James Graham Transferring

JacketOff

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,194
As of right now, every team in the Coastal save Duke and VT are ranked ahead of us in recruiting per Rivals. Add in Clemson and uga and that means at least half the teams we play are recruiting better than us. Recruiting alone won't fix what is now broken at GT.
Pitt is 71 points ahead and Virginia is 45 ahead. Both of them also have more players currently committed than Tech as well. The difference is negligible. If Tech gets a commit from another 3 star player they pass both Pitt and Virginia and become 3rd in the Coastal. The important thing is that Virginia and Pitt aren’t out recruiting Tech right now like they had been for years.
 

AlabamaBuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,107
Location
Hartselle, AL (originally Rome, GA)
My issue with recruiting has always been that we cannot judge how good we are based off an isolated year. Last year was great by GT standards, but can we maintain it? Also, it doesn't matter if last year was great by GT standards if our yearly competition is beating us in recruiting, as they are this year. We play at least 3 factories every year in uga, Clemson and Da U. UNC could quickly approach factory like status given their HC and recruiting in the top 15. (and their complete disdain for NCAA mandated academics which is by now apparent) If VT returns to it's former self there are 5 legit schools every season that we will struggle to out talent. Not to mention ND every few years. Getting transfers helps shore up depth, but depending on them to be our more talented players is a fools errand.

I will note that I DO believe that CGC will be able to maintain recruiting in the 20-25 level with occasional rankings in the 15-20 range and occasional years in the low 30's as a floor. What I don't know is if that will be good enough to win enough games consistently to keep our fan base happy.

To answer your last statement, the answer is "no" unless the coaching acumen that exists is greater than most of the coaches we will face, and I have serious doubts at this point, but I am hoping CGC will make me eat those words.
 

vespinaeGT

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
193
There will always be a team, or teams, that recruit better. It’s what you do with them.

Every championship coach (Heisman, Dodd, Bryant, Parcells, Meyer) stressed avoiding turnovers and kicking. Meyer practices kickoffs by placing the kick inside the ten without going into the end zone ... he figures a 10 yard change in field position gives him an edge of 9% for a 3 and out.

Parcells went further. He said if you can play a turnover free game and have a positive hidden yardage figure, you should win. Without any fancy plays.

Those are the stats I’m looking at for Tech ... net yards per attempt, turnovers and kicking. And explains a lot of our results.
These Ideas work when the talent is basically the same between the 2 teams (NFL). In CFB, the talent differential is sometime much wider, which is when fancy and unlikely plays are needed for an upset. For us to beat/compete with Clem and u[sic]ga, we'll need more than a mistake-free game. I agree that we can be much much better in turnovers, kicking, hidden yardage, etc. but it's going to be a big task to try and beat playoff-fringe teams at their own game (no major scheme advantage on offense or defense).
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,930
Location
Auburn, AL
These Ideas work when the talent is basically the same between the 2 teams (NFL). In CFB, the talent differential is sometime much wider, which is when fancy and unlikely plays are needed for an upset. For us to beat/compete with Clem and u[sic]ga, we'll need more than a mistake-free game. I agree that we can be much much better in turnovers, kicking, hidden yardage, etc. but it's going to be a big task to try and beat playoff-fringe teams at their own game (no major scheme advantage on offense or defense).
I don’t disagree and to your point, Parcells described the talent advantage in the NFL as negligible.

Bryant however, wrote often that more games are lost than won. For example, you cannot win without a big play because the likelihood of errors increase based on the play count.

The basics don’t change ... don’t f up. Heisman: Better to die a small boy than fumble.
 

TheJuiceIsLoose

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
69
My issue with recruiting has always been that we cannot judge how good we are based off an isolated year. Last year was great by GT standards, but can we maintain it? Also, it doesn't matter if last year was great by GT standards if our yearly competition is beating us in recruiting, as they are this year. We play at least 3 factories every year in uga, Clemson and Da U. UNC could quickly approach factory like status given their HC and recruiting in the top 15. (and their complete disdain for NCAA mandated academics which is by now apparent) If VT returns to it's former self there are 5 legit schools every season that we will struggle to out talent. Not to mention ND every few years. Getting transfers helps shore up depth, but depending on them to be our more talented players is a fools errand.

I will note that I DO believe that CGC will be able to maintain recruiting in the 20-25 level with occasional rankings in the 15-20 range and occasional years in the low 30's as a floor. What I don't know is if that will be good enough to win enough games consistently to keep our fan base happy.
The NCAA has never really mandated anything Academically

The NCAA has always had a hands off attitude, basically whatever your University accepts Academically then the NCAA will accept that also

If the Board of Regents in your State or at your Private University accepts something for Regular Students, then the NCAA will accept that for Athletes

What you call a mandate is akin to a fluid set of standards, that's why UNC wasn't punished, the University allowed those easy classes for any member of the Student Body that wanted to enroll in those Classes, ergo no NCAA violation

The NCAA doesn't force every member Institution to offer classes that are of equal difficulty, us GT folks gotta understand the gray areas of the NCAA Rulebook, GT Alums understand the gray areas of Corp America to operate in, just apply the same to our Athl Dept

It's not difficult, but for some reason GT Alums take special pride in making things difficult
 

Augusta_Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,785
Location
Augusta, Georgia
The NCAA has never really mandated anything Academically

This is not true. They mandate progress towards graduation and other factors, such as minimum GPA. As a former NCAA athlete, (Div III baseball), I can assure you that certain academic requirements were absolutely mandated by the NCAA. Granted, my swipe at UNC was more tongue in cheek, but let's face it, the stunt they pulled is the very definition of "factory academics" which was my point.
 

cthenrys

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
43
The NCAA has never really mandated anything Academically

The NCAA has always had a hands off attitude, basically whatever your University accepts Academically then the NCAA will accept that also

If the Board of Regents in your State or at your Private University accepts something for Regular Students, then the NCAA will accept that for Athletes

What you call a mandate is akin to a fluid set of standards, that's why UNC wasn't punished, the University allowed those easy classes for any member of the Student Body that wanted to enroll in those Classes, ergo no NCAA violation

The NCAA doesn't force every member Institution to offer classes that are of equal difficulty, us GT folks gotta understand the gray areas of the NCAA Rulebook, GT Alums understand the gray areas of Corp America to operate in, just apply the same to our Athl Dept

It's not difficult, but for some reason GT Alums take special pride in making things difficult
We take pride in not being a scumbag program. I’ll pass on what you propose. Thanks.
 

TheJuiceIsLoose

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
69
cthenrys:

Not one UNC graduate was denied a job offer due to a bunch of Athletes in general taking an easy class for a "free elective"

Do you think the hot blonde women's Volleyball Player that took that Class lost her job offer as a Pharmaceutical Rep?

Athletes in every Sport took those 1 or 2 classes, also you can't graduate from any University with a transcript full of Free Electives, all colleges and all Academic Majors allow Free Electives, none of that makes UNC a scumbag Program

Calling UNC a scumbag Program won't elevate GT nor will it convince Recruits to like GT better

You sound like the jaded avg looking Girl that calls the Popular, Attractive Girl a slut for no legitimate reason, there's nothing about UNC that makes them a scumbag Program, after all we have Free Electives at GT also
 

cthenrys

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
43
cthenrys:

Not one UNC graduate was denied a job offer due to a bunch of Athletes in general taking an easy class for a "free elective"

Do you think the hot blonde women's Volleyball Player that took that Class lost her job offer as a Pharmaceutical Rep?

Athletes in every Sport took those 1 or 2 classes, also you can't graduate from any University with a transcript full of Free Electives, all colleges and all Academic Majors allow Free Electives, none of that makes UNC a scumbag Program

Calling UNC a scumbag Program won't elevate GT nor will it convince Recruits to like GT better

You sound like the jaded avg looking Girl that calls the Popular, Attractive Girl a slut for no legitimate reason, there's nothing about UNC that makes them a scumbag Program, after all we have Free Electives at GT also
Thanks coach. Keep posting at a high level.
 

ncjacket79

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
835
Thanks coach. Keep posting at a high level.
To be fair nothing he posted is untrue. As much as we rightfully complain about UNC and their fake classes it has has no impact on their academic reputation or student recruitment. Also unless it has changed rocks for jocks and bricks for kicks were only harder because you actually did have to take an exam...hard for classes to be any easier.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,172
I wish JG the best and thank him for his play here at GT! I don’t see him getting a P5 QB opportunity unfortunately, I wish he would think about long-term football goals and try the switch to DB or WR. He could have been great as a option QB, it’s a real shame that the coaching transition happened right when it was his turn to shine, maybe Kennesaw St. could be a good landing spot for him?
 

bwelbo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,301
This is scary ^^^

It was the same most of last year too. We signed 4 guys in December and had quite a few ratings upgrades at the end.

We're currently ranked 7th in the ACC out of 14. The points are so close ahead of us that we're 1 new commit out of being in 5th. #4, 5, and 6 all have more commits than we do. For example, Louisville is in 4th place with 22 commits, whereas we have 19. If we signed 3 more of our average rated recruits, we'd pass them and take over 4th place overall.

This argument is an argument about nothing.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,812
It was the same most of last year too. We signed 4 guys in December and had quite a few ratings upgrades at the end.

We're currently ranked 7th in the ACC out of 14. The points are so close ahead of us that we're 1 new commit out of being in 5th. #4, 5, and 6 all have more commits than we do. For example, Louisville is in 4th place with 22 commits, whereas we have 19. If we signed 3 more of our average rated recruits, we'd pass them and take over 4th place overall.

This argument is an argument about nothing.
Rivals only counts the top 20 recruits, so signing 3 more won't change things that much unless those three bump the bottom ranked recruits out of the calculation and improve the average.

I don't think looking at recruiting site rankings is extremely useful at all. Like you indicate at this point it is even less useful. I consider the player rankings to be suspect at best. This year, the recruiting sites haven't even been able to evaluate the players to arrive at (suspect) rankings, so the rankings are even less accurate.

I think your analysis is somewhat rosy. Sure, we could rise a few places if we sign a few highly regarded recruits. However, look at the teams below us also. FSU only has 15 commits. If they sign 2 or 3 just at the average of GT's recruits, they would pass GT. Of all the teams ranked below GT, I think only BC is in a position that would make it virtually impossible for them to pass GT. Duke most likely won't, but they have 9 spots available. If they were to sign 3 or 4 4* guys, they probably would pass GT.

Back to your point about having to wait until the end, with where things are now, GT could end up anywhere from #4 to #13 in the rankings come February. Just a total guess, I would guess that it will be somewhere between 6 and 9. However, it is very possible to be a little higher or a little lower than my guess.
 

BurdellJacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
203
Location
Atlanta
As of right now, every team in the Coastal save Duke and VT are ranked ahead of us in recruiting per Rivals. Add in Clemson and uga and that means at least half the teams we play are recruiting better than us. Recruiting alone won't fix what is now broken at GT.

The recruiting season is not nearly over with several months to go. They have us ranked number 27 behind Pitt at number 22 who is only .01 point average and one man more committed than GT. What a negative freaking bunch. Sheesh!
 

jacketup

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
978
Leave it to a bunch of Tech guys to seize on numbers and forget what is behind them. The recruiting rankings are a bunch of (subjective) numbers, but what is behind them?

For years we were in the 40-50's, but based on skill position players. We weren't signing linemen, which is what is hurting us now. The problem is that linemen are harder to rate, and the services don't do a good job of rating them--but admittedly, it's harder to rate an OL than it is a 6'4 WR with 4.3 speed and 30 TD receptions. But forget the rankings--we just weren't signing enough linemen.

Like many of you are saying, we are currently close to most of the ACC in the rankings. Clemson Miami and UNC are a cut above, and there are a bunch of teams in the middle. But so what?

At the end of the day, it's about signing what you need. We weren't doing that when you look at the Jrs and Srs on this team. We have some good Jrs and Srs, but not necessarily at the right positions.

If you want to look at rankings and stars, you also have to look at transfers. We have a young transfer from Michigan and one from ND. We are getting one from Texas. We may get one from Alabama and one from Miss St. We are doing better there than most of ACC teams. We also have older transfers from UF and Tennessee--if they come back for one more year.

DTs have always been a problem, and will likely to continue to be.
 

TheTechGuy

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
750
Pitt is 71 points ahead and Virginia is 45 ahead. Both of them also have more players currently committed than Tech as well. The difference is negligible. If Tech gets a commit from another 3 star player they pass both Pitt and Virginia and become 3rd in the Coastal. The important thing is that Virginia and Pitt aren’t out recruiting Tech right now like they had been for years.
Per 247 composite, since the class of 2015, Pitt has had a better class than Tech twice, 2016 and 2017. UVA had a better class once, 2019. That doesn’t align with your statement that UVA and Pitt have out recruited Tech for years...
 
Top