GT making players better!

MidtownJacket

MidtownJacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
4,873
Either we make it better - GASP - or the coaches recruit based on their desired attributes to fit into the system and rigor of classes/workload/etc and character and culture. Somehow the guys who live GT Football day in and day out know better than a recruiting service if the kid can play for us.

;)
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,390
Anyone that is objective knows that GT has been one of the most consistent FB programs over the last two decades. I mean, our bowl streak will attest to that. What people outside of our fanbase don't realize until they see data like the OP is GT is doing it with recruiting classes that normally would not compete in P5 conferences.

The great thing is we are set up to have seasons like 2014 more often than seasons like 2013 over the next few years.
 
Bruce Wayne

Bruce Wayne

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,870
Ok so what are the possible logical reasons to account for a program consistently outperforming its recruiting predictions as derived from the sites? I have thought of 4 can more be added?

1) Those sites are providing grossly inaccurate rankings for the players at the schools which overachieve. This possibility leads to several interesting hypotheses as to why, in which the most cynical would include "number of subscriptions from that team's fanbase."

2) The player evaluations by the sites while not "grossly" inaccurate are created in such a way as to unfairly suppress the rankings of certain programs. Here is where one would point out that Factories oversign, and freely sign, the comatose and criminal who have majored in football and creating hype their entire lives. Here to would be the complaint that rankings are not taking into account the program (such as a unique offense) and player fit.

3) The site evals are fairly accurate but there is far more parity among the recruits than the sites can account for given their determination to create a 1-2000 best to least list of recruits. When you must place them all in a hierarchy and assign point values to each recruit than recognition of real-world parity in talent will be sacrificed.

4) The site evaluations are very accurate and credit simply goes to the individual football programs and coaching staffs.

So option 4 may make the most people happy. It may please both those that praise the star system and fawn over 4 and 5 star recruits, as well as those who dismiss them. But I don't find it all that satisfying or complete an answer. Not when a program consistently "overachieves" its perceived/site evaluated talent level despite coaching turnover, or even entire regime changes.

Why is the opinion that Tech is achieving closer to its actual level of talent not a possibility? The coaches consistently say they think they have talented players . . . are they just being humble and generous? Why do the recruiting sites get to dictate that we think of Tech as primarily made up of "hard working," "gutsy," "never give up," (lesser-talented) "overachievers"?
 
MidtownJacket

MidtownJacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
4,873
I would think it is a blend of all 4.

I doubt anyone would argue that parity exists beyond a small handful of extremely talented guys, but the other thing to note is the players are being evaluated at a phase when they are still growing, and maturing in their physical/mental development. It is a guessing game - the statistics play that out. There is no way to know if a kid will hit a growth spurt or plateau in muscle development while still in high school.

Which brings me back to the premise that it is all 4. The sites are all operating as a business (even if just click based revenue for ads) so they obviously are inclined to shade into 1 and 2. The example of growth etc brings in 3 for me. Finally, the football staff is the only one who knows where they project at in their programs. Therefore they already have an edge on the services because they know if the kid is likely going to need to add mass, speed, or what have you.
 
Bruce Wayne

Bruce Wayne

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,870
I agree @MidtownJacket.

I remember there is/was a radio show on Tech sports that the publisher from Scout for GT, Jonathan Leifheit, co-hosted. Every year when he covered recruiting he would tell the listeners to treat the stars assigned by his website with a huge grain of salt. He seriously downplayed them all the time. Yet, there are always a slew of Tech fans carrying the water for these recruiting site evaluations. That is the only thing that makes me even discuss my opinions on the star system; namely, its utter irrelevance to a fan of GTFB. I actually think Tech fans who want to stay informed should go ahead and join the pay sites , they would surely be additional ways to feed the addiction of fandom. But as the publisher of one said, there is no reason to care about evaluations and rankings.

Also, I think it is extremely reasonable for a evaluator for some online recruiting site to follow and use the evaluation of Saban's staff at Bama as his primary guide to talent in the SE, and to OSU in the midwest, etc. Sure, I find this reasonable in part because of human nature and the proclivity towards laziness and cutting corners we are all prone to. But it is not simply pessimism. It also just makes sense for a talent evaluator to do so because a) it saves them time and expense and b) is likely to prove extremely accurate.

Why b? Because: 1) Alabama has a deep-pocketed and very tuned in and active network of bagmen which puts them in play for the full range of talent; 2) Bama has no compunction about admitting the comatose and criminal which means they only have to evaluate athletic talent, which is all the pay site cares about; 3) they ruthlessly exploit football talent by oversigning and dismissing, hence they will go after all of the most talented players they spot, thus cluing the scout into those kids; 4) factories often pay their assistants incentives for landing 4/5 star recruits, so there are good chances at kickbacks that the scout can receive from that program or it's assistant coaches.

Sure, some of my factors assume the possibility of a lack of ethical conduct by an online talent evaluator. But I will make my stand in defense of pessimism on concupiscent human nature itself, as well as the likely low-pay of this kind of career.
 
Top