Duke Vs Ga Tech Recruiting since 2015

SteamWhistle

SteamWhistle

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,436
Location
Rome, GA
This years 5th year seniors are class of 2015.

2015
Duke - NAT 52 ACC 12
Tech - NAT 44 ACC 8

2016
Duke - NAT 33 ACC 6
Tech - NAT 60 ACC 11

2017
Duke - NAT 47 ACC 8
Tech - NAT 48 ACC 9

2018
Duke - NAT 63 ACC 12
Tech - NAT 44 ACC 8

2019
Duke - NAT 49 ACC 8
Tech - NAT 51 ACC 9

So Duke not only has been on par/ better then Tech most years they’ve also been recruiting for their own scheme. Duke also has a number of players from Georgia and Atlanta on the roster. I think we all agree that Tech should be out recruiting Duke every season, especially now that we have more money, coaches and a different scheme.

The main reason I shared this data isn’t to look for an excuse to why we lost to Duke. It’s to help put into perspective how out manned Tech is against every team we play. If these are the numbers against Duke you can all pretty much assume what it’s looks like when we compare recruiting to Miami, UNC, VT, UGA, Clemson etc. In my opinion The main reason Tech is struggling this season and has struggled since 2014 isn’t because of any coach or scheme but just simply because of recruiting.
 

ezbee

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
71
SteamWhistle said:
This years 5th year seniors are class of 2015.

2015
Duke - NAT 52 ACC 12
Tech - NAT 44 ACC 8

2016
Duke - NAT 33 ACC 6
Tech - NAT 60 ACC 11

2017
Duke - NAT 47 ACC 8
Tech - NAT 48 ACC 9

2018
Duke - NAT 63 ACC 12
Tech - NAT 44 ACC 8

2019
Duke - NAT 49 ACC 8
Tech - NAT 51 ACC 9

So Duke not only has been on par/ better then Tech most years they’ve also been recruiting for their own scheme. Duke also has a number of players from Georgia and Atlanta on the roster. I think we all agree that Tech should be out recruiting Duke every season, especially now that we have more money, coaches and a different scheme.

The main reason I shared this data isn’t to look for an excuse to why we lost to Duke. It’s to help put into perspective how out manned Tech is against every team we play. If these are the numbers against Duke you can all pretty much assume what it’s looks like when we compare recruiting to Miami, UNC, VT, UGA, Clemson etc. In my opinion The main reason Tech is struggling this season and has struggled since 2014 isn’t because of any coach or scheme but just simply because of recruiting.
Click to expand...

So if my math is correct, the avg national rank over the five years:

Duke - 48.8
Tech - 49.4

Zero difference in recruiting. Especially considering most of the *** clowns that drive the recruiting rankings aren’t qualified for it.

I will concede that duke obviously didn’t change their scheme so their players were recruited for the system but otherwise the recruiting differences are nil.

Our injury rate over the last five years seems to be on the ridiculous level though....
 
THWG

THWG

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,187
ElCidBUZZingFAN said:
We have even talent and the game was over at half.

Cool insight, bro.
Click to expand...
How many upperclassmen do we have and how many do they have? What system were their players recruited for and what system were our players recruited for? How many years have they ran that system and how many years have our players ran our system?

These were the difference in the game. Each of these things matter and for a bunch of fans who are supposedly "smart", y'all sure can't grasp this reality.
 

Animal02

Banned
Messages
6,269
Location
Southeastern Michigan
SteamWhistle said:
This years 5th year seniors are class of 2015.

2015
Duke - NAT 52 ACC 12
Tech - NAT 44 ACC 8

2016
Duke - NAT 33 ACC 6
Tech - NAT 60 ACC 11

2017
Duke - NAT 47 ACC 8
Tech - NAT 48 ACC 9

2018
Duke - NAT 63 ACC 12
Tech - NAT 44 ACC 8

2019
Duke - NAT 49 ACC 8
Tech - NAT 51 ACC 9

So Duke not only has been on par/ better then Tech most years they’ve also been recruiting for their own scheme. Duke also has a number of players from Georgia and Atlanta on the roster. I think we all agree that Tech should be out recruiting Duke every season, especially now that we have more money, coaches and a different scheme.

The main reason I shared this data isn’t to look for an excuse to why we lost to Duke. It’s to help put into perspective how out manned Tech is against every team we play. If these are the numbers against Duke you can all pretty much assume what it’s looks like when we compare recruiting to Miami, UNC, VT, UGA, Clemson etc. In my opinion The main reason Tech is struggling this season and has struggled since 2014 isn’t because of any coach or scheme but just simply because of recruiting.
Click to expand...
THWG said:
How many seniors do we have and how many seniors do they have? What system were their players recruited for and what system were our players recruited for? How many years have they ran that system and how many years have our players ran our system?

These were the difference in the game. Each of these things matter and for a bunch of fans who are supposedly "smart", y'all sure can't grasp this reality.
Click to expand...
Yeah...nothing to do with coaching ability :rolleyes:. Citadel says hello
 
smokey_wasp

smokey_wasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,486
ezbee said:
So if my math is correct, the avg national rank over the five years:

Duke - 48.8
Tech - 49.4

Zero difference in recruiting. Especially considering most of the *** clowns that drive the recruiting rankings aren’t qualified for it.

I will concede that duke obviously didn’t change their scheme so their players were recruited for the system but otherwise the recruiting differences are nil.

Our injury rate over the last five years seems to be on the ridiculous level though....
Click to expand...

This is kind of big, though. They have been recruiting players to their scheme, which is now closer to our scheme. OLine is the biggest place this shows up. There is no substitute for size. In our 2020 class, even our lower rated recruits are absolute giants compared to before, bith sides if the ball. We are physically mismatched without running our unique scheme, even against Duke.
 
Cam

Cam

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,591
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
GT and Duke have relatively even rosters, as supported by 247's Team Talent Composite where they're right next to each other. Though it's worth noting that 5 of our top 10 rated players were recruited by Collins (Clayton, Allen, Sims, Ezzard, and J. Griffin), so Duke has recruited quite a bit better than us in recent years. Also worth mentioning 3 of those top 10 aren't eligible to play.

The key difference is that Duke recruited players to fit Cutcliffe's program, and ours were recruited to fit Paul Johnson's program. Our players are certainly as talented collectively as Duke's, but the skill set fit doesn't seem to be there on offense. It's dumb to compare talent utilization between a program in year 12 to one in year 1.

I liken it to asking a group of electrical engineers to take over a chemical engineering company. Those highly trained EE's could be very skilled in their field, but that company won't run smoothly. Need to keep recruiting more chemical engineers.
 

TheTechGuy

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
922
THWG said:
Did I say anything about Citadel? We are talking about Duke, again y'all have a hard time with reading comprehension.
Click to expand...
You chose to ask rhetorical questions that focus solely on the players, and then you made a broad assertion, "Each of these things matter and for a bunch of fans who are supposedly "smart", y'all sure can't grasp this reality," based on a limited review of the Duke and GT recruiting comparison.

@Animal02 then utilized the Citadel game to refute your point, namely that coaching may also be an issue. Why you then chose to resort to a personal attack and castigate his reading comprehension is beyond me. His post seemed easy to interpret, he was pointing out that you have relied on a select metric to make an assertion regarding an issue that can presumably be explained by alternative theories.
 
THWG

THWG

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,187
Animal02 said:
No problem with reading comprehension. You just want to ignore the elephant in the room to promote your narrative
Click to expand...
If that ain't the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is. You need to get over Johnson leaving. Je retired and left. He left the program in the shape that it is in. I loved Johnson, but it was time for a change. We got a good coach who needs time to change the program to his vision. He is a good coach and I'm judging this based on his entire coaching career and not 6 games at Tech like you are. If he doesn't do anything in year 3, I'll be ready to move on, but we all need to be patient and it doesn't help to have fans jumping down his throat every chance they get.
 
stech81

stech81

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,962
Location
Woodstock Georgia
THWG said:
How many upperclassmen do we have and how many do they have? What system were their players recruited for and what system were our players recruited for? How many years have they ran that system and how many years have our players ran our system?

These were the difference in the game. Each of these things matter and for a bunch of fans who are supposedly "smart", y'all sure can't grasp this reality.
Click to expand...
Ok I'll buy that for the offense what about the pitiful defense were they not recruited to tackle ?
 

ezbee

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
71
smokey_wasp said:
This is kind of big, though. They have been recruiting players to their scheme, which is now closer to our scheme. OLine is the biggest place this shows up. There is no substitute for size. In our 2020 class, even our lower rated recruits are absolute giants compared to before, bith sides if the ball. We are physically mismatched without running our unique scheme, even against Duke.
Click to expand...

Good post and I agree 100%. The question I have is do we have a coaching staff that can maximize the talent they have. Be it 3, 4, or 5 star.

Cutcliffe is a dbag but a helluva coach. Can we get better results out of our players than Cutcliffe if we move a five year recruiting ranking from 49 to 35?

I don’t believe in the rankings like most on this board. Winning with bigger and faster players is obviously easier but you still have to scheme and coach.
 
THWG

THWG

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,187
TheTechGuy said:
You chose to ask rhetorical questions that focus solely on the players, and then you made a broad assertion, "Each of these things matter and for a bunch of fans who are supposedly "smart", y'all sure can't grasp this reality," based on a limited review of the Duke and GT recruiting comparison.

@Animal02 then utilized the Citadel game to refute your point, namely that coaching may also be an issue. Why you then chose to resort to a personal attack and castigate his reading comprehension is beyond me. His post seemed easy to interpret, he was pointing out that you have relied on a select metric to make an assertion regarding an issue that can presumably be explained by alternative theories.
Click to expand...
They aren't rhetorical, they can be answered with facts that y'all choose to ignore. The Citadel game sucked and that is on Collins, but I'm not going to judge a coach on one season. If I did that, then Bobby Ross would have been one of the worst coaches in Tech history.
 

Animal02

Banned
Messages
6,269
Location
Southeastern Michigan
Cam said:
GT and Duke have relatively even rosters, as supported by 247's Team Talent Composite where they're right next to each other. Though it's worth noting that 5 of our top 10 rated players were recruited by Collins (Clayton, Allen, Sims, Ezzard, and J. Griffin), so Duke has recruited quite a bit better than us in recent years. Also worth mentioning 3 of those top 10 aren't eligible to play.

The key difference is that Duke recruited players to fit Cutcliffe's program, and ours were recruited to fit Paul Johnson's program. Our players are certainly as talented collectively as Duke's, but the skill set fit doesn't seem to be there on offense. It's dumb to compare talent utilization between a program in year 12 to one in year 1.

I liken it to asking a group of electrical engineers to take over a chemical engineering company. Those highly trained EE's could be very skilled in their field, but that company won't run smoothly. Need to keep recruiting more chemical engineers.
Click to expand...
You are not asking EEs to take over a ChemE company.....you are FORCING them.....thus the difference. Collins and TSTan chose to create this **** show.
 
THWG

THWG

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,187
stech81 said:
Ok I'll buy that for the offense what about the pitiful defense were they not recruited to tackle ?
Click to expand...
That's true, but we also only have 2 seniors seeing significant time on defense. We lost our best DT (RIP big fella) and a walk on is playing significant minutes at DT now. We just don't have the horses or experience, yet.
 

TheTechGuy

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
922
THWG said:
They aren't rhetorical, they can be answered with facts that y'all choose to ignore. The Citadel game sucked and that is on Collins, but I'm not going to judge a coach on one season. If I did that, then Bobby Ross would have been one of the worst coaches in Tech history.
Click to expand...
They were certainly rhetorical questions, you knew the intended reader knew the answer. I have not seen anyone ask you to judge Collins. I have seen you sarcastically insult "smart" fans, which the site prohibits. Though, I do not agree with the site's rule, I really enjoy sarcasm.
 
stech81

stech81

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,962
Location
Woodstock Georgia
THWG said:
That's true, but we also only have 2 seniors seeing significant time on defense. We lost our best DT (RIP big fella) and a walk on is playing significant minutes at DT now. We just don't have the horses or experience, yet.
Click to expand...
I know it don't matter but a few of us have been season ticket holders for close to 40 years and we see a pattern this year we have seen before. Like him or not I know we have him a long time , maybe too long I just want to see better coaching which I have not the last few games.
 
Top