A Thread to Rehash GT HC Comparisons

[ibeattetris]

1 of those links had the ACC ranked 3rd, as in last, of the 3 P5 conferences playing . Only 1 out of 6 media publications I posted doesn’t have the ACC rated last out of the P5 conferences. Even though I posted some clear perspectives above, here’s some clear words that will do so: 2 media publications picked the ACC as the sixth best conference. So yeah. That’s pretty abysmal

And yet, another of the articles had them ranked 3rd overall. Thus “by every metric” being hyperbolic rubbish. I don’t even mind, the board is full of it, but you gave me a sincere laugh when you listed proof that your statement was false.

 

[JacketOff]

And yet, another of the articles had them ranked 3rd overall. Thus “by every metric” being hyperbolic rubbish. I don’t even mind, the board is full of it, but you gave me a sincere laugh when you listed proof that your statement was false.

Like I said on your previous post, . If you can seriously nitpick my post enough to say the ACC hasn’t been abysmal because “every single” metric doesn’t agree after I posted “1” singular publication that doesn’t rank the ACC last, then that’s just as ridiculous as calling me out for “hyperbolic rubbish.”
As bwelbo said, I really don’t care what the ACC is ranked. The only reason it was brought up was because some 3O wacko said the ACC was “brutal” when it comes to Tech’s schedule. You can think the ACC is better than the NFC East for all I care, it doesn’t impact me at all.

But with all that being said, if you’re going to call me out for posting “hyperbolic rubbish,” then at least make sure you’re coming with some sort of facts or new information. You didn’t provide either. So here’s a little counterargument. The definition for metric is as follows:
noun
Often metrics . a standard for measuring or evaluating something, especially one that uses figures or statistics:

Most of those articles I posted are not “metrics.” The “one” that doesn’t rank the ACC last doesn’t even mention statistics, and seems to be based totally on subjective biases. So here’s some “actual” metrics:

• The ACC finished 2019 with 1 (one) team ranked. The least of P5 conferences, the same amount as the Sun Belt, and fewer than 2 other G5 conferences (MWC and AAC)
• The ACC has had the worst P5 OOC record for 4 of the last 5 years
• The ACC has the 2nd worst P6 OOC record since 1998, only ahead of the now defunct Big East
• The ACC ha2 teams finish the season ranked in 2018, tied for the fewest in P5
• The ACC has 2 .500 or better P5 OOC seasons since 2008
  • The Big 12 has 7
  • The Big East had 3 from 2008 until 2012 when it disbanded
  • The Big 10 has 3
  • The PAC 12 has 7
  • The SEC has 10

Those are actual metrics. And they show the ACC has been abysmal. Once again, you can disagree and say the ACC is the best conference in the world. I don’t care. I’m not going to post about it anymore in this thread. But don’t come at me for posting “hyperbolic rubbish” when all of my posts have been backed up by facts and statistics, and your entire argument is based on the subjective rankings of a media publication. *mic drop*

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Like I said on your previous post, . If you can seriously nitpick my post enough to say the ACC hasn’t been abysmal because “every single” metric doesn’t agree after I posted “1” singular publication that doesn’t rank the ACC last, then that’s just as ridiculous as calling me out for “hyperbolic rubbish.”
As bwelbo said, I really don’t care what the ACC is ranked. The only reason it was brought up was because some 3O wacko said the ACC was “brutal” when it comes to Tech’s schedule. You can think the ACC is better than the NFC East for all I care, it doesn’t impact me at all.

But with all that being said, if you’re going to call me out for posting “hyperbolic rubbish,” then at least make sure you’re coming with some sort of facts or new information. You didn’t provide either. So here’s a little counterargument. The definition for metric is as follows:
noun
Often metrics . a standard for measuring or evaluating something, especially one that uses figures or statistics:

Most of those articles I posted are not “metrics.” The “one” that doesn’t rank the ACC last doesn’t even mention statistics, and seems to be based totally on subjective biases. So here’s some “actual” metrics:

• The ACC finished 2019 with 1 (one) team ranked. The least of P5 conferences, the same amount as the Sun Belt, and fewer than 2 other G5 conferences (MWC and AAC)
• The ACC has had the worst P5 OOC record for 4 of the last 5 years
• The ACC has the 2nd worst P6 OOC record since 1998, only ahead of the now defunct Big East
• The ACC ha2 teams finish the season ranked in 2018, tied for the fewest in P5
• The ACC has 2 .500 or better P5 OOC seasons since 2008
  • The Big 12 has 7
  • The Big East had 3 from 2008 until 2012 when it disbanded
  • The Big 10 has 3
  • The PAC 12 has 7
  • The SEC has 10

Those are actual metrics. And they show the ACC has been abysmal. Once again, you can disagree and say the ACC is the best conference in the world. I don’t care. I’m not going to post about it anymore in this thread. But don’t come at me for posting “hyperbolic rubbish” when all of my posts have been backed up by facts and statistics, and your entire argument is based on the subjective rankings of a media publication. *mic drop*

Last year we only had 1 elite team and only 1 great team. But we had tons of regular good teams - more than other conferences. Just because we only had 1 great team doesn’t mean we’re the worst. Nobody had more bowl teams than we did:
ACC: 10
SEC: 9
Big Ten: 9
Pac12: 7
Big12: 6

 

[Coloradojacket]

Hard to tell because of new recruits... You would have had Connor Hansen and Parker Braun last year though. Parker Braun being awesome.

Head Coach: Jeff Monken
QB: Tobias Oliver
AB: Dontae Smith
AB: Tij Whatley
BB: Jordan Mason/Jerry Howard
WR: Jalen Camp
WR: Malachi Carter
OL: Zach Quinney
OL: Kenny Cooper
OL: Mikey Minihan
OL: Connor Hansen
OL: Charlie Clark

"First of all, not even concerning the rest of your incoherent combination of vomit, did you just call the ACC: “BRUTAL”?? Lmao. In what world buddy? Pitt played for the conference championship in 2018, and finished with a 7-7 record. Clemson was the only team to win 10 games from the ACC last year. The ACC is at best the 4th best P5 conference from top to bottom."

Ok, let me clarify here..... Georgia Tech plays a brutal schedule. Clemson has been nearly unbeatable for awhile... Georgia is a top 5 team every year. Duke was pretty good with Daniel Jones for awhile... Miami always has talent.. Etc. ACC has been a good league, but when talking Georgia Tech schedule you have to include the game against Georgia in that convo as well.



Offense simply was not the problem. Even in the down years, it was the defense that was a huge problem. They scored plenty of points. Let me know when Geoff Collins puts 60+ on anybody. Even that last year, 2018.. 49 on Virginia Tech, 66 on Louisville, 63 on Bowling Green, 40 on UNC, etc. And the damn defense couldn't get anyone off the field.



Hey thanks man! Sending resume over now.



Lets see what happens this year and next year... I have a feeling people will get tired of being awful.

Just clarifying from your response, I didn't say CPJ offense was the issue, I said CDP was Vanilla, our current OC. I think you didn't read my entire post.

 

[year_of_the_swarm]

Let me ask you guys an honest question.... Within all realms of realism, can Georgia Tech be a top program in the ACC? Consistently?

Is that a realistic outcome?

 

[cthenrys]

Let me ask you guys an honest question.... Within all realms of realism, can Georgia Tech be a top program in the ACC? Consistently?

Is that a realistic outcome?

Nope. To think otherwise is to be delusional.

 

[cthenrys]

Let me ask you guys an honest question.... Within all realms of realism, can Georgia Tech be a top program in the ACC? Consistently?

Is that a realistic outcome?

Nope. To think otherwise is to be delusional.

 

[Pointer]

Let me ask you guys an honest question.... Within all realms of realism, can Georgia Tech be a top program in the ACC? Consistently?

Is that a realistic outcome?

Yes. Having T Stan is the biggest hope.

 

[JacketOff]

Nope. To think otherwise is to be delusional.

This is idiotic and not even worth the response a troll like you is trying to illicit.

 

[chris975d]

Let me ask you guys an honest question.... Within all realms of realism, can Georgia Tech be a top program in the ACC? Consistently?

Is that a realistic outcome?

What’s the definition of top program?

Consistently finish in the top half? Yes, most definitely.

Consistently finish in the top 3 of our division? Yes.

Consistently win our division? This is where doubt starts entering the equation for me. I don’t think we can do this consistently.

Consistently challenge Clemson for the conference in any meaningful way? No, unless there’s a big turnover in staff at Clemson.

This is obviously all my personal opinion, and is based on no staffing changes within our program or others. Of course staffing changes anywhere could shake things back up.

 

[sgreer]

Yes. Having T Stan is the biggest hope.

I think so if they can recruit the top talent from the state and keep bringing in good transfers. The coaching staff will continue to improve IMO.

 

[slugboy]

O’Leary had us consistently at or towards the top of the ACC when FSU was a big deal, and he never had a good defense. So, not only do I think it’s possible, but I think we can be better than that.

 

[orientalnc]

What’s the definition of top program?

Consistently finish in the top half? Yes, most definitely.

Consistently finish in the top 3 of our division? Yes.

Consistently win our division? This is where doubt starts entering the equation for me. I don’t think we can do this consistently.

Consistently challenge Clemson for the conference in any meaningful way? No, unless there’s a big turnover in staff at Clemson.

This is obviously all my personal opinion, and is based on no staffing changes within our program or others. Of course staffing changes anywhere could shake things back up.

I do not expect us to consistently win our division. The ACC is very competitive and we will never have the fan base or resources to be like Clemson or Alabama. That is not a reasonable measure. Can we be competitive every year and win the division frequently? Yes, by all means, that is doable. Can we beat Clemson? Of course we can. But not likely this year.

 

[GT_EE78]

Let me ask you guys an honest question.... Within all realms of realism, can Georgia Tech be a top program in the ACC? Consistently?

Is that a realistic outcome?

In the seventies Clemson always travelled to Atlanta.
One would have laughed then, if you had told them that tigers would become an elite program with one of the best coaching staffs.
Yes, it's achievable.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

In the seventies Clemson always travelled to Atlanta.
One would have laughed then, if you had told them that tigers would become an elite program with one of the best coaching staffs.
Yes, it's achievable.

If we double our spending on the program and create degrees like Parks & Rec, we absolutely can get there too indeed.

 

[GT_EE78]

If we double our spending on the program and create degrees like Parks & Rec, we absolutely can get there too indeed.

i'm not as certain about the details but agree that you're pointing in the right direction.

 

[Vespidae]

Let me ask you guys an honest question.... Within all realms of realism, can Georgia Tech be a top program in the ACC? Consistently?

Is that a realistic outcome?

Tech can and should compete for Coastal. To be a top program, the problem for Tech is recruiting, yes ... but it’s also facilities. The debt the AA carries has a huge impact on reinvestment. Add in a small fan base with changing demographics, and it compounds the problem. I would feel a lot better if Tech had maneuvering room in its budget but it doesn’t.

 

[Jacketman99]

There are very few teams in college football that consistently win there division. However, we should consistently compete for the division title. I think we can be in the discussion in a yearly basis and win our share. Miami, UNC, VT, UVA, and Pitt are not just going to sit idly by while we dominate the division. They are wanting the same thing and many have a lot more resources.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Since the dawn of divisions in the ACC in 2005, we've finished:
* 1st overall in the ACC once, and lost in the Championship game twice.
* Division finishes: 1st (4x), top 3 (11x out of the 15 years).

Going back 20+ years prior to that before divisions, as long as we've been in the ACC we finished:
* 1st (2x), top 3 (7x), top 4 (13x)

So to me our legacy as a program in modern history is that we're in the top half of our division (3rd or better out of 7) 70% of the time, and top 3rd of the conference (5th or better) 70% of the time. We win the division 25% of the time (so we make it to the championship game 25% of the time) and win the conference 6%-8% of the time. We are in the running for the division with a couple games left nearly half the time.

That to me should be a bare minimum, and probably implies 7+ win seasons and 5-3s in conference play. I think most of us see no reason why we can't do better than that, and have 8-9+ win seasons and 6-2 in conference play.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Let me ask you guys an honest question.... Within all realms of realism, can Georgia Tech be a top program in the ACC? Consistently?

Is that a realistic outcome?

If we want an honest answer to that question, we first need to define top program. In my opinion, GT fans need to decide where they want the floor of the program to be and then fund the infrastructure to make it happen. There is no realistic option for GT being a consistent playoff contender without significant spending increases. Since winning the ACC with 11-12 wins would be in that realm, then it's probably not reasonable to assume that being a consistent 10 game winner is realistic either. My gut feeling is we can routinely win 8-9 games with an occasional 10-11 win season and a rebuilding floor every few years of 6-7 wins for a single season. The reasons for this are spending and schedule.

As for spending, we ranked 61st in 2017 in all of power 5 spending. The reality is that since then, we have increased somewhat, but I am doubtful we have cracked the top 35 yet. Also, to just account for our spending increase alone assumes a static landscape of spending across the P5, and we know that instead it is very much an arms race. Over the past 30 years, 18 different teams have won national titles. The only two to not finish in the top 30 in spending were GT and Colorado in 1990. Since the BCS took over in 1998, only one team not in the top 25 in spending has won, and that was Tennessee in 1998, which is ranked 26th. LSU is the only team to win a title in the last decade that wasn't in the top 10 of spending, as they are ranked 18th. Now, correlation is not causation, but the evidence strongly suggests that if you want to compete on the highest levels, you are going to have to spend accordingly. Our smaller fanbase and the general makeup of our student population does not bode well for staying in any spending race in the long haul.

Scheduling is the next issue. Currently, we play Clemson, uga, Miami, and VT every year. Each of these schools is in the top 25 of spending on football, and historically have been solid football programs. Granted, Miami and VT are in a state of transition right now, but to expect them to stay down is a fools errand. They throw enough money at football so that they will eventually figure it out. After all, that's what Clemson did. The expectation of routinely losing to Clemson ang uga with occasional wins is the most reasonable outlook. That's a 10-2 season assuming we beat Miami, UNC, and VT every year and we don't pull FSU from the Atlantic. (FSU will figure it out soon as well) There is also the addition of Notre Dame every few years which with their trajectory is a likely loss most years. If we insist on adding other top tier OoC opponents like Auburn to the mix, then we also add to the likely loss column.

Now, all is not doom and gloom. It is entirely possible that GT hired the single best coach to get us back to competitive levels in the future. I am a firm believer in most of what CGC is doing here on the Flats. If we can get recruiting back in the top 25 consistently and hit homeruns on select skill positions, then the occurrence of 11-12 win seasons could well increase. As it stands, I will be content if he can get us to 8-9 wins and be competitive in the games against our toughest opponents.

College football championship history

Here is a comprehensive list of every college football champion from 1869 to the present day.

www.ncaa.com

Which schools spend the most on college football? Where does Syracuse rank?

A look at which schools spend the most on college football and which spend the least.

www.syracuse.com