How does this years recruiting class stack up to years past?

[TheSilasSonRising]

The top 3-5 offers recruits had in years past were in part influenced by recruiting smaller backs and OL for the option. This class should have more offers from schools who run the system we have in mind, which is almost everybody. Fact still remains in round numbers the class to date has a .01 margin on the last class and we still have predominately 3* with a smattering of 4*, which is par for the last several years. A couple of Bama defectors might change things a bit.

And as I said, when signing day is all said and done, I would like to see the verifiable top 3 offers of each signee compared to top 3 offers of guys in years past.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

And as I said, when signing day is all said and done, I would like to see the verifiable top 3 offers of each signee compared to top 3 offers of guys in years past.

Yeah, I don't have a dog in this fight but for those who care a deeper analysis would be good. My impression in the past is that we flipped a couple of guys from Alabama and the running average was still the same as it had been the last 20 years with that one crazy good Chan Gailey class being the statistical outlier.

 

[stech81]

It's funny how people forget that one great class had a player Kyle Jackson known as the ambassador who texted and facebook players and then others followed the players recruited the players. Find that now and you will see it happen again. And yes I know the coaches made the offers but the players stayed in touch with each other.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

And as I said, when signing day is all said and done, I would like to see the verifiable top 3 offers of each signee compared to top 3 offers of guys in years past.

A couple of points here:

1. Since the recruits themselves report the offers and universities are not allowed to comment on recruits, there is no way to actually "verify" any offer except the one they accept.
2. The types of athletes we are recruiting has changed somewhat, (at least offensively), so the likelihood that more of them will have "better" offer sheets is high anyways.

To me, the real difference in recruiting will show up in the defensive guys first. CGC removes all arguments that the O hurts D recruiting so we should immediately see an uptick there.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

It seems like this staff got their A-List guys at every position except OL. We loaded up quickly on our early targets, which all have a common theme of great length. Even for OL we're offering guys like Wing Green, Devin Willock, and James Robinson on a weekly basis who have great measurables. The staff is getting who they want right now and we're still in it for 4* players like Jayson Jones, Josh Downs, Bryce Howdy, Nazir Stackhouse, Javier Morton, etc.

Mind you, we have a very real possibility of starting the 2021 class with three 4* commitments from Jordan Dingle, Kamar Wilcoxson, and Barrett Carter. Recruiting will get better with each year that we can establish relationships with players.

That last sentence is key. Gonna take a couple of classes to build the momentum (and relationships) needed to really compete for the better athletes.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

A couple of points here:

1. Since the recruits themselves report the offers and universities are not allowed to comment on recruits, there is no way to actually "verify" any offer except the one they accept.
2. The types of athletes we are recruiting has changed somewhat, (at least offensively), so the likelihood that more of them will have "better" offer sheets is high anyways.

To me, the real difference in recruiting will show up in the defensive guys first. CGC removes all arguments that the O hurts D recruiting so we should immediately see an uptick there.

To me the uptick on recruiting will be an established fact when we pick up a couple of 4 star DTs. I know I keep pummeling this horse but in all my years of watching Tech that has been the litmus test.

 

[stech81]

The coaches we have work hard and put in the hours , now you have to show them you can win , don't win with the players you have it will not get any better.

 

[GTRX7]

No, no, no, you just don't get our scheme. "They're essentially a 4 or 5 because of the way they fit perfectly to our scheme." We all heard it for years from all 6 of you. Gtfoh

I mean, do you not actually believe there was some truth to that for positions like QB, A-back, and O-line? In general, guys that brought a lot of value in our option system did not always fit the mold for valuable players in more traditional systems. Yes, the 5* guys would have been great in either system, but guys like Washington, Oliver, Mason, Cooper, Orwin, Searcy, Lynch, Godhigh, etc. were excellently suited for the option offense and would have been ranked much higher had they been evaluated on that basis. Other than Mason, I am not sure any of those guys gets any minutes at any other P5 school.

Now, before you freak out, I do believe the option offense hurt our recruiting. But that doesn't mean that there wasn't also certain types of players that were better suited for our offense than for more traditional offenses and therefore legitimately ranked lower by the scouting systems than the value they actually brought to the field.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Yes, the 5* guys would have been great in either system,...

Can't fully agree with you here. A Peyton Manning pro-style pocket passer would probably not be a good fit for an option offense. The recent 5* dual-threat QBs would have been dynamite in CPJs offense though...

 

[jacketup]

Can't fully agree with you here. A Peyton Manning pro-style pocket passer would probably not be a good fit for an option offense. The recent 5* dual-threat QBs would have been dynamite in CPJs offense though...

That's the difference in Paul Johnson and Ralph Friedgen. Friedgen would have adapted his offense to Peyton Manning. He won with Joe Hamilton and he won with Goose Godsey.

Posters who say our offense will "be like everyone else's" are wrong. The real question: Is Patenaude more like Friedgen, or more like Gailey? Hopefully, the former and not the latter.

 

[takethepoints]

Can't fully agree with you here. A Peyton Manning pro-style pocket passer would probably not be a good fit for an option offense. The recent 5* dual-threat QBs would have been dynamite in CPJs offense though...

His dad would have been dy-no-mite. Archie was the best college QB I ever saw play.

 

[takethepoints]

I mean, do you not actually believe there was some truth to that for positions like QB, A-back, and O-line? In general, guys that brought a lot of value in our option system did not always fit the mold for valuable players in more traditional systems. Yes, the 5* guys would have been great in either system, but guys like Washington, Oliver, Mason, Cooper, Orwin, Searcy, Lynch, Godhigh, etc. were excellently suited for the option offense and would have been ranked much higher had they been evaluated on that basis. Other than Mason, I am not sure any of those guys gets any minutes at any other P5 school.

Yes, and as Boomer pointed out awhile ago, our offensive record during Paul's years - the best, year over year, in Tech history - shows it. Tech recruited for what we needed and it worked.

Now we have to do the same thing. Let's hope Coach gets the recruiting infrastructure he needs to pull that off.

 

[Silk3]

Comparing CPJs what 12th class which was one of his best to CGC first class thats not even close to done seems fair. And it still is better lmao

 

[takethepoints]

On the analysis:

I'm glad you did it, but I don't think it tells us as much as you think. The reason I say that is one I've gone over here before: the gradations in ratings given to athletes by the recruiting services are almost certainly invalid. I posted these links before; for those who remember it's a tl:dr:

Here's Christian Malloy. Watch the film:

https://www.fromtherumbleseat.com/g...malloy-flips-from-fiu-commits-to-georgia-tech

His senior year stats: 9 games played, 1538 rushing, 13 ypc, 20 TDs.

Here's Jamious Griffin:

https://www.fromtherumbleseat.com/g...talent-jamious-griffin-commits-to-the-jackets

His senior year stats: 14 games played, 2815 rushing, 9.8 ypc, 40 TDs.

No question Griffin deserved a 4 star ranking; he was really good for three straight years in high school. No doubt Malloy deserved a three star rating; he was dynamite while he played, but he was hurt for some of his senior year and wasn't a house on fire as a junior. But look at the film then look at the rankings (both players were in 5 (Griffin) or 6 (Malloy) A regions): Griffin .89, Malloy .80. Something smells in Denmark here, if we are comparing talent alone.

This kind of thing is why I get in a comparing mood I always go for the star ratings alone for players and average stars for recruiting classes. (I also tend to trust the Rivals ratings more then the 247 ones.) Everyone can tell who the 5 star players are and they aren't in dispute. Most of the "high 4 star" players are probably pretty good too. Below that things get pretty uncertain pretty fast. That's why I don't trust ratings based on averaging a 4 decimal scale.

But, like I said, I'm glad you did the analysis anyway and I found it revealing. It's always good to get some data into any argument.

 

[Ibeeballin]

Yes, and as Boomer pointed out awhile ago, our offensive record during Paul's years - the best, year over year, in Tech history - shows it. Tech recruited for what we needed and it worked.

Now we have to do the same thing. Let's hope Coach gets the recruiting infrastructure he needs to pull that off.

I’m not so sure about this

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Can't fully agree with you here. A Peyton Manning pro-style pocket passer would probably not be a good fit for an option offense. The recent 5* dual-threat QBs would have been dynamite in CPJs offense though...

CPJ's first season he had a quarterback that Gailey recruited as a pocket passer if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

That's the difference in Paul Johnson and Ralph Friedgen. Friedgen would have adapted his offense to Peyton Manning. He won with Joe Hamilton and he won with Goose Godsey.

Posters who say our offense will "be like everyone else's" are wrong. The real question: Is Patenaude more like Friedgen, or more like Gailey? Hopefully, the former and not the latter.

Friedgen was unique. I watched his offense line up in shotgun, wishbone, veer and classic pro set. Sometimes all in the same series of plays. 3-dimensional chess player if there ever was one.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

CPJ's first season he had a quarterback that Gailey recruited as a pocket passer if I'm not mistaken.

Nesbitt was recruited as a dual-threat QB.

https://247sports.com/Player/Joshua-Nesbitt-5957/high-school-39741/

https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/2007/josh-nesbitt-33930

 

[knoxjacket]

On the analysis:

I'm glad you did it, but I don't think it tells us as much as you think. The reason I say that is one I've gone over here before: the gradations in ratings given to athletes by the recruiting services are almost certainly invalid. I posted these links before; for those who remember it's a tl:dr:

Here's Christian Malloy. Watch the film:

https://www.fromtherumbleseat.com/g...malloy-flips-from-fiu-commits-to-georgia-tech

His senior year stats: 9 games played, 1538 rushing, 13 ypc, 20 TDs.

Here's Jamious Griffin:

https://www.fromtherumbleseat.com/g...talent-jamious-griffin-commits-to-the-jackets

His senior year stats: 14 games played, 2815 rushing, 9.8 ypc, 40 TDs.

No question Griffin deserved a 4 star ranking; he was really good for three straight years in high school. No doubt Malloy deserved a three star rating; he was dynamite while he played, but he was hurt for some of his senior year and wasn't a house on fire as a junior. But look at the film then look at the rankings (both players were in 5 (Griffin) or 6 (Malloy) A regions): Griffin .89, Malloy .80. Something smells in Denmark here, if we are comparing talent alone.

This kind of thing is why I get in a comparing mood I always go for the star ratings alone for players and average stars for recruiting classes. (I also tend to trust the Rivals ratings more then the 247 ones.) Everyone can tell who the 5 star players are and they aren't in dispute. Most of the "high 4 star" players are probably pretty good too. Below that things get pretty uncertain pretty fast. That's why I don't trust ratings based on averaging a 4 decimal scale.

But, like I said, I'm glad you did the analysis anyway and I found it revealing. It's always good to get some data into any argument.

I’m glad we have them all but the reason griffin is higher rated and was more highly recruited is his ability to make people miss. This is also the reason that Gibbs looks better than either of them and is probably the best running back commit since Dwyer.

 

[smathis30]

On the analysis:

I'm glad you did it, but I don't think it tells us as much as you think. The reason I say that is one I've gone over here before: the gradations in ratings given to athletes by the recruiting services are almost certainly invalid. I posted these links before; for those who remember it's a tl:dr:

Here's Christian Malloy. Watch the film:

https://www.fromtherumbleseat.com/g...malloy-flips-from-fiu-commits-to-georgia-tech

His senior year stats: 9 games played, 1538 rushing, 13 ypc, 20 TDs.

Here's Jamious Griffin:

https://www.fromtherumbleseat.com/g...talent-jamious-griffin-commits-to-the-jackets

His senior year stats: 14 games played, 2815 rushing, 9.8 ypc, 40 TDs.

No question Griffin deserved a 4 star ranking; he was really good for three straight years in high school. No doubt Malloy deserved a three star rating; he was dynamite while he played, but he was hurt for some of his senior year and wasn't a house on fire as a junior. But look at the film then look at the rankings (both players were in 5 (Griffin) or 6 (Malloy) A regions): Griffin .89, Malloy .80. Something smells in Denmark here, if we are comparing talent alone.

This kind of thing is why I get in a comparing mood I always go for the star ratings alone for players and average stars for recruiting classes. (I also tend to trust the Rivals ratings more then the 247 ones.) Everyone can tell who the 5 star players are and they aren't in dispute. Most of the "high 4 star" players are probably pretty good too. Below that things get pretty uncertain pretty fast. That's why I don't trust ratings based on averaging a 4 decimal scale.

But, like I said, I'm glad you did the analysis anyway and I found it revealing. It's always good to get some data into any argument.

The other running back was able to put up similar numbers once Malloy was hurt. Not saying that he wasn’t good as the other running back is starting to get a lot of attention for college football as well. Looking at the measurables of both is also night and day. It is hard to judge people based off game film as it’s different competition, which is why the measurables matter and so do camps. And in that regard, Jamious’s are insane.