Key promises to make city proud of Georgia Tech

[bobongo]

Depends if the offense is designed to minimize the need for a superior line.

That's where the coaching comes in, but there's only so much you can do to ameliorate a poor line.
Not saying we have one - just talking hypothetically.

 

[yeti92]

He uses last years statistical numbers for his talent ratings. We were not a good team, we did improve however.
But way to be a true GT and fine the one, small negative in a positive article.

Basing it off of in-game performance sounds like a very different definition of talent than is typically used, for better or worse. Not trying to dump on the article, just laughing at the inconsistency with which some of these things are determined. Sorry if that upsets you.

 

[slugboy]

Talent is in the bottom level? 247 says we are 30th in talent composite. Who do we trust more?

I guess that's pseudoscience for ya.

There are a lot of different ways to evaluate talent. I’ve posted that “talent composite” as well.

I think Johnson used to talk about the “first 5 guys” on either side of the ball. Those kinds of players would show up on the all conference teams.

Here’s the Athlon pre-season all-conference team: https://athlonsports.com/college-football/acc-football-2023-all-conference-team.

We don’t have any first-team selections. Yes, Clemson and Miami and FSU do, but so do Duke and NCST and BC and Syracuse.

Our first selection is an underrated LaMiles Brooks as the second-team Safety. Our first offensive selection is Dontae Smith as the 4th team RB. We had no special teams selections as far as I noticed.

So, in the community that Phil Steele is in, people are talking up ACC players on other teams more than they are talking up our players.

If you gave 1 point for every 4th team selection, 2 for every 3rd team selection, 3 for every 2nd team selection, and 4 for every first team selection, we’d have a point total at or near the bottom of the conference.

That’s fixable if we play better. We had a beast at LB last year and we need another. Same at other positions. Those players may be on the roster—we need to have them show up on TV

 

[roadkill]

There are a lot of different ways to evaluate talent. I’ve posted that “talent composite” as well.

I think Johnson used to talk about the “first 5 guys” on either side of the ball. Those kinds of players would show up on the all conference teams.

Here’s the Athlon pre-season all-conference team: https://athlonsports.com/college-football/acc-football-2023-all-conference-team.

We don’t have any first-team selections. Yes, Clemson and Miami and FSU do, but so do Duke and NCST and BC and Syracuse.

Our first selection is an underrated LaMiles Brooks as the second-team Safety. Our first offensive selection is Dontae Smith as the 4th team RB. We had no special teams selections as far as I noticed.

So, in the community that Phil Steele is in, people are talking up ACC players on other teams more than they are talking up our players.

If you gave 1 point for every 4th team selection, 2 for every 3rd team selection, 3 for every 2nd team selection, and 4 for every first team selection, we’d have a point total at or near the bottom of the conference.

That’s fixable if we play better. We had a beast at LB last year and we need another. Same at other positions. Those players may be on the roster—we need to have them show up on TV

All-conference selections, in my opinion, are biased in favor of a team's record.

Earlier in this thread I had made a comment about our composite talent ranking contradicting posts about our so-called “lack of talent”. I don’t consider the 247 composite ranking “pseudoscience”. It simply takes imprecise data and averages it together to achieve a more meaningful number.

Much has been said about individual recruit ranking’s inaccuracy. However, annual class ratings average much of these individual inaccuracies out of the equation, and composite team rankings, which also factor in transfers and a much larger number of individual ratings, tend to average things out even more. The result is that composite rankings generally correlate pretty well with a team’s success on the field (see “blue chip ratio”). There are exceptions of course. Miami comes to mind.

So, for example, if we are in the upper third of the conference in talent ranking, but lower third in results, you can look at the two other factors that have been discussed here. Those are by-position talent, and coaching and development. With the exception of RB, there seems to be a consensus that our overall by-position talent is bad, or at least poor relative to our peers. This is hard for me to reconcile with our composite talent. Did we do an incredibly bad job recruiting positions of need compared to our peers? Where is our talent hiding? Alternatively, we can look at coaching and development. To me, this is the area that can better explain the disparity between our talent rating and our performance on the field. It is also an area that Key has made moves to improve, which I am optimistic about.

 

[yeti92]

There are a lot of different ways to evaluate talent. I’ve posted that “talent composite” as well.

I think Johnson used to talk about the “first 5 guys” on either side of the ball. Those kinds of players would show up on the all conference teams.

Here’s the Athlon pre-season all-conference team: https://athlonsports.com/college-football/acc-football-2023-all-conference-team.

We don’t have any first-team selections. Yes, Clemson and Miami and FSU do, but so do Duke and NCST and BC and Syracuse.

Our first selection is an underrated LaMiles Brooks as the second-team Safety. Our first offensive selection is Dontae Smith as the 4th team RB. We had no special teams selections as far as I noticed.

So, in the community that Phil Steele is in, people are talking up ACC players on other teams more than they are talking up our players.

If you gave 1 point for every 4th team selection, 2 for every 3rd team selection, 3 for every 2nd team selection, and 4 for every first team selection, we’d have a point total at or near the bottom of the conference.

That’s fixable if we play better. We had a beast at LB last year and we need another. Same at other positions. Those players may be on the roster—we need to have them show up on TV

I think a lot of that is that guys on winning or popular teams tend to get more recognition. You mention that we had no special teams guys on the list, but Gavin Stewart missed only one field goal last season (13/14) while each of the 1-3rd team kickers listed missed 3 or 4, and the 4th team guy missed 6! Are they really better than he is? Don't think I'd want to trade.

 

[GetYourBuzzOn]

Re: on the field talent-

GT is entering this year with only 4 players that have a PFF grade of 70+ (Dontae Smith RB, LaMiles Brooks S, Clayton Powell-Lee S, and D'Quan Douse DL). Only Washington St, Indiana, NCST, Nebraska, Texas A&M, Vandy, Northwestern, and Stanford have less.

Our 247 4yr recruiting composite score is 42nd among P5 teams. You can extrapolate the negative effects of our coaching staff (and other staffs who recruit well but don't develop or maximize their talent).
Re: Key and O-line-
As I dig into advanced stats to prepare for this season one thing that makes me nervous about this hire was his o-line's abysmal performance (see attached stats from '22). Obviously, offensive scheme, game planning and playcalling can put units in position to succeed and we know how that has been lacking the past few years. It does give me legitimate concern, however, especially when you dig into the advanced stats and see just how bad we have been at that position.

The bright side is that we were almost dead last in '22 in o-line continuity and our projected starters for '23 are the same guys who started against UGA. Barring injury, this should yield much better results.

Additionally, Geep Wade's past few o-lines have graded out well.

 

[slugboy]

All-conference selections, in my opinion, are biased in favor of a team's record.

Duke, BC, and Syracuse got 1st team selections on offense. BC and Duke both got a defensive lineman on the first team defense. UNC got a LB on the first team despite their overall defense. NC State got two players on the first team defense.

BC, VT, and UVA all finished worse than us, but they did better on the all-conference teams. Miami finished with the same record and did much better. Syracuse, Louisville, and NCST all had the same conference record that we had and had more athletes rated higher on that list (not overall—they had better overall records).

None of that agrees with the idea that the list is the way it is because of bias—certainly not enough for us to barely appear on the list.

We started this particular part of the discussion because of a comment by Phil Steele that indicated we are perceived as lacking talent compared to the rest of the conference. Well, we ARE perceived as lacking talent compared to the rest of the conference—if we weren’t, we’d have at least a bunch of 4th team players.

Looking at the list, I don’t think Shipley would be a first-teamer if he weren’t playing for Clemson, but the rest of the list makes a lot of sense. I think LaMiles is underrated. Who do you knock off of those positions for one of our guys from last year?

Last year we didn’t have many game-changers. One that we did have—Charlie Thomas—is gone. On offense, Dontae is one of those players, but there are a TON of good RBs out there.

@GetYourBuzzOn That second table—if they managed to get accurate counts there—is just gruesome. That’s a ton of blown assignments.

 

[roadkill]

Nice smack down of my opinion! I defer to your analysis.
I still maintain that the “popular” and more successful teams get more publicity for their players and thus they are more easily recognized for their achievements. But I don’t have data to back that up.

 

[Root4GT]

Nice smack down of my opinion! I defer to your analysis.
I still maintain that the “popular” and more successful teams get more publicity for their players and thus they are more easily recognized for their achievements. But I don’t have data to back that up.

It's a GT sports board. You can have an opinion without any facts. Doesn't mean you are correct, simply a GT fan.

By any real performance metric we have not been a talented team in a while. Gibbs was our only true offensive difference maker the past several years. We had some good players but no one else that caused the opponent to game plan around.

On defense Thomas was very good and White caused teams to modify their blocking schemes to deal with him. We had some solid DB though none were good enough to not throw at.

If we get a few real difference makers on each side of the ball that opponents need to truly worry about then we can actually make some noise in Conference. It starts with playing sound consistent football. We have a chance to start down the path this year!

 

[slugboy]

Nice smack down of my opinion! I defer to your analysis.
I still maintain that the “popular” and more successful teams get more publicity for their players and thus they are more easily recognized for their achievements. But I don’t have data to back that up.

Clemson probably got a “bump” for a couple of their players. Shipley and Klubnik come to mind. However, both will probably look like world-beaters with Clemson’s new OC.

For us, we have Brooks, Lee, and Douse as the players who get called out on film when the other team breaks us down.

On offense, I’d watch Dontae Smith and maybe Jamie Felix or Cooley if I was an opposing coach. Pyron has guts

For the rest, I’m looking at the position more than the player (so far). We’re supposed to air the ball out, but which receiver has a history of big games? Which lineman do you follow on 4th and 2? Those are things we have to change.

Hopefully, after the Louisville game, teams ask “who are those guys”?

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

Great year, but you left our ACC Co-Champions with FSU. The ring on my profile is from that season. It has the ACC champs on top, the Gator Bowl logo on one side, and Tech Tower on the other side with the uGa final score.

Forgive me Rhino but fans have a way of glossing over stuff all the time whereas when you live the moment so to speak you remember it in all its glory. Thank you and your teammates from that era for some great football on the Flats.

 

[Sarrick]

Re: on the field talent-

GT is entering this year with only 4 players that have a PFF grade of 70+ (Dontae Smith RB, LaMiles Brooks S, Clayton Powell-Lee S, and D'Quan Douse DL). Only Washington St, Indiana, NCST, Nebraska, Texas A&M, Vandy, Northwestern, and Stanford have less.

Our 247 4yr recruiting composite score is 42nd among P5 teams. You can extrapolate the negative effects of our coaching staff (and other staffs who recruit well but don't develop or maximize their talent).
Re: Key and O-line-
As I dig into advanced stats to prepare for this season one thing that makes me nervous about this hire was his o-line's abysmal performance (see attached stats from '22). Obviously, offensive scheme, game planning and playcalling can put units in position to succeed and we know how that has been lacking the past few years. It does give me legitimate concern, however, especially when you dig into the advanced stats and see just how bad we have been at that position.

The bright side is that we were almost dead last in '22 in o-line continuity and our projected starters for '23 are the same guys who started against UGA. Barring injury, this should yield much better results.

Additionally, Geep Wade's past few o-lines have graded out well.

I’m of the belief that our OL improved more in the weeks after TFG was fired than they did the previous 3 years under him. So with Key and Wade running the show, I think our OL might surprise some people. We have the size, just need to put it together

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

All-conference selections, in my opinion, are biased in favor of a team's record.

I'd argue that good win-loss records are often indicative of having multiple all-conference selections on your roster.

 

[roadkill]

I'd argue that good win-loss records are often indicative of having multiple all-conference selections on your roster.

All-conference selections, in my opinion, are biased in favor of a team's record.

Both can be true. But @slugboy's excellent retort has me rethinking my opinion.
Regardless, I think we should differentiate between "talent" as indicated by recruiting rankings, and performance-based "talent on the field" as indicated by PFF scores, all-conference selections, and the like. I suspect much of the time that "talent on the field" is what folks mean when they point to GT's perceived shortcomings in this regard.

 

[UgaBlows]

I’m of the belief that our OL improved more in the weeks after TFG was fired than they did the previous 3 years under him. So with Key and Wade running the show, I think our OL might surprise some people. We have the size, just need to put it together

Yes, and the improvement from that point until the end of the season was also noticeable. I am looking for the OL to be very serviceable this season, and hoping for a big improvement in run blocking. Dontae Smith has all-Acc potential with decent blocking, folks are really sleeping on his talent due to our poor OL play in previous seasons imo.