Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
A Message our Players (Reposted from the other site.)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="jojatk" data-source="post: 645657" data-attributes="member: 2627"><p>I both agree and disagree. But in both cases I appreciate your point and analysis and conclusions.</p><p></p><p>Agree</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">the coaches are ripping off the band-aid</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Duke and UNC don't have an "overwhelming" talent advantage in terms of athletic ability</li> </ul><p>Disagree</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Our OL and DL recruiting, which are the places I've noted as having the biggest issues right now, has not been as close to Duke and UNC as the overall rankings or star rankings suggest **</li> </ul><p>Looking at Duke and UNC (and I didn't cherry pick them, they're just the two we've faced so far besides Clemson) I looked back to the 2015-2019 recruiting classes. UNC is similar to us in that they have a new coaching staff. They're transition is much less than ours but it's a change so I think UNC's advantages were more about pure talent. And the recruiting numbers I saw (please look at the caveats below where I talk about why the numbers are flawed, I get it, I find the numbers interesting but not the whole story) suggest that UNC's DL recruiting over that span has been a lot better than our OL recruiting. Similarly their OL recruiting has been quite a lot better than our DL recruiting. Duke, on the other hand, has what I think is a pretty good coaching staff and while the numbers don't show a big disparity on the line of scrimmage like it does vs UNC we still come out below them on DL vs OL and OL vs DL recruiting numbers. I think, however, that they are really well coached (boy is that hard to say regarding Duke's staff!!!) and in that game we saw a combination of somewhat better talent who have been in one system for a long time vs somewhat less talent that are in a brand new system.</p><p></p><p>** caveats: I only went through the 247 numbers, I'm not a huge fan of those numbers in isolation but they are interesting in comparison rather than absolute value, sometimes the numbers are so wrong it's not even funny (Daniel Jones was rated 0.7898 coming out of HS), and I didn't cross-reference with guys who are actually still on the teams and playing those actual positions but rather I only used the reported positions in the recruiting database. These are my way of saying there's tons of flaws in this discussion about recruiting and it's purely academic and doesn't account at all for coaching once the guys get there.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="jojatk, post: 645657, member: 2627"] I both agree and disagree. But in both cases I appreciate your point and analysis and conclusions. Agree [LIST] [*]the coaches are ripping off the band-aid [*]Duke and UNC don't have an "overwhelming" talent advantage in terms of athletic ability [/LIST] Disagree [LIST] [*]Our OL and DL recruiting, which are the places I've noted as having the biggest issues right now, has not been as close to Duke and UNC as the overall rankings or star rankings suggest ** [/LIST] Looking at Duke and UNC (and I didn't cherry pick them, they're just the two we've faced so far besides Clemson) I looked back to the 2015-2019 recruiting classes. UNC is similar to us in that they have a new coaching staff. They're transition is much less than ours but it's a change so I think UNC's advantages were more about pure talent. And the recruiting numbers I saw (please look at the caveats below where I talk about why the numbers are flawed, I get it, I find the numbers interesting but not the whole story) suggest that UNC's DL recruiting over that span has been a lot better than our OL recruiting. Similarly their OL recruiting has been quite a lot better than our DL recruiting. Duke, on the other hand, has what I think is a pretty good coaching staff and while the numbers don't show a big disparity on the line of scrimmage like it does vs UNC we still come out below them on DL vs OL and OL vs DL recruiting numbers. I think, however, that they are really well coached (boy is that hard to say regarding Duke's staff!!!) and in that game we saw a combination of somewhat better talent who have been in one system for a long time vs somewhat less talent that are in a brand new system. ** caveats: I only went through the 247 numbers, I'm not a huge fan of those numbers in isolation but they are interesting in comparison rather than absolute value, sometimes the numbers are so wrong it's not even funny (Daniel Jones was rated 0.7898 coming out of HS), and I didn't cross-reference with guys who are actually still on the teams and playing those actual positions but rather I only used the reported positions in the recruiting database. These are my way of saying there's tons of flaws in this discussion about recruiting and it's purely academic and doesn't account at all for coaching once the guys get there. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
How many points did Georgia Tech score against Cumberland in 1916?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
A Message our Players (Reposted from the other site.)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top