ACC Discussion 2020

[CuseJacket]

Thread for news about our future opponents and general ACC musings.

 

[bob4gt]

Not ACC, but UCF had 10 players opt out of the season, including 2 starters.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Thread for news about our future opponents and general ACC musings.

Makes me chuckle that teams are listed as having no fans.

 

[GTBandman]

UNC would be top of the list of schools with athletes in no classes.

 

[CuseJacket]

5-7 with 3 of the wins against Liberty, Holy Cross, and W Michigan. Also lost to a Maryland team that wasn't good 63-20, and lost to the same NC State team we beat 16-10. So yes they were pretty terrible last year. As were we

Pulling the reply to a more appropriate thread since we're further off track from the FSU and UCF game time thread.

It's clear we're debating the definition of terrible. I disagree with your definition. 5 wins, most of which were better than ours, makes that a below average BCS team and far from terrible, in my opinion.

Liberty: 8-5, bowl team
Holy Cross = Citadel
Western Michigan: 7-6, bowl team

Did any of our wins look like that? Only Miami.

The NC State comparison is an interesting one without context. Just like when Syracuse beat Duke 49-6 and we lost to Duke 41-23. The context missing from the NC State game is that Syracuse beat NC State 1.5 months prior when the Wolfpack had a different participation report i.e., two full(er) strength teams, whereas we won a battle of attrition in late November.

We beat a single bowl team last year. Our Head Coach took a 10 second run-off with approx 30 seconds remaining against an FCS team, with a timeout in his pocket, and ultimately lost to said FCS team.

The reason for my initial reply in the other thread was to say that Syracuse was decisively better than us last year, meaning as of today we will be an underdog at Syracuse. Even if I concede that Syracuse was "terrible", I can only go as far as saying that I wish we were that terrible.

 

[forensicbuzz]

Pulling the reply to a more appropriate thread since we're further off track from the FSU and UCF game time thread.

It's clear we're debating the definition of terrible. I disagree with your definition. 5 wins, most of which were better than ours, makes that a below average BCS team and far from terrible, in my opinion.

Liberty: 8-5, bowl team
Holy Cross = Citadel
Western Michigan: 7-6, bowl team

Did any of our wins look like that? Only Miami.

The NC State comparison is an interesting one without context. Just like when Syracuse beat Duke 49-6 and we lost to Duke 41-23. The context missing from the NC State game is that Syracuse beat NC State 1.5 months prior when the Wolfpack had a different participation report i.e., two full(er) strength teams, whereas we won a battle of attrition in late November.

We beat a single bowl team last year. Our Head Coach took a 10 second run-off with approx 30 seconds remaining against an FCS team, with a timeout in his pocket, and ultimately lost to said FCS team.

The reason for my initial reply in the other thread was to say that Syracuse was decisively better than us last year, meaning as of today we will be an underdog at Syracuse. Even if I concede that Syracuse was "terrible", I can only go as far as saying that I wish we were that terrible.

The thing is, this GT team is no comparison to last year's GT team. Unless we start losing starters due to injury or illness, this team would beat last year's team 49 of 50 times, in my opinion. Every group is light-years better this year, and that is just looking at the injured we got back. So, unless Syracuse made huge strides themselves (I have zero idea), comparing us last year is irrelevant.

 

[Silk3]

Pulling the reply to a more appropriate thread since we're further off track from the FSU and UCF game time thread.

It's clear we're debating the definition of terrible. I disagree with your definition. 5 wins, most of which were better than ours, makes that a below average BCS team and far from terrible, in my opinion.

Liberty: 8-5, bowl team
Holy Cross = Citadel
Western Michigan: 7-6, bowl team

Did any of our wins look like that? Only Miami.

The NC State comparison is an interesting one without context. Just like when Syracuse beat Duke 49-6 and we lost to Duke 41-23. The context missing from the NC State game is that Syracuse beat NC State 1.5 months prior when the Wolfpack had a different participation report i.e., two full(er) strength teams, whereas we won a battle of attrition in late November.

We beat a single bowl team last year. Our Head Coach took a 10 second run-off with approx 30 seconds remaining against an FCS team, with a timeout in his pocket, and ultimately lost to said FCS team.

The reason for my initial reply in the other thread was to say that Syracuse was decisively better than us last year, meaning as of today we will be an underdog at Syracuse. Even if I concede that Syracuse was "terrible", I can only go as far as saying that I wish we were that terrible.

I didnt say we were any good

 

[CuseJacket]

I didnt say we were any good

What's your threshold to not be "terrible"? Bowl team?

 

[forensicbuzz]

2-6 in conference games. "terrible"

3 of 5 wins against lower P5 or worse teams. "terrible"

SU was NCST only conference win. Their ONLY conference win. "terrible"

They only beat WF and Duke. "terrible"

 

[forensicbuzz]

So, why was Syracuse so terrible last year? Injuries? Chemistry? Coaching?

Why are they light-years better this year?

 

[Silk3]

What's your threshold to not be "terrible"? Bowl team?

I watched alot of their games last year bc I had a betting interest and if they wernt terrible they pretty damn close to terrible. They were bad/not good if thats better for you.

 

[forensicbuzz]

What's your threshold to not be "terrible"? Bowl team?

I would posit that if GT had played Syracuse's schedule last year they probably would have gone 5-7, maybe even 6-6.

Hell, without all the injuries we sustained last year, we might have gone 5-7 with our own schedule. The Citadel game was a fluke. 19 of 20 times we beat them going away, in my opinion.

And we were terrible.

 

[Silk3]

2-6 in conference games. "terrible"

3 of 5 wins against lower P5 or worse teams. "terrible"

SU was NCST only conference win. Their ONLY conference win. "terrible"

They only beat WF and Duke. "terrible"

Not to mention we were year 1 in huge transition and they are in year 5 or so. So i would hope they were better then us last year

 

[Silk3]

I would posit that if GT had played Syracuse's schedule last year they probably would have gone 5-7, maybe even 6-6.

Hell, without all the injuries we sustained last year, we might have gone 5-7 with our own schedule. The Citadel game was a fluke. 19 of 20 times we beat them going away, in my opinion.

And we were terrible.

Haha idk about that but they def had easier schedule

 

[CuseJacket]

The thing is, this GT team is no comparison to last year's GT team. Unless we start losing starters due to injury or illness, this team would beat last year's team 49 of 50 times, in my opinion. Every group is light-years better this year, and that is just looking at the injured we got back. So, unless Syracuse made huge strides themselves (I have zero idea), comparing us last year is irrelevant.

When you define "light-years" as getting guys back from injury, I agree we have improved in light-years from last year to this year. I was referring to on-field performance.

2-6 in conference games. "terrible"

3 of 5 wins against lower P5 or worse teams. "terrible"

SU was NCST only conference win. Their ONLY conference win. "terrible"

They only beat WF and Duke. "terrible"

I was with you until you edited your post to go beyond the first sentence. Beating bad teams does not make the winner terrible.

 

[CuseJacket]

I watched alot of their games last year bc I had a betting interest and if they wernt terrible they pretty damn close to terrible. They were bad/not good if thats better for you.

Yea, that is better. I've never considered a 5-7 team terrible. That was the point I was debating.

 

[orientalnc]

Yea, that is better. I've never considered a 5-7 team terrible. That was the point I was debating.

My issue with the 2019 GT team was the inconsistency against teams that were not absolutely better than us.. We could look really good for a half, then get blown out in the second half. I know there are legit reasons, but that was frustrating.

 

[CuseJacket]

I would posit that if GT had played Syracuse's schedule last year they probably would have gone 5-7, maybe even 6-6.

Hell, without all the injuries we sustained last year, we might have gone 5-7 with our own schedule. The Citadel game was a fluke. 19 of 20 times we beat them going away, in my opinion.

And we were terrible.

I'm not going to continue down this path as I think the context of the original comment is getting lost. Neither team was good last year and we're debating semantics and relative comparisons of "not good". No bueno.

What I don't want to get lost is that I'm optimistic about this year. What I'm littering throughout the threads is that is largely based on belief without much evidence. The evidence I'm looking for is what happens on the field, and we just haven't had that opportunity to see yet. Even if we lose week 1, I could walk away feeling more optimistic. Just depends on what we see.

The salt I might pour in our own wound is my question about coaching. No, not the offense. We weren't ravaged by injuries against The Citadel. We got 1 snap off in the final 27 seconds of the game... a FG attempt. Our HC's decision to allow a 10 second runoff with a timeout in the pocket is still traumatic to me to this day. That was a (temporary) dead ball, horrible decision that had nothing to do with talent, transition, nor injuries. I'm otherwise fairly lenient about last year and willing to give the X's and O's decision a pass until we see year 2.

 

[CuseJacket]

My issue with the 2019 GT team was the inconsistency against teams that were not absolutely better than us.. We could look really good for a half, then get blown out in the second half. I know there are legit reasons, but that was frustrating.

I'm about to post an FSU preview article. The gist of that is the gist of my feelings about GT. vs. the rest of the ACC. I still think nearly every team has a head start on us based on last year. We have to get a lot better, but other teams might only have to get marginally better to stay ahead of us.

 

[forensicbuzz]

When you define "light-years" as getting guys back from injury, I agree we have improved in light-years from last year to this year. I was referring to on-field performance.

I was with you until you edited your post to go beyond the first sentence. Beating bad teams does not make the winner terrible.

I agree beating bad teams doesn't make the winner terrible. But when most of your wins are against bad teams, that's an indication that your team is terrible.