FanDuel sets over/under at 4 wins

[ncjacket79]

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.

Agree with much of this post but the cupboard was NOT thin when CCG left.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

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.

While all that might be true, it misses the point of why a 7 year contract was offered. TStan was cognizant that this rebuild could take time and put extra years, as well as extra buyout, to help ensure CGC could have the freedom to make the necessary changes.

 

[LibertyTurns]

Agree with much of this post but the cupboard was NOT thin when CCG left.

Chan couldn’t run a football team but he could run a cupboard! Well there you go he was an expert at something after all.

 

[Skeptic]

While all that might be true, it misses the point of why a 7 year contract was offered. TStan was cognizant that this rebuild could take time and put extra years, as well as extra buyout, to help ensure CGC could have the freedom to make the necessary changes.

No, I understand that the recruiting priorities had to be turned upside down and the returning roster shaken out. Seven years just seems a bit excessive and the queasy part of me at this hire wonders whether having been given seven years to flip it means he will take seven years to flip it. I think it is called Parkinson's Law: work expands to fit the time available or some such.

 

[LibertyTurns]

No, I understand that the recruiting priorities had to be turned upside down and the returning roster shaken out. Seven years just seems a bit excessive and the queasy part of me at this hire wonders whether having been given seven years to flip it means he will take seven years to flip it. I think it is called Parkinson's Law: work expands to fit the time available or some such.

If he’s a good hire nobody’s going to care and we’ll be extending the contract for more $$.

If he’s a bad hire, he will be gone before year 7.

I don’t believe there’s any middle ground.

 

[stech81]

No, I understand that the recruiting priorities had to be turned upside down and the returning roster shaken out. Seven years just seems a bit excessive and the queasy part of me at this hire wonders whether having been given seven years to flip it means he will take seven years to flip it. I think it is called Parkinson's Law: work expands to fit the time available or some such.

I also think 7 years is a long time . And I still think we will win 7 or 8 games this year. But I also see use taking one giant step back in 2020 because I could see us having so many freshmen and sophomores starting in 2020. If we see Improvement during the year of 2020 and recruiting picking up we will be fine. If not ........?

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

If he’s a good hire nobody’s going to care and we’ll be extending the contract for more $$.

If he’s a bad hire, he will be gone before year 7.

I don’t believe there’s any middle ground.

This is correct, the difference being gone by year 7 instead of gone by year 5. He will get at least a two year extra window that most coaching hires don't get.

 

[Skeptic]

This is correct, the difference being gone by year 7 instead of gone by year 5. He will get at least a two year extra window that most coaching hires don't get.

Looking at it another way, the coach and the AD agree that it will take at least six -- six -- recruiting classes to achieve whatever it is they seek to achieve. (I am not being churlish here, really. If they don't like the offense, then by all means change it. While I and others may not like it, I can live with anything that scores more points than the other guy ... and doesn't dink 8-yard passes down the field sideways and call it a passing game.) But it does seem to me that right off the bat the new coach admits he will lay an egg in at least two recruiting years, not exactly the great recruiting we have been sold. I will throw in the 7th year as sunk costs or something.)

Now, compare that to the team that, outside of Georgia, we hear most about: hired fulltime in 2009, Dabo Swinney fired two coordinators, installed radically different philosophies on offense and defense, went up-tempo, in his 3rd full season won 10 games and has been in double digits every season since, and in his 7th season played for the NC. For which he was rewarded with a 6-year contract.

Just saying.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Looking at it another way, the coach and the AD agree that it will take at least six -- six -- recruiting classes to achieve whatever it is they seek to achieve. (I am not being churlish here, really. If they don't like the offense, then by all means change it. While I and others may not like it, I can live with anything that scores more points than the other guy ... and doesn't dink 8-yard passes down the field sideways and call it a passing game.) But it does seem to me that right off the bat the new coach admits he will lay an egg in at least two recruiting years, not exactly the great recruiting we have been sold. I will throw in the 7th year as sunk costs or something.)

Now, compare that to the team that, outside of Georgia, we hear most about: hired fulltime in 2009, Dabo Swinney fired two coordinators, installed radically different philosophies on offense and defense, went up-tempo, in his 3rd full season won 10 games and has been in double digits every season since, and in his 7th season played for the NC. For which he was rewarded with a 6-year contract.

Just saying.

Clemson has also been recruiting in the top 20 for two decades now. Not exactly the same boat we're in.

 

[biggtfan]

This site is a bit more optimistic. Not a lot of detail behind their number. I am providing purely to cheer us up (a little).

ACC:
https://watchstadium.com/news/predicting-the-2019-over-under-win-totals-for-the-acc-02-11-2019

Georgia Tech:

2019 outlook: There will be big changes for Georgia Tech as they move away from the triple-option offense after hiring former Temple Head Coach Geoff Collins. The Yellow Jackets face Clemson on the first Thursday of the season and finish September at Temple in a bit of a homecoming for Collins. Their other cross-division game is in November against North Carolina State. A week later Georgia Tech closes the season at home against Georgia.

2019 over/under win total prediction: 5.5

 

[Skeptic]

Clemson has also been recruiting in the top 20 for two decades now. Not exactly the same boat we're in.

Actually it wasn't about the recruiting before or after. Clemson was losing and a coach turned it around in a lot less than seven years while changing offense and defense. If it takes a coach seven recruiting cycles to put his system in, well ....

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

I still can’t understand the doom and gloom. We play in a conference with 1 top tier team and a whole lot of .500 hovering teams. For us to only win 5 or 6 games it means we’ve had a lot of injuries and turnovers. It could happen but the other teams we play will also have injuries and turnovers. And this talk of the length of the contract somehow equating to how long a rebuild will take I also don’t understand. The contract length is all about TStan’s belief in Collins and letting recruits know we are serious about Collins. We have good players, several playmakers, and a young enthusiastic coaching staff who are putting their reputations on the line. I’ll take that over what most of the teams we play have. Coach Johnson did not leave the cupboard bare in the least. We may be thin but we have players. Our receivers are gonna be the biggest surprise in the ACC.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Actually it wasn't about the recruiting before or after. Clemson was losing and a coach turned it around in a lot less than seven years while changing offense and defense. If it takes a coach seven recruiting cycles to put his system in, well ....

Clemson didn't drastically change their scheme. They just got better at maximizing the amazing talent they were bringing in.

 

[ncjacket79]

Clemson didn't drastically change their scheme. They just got better at maximizing the amazing talent they were bringing in.

Exactly. They had the players just needed a coaching staff. Once they started to win recruiting became easier just like it will here is CGC is successful. The difference is we need to turn around they way recruits look at the program. Clemson didn’t have that to deal with.

 

[GTRX7]

...2008 had better: QB (again, if they were better than TQM they would have started. end of discussion.)...

To be fair, Lucas Johnson was hurt last year or otherwise probably would have won the job. The other two guys, Oliver and Graham, were a true freshman and a redshirt freshman competing against a senior. And Oliver still played in almost every game (Graham was redshirted). Even had CPJ and Marshall both returned this year, I think it is extremely unlikely that Marshall would start.

More than that, there is no way Nesbitt would have been a winning QB in any traditional offense in 2008.

 

[Skeptic]

Clemson didn't drastically change their scheme. They just got better at maximizing the amazing talent they were bringing in.

Hmm. Tell that to Dabo Swinney, who fired a DC not because he got blown out in a bowl game, but because said DC objected to the change in offensive scheme. Drastic, I dunno, but dramatic? You bet. And less than seven years, too. And they didn't start bringing in boatloads until Swinney got the whole show. (C.J. Spiller, for instance, was a Dabo recruit, but the first "big time" blue chipper.) You guys have a vision of Clemson packed to the gills with five-stars. Not hardly.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

You guys have a vision of Clemson packed to the gills with five-stars. Not hardly.

If your argument is solely based on 5 star recruits, then you win. If you look at the fact that Clemson was routinely in the top 15 for recruiting, with boatloads of rivals 4* rated 5.9 or 6, and add in the fact that their offensive scheme change was not drastic, it just went HUNH, (which is why the DC complained), then it's not hard to understand why they were able to turn the table as quickly as they did.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

There are only two Penciled in losses on this schedule. If we don’t go 500 it’s a bad year. The hedging by the Kool-Aid fanboys is ridiculous.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

There are only two Penciled in losses on this schedule. If we don’t go 500 it’s a bad year. The hedging by the Kool-Aid fanboys is ridiculous.

This is what I don't get. I'm not a "Kool-Aid fanboy" and have been as pro-CPJ as anyone on these boards. I'm firmly on the wait and see train. That being said, I have us pegged for 4-5 wins this year.

 

[stech81]

There are only two Penciled in losses on this schedule. If we don’t go 500 it’s a bad year. The hedging by the Kool-Aid fanboys is ridiculous.

I agree, I'm not saying we will win 10 games but anything less than 7 without a rash of injuries I would be disappointed we have good players and other than Clemson and uga I see not reason to believe we can't beat anyone else.