UGA offensively, including 495 yards this season, and 512 yards in 2010....both were losses. Tech has been able to pile up the yards and the points, but so has UGA.

[walliver]

They do, but ultimately both Navy and Army should be playing in the Patriot League, at the FCS-level....which they will be before the decade's out probably.

Army and Navy both offer around 100 football scholarships every year (they're just not called football scholarships), well above the FCS 63 limit. They will never be dominant, but can compete with Sun Belt, MAC and C-USA teams (in either of C-USA's configurations, C-USA or AAC). Why would either school want to play away games in Patriot-sized stadia with Patriot-sized attendance?

[Go Green]

They will never be dominant, but can compete with Sun Belt, MAC and C-USA teams (in either of C-USA's configurations, C-USA or AAC). ?

Army went 9-41 in league games when they were a member of Conference USA.

http://blogs.militarytimes.com/afteraction/2011/11/02/c-usa-memories-why-army-big-east-arent-a-match/

[walliver]

Army went 9-41 in league games when they were a member of Conference USA.

http://blogs.militarytimes.com/afteraction/2011/11/02/c-usa-memories-why-army-big-east-arent-a-match/


But the new C-USA is really the old Sun Belt + 2 startups. Army might have problems with the AAC, however.

[PaladinFan]

There's no argument that Florida was a better team in 2011 when they defeated Furman by 3TD's, but they were also a 7-6 team that season with an easier schedule to boot. It's not like GSU got lucky and squeezed out a victory against the Gators. The fact is Georgia Southern DOMINATED Florida on both sides of the ball that day. If it weren't for a fumbled punt snap, 2 turnovers, and 2 missed extra points, we would have easily beaten them by 3 TD's. Hell, they had no turnovers and didn't commit their first penalty of the game until their last drive. They were horrible, but they played a clean game and didn't give us anything.

Just because Georgia has defeated Tech 5 years in a row doesn't mean they've "figured out" anything. The only constant with the series is that Tech's defense has been horrible. Three out of the last 4 years Tech has out gained UGA offensively, including 495 yards this season, and 512 yards in 2010....both were losses. Tech has been able to pile up the yards and the points, but so has UGA.

My point is not that GSU didn't play well that Saturday. My point is that three unrelated games against FBS programs years apart does not convince me that the option offense is going to take the SunBelt by storm.

The reality is that Florida, UGA, and Bama didn't take GSU seriously enough to prepare for the offense as a SoCon opponent would (recall, Furman used to take their bye week and schedule GSU and Wofford back to back). GSU's games against UGA and Alabama went as most games by good FCS teams against powerful FBS teams go. Close early on, and then overwhelming depth turns a close game into a runaway in the second half. That happens every single season.

[Baldy]

My point is not that GSU didn't play well that Saturday. My point is that three unrelated games against FBS programs years apart does not convince me that the option offense is going to take the SunBelt by storm.

The reality is that Florida, UGA, and Bama didn't take GSU seriously enough to prepare for the offense as a SoCon opponent would (recall, Furman used to take their bye week and schedule GSU and Wofford back to back). GSU's games against UGA and Alabama went as most games by good FCS teams against powerful FBS teams go. Close early on, and then overwhelming depth turns a close game into a runaway in the second half. That happens every single season.
All I'll say is that Saban took two weeks out of fall camp to practice for us and they also practiced for us when they had a bye after the Tennessee game and before the LSU game in 2011. A reporter even asked him why was he practicing for Georgia Southern when he had #1 LSU next week. Saban responded (paraphrasing) "we know what LSU is going to do".

[JSUBison]

The service academies will remain FBS for one reason: recruiting. Not athletic recruiting, but the kind that gets people to enlist.

[GATA_Eagles]

Georgia Southern: Sources tell us that Sam Houston State head coach Willie Fritz has spoken with Georgia Southern AD Tom Kleinlein.

http://www.footballscoop.com/the-scoop

I'd like that hire as well.