NFL by Acc and Colleges similar to Gt

[iceeater1969]

Some data points FROM ESPN that show current count of nfl by schools follows below.
Northwestern 18
Stanford 41

Acc
Clemson- sec like too many to count.
MIAMI- almost Clemson.
FSU - ditto above.
UNC - 27
BC 26
UVA - 26
NCST - 24
LOUISVILLE 23
Vt -20
DUKE - 16
WF - 13
SYRACUSE- 13
GEORGIA TECH - 11

HARVARD - 10 ( 3 centers and 3 tight ends)

I hope we are out of the cellar in 3 years but could see us drop below 9 based on possible non signings this season.

Just data.

 

[augustabuzz]

Some data points FROM ESPN that show current count of nfl by schools follows below.
Northwestern 18
Stanford 41

Acc
Clemson- sec like too many to count.
MIAMI- almost Clemson.
FSU - ditto above.
UNC - 27
BC 26
UVA - 26
NCST - 24
LOUISVILLE 23
Vt -20
DUKE - 16
WF - 13
SYRACUSE- 13
GEORGIA TECH - 11

HARVARD - 10 ( 3 centers and 3 tight ends)

I hope we are out of the cellar in 3 years but could see us drop below 9 based on possible non signings this season.

Just data.

We have no academic peers competing in FBS football. Similar schools to Georgia Tech academically are Cal Tech and MIT.

 

[smokey_wasp]

We have no academic peers competing in FBS football. Similar schools to Georgia Tech academically are Cal Tech and MIT.

Not sure it is relevant to bring that up here. That is not a new thing. Our lack of recent draftees is.

 

[augustabuzz]

Not sure it is relevant to bring that up here. That is not a new thing. Our lack of recent draftees is.

NFL by Acc and Colleges similar to Gt
Discussion in 'Georgia Tech Football' started by iceeater1969, Yesterday at 9:53 PM.
None of the colleges compared to Tech are similar academically.

 

[smokey_wasp]

NFL by Acc and Colleges similar to Gt
Discussion in 'Georgia Tech Football' started by iceeater1969, Yesterday at 9:53 PM.
None of the colleges compared to Tech are similar academically.

I think he means similar to GT in terms of balancing academics and football. Do you think GT is more similar in football to MIT and Cal Tech than Northwestern and Stanford? Was GT not a STEM school when they were putting more guys in the NFL? That's why I questioned the relevancy of your point.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Some data points FROM ESPN that show current count of nfl by schools follows below.
Northwestern 18
Stanford 41

Acc
Clemson- sec like too many to count.
MIAMI- almost Clemson.
FSU - ditto above.
UNC - 27
BC 26
UVA - 26
NCST - 24
LOUISVILLE 23
Vt -20
DUKE - 16
WF - 13
SYRACUSE- 13
GEORGIA TECH - 11

HARVARD - 10 ( 3 centers and 3 tight ends)

I hope we are out of the cellar in 3 years but could see us drop below 9 based on possible non signings this season.

Just data.

You do realize the can of worms you’re opening here, right?

 

[iceeater1969]

We have no academic peers competing in FBS football. Similar schools to Georgia Tech academically are Cal Tech and MIT.

I would have said we are similar to purdue - just more rigorous. My hs friends that went to cal t and mit were good guys but egg heads = super nerds. The classes they described had WAY fewer students. Thier classes had way more emphasis on labs and resesrch and not so much enginedring as a trade Both friend got jobs in research. My memory could be wrong.
What's the number of undergrad s at mit vs ga tech.?

After college sent to oil buisness and met numerous gt grads ovdr 45 years and met 0 mit or Caltech.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Of the top 20 STEM schools in the country, how many even play big boy football? To me, this discussion ends right here.

I think this topic is more about us compared to us than us to others. Recently, we have gotten fewer NFL players than in the past. I think that is related to the offense we ran for the past decade.

The real question is does it matter? Yes and no. If you’re pretty lucky with the injury/attrition bug, the answer is no. If you’re pretty unlucky with the injury/attrition bug, the answer is yes. CPJ didn’t recruit well enough to overcome the injury/attrition he encountered the last few years.

I suspect Coach Collins will recruit better with respect to NFL future players. The question will be will it make us a better college team. Even with better recruiting, we will need to be better with respect to injury and attrition to be the kind of program we all want.

 

[Ash]

Why are we looking for NFL to validate our successes again?

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

Waah to the finest.

NFL teams don't give a crap where you went to school.

Obviously we didn't recruit any of these other players that ended up in NFL.

If we did we mostly failed.

If we didn't we mostly failed.

Most important - the old reasons and excuses are GWTW.

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

Why are we looking for NFL to validate our successes again?

I assume because, for the most part, the schools with more players going to the NFL have more wins.

 

[iceeater1969]

You do realize the can of worms you’re opening here, right?

This list is what it is, a snap shot in time.

To me it shows the hill we need to climb. We should be able to climb to be at BC but i doubt we can be in the factory level.

Best management / performance consultant we ever hired said pick out an easily measured metric that's a fall out of a performance you want and MEASURE AND TRACK IT. . I want to see more buzz on the field at bds. With out the scheme advantage against the weak teams we are going to need more nfl talent .

It is what it is , but lets see how much it changes w the new staff.

 

[RonJohn]

This list is what it is, a snap shot in time.

To me it shows the hill we need to climb. We should be able to climb to be at BC but i doubt we can be in the factory level.

Best management / performance consultant we ever hired said pick out an easily measured metric that's a fall out of a performance you want and MEASURE AND TRACK IT. . I want to see more buzz on the field at bds. With out the scheme advantage against the weak teams we are going to need more nfl talent .

It is what it is , but lets see how much it changes w the new staff.

I'm not sure that the number of players in the NFL is pure measurement of success(on the football field). The teams you listed in the Coastal division all have similar records over the last 5 years to GT.

The advantage that Clemson and Alabama have is that they have high level players deep into the depth chart. It is possible that some of the third string players from 2018 on those teams will be drafted in two years. However, take a look at Miami. They have had a lot of talent, but have been a roller coaster. They can't lose, then the can't win. FSU was in the top 5 in recruiting for a few years before Jimbo Fisher left for A&M. Since then they have been right at .500. Not abnormal for a coaching change to have the culture negatively affect the team.

The point I am trying to make is that NFL players isn't an isolated metric. If you work all out to get NFL caliber players, but ignore teamwork and culture there are several examples that show it won't work.

 

[GoldZ]

Waah to the finest.

NFL teams don't give a crap where you went to school.

Obviously we didn't recruit any of these other players that ended up in NFL.

If we did we mostly failed.

If we didn't we mostly failed.

Most important - the old reasons and excuses are GWTW.

Excuses-maybe Reasons-I doubt it GWTW didn't pan out so well for Tara and Scarlett, huh?

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I assume because, for the most part, the schools with more players going to the NFL have more wins.

I bet we beat a lot of the teams on that list in ACC win percentage over the last decade.

 

[iceeater1969]

Why are we looking for NFL to validate our successes again?

I will be posting NUMBER comparisons in the history of donations and ticket sales and debt. By the way we are factory level in debt and near last in donations. We dont make principal payments on the debt - just 12,000,000 in interest which is more than donations.


Dont know what validation u want to make out of these numbers or the next set of numbers.

As cheese said and is pretty obvious, we are where we are and we don't care relative to others.

I say if these easily numbers significantly improve over time its a very good thing.

 

[iceeater1969]

I bet we beat a lot of the teams on that list in ACC win percentage over the last decade.

Yes, but the best coach at that scheme quit after 1 year in his 3 year extension. The scheme is gone.


.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

What I find interesting is how we were able to win so many football games despite supposedly having no talent. How on earth in the last 15 years did we win the ACC once, win the Coastal 4 times, and win 8+ games 6 times despite apparently having nobody on our team?

We beat Clemson 8 times in the last 15 years. We beat Virginia Tech almost every year. We have 1 sub 0.500 season in ACC play in the last 25 years...something no other team can say.

I guess we are just somehow miraculously able to take a bunch of sand lot kids and chop block everyone into oblivion.

 

[smokey_wasp]

I bet we beat a lot of the teams on that list in ACC win percentage over the last decade.

And we beat them more when we had NFL talent in 09 and 14. I don't think there is a lot of disagreement here. Its just a matter of what you choose to highlight

 

[Cam]

I thought it was interesting that Trysten Hill was drafted in the second round (58th overall) this year. That was a guy we had committed to us for awhile before something happened at one of the games that pissed him off and caused him to decommit. Turns out he was a pretty elite DT talent despite being a 2* player. That being said, his draft profile outlines major maturity and character issues he had at UCF, so I doubt he would have lasted on our team for long.