Paul Johnsons scoring...if you think running is boring

PhirePhilBennett · Post by **PhirePhilBennett** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:52 pm

Just looked at his record.

62-10 in 1-AA, Two National Championships

Starting in '04...

Bowls: 2-2 (and a 1pt loss to BC last year)

2001: 2-10
2003: 8-5 (lost to TECH in the Bowl)
2004: 10-2 (beat NM in Bowl)
2005: 8-4 (won bowl)
2006: 9-4 (lost 25-24 to BC)
2007: 7-4 (plus Army and Bowl to go)

Look at this scoring:

ug 31 - W at Temple, 30-19 Wrap Box
Sep 7 - L at Rutgers, 24-41 Wrap Box
Sep 15 - L vs. Ball State, 31-34 OT Wrap Box
Sep 22 - W vs. Duke, 46-43 Wrap Box
Sep 29 - W vs. Air Force, 31-20 Wrap Box
Oct 6 - Open
Oct 10 - W at Pittsburgh, 48-45 2OT Wrap Box
Oct 20 - L vs. Wake Forest, 24-44 Wrap Box
Oct 27 - L vs. Delaware, 52-59 Box
Nov 3 - W at Notre Dame, 46-44 3OT Wrap Box
Nov 10 - W at North Texas, 74-62 Wrap Box
Nov 17 - W vs. Northern Ill, 35-24 Wrap Box
Nov 24 - Open
Dec 1 - at Army, 12:00 PM ET
Dec 20 - at TBA, 9:00 PM ET

cs09viking · Post by **cs09viking** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:01 pm

Navy is probably going to be playing Utah in a bowl game this season.

his triple option is greatness. its probably the best offensive system to use when you are "trying to get more out of less"...its the reason Air Force which extensively ran the triple option for 20 years has beaten: Ohio State, Texas, BYU, Utah, Washington, Notre Dame (several times and four years in a row in the 80s), Oregon, Virginia Tech, and Cal.

give the triple option a chance. most teams don't see it often enough to prepare for it and always run into trouble when they face this system.

Charleston Pony · Post by **Charleston Pony** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:03 pm

and for those who would criticize that schedule, how many would SMU have won? Think we could have beaten UNT at their place???

jason54858 · Post by **jason54858** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:09 pm

cs09viking wrote:Navy is probably going to be playing Utah in a bowl game this season.

his triple option is greatness. its probably the best offensive system to use when you are "trying to get more out of less"...its the reason Air Force which extensively ran the triple option for 20 years has beaten: Ohio State, Texas, BYU, Utah, Washington, Notre Dame (several times and four years in a row in the 80s), Oregon, Virginia Tech, and Cal.

give the triple option a chance. most teams don't see it often enough to prepare for it and always run into trouble when they face this system.

Yeah I bet all those receivers SMU has is very excited. The passing game will be nearly non existent.

Stallion · Post by **Stallion** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:27 pm

Teams that run that offense will have trouble recruiting QBs, WRs and RBs as none are excited by that style. RBs don't want to carry the ball 10 times and share 1/3rd of the load. You get leftovers.

perunapower · Post by **perunapower** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:30 pm

Charleston Pony wrote:and for those who would criticize that schedule, how many would SMU have won? Think we could have beaten UNT at their place???

Temple, Duke, North Texas, NIU, and maybe Notre Dame and Delaware (I gotta give Delaware some props for demolishing Del. St. Saturday). Yes, I think we could beat UNT at their place.

mrydel · Post by **mrydel** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:35 pm

Stallion wrote:Teams that run that offense will have trouble recruiting QBs, WRs and RBs as none are excited by that style. RBs don't want to carry the ball 10 times and share 1/3rd of the load. You get leftovers.

So you are saying nothing will change?

Actually, I disagree with that. Texas and OU never had trouble with their wishbones. They had the RBs backed up and begging. And they usually snared a great WR who although got little attention, stood out in the offense. I think the key to the offense just like the key to any offensive is can he recruit linemen. Great linemen can make average RBs look great and average linemen make great RBs look average. With the BCS discrepency, I do not see the recruiting war changing much with the hope that the new coach can get some good big guys up front.

All that said, until I hear otherwise, I am still going with expony 18 and Fran.

Stallion · Post by **Stallion** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:41 pm

Recruits want to have "fun". They flock these days to the programs with wide open offenses. The Wishbone was the New Thing in the 60s and 70s. Not so any more. Heck A&M had touble getting the TOP skill position players in Texas just because Fran ran a somewhat more conservative offense. I'm pretty confident that my characterization is accurate. Forget about any top RBs, WRs or QBs.

StallionsModelT · Post by **StallionsModelT** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:45 pm

So how will that effect SMU's recruiting ability? We already don't get these type of players.

PonyDoh · Post by **PonyDoh** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:48 pm

Stallion wrote:Recruits want to have "fun". They flock these days to the programs with wide open offenses. The Wishbone was the New Thing in the 60s and 70s. Not so any more. Heck A&M had touble getting the TOP skill position players in Texas just because Fran ran a somewhat more conservative offense. I'm pretty confident that my characterization is accurate. Forget about any top RBs, WRs or QBs.

He won't run a straight wishbone, that's not his style. He'll run a hybrid and it'll put huge points on the board.

GeorgiaMustang · Post by **GeorgiaMustang** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:49 pm

jason54858 wrote:
cs09viking wrote:Navy is probably going to be playing Utah in a bowl game this season.

his triple option is greatness. its probably the best offensive system to use when you are "trying to get more out of less"...its the reason Air Force which extensively ran the triple option for 20 years has beaten: Ohio State, Texas, BYU, Utah, Washington, Notre Dame (several times and four years in a row in the 80s), Oregon, Virginia Tech, and Cal.

give the triple option a chance. most teams don't see it often enough to prepare for it and always run into trouble when they face this system.

Yeah I bet all those recievers SMU has is very excited. The passing game will be nearly non excident.

Who's to say he can't tweak the playbook and add more passing? Just think, if we could run as well as Johnson's offenses do and still pass the ball effectively. The opportunities are amazing. Besides, Jwills mobility would work well for the triple option. At the same time, can he please learn to hold tuck the damn ball when he is in traffic!

mrydel · Post by **mrydel** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:57 pm

Stallion wrote:Recruits want to have "fun". They flock these days to the programs with wide open offenses. The Wishbone was the New Thing in the 60s and 70s. Not so any more. Heck A&M had touble getting the TOP skill position players in Texas just because Fran ran a somewhat more conservative offense. I'm pretty confident that my characterization is accurate. Forget about any top RBs, WRs or QBs.

I hear you and I would be that way especially if I were a wide out, but I just do not see it affecting our recruiting negatively. If Johnson can recruit, and I do not know if he can (to me that is the question), he should be able to convince some decent kids that want to average 40+ points a game to come to SMU.

But I am still thinking Fran and until then this is not an issue that comes into play.

bigdaddy08091 · Post by **bigdaddy08091** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:13 pm

Stallion wrote:Teams that run that offense will have trouble recruiting QBs, WRs and RBs as none are excited by that style. RBs don't want to carry the ball 10 times and share 1/3rd of the load. You get leftovers.

JWill better put on about 10-15 lbs. We don't have the OL to support this. This is suicide for our QB an RBs.

cs09viking · Post by **cs09viking** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 11:03 pm

sorry guys but PJ aint coming....its gonna some no name obscure coordinator that no one has ever heard of....

Pony^ · Post by **Pony^** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 1:55 am

http://www.hometownannapolis.com/cgi-bi ... _28-27/NAS