ACC Discussion 2019

BleedGoldNWhite21

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,456
I don’t give a rat’s *** about the coach debate, I’m just sick of so many people on this board talking about our players like we have a high school JV team. There’s a huge difference between making a legitimate point about talent differential(Clemson is more talented than us) and doing what some people on this board are doing. We won 7 games last year. We had a winning record (5-3) in the conference. There’s no need for comments like “no other program in our conference is working with anything like we are” when discussing the talent on our team. You’re implying our guys are complete and utter **** and that’s factually false and it seems some people rather **** on our kids to make their point.
 

Pointer

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,801
That's the thing though. The option didn't really work, at least early on, in 2008. BC, VT, Clemson, UVA, GW, UNC. Even duke was more on the talent advantage Bebe and Dwyer had over the doormat team. Johnson did a good job but even then it wasn't an overly impressive showing until we blew out miami and beat UGA, but it took a near entire season to get there. There were flashes, but those flashes also largely centered around the talent at skill positions (like against Duke when Bebe went nuts). Johnson made it work primarily because he had an elite DL to lean on while working things out.



Coaches run their system. They may tailor the playcalls in them to the talent they have (for instance we'll probably be run heavier this year than most), but we're not running an offense that fits the current talent. We're running a limited version of the offense to try and get the closest fit with the talent. The coaches talked up a lot of things in the offseason that need to be taken with a more than a little salt.



You're right that he wasn't option ready from a making reads point of view. However, he was 100% physically ready to do what the option required him to do. Beyond that his style of running compensated somewhat for the weaknesses of the team around him in that he could get tough yards even if the blocking wasn't perfect. His style of running, and the offense being naturally run heavy anyways, made it easier for Johnson to have called runs and dress them up as option plays making it easier for Nesbitt. This year it's possible Graham, for example, has the tools needed to succeed in this offense. but I don't think it's likely that he has an equivalent attribute that will make up for the weakness on the OL the way Nesbitt's power running did. Basically, Nesbitt was damn good in 08 despite not being a great option QB, which he became in 09. I think our QBs have potential to be great QBs with a year of experience, but I don't really see how they will be good this year without the ability make the reads and throws that they aren't used to.
That's pretty good insight. I think I agree with most of what you're saying. But still, some are talking about a 3-4 year transition because of the old offense style. I don't think it took so long for nessbit to figure out the reads, he seemed to get the hang of the reads pretty quickly. And for the Duke game he didn't play because of injury which is why Shaw was slinging it everywhere cause he couldn't run the offense. Even still if it took nessbit 4-5 games to get good at his reads, a half season, that's still drastically different from the 3-4 year cushion people are giving the new offense. I want to see real results at the end of year 2, as in I want to see progress in that the new system are installed. Even then the cushion is because of the defensive sides because I will agreea CPJ did inherit a better defense. It must be said that the offense he interested was not that great either though. I think even this year, they should have decent results cause everyone outside of Clemson in the acc looks winnable. I think right now based on what I saw against Clemson, it's TO or Graham but I gotta see more of both. But again the I'm tired of reading how tough a job the current coaching staff has with what they are working with. And one more thing, nessbit was absolutely 100% physically ready as well, but so are the current players. It's like you said, getting the current set of players used to the new systems. Well just have to see how long that will take or if it will work for that matter. The real big issue people should be focusing on is not transitions or rebuilds or anything like that. I think CGC has the potential to be a great coach, and we can always switch OC if coach p doesn't work out, but the biggest issue is funding. If we can't figure out a way to close that gap, the hype will die out and recruiting will go back to the average it's been. Whatever everyone's differences are on this board, I think we can agree on that.
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,580
Even still if it took nessbit 4-5 games to get good at his reads, a half season, that's still drastically different from the 3-4 year cushion people are giving the new offense.

It was 5-6 games to get good enough to let the elite talent we have show out. However, Nesbitt was still making pretty significant strides even into his senior year. One of the reasons people view(ed) Washington as a wizard of the option was because of the way he ran in in comparison to Nesbitt. Nesbitt was no doubt good for us but it's pretty clear that him only having 3 years in the system limited him when it came to opening up the system. It's the same thing now. No matter who wins the starting job, they won't have the 2-3 year experience in the system that most first year QBs will have and that'll hurt them. It hurt Nesbitt. Nesbitt was able to find success despite that for a number of reasons, and I'm not convinced a similar thing is present here.

As far as the 3-4 year thing, goes, we have big ?s at every spot on offense except running back. It's possible the coaching staff can make do with what's there, but there is also a chance that what is here is just too bad a fit to do what the next staff wants. Even if it turns out that Graham or whoever is good at QB, there is still the concern with WRs, TEs, and OL. Some will transition fine, but there is a very good chance that the answers to at least some of those questions will be found through recruiting, which means a couple of years down the road. We'll probably have an okay running game, but the passing game likely won't start to be good until new blood is brought in and trained. There are just too many moving pieces and we don't have the Bebe or Dwyer to compensate like we did before.

Also, overall the 3+ year rebuild thing is because the biggest issue facing this staff is on the other side of the ball. While the defense won't have as big of issues transition systems, there are also very clear issues in the front 7 that likely will need recruiting to fix. There are just too many areas of concern to realistically believe they will all be smoothed over with what we have. Some will require recruiting to deal with.


And I agree that funding is the biggest issue, but that is a whole different can of worms.
 

pbrown520

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
586
I don’t give a rat’s *** about the coach debate, I’m just sick of so many people on this board talking about our players like we have a high school JV team. There’s a huge difference between making a legitimate point about talent differential(Clemson is more talented than us) and doing what some people on this board are doing. We won 7 games last year. We had a winning record (5-3) in the conference. There’s no need for comments like “no other program in our conference is working with anything like we are” when discussing the talent on our team. You’re implying our guys are complete and utter **** and that’s factually false and it seems some people rather **** on our kids to make their point.

This.
 

Oldgoldandwhite

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,759
It’s really hard to judge teams after one game. Remember 2014 and Kenny Hill?
After one game he was the Heisman front runner. By the end of the year, on the bench and transferred.
 

GTRX7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,524
Location
Atlanta
I don’t give a rat’s *** about the coach debate, I’m just sick of so many people on this board talking about our players like we have a high school JV team. There’s a huge difference between making a legitimate point about talent differential(Clemson is more talented than us) and doing what some people on this board are doing. We won 7 games last year. We had a winning record (5-3) in the conference. There’s no need for comments like “no other program in our conference is working with anything like we are” when discussing the talent on our team. You’re implying our guys are complete and utter **** and that’s factually false and it seems some people rather **** on our kids to make their point.

We have middle of the pack ACC talent. Our defensive line is not great, but hasn't been for years and neither is most of the bottom half of the ACC. Aside from that, there is no reason our D cannot compete at a very good level in the ACC this year. On offense, our line again is a concern, but I think we have enough at every other position to compete this year as well. While our QBs are still relatively untested, we have 4 guys with potential that, if used correctly, should still be .500 or better in the ACC (as we have been 23 of the last 24 years).

According to 247's composite team talent rankings, there are four distinct ACC tiers:

Tier 1
FSU, Clem, Miami (at least 30 four star players and an average ranking over 88)
Tier 2
UNC, Va Tech (at least 15 four star players and an average ranking above 86)
Tier 3
NC St, Pitt, Duke, UL, GT (at least 7 four star players and an average raking over 84)
Tier 4
UVA, Syracuse, BC, Wake (3 or less four star players and an average ranking less than 84)
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,792
So two of the best teams (UVA and Cuse) in the ACC are tier4? And FSU in tier1 is one of the very worst, while UM also in tier1 is mediocre at best......crazy!
 

SteamWhistle

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,434
Location
Rome, GA
The ACC is down, Until Us VT Miami get it going the ACC is the 2nd worst P5 Conference. the ACC will produce a playoff team every year though.
 
Top