FanDuel sets over/under at 4 wins

[LibertyTurns]

Some of you guys need to stop being so nervous. We’re going to win 6-8 games this year, could be as high as 9.

I’ve got my tickets bought, my plane tickets, my hotel rooms & today I put in vacation time for Homecoming, the Thursday night game & a couple others so I could get a head start on Saturday by meeting up with old friends on Friday night. Couple that with I’d rather work from my hotel room on Saturday morning than wake up at 0 dark thirty, drive to airport before the damn Starbucks is even open so I can board a plane at 6 then stand at the Marta deck ay 0800. I’m too old now & am going high maintenance. Waffle house instead of airport.

I’m not going to jump off a cliff if we screw the pooch or get decimated by injuries, but we’re going to be highly competitive in every game save 1 maybe 2. For us to go 0-7 once you factor in the gimmes means that we definitely hired the wrong guy(s). 2-5 & I’m nervous, 3-4 to 5-2 is a crapshoot and probably has as much to do with everyone else or luck as it does with how we’re being coached. Not much different than any other year.

 

[smokey_wasp]

I have heard good arguments on this from both sides. I really don't know what to expect.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

First I always wear gold color glasses that is what fans do. Will I get pissed if we lose , hell yes but I'll get over it just like I did in 2015, 1994, and 1981 and I was ready for the next game after each loss. Ok QB's may not hold an offer from any P5 schools but big deal they all run an offense very close to this new one. If our coach on offense is any good he can plan a game around what they can do. As for the WR's they will be fine I really think they will be better than avg. And OL they can't be an worse than the last few years ( I know famous last words) , at least this year they will be on their feet and not on the ground looking up to see who made the tackle.

There is a wide gulf between being able to run plays and game planning for available talent and then turning around and beating P5 defenses with said players and gameplans. I'll be in my seats cheering, but I can't honestly say I have any real expectations this year.

 

[knoxjacket]

I have heard good arguments on this from both sides. I really don't know what to expect.

This is really the only reasonable outlook.

 

[4shotB]

. Waffle house instead of airport.

Now this is really embracing the new coach and culture!!! CGC should be getting a commission from WaHo!

 

[BurdellJacket]

I just think too many of us are letting our gold tinted glasses make homers out of us. While it's great to be optimistic, and I am usually optimistic, I fear that we're going to have a LOT of fans very angry if the experts are correct and we only win a handful of games.

I don't drink Kool-aid nor do I own any gold tinted glasses but I am a GT fan and I've always thought it was ok for "fans" to be optimistic.

That said, I don't understand why it will be so very hard to learn a "new system" (horrors!). We won 9 and 11 games in CPJ's first two years, and that WAS learning a "very new system" with a very thin (in many ways) OL.

We have returning a two deep experienced talented OL. I have never understood why some posters persist in raining on our personnel. We finished number 14 in offensive FEI last year and have consistently finished in the top 25. Brothers and sisters, you don't do that with a suckey OL. And, in my experience, pass blocking is much easier to learn and execute than run blocking.

We will be fine at quarterback. We will be 3 deep in talented, serviceable QB's.

I cannot understand how any fan can think there would be 6 or 7 teams on the schedule that are better than GT!

 

[smathis30]

I don't drink Kool-aid nor do I own any gold tinted glasses but I am a GT fan and I've always thought it was ok for "fans" to be optimistic.

That said, I don't understand why it will be so very hard to learn a "new system" (horrors!). We won 9 and 11 games in CPJ's first two years, and that WAS learning a "very new system" with a very thin (in many ways) OL.

We have returning a two deep experienced talented OL. I have never understood why some posters persist in raining on our personnel. We finished number 14 in offensive FEI last year and have consistently finished in the top 25. Brothers and sisters, you don't do that with a suckey OL. And, in my experience, pass blocking is much easier to learn and execute than run blocking.

We will be fine at quarterback. We will be 3 deep in talented, serviceable QB's.

I cannot understand how any fan can think there would be 6 or 7 teams on the schedule that are better than GT!

We returned an All ACC lineman and came off a season where GT had the most All-ACC sections of any team in the ACC. The 2008 roster was tied with Clemson for the most NFL people on the roster in the ACC. Any argument about talent is null as it is night and day. If you don’t think GT could be argued to have the most talent on its roster now in the ACC, then there is no point in trying to make it look like Paul Johnson pulled a miracle out of his ***. He was underestimated, as was the roster talent, but acting like he was dealt a ****ty hand just isn’t true at all when he was dealt one of the best handoffs in GT history.
We did finish really well in FEI last year but also played half our schedule against teams that finished with a defensive ranking above 75 in UNC, Alcorn, Bowling green, Louisville , South Florida and VT. We don’t have that same schedule again this year, with the bodies they return.
SP had us at 40 On O FWIW. And defense at 100th
OL is probably our strength and I’ve never understood the QB argument as all of them had the potential to start above TQM last year but didn’t. For two straight years.

 

[BurdellJacket]

We returned an All ACC lineman and came off a season where GT had the most All-ACC sections of any team in the ACC. The 2008 roster was tied with Clemson for the most NFL people on the roster in the ACC. Any argument about talent is null as it is night and day. If you don’t think GT could be argued to have the most talent on its roster now in the ACC, then there is no point in trying to make it look like Paul Johnson pulled a miracle out of his ***. He was underestimated, as was the roster talent, but acting like he was dealt a ****ty hand just isn’t true at all when he was dealt one of the best handoffs in GT history.
We did finish really well in FEI last year but also played half our schedule against teams that finished with a defensive ranking above 75 in UNC, Alcorn, Bowling green, Louisville , South Florida and VT. We don’t have that same schedule again this year, with the bodies they return.
SP had us at 40 On O FWIW. And defense at 100th
OL is probably our strength and I’ve never understood the QB argument as all of them had the potential to start above TQM last year but didn’t. For two straight years.

I'll certainly not argue that we didn't have an all ACC starting DL. However you might agree it takes about 44 players (2 deep) to be highly competitive. Except for Dwyer our two deep backfield and offensive line will be longer and stronger this year. Nesbitt was a soph with very few backup snaps as a freshman and certainly NONE in the 3O.

On defense, outside of DL, we will have more depth and more talent on the field than in 2008 at LB, CB, and S. That is surely subjective but study it closely by position 2 deep. And with the corners playing near the LOS instead of 12 yds off the receivers on 3rd and 5, the passing D has to be better.

 

[jacketup]

Me too, DCS.

Those that want to believe the improvement in defense is "scheme or strategy based" will continue to believe this. I believe on D, more than on the O side, it is all about the talent level - size and speed. I do believe bad coaching can "drag down" a poor D even more, but I believe our D-coordinators have been doing a pretty good job with the front 7 they had to work with.

I agree with your conclusion, but it's not "all" about talent on D. Experience is extremely important on D since every D has to react to the play that the O runs. On O you can teach the plays, but you can't do that on D. Experience reduces mistakes. A very fast and talented kid can use speed to cover some mistakes, but a slower kid who is experienced might not be out of position to begin with.

Even if we have just as much talent on D as last year, some people are forgetting how much experience we lost on D.

I expect this team to play hard for these coaches, and I expect improvement on ST. From there, who knows?

 

[lv20gt]

We have been a .500 program over the last 4 years, went 7-6 last year, are completely retooling the offense. trying to build a defense that hasn't been good in a decade, and are doing both those on the back of recruiting classes that have been mediocre. People are grasping at 2008 as a reason for optimism, but we weren't trying to rebuild the defense in 2008. Our defense, at that time, had a history of being good, had 4 future NFL defensive linemen, and it was based on those things that 2008 was built on. We held our first 11 opponents to 28 or less and the first 7 to 20 or less. We won 2/3rds of our games that year in those first 7 and it wasn't until game 11 against Miami where our offense really hit stride. There isn't a similar anchor on this year's upcoming team. There is no reason to believe we'll be able to ride our defense while our offense gets sorted out or ride our offense while our defense gets sorted out. Our front 7 on defense and everything but RB on offense are big question marks and while some will inevitably be answer favorably it's also an almost certainty that we will have big problems on both sides of the ball this year for most, if not all, of the season.

Our schedule is set up in such a way that after clemson we have a 4 game stretch where we could win without playing great while we work through growing pains, but outside of citadel none of those are gimme games and after UNC we could lose to anyone on the schedule even if we do play well. There is a path to 6-7 wins so if you want to wear the gold tinted lenses go for it, but there is no reason to believe anyone outside of the fanbase will, or should, see things that way.

 

[smathis30]

I'll certainly not argue that we didn't have an all ACC starting DL. However you might agree it takes about 44 players (2 deep) to be highly competitive. Except for Dwyer our two deep backfield and offensive line will be longer and stronger this year. Nesbitt was a soph with very few backup snaps as a freshman and certainly NONE in the 3O.

On defense, outside of DL, we will have more depth and more talent on the field than in 2008 at LB, CB, and S. That is surely subjective but study it closely by position 2 deep. And with the corners playing near the LOS instead of 12 yds off the receivers on 3rd and 5, the passing D has to be better.

sorry but just no.
2 deep is important but if your starters play 90% of downs it doesnt matter who is best at keeping the bench warmed.
2008 had better: QB (again, if they were better than TQM they would have started. end of discussion.) WR. debatebly RB (freshman are interesting, but is the starter an early leave for the NFL draft? No, then Dwyer is better), OT, DE, DT.
2019 has better: C,OG,DB,S

Debateble: LB, DB. We did have NFL draft picks at DB. Tre is the only one thats proved his worth so far as NFL potential IMO. Theres potential, but theres a reason theres been like 6 names thrown around for the second corner spot, and its because no one has earned it yet.

arguing about two deep is useless if they never see the field. Starters win games. Arguing anything else is laughable.

 

[stech81]

arguing about two deep is useless if they never see the field. Starters win games. Arguing anything else is laughable.

Under other coaches yes but under CGC if you are above line you will play. How much we don't know but if he keeps his word then they will play. The other question we don't know is how many we be above the line and what position they are if all DB'S and running backs with no OL or D L then we have a major problem.

 

[BurdellJacket]

We have been a .500 program over the last 4 years, went 7-6 last year, are completely retooling the offense. trying to build a defense that hasn't been good in a decade, and are doing both those on the back of recruiting classes that have been mediocre. People are grasping at 2008 as a reason for optimism, but we weren't trying to rebuild the defense in 2008. Our defense, at that time, had a history of being good, had 4 future NFL defensive linemen, and it was based on those things that 2008 was built on. We held our first 11 opponents to 28 or less and the first 7 to 20 or less. We won 2/3rds of our games that year in those first 7 and it wasn't until game 11 against Miami where our offense really hit stride. There isn't a similar anchor on this year's upcoming team. There is no reason to believe we'll be able to ride our defense while our offense gets sorted out or ride our offense while our defense gets sorted out. Our front 7 on defense and everything but RB on offense are big question marks and while some will inevitably be answer favorably it's also an almost certainty that we will have big problems on both sides of the ball this year for most, if not all, of the season.

Our schedule is set up in such a way that after clemson we have a 4 game stretch where we could win without playing great while we work through growing pains, but outside of citadel none of those are gimme games and after UNC we could lose to anyone on the schedule even if we do play well. There is a path to 6-7 wins so if you want to wear the gold tinted lenses go for it, but there is no reason to believe anyone outside of the fanbase will, or should, see things that way.

OK. You win. You are convinced that things will be so bad and we will be so poor that we may only win three or four games. Enjoy it. I will remain fat, dumb and happy believing that we have a good shot at winning seven or eight games, maybe even more!

 

[Oakland]

This is what I would like to see: Play a competitive game against Clemson in the opener, beat South Florida the next week, and win no less than seven games going into the Georgia game. Beat those guys in Atlanta. The state would go crazy. My two big worries, even if Parker Braun had stayed, I'm not sure if our offensive line can pass block well enough and can our defense improve.

 

[BurdellJacket]

sorry but just no.
2 deep is important but if your starters play 90% of downs it doesnt matter who is best at keeping the bench warmed.
2008 had better: QB (again, if they were better than TQM they would have started. end of discussion.) WR. debatebly RB (freshman are interesting, but is the starter an early leave for the NFL draft? No, then Dwyer is better), OT, DE, DT.
2019 has better: C,OG,DB,S

Debateble: LB, DB. We did have NFL draft picks at DB. Tre is the only one thats proved his worth so far as NFL potential IMO. Theres potential, but theres a reason theres been like 6 names thrown around for the second corner spot, and its because no one has earned it yet.

arguing about two deep is useless if they never see the field. Starters win games. Arguing anything else is laughable.

What you say, sir, is entirely laughable. You say basically that the second team is irrelevant. That is very laughable. One of Tech's main problems through the years is that the backups fell off too much and our starters could hang with most teams into the third quarter or so but would be winded by late in the fourth. And it is just plain stupid to say that backups don't count and only starters win the games.

You missed the point anyway. Our offense backfield and LB units in total this year will be better than 20o8, as will the OL, WR and secondary. Contrary to your insistence, the cupboard was pretty thin when CCG left.

 

[smathis30]

What you say, sir, is entirely laughable. You basically that the second team is irrelevant. That is very laughable. One of Tech's main problem through the years is that the backups fell off to much and our starters could hang with most teams into the third quarter or so but would be winded by late in the fourth. And it is just plain stupid to say that backups don't count and only starters win the games.

You missed the point anyway. Our offense backfield and LB units in total this year will be better than 20o8, as will the OL, WR and secondary. Contrary to your insistence, the cupboard was pretty thin when CCG left.

Depth matters, but 10% of the game doesnt decide the game.
Clemsons 3rd and 4th string receivers didnt burn us. 1st ones did.
Same with Pitt.
Same with Duke.
Starters decide games.
Our LB play has been our weakness since 2015 and everyone graudated last year on the front 7 of a 100th ranked defense that none of the other LBs could sniff playing on.
I argued in a thread that our secondary was going to struggle last year. People said our recruiting would make it better than what it was in 2017. I said experience was more important, and if they were better, they would have started. we dropped from 50th to 113th in pass defense.
I really don't want to have that argument again.
2015 wasn't due to injuries, it was due to us graudating 7/8 of our skill players on offense. We lost OL, yes, but our inability to do anything with A backs wasn't do to that. We had 16 people get their first start ever in 2015, and 12/16 got it because the person ahead of them in 2014 graduated or they beat someone else out in the depth chart that season who only started because the person ahead of them in 2014 graduated.
So looking at depth matters, but only towards the future. 2014 wasn't bad because we had 3-9 depth behind it, it was good because it had 7 NFL players starting on it, which was the second best NFL talent starting team in CPJs tenure.
Saying the cupboard is bare is stupid. There was only 1 more NFL draft pick on the recruiting classes between 2009 and 2015 than what was on that 2008 team.
Second team isnt nearly as important as first team, just look at 2014.

 

[BurdellJacket]

Depth matters, but 10% of the game doesnt decide the game.
Clemsons 3rd and 4th string receivers didnt burn us. 1st ones did.
Same with Pitt.
Same with Duke.
Starters decide games.
Our LB play has been our weakness since 2015 and everyone graudated last year on the front 7 of a 100th ranked defense that none of the other LBs could sniff playing on.
I argued in a thread that our secondary was going to struggle last year. People said our recruiting would make it better than what it was in 2017. I said experience was more important, and if they were better, they would have started. we dropped from 50th to 113th in pass defense.
I really don't want to have that argument again.
2015 wasn't due to injuries, it was due to us graudating 7/8 of our skill players on offense. We lost OL, yes, but our inability to do anything with A backs wasn't do to that. We had 16 people get their first start ever in 2015, and 12/16 got it because the person ahead of them in 2014 graduated or they beat someone else out in the depth chart that season who only started because the person ahead of them in 2014 graduated.
So looking at depth matters, but only towards the future. 2014 wasn't bad because we had 3-9 depth behind it, it was good because it had 7 NFL players starting on it, which was the second best NFL talent starting team in CPJs tenure.
Saying the cupboard is bare is stupid. There was only 1 more NFL draft pick on the recruiting classes between 2009 and 2015 than what was on that 2008 team.
Second team isnt nearly as important as first team, just look at 2014.

I knew I had you on ignore for some reason. Don't know why I turned it off. Bye!

 

[Skeptic]

Why do you think we gave CGC a 7 year contract? The next two years might be rough while CGC gets his players recruited and his systems installed.

Sounds like he is building a Mars probe instead of a football team. (Past experience is that at about the 5-year level we will hear that "things are close, we are almost there" ... but the ball coach now needs an extension for recruiting purposes.) Some things never change, and coaches and contracts are among them.

 

[Skeptic]

Depth matters, but 10% of the game doesnt decide the game.
Clemsons 3rd and 4th string receivers didnt burn us. 1st ones did.
Same with Pitt.
Same with Duke.
Starters decide games.
Our LB play has been our weakness since 2015 and everyone graudated last year on the front 7 of a 100th ranked defense that none of the other LBs could sniff playing on.
I argued in a thread that our secondary was going to struggle last year. People said our recruiting would make it better than what it was in 2017. I said experience was more important, and if they were better, they would have started. we dropped from 50th to 113th in pass defense.
I really don't want to have that argument again.
2015 wasn't due to injuries, it was due to us graudating 7/8 of our skill players on offense. We lost OL, yes, but our inability to do anything with A backs wasn't do to that. We had 16 people get their first start ever in 2015, and 12/16 got it because the person ahead of them in 2014 graduated or they beat someone else out in the depth chart that season who only started because the person ahead of them in 2014 graduated.
So looking at depth matters, but only towards the future. 2014 wasn't bad because we had 3-9 depth behind it, it was good because it had 7 NFL players starting on it, which was the second best NFL talent starting team in CPJs tenure.
Saying the cupboard is bare is stupid. There was only 1 more NFL draft pick on the recruiting classes between 2009 and 2015 than what was on that 2008 team.
Second team isnt nearly as important as first team, just look at 2014.

I think our coaching friends over Clemson way would take issue with most of this regarding 1st-4th teams. Dabo has almost always been good one-deep. It was not until he could recruit 3-deep that Clemson became a powerhouse. He pounded ND last year despite comparable talent across the starting lineups -- ND, for instance, had a really good QB -- but he was running in 2s and 3s by the second quarter while ND and then Alabama had their starters gassed by the 4th. (Everybody talked about 'Bama's talent, but it was always across the starting lineups.) Clemson, for instance, lost a starting defensive All-American for the playoffs and his replacement was seamless. You win championships with 2 and 3-deeps. (I know nothing about Georgia football except I hate the thought of Georgia football, but I would bet they had no reserve skills to speak of. That seems the story of SEC football that nobody writes about: beat their 2s and 3s and you win.

 

[4shotB]

Sounds like he is building a Mars probe instead of a football team. (Past experience is that at about the 5-year level we will hear that "things are close, we are almost there" ... but the ball coach now needs an extension for recruiting purposes.) Some things never change, and coaches and contracts are among them.

Tend to agree with your thinking but when reflecting back, the really good ones (the ones not pleading for my time and patience in year 5) show results in the relative short term (2-3 years). Guys like CBR in fb and CBC in bb. In their 3rd season, while not having great records in the absolute sense, both had created a belief in the fan base that they had turned the ship. These seasons were perceived differently imo than our other random good years that we have experienced through the years...it was felt like these men were laying the foundations of a programs that would have ongoing success. To some degree, I felt like CPJ did that early on too. Sadly it was not sustained (for reasons discussed here as nuaseum).