Paul Johnson was on 680 The Fan's Chuck & Chernoff show today. Chernoff raised the subject of Johnson's strategy of revoking scholarships to committed players who take visits to other schools, which has taken at least two players off of the Jackets' commit lists since being instituted.
I'd say you don't know what you're talking about. The numbers aren't gonna change. I look at it like this. What if I committed to your son and kept shopping around until I found a better player, like a lot of people do, and then come signing day I didn't sign him, or told him he had to grayshirt? You'd be critical of that too, wouldn't you?
To Johnson's analogy of dating other women after marrying, Chernoff counters that he's allowed to speak to other women despite having a wife and asks about Johnson's practice of recruiting players who are committed elsewhere.
Sure. They're not committed if they're talking to others.
Chernoff wonders whether that's hypocritical, and then Paul Johnson happens.
Let me talk real slow and I'll try to explain it to you.
A whirlpool of dismissive and twangy invective opens up, and we really don't get anywhere. The disconnect here: Johnson might be the only college football coach who treats the word commitment by its dictionary definition.
I have no idea whether his preferred handling of commit visits is the best course of action or not, as it certainly has pros and cons, but based on the letter of the law (so to speak) he's correct. He could acknowledge that his method is unique, but he's never really seemed interested in anybody else's methods anyway.