GT number 15 in lowest talent on roster

Gtswifty81

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
435
A 0.8598 rating seems accurate although I bet there are another 15 teams between 0.86 and 0.87 which isn’t a huge margarin. The recruiting class this year as it stands is 0.871 which is a nice improvement. We rank 26th right now on 247 although 3 or 4 teams have higher avg ratings which are ranked below us due to number of recruits.

The overall win loss record of 27-34 isn’t great, but it shows how stagnant the program has been over the last five years. Even taking out this year, we were 24-25 the last four years. CPJ had some nice highs during his tenure, but in the end he produced the same winning percentage as Gailey. I’m not sure if CGC is going to take us to a better level than our previous two coaches, but I’m enjoying an up tick in recruiting and I’m willing to give it a couple years.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,096
Geoff and staff are changing this.
Let's hope that their efforts pay off as well as some of the "less talented" teams mentioned here. If we could do as well as KSU over the next 5 years, I, for one, would be very pleased.

I think what this really shows is how screwed up the recruiting ratings are. If a coach knows what he wants to do and recruits to do it, you don't have to recruit lights out every year to be successful. Kansas State when Bill Synder was there is a fine example. During Paul's time, they consistently rated lower then Tech in recruiting and did just as well or, usually, better in terms of wins. Synder knew what he was after. Jesse Erst, who led the Cats to a 9-4 record in 2016, was a low 3 star QB (about the same rating as Tobias), but he could do what Synder wanted and that was enough.

I know that Collins and staff are trying to do just that - recruit the players who can do what they want. We'll see if their acumen pays off.
 

gtstinger776

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
565
The “doing more with less” narrative was getting old. You
I think this is using recruiting rankings and titled wrong using talent. It would be better to rank by All-American, 1st team all conference, 2nd team all conference, 3rd team all conf on a scale over a period of time.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We have sucked in this area as well. There’s only so many times someone can say “the recruiting rankings are meaningless”, “the all conference / American selections are biased”, and “the NFL scouts are out to get us.”

I don’t think you need a 5* at every position to be a great program - a solid core of 3* and 4* guys is what we need. But the number of guys with 0 or very few P5 offers, coupled with poor S&C / player development, was clearly showing on the field
 

BeeStorm

Banned
Messages
27
The “doing more with less” narrative was getting old. You

We have sucked in this area as well. There’s only so many times someone can say “the recruiting rankings are meaningless”, “the all conference / American selections are biased”, and “the NFL scouts are out to get us.”

I don’t think you need a 5* at every position to be a great program - a solid core of 3* and 4* guys is what we need. But the number of guys with 0 or very few P5 offers, coupled with poor S&C / player development, was clearly showing on the field

Not to mention, our defensive guys never progressed because they were constantly practicing against an offense they would never see.
 

IronJacket7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,556
Let's hope that their efforts pay off as well as some of the "less talented" teams mentioned here. If we could do as well as KSU over the next 5 years, I, for one, would be very pleased.

I think what this really shows is how screwed up the recruiting ratings are. If a coach knows what he wants to do and recruits to do it, you don't have to recruit lights out every year to be successful. Kansas State when Bill Synder was there is a fine example. During Paul's time, they consistently rated lower then Tech in recruiting and did just as well or, usually, better in terms of wins. Synder knew what he was after. Jesse Erst, who led the Cats to a 9-4 record in 2016, was a low 3 star QB (about the same rating as Tobias), but he could do what Synder wanted and that was enough.

I know that Collins and staff are trying to do just that - recruit the players who can do what they want. We'll see if their acumen pays off.
No offense to your reference but I believe CGC is aiming alot higher than KSU.
 

croberts

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
869
Let's hope that their efforts pay off as well as some of the "less talented" teams mentioned here. If we could do as well as KSU over the next 5 years, I, for one, would be very pleased.

I think what this really shows is how screwed up the recruiting ratings are. If a coach knows what he wants to do and recruits to do it, you don't have to recruit lights out every year to be successful. Kansas State when Bill Synder was there is a fine example. During Paul's time, they consistently rated lower then Tech in recruiting and did just as well or, usually, better in terms of wins. Synder knew what he was after. Jesse Erst, who led the Cats to a 9-4 record in 2016, was a low 3 star QB (about the same rating as Tobias), but he could do what Synder wanted and that was enough.

I know that Collins and staff are trying to do just that - recruit the players who can do what they want. We'll see if their acumen pays off.
KSU relies heavily on the JUCO system which we will never do. One third of their starters (any given year) were not signed as freshmen. I do believe the Transfer Portal could become our best friend though as well as plucking graduates for a final year. Anyone that doesn't recognize the potential of our two OL transfers need to climb out of their cave.
 

smokey_wasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,486
I think this is using recruiting rankings and titled wrong using talent. It would be better to rank by All-American, 1st team all conference, 2nd team all conference, 3rd team all conf on a scale over a period of time.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You could do that, or you could use draft results. Point is, you aren't going to find a metric that makes the picture look any better for us.
 

BeeStorm

Banned
Messages
27
I think this is using recruiting rankings and titled wrong using talent. It would be better to rank by All-American, 1st team all conference, 2nd team all conference, 3rd team all conf on a scale over a period of time.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Those are not necessarily based off of who is good at football. Highly dependent on coaches nominating their own guys.
 

GSOJacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
249
Something else to take into account: CPJ recruited for his offensive system, which in many cases emphasized different skill sets than what the ratings are based on. This, IMO, understated Tech's talent level relative to what we were trying achieve in our recruiting during CPJ's tenure.
 
Last edited:

gtstinger776

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
565
Something else to take into account: CPJ recruited for his offensive system, which in many cases emphasized different skill sets than what the ratings are based on. This, IMO, understated Tech's talent level relative to what we were trying achieve in our recruiting.
We had a lot of all-conference players early in his tenure - CGC/CCG recruits. The bar dropped after those guys left.
 

smokey_wasp

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,486
Something else to take into account: CPJ recruited for his offensive system, which in many cases emphasized different skill sets than what the ratings are based on. This, IMO, understated Tech's talent level relative to what we were trying achieve in our recruiting during CPJ's tenure.

This gets repeated a lot but is only true to a very small degree, and really only holds water if you are talking about the OL. Trust me, CPJ would have been more than happy to have a Jeff Sims type at QB, an Ahmarean Brown at A-back, a Jamious Griffin at B-back, etc. and so on. He didn't pass on offering the same talent that every other team offered (even he said this over and over). He just was able to make it work reasonably well with the players he was capable of getting, which is a credit to his coaching.

That said, it's really neither here nor there at this point. We all agree the talent left was a poor fit for what we are now trying to do.
 
Messages
2,034
This gets repeated a lot but is only true to a very small degree, and really only holds water if you are talking about the OL. Trust me, CPJ would have been more than happy to have a Jeff Sims type at QB, an Ahmarean Brown at A-back, a Jamious Griffin at B-back, etc. and so on. He didn't pass on offering the same talent that every other team offered (even he said this over and over). He just was able to make it work reasonably well with the players he was capable of getting, which is a credit to his coaching.

That said, it's really neither here nor there at this point. We all agree the talent left was a poor fit for what we are now trying to do.

The CPJ years we never had an issue with offense. We had as we have had for many years a problem on defense. What encourages me about this staff is I saw a lot of improvement on defense. Now if we can get back to even 70% of what CPJ did on offense then we will win some games. Punting 13 times against UGA isn't going to add up to very many wins.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,096
KSU relies heavily on the JUCO system which we will never do. One third of their starters (any given year) were not signed as freshmen. I do believe the Transfer Portal could become our best friend though as well as plucking graduates for a final year. Anyone that doesn't recognize the potential of our two OL transfers need to climb out of their cave.
Actually, this varied from year to year. Over the last decade, KSU has usually taken about 20 - 25 frosh a year (you can check). They did use JUCO transfers more the Tech did when Synder was there, but I don't think they do now. But, yes, KSU could do this and Tech couldn't due to problems transferring credits. And, as with most transfers, sometimes it worked and sometimes it didn't. As you say, it is all a matter of potential.
 

GoGATech

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
402
So in case you guys want to know how this is changing... I took the liberty of adding all of our transfers + signees + Gibbs to the roster, and sorted by ranking to do a new top 40. Here's how it breaks down:

Our top 40 players average rating for 2020 is 0.8863 (compared to 0.8598 in this 2015-2019 average). That is a significant jump. Of those 40 that we hope will be on the 2020 roster, CGC is responsible for 24 of them, and 7 of the top 10. So in a little more than one full year, CGC has added more than 50% of our top 40 players, and he isn't done yet. We still have a couple recruits left on the board and may have room for another transfer. If we continue on this trend and stay around that 0.8863 number overall, we should be squarely in the top 20 talent composite in a couple more years.
 

GTRX7

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,524
Location
Atlanta
So in case you guys want to know how this is changing... I took the liberty of adding all of our transfers + signees + Gibbs to the roster, and sorted by ranking to do a new top 40. Here's how it breaks down:

Our top 40 players average rating for 2020 is 0.8863 (compared to 0.8598 in this 2015-2019 average). That is a significant jump. Of those 40 that we hope will be on the 2020 roster, CGC is responsible for 24 of them, and 7 of the top 10. So in a little more than one full year, CGC has added more than 50% of our top 40 players, and he isn't done yet. We still have a couple recruits left on the board and may have room for another transfer. If we continue on this trend and stay around that 0.8863 number overall, we should be squarely in the top 20 talent composite in a couple more years.

That is awesome! Saw coach flying his helicopter all over Georgia in the last week or so visiting high schools. He is doing everything humanly possible to bring in new, exciting talent.
 
Top