PasstheDamnBallGuy

The problem is he was losing by one score to teams we should have beaten by 2 or more scores

Hmmm maybe he got superstitious and put it back on at some point. Or we hired a dirty liar for a coach smh

I saw an interview when he joined the panthers he talked about switching to regular attire so not sure he wears it anymore.

@Jeremy morally I would have a little pause on Urban but it's not my decision and there is no doubt he would win here so I'd def be happy about it. Don't forget how Ubran was 80% locked in according to someone here. Oh and on the on3 board someone has said Klieman is locked in already so there is another one.

The thing is imo it's about finding a good HC and overall staff. We have run all those offenses and a lot of them have been good enough to win a lot of games but didn't have the rest of the team to win. Honestly it's a crapshoot hiring coaches so you never know but my best guess is any one of Leipold, Malzahn, DeBoer, Rhule, Aranda, Klieman, Kiffin would have a good chance to turn this around and then once you get to winning 9-10 games I think we would recruit up into the 15 range where we would have the talent to compete with top teams. Who do you think will come in and run the offense you want to see and win?

What other guy? And in what way did he make it clear. The very start of this discussion was someone saying we need to do something different because we cant out recruit other teams, but apparently that style falls off without the at least top 10 classes that we were getting before Frank. Osborne was absolutely recruiting with the top schools in the nation so if you need that level of recruits what is the point.

But I thought the whole point was that system we could get by with lesser recruits and thats why we need it here because we are different

Its funny how when that offense doesnt work its just the coach isnt doing it right, but when other offenses dont its the scheme.

Isn't there some law about having to publicly post to position before someone can get hired? Did they already do that a while ago or are they gonna to have to do it right before they announce?

Solich 1999 offense...34.2 ppg....392.2ypg 46 total TDs Solich 2000 offense...41.5ppg...459.9ypg 56 total TDs 2006 - 30.6 ppg, 414.6 ypg 57 total TDs 2007 - 33.4 ppg, 468.2 ypg 50 total TDs Seems likely the defense and/or would be the main different in ppg when you are looking at the yards and TDs. As for your other question, wth are yall even advocating for then because as Ive had to state over and over we have been running the ball and running the option already.

We have been running option football most years. In fact most teams do some form of option now and I havent seen a single person say they was a completely non option offense. I think most people want a balanced offense. We have seen offenses that relied mostly on run. Inevitably that gets shut down because there will always be some teams that will force you to try and beat them in the air and it gets really ugly. Everyone is pushing back on the idea that we go even further into a rushing shell and limit the areas where we can beat defenses. Its def ok to be a run heavy offense but you cant be just that in p5 and expect to compete at the highest levels.

You have Ohio State as one of 2 examples so no you just gave one example and a g5 one at that. Frost also won a g5 championship with his offense. If you want to say some thing say it. Don't do this question you know the answer to bulls#!t. I will prove why it's wrong and you can ignore it like you have everything else. You also keep talking about what we ran that didn't work but we have ran a lot of different offense since our last conference championship including some really bad years of running basically Osborne's offense, running heavily under Bo including a lot of option, running heavily 2 out of the 3 Riley years including some option, running heavily under Frost including a lot of options and taking concepts directly from Coastal. We don't have to run the exact same offense as OSU and i dont see anyone suggesting that , but guess what OSU and all those other schools are also going to try to get all the good HBs and Oline also. It does not matter what we run we have to eventually go get recruits from those guys. Adding to that those QBs that were fast and just ran option in HS are being taught to throw at least decent before they get to college and are high ranked recruits that every school wants now.

Ok you got nothing. I guess I already knew that

Lmao what?! You are trying to claim OSU? There is no way you are going to try to say we need to get back to a Osborne style offense then point to OSU. Your original claim was we have to run a different offense and then claim the one Ohio State runs fits into that category. If you are going to claim Chadwell that's fine I guess you have a single team that has won a g5 conf championship running that type of offense. Not "just to name a few" then only name 2 and one of them is and insane reach. Maybe we should try to take some of that CCU offense and see. It kinda feels like we tried that and won 3 games. There is one coach who is using some of that offense and having p5 success this year though. I wonder if people have been mentioning him the whole time in here.

That no one can win anything significant running that style of offense so we should? Makes perfect sense. Someone contact Trev quick. We need to try something that doesnt work

When is the last time anyone won a conference championship running an offense like that?

I feel like you just have to not follow recruiting to have this take.

Yes and im sure that team was pass happy compared to teams before the forward pass

Outside of one year since 2009 we have run the ball more than passed including this year. Starting this year and going back our FBS rank in passing percentage is 65, 85, 95, 111, 57. So no i would not say any time outside the one Riley year were we pass happy.

So what if someone had say 6 championships at a lower level?

Yeah I mean I wouldn't take a chance on someone like that yet but he def seems to be a great coach so far

I mean maybe if you don't watch college football you wouldn't know who Jeff Traylor is

So you are fine using the argument of inferior talent to handicup wins/losses? Because according to this Campbell and Leipold are ranking the highest compared to talent level https://black41flashreverse.substack.com/p/seasons-off-the-rails-so-lets-go?utm_source=direct&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

But he didn't say his agent hasn't hmmmm

So Riley was better than Franklin then? I feel like .400 to .455 conference record between him and Stoops is a little hair splitting. Maybe I need to look around more and see if it matters though it may be hard to find a lot of examples that are very similar situations. I don't even care specifically about Stoops he is down a little ways on my list but I think winning 10 games at Kentucky is impressive and you can't just pick out conference record set an arbitrary percentage it should be over and say someone can't win here because of that especially when its in likely the toughest conference. He has an average roster and has won big games while facing the most talented rosters. It's a lot of looking at stats without context like Rhule and his record against ranked teams.