Other football fans are clueless

[4shotB]

I don't think players in the league is the best measure of overall talent. If you look at recruiting rankings, georgie has had much more talent longer, iiuc.

Also, I chose players in the league as a benchmark because I have been told repeatedly on the Gt boards that recruiting rankings don't matter! Anyway, to my casual and untrained eye, over the years those two teams look alike "getting off the bus".

 

[AE 87]

@4shotB no worries

Fwiw, I think recruiting rankings are more useful in aggregate than on individuals. U[sic]ga averaged top 5/top 10 classes for the last 15 yrs, iirc. According to cfbmatrix, they were the only such team without a nat championship.

CUs recruiting was not that good but is getting better. It has still been better than ours.

 

[vamosjackets]

I have always been extremely intrigued by the difference in our records against Clemson and Ga. over the years. In my opinion, these two programs have always looked the same in terms of athletes on the field. Both have approx. the same number of players in the league (45 for Clemson, 50 for Uga. Disclaimer: the data was found on the internet so take it for what it is worth.)

What do you all think accounts for the difference? Voodoo and curses? Psychological? Superior coaching at Uga vs. Clemson historically? Has Clemson indeed taken a leap in its coaching (and therefore program) such that our series record with them will begin to resemble what it has been against Ga. over the last 40 years or so? I hope not as the Clemson series and rivalry has easily been the most fun and entertaining over the years. I have had Clemson fans say the same as well.

I think your observations are on point, and I think the questions you ask and their expected answer tell the story. I do believe it is part psychological and part coaching. It's psychological when you see all the close games we had in the CCG and CPJ eras and how we're one play away from a win. But, it's also coaching when you see UGA's record over those years compared with Clemson's. 2009 is a perfect example. It's coaching, psychological, luck, and refs. We're going against Willie Martinez - probably their worst DC in the last 20 years - so advantage us. But, they're going against Dave Wommack - our worst DC in 20 years. Don't give up record numbers in rushing (make their worst QB in 20 years beat us) and we win the game. Refs allow UGA players to continue to torque Josh Nesbitt's body way after he's down with zero consequences. So, we lose our starting QB for a quarter or two. That doesn't happen, we win the game. We still have a chance to win though. And, CPJ, a normally great play caller calls 3 or 4 passes in a row to end the game when we're in their territory. STILL, if Stephen Hill runs the correct route (the Brad Stewart vs FSU route, btw) and it's likely a TD, and CPJ looks like a genius. STILL, Bay Bay is wide open, gets a ball thrown right to his hands, and drops the ball on our last play. Psychological without question.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

If I were a fan of another school that recruited better than GT, had less obstacles than GT, and yet still got beat by GT on a frequent basis, then I would want GT to change offenses too.

I like this so much I had to do more than just "like" it.!

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Also, I chose players in the league as a benchmark because I have been told repeatedly on the Gt boards that recruiting rankings don't matter! Anyway, to my casual and untrained eye, over the years those two teams look alike "getting off the bus".

I'll take play on the field over looking like you just got off the bus any day of the week. By the way, Francis Kallon looks like he just got off the bus and where has that gotten us?

 

[4shotB]

I'll take play on the field over looking like you just got off the bus any day of the week. By the way, Francis Kallon looks like he just got off the bus and where has that gotten us?

I think you are missing the point and/or getting tangled up in semantics. The bigger issue is: Georgia and Clemson have recruited very much the same (as gauged by putting players into the NFL, which should - imo- trump the subjective opinions of recruiting "gurus"). They are similar type schools. Why the gap in GT's performance against these two teams over the years?

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I think you are missing the point and/or getting tangled up in semantics. The bigger issue is: Georgia and Clemson have recruited very much the same (as gauged by putting players into the NFL, which should - imo- trump the subjective opinions of recruiting "gurus"). They are similar type schools. Why the gap in GT's performance against these two teams over the years?

You have to ask?

Why the gap in GT's performance against these two teams over the years?[/QUOTE]

 

[4shotB]

You have to ask?

Why the gap in GT's performance against these two teams over the years?

[/QUOTE]

To answer your question, no I didn't have to ask it. Apparently, however curiosity got the better of me.

 

[Sideways]

I have always been extremely intrigued by the difference in our records against Clemson and Ga. over the years. In my opinion, these two programs have always looked the same in terms of athletes on the field. Both have approx. the same number of players in the league (45 for Clemson, 50 for Uga. Disclaimer: the data was found on the internet so take it for what it is worth.)

What do you all think accounts for the difference? Voodoo and curses? Psychological? Superior coaching at Uga vs. Clemson historically? Has Clemson indeed taken a leap in its coaching (and therefore program) such that our series record with them will begin to resemble what it has been against Ga. over the last 40 years or so? I hope not as the Clemson series and rivalry has easily been the most fun and entertaining over the years. I have had Clemson fans say the same as well.

Short answer we have been in their heads a long time. Long answer, going back to the days of Dodd we owned them. In 1966 a pretty average Clemson team came to Grant Field and for 3 and half quarters out played and out coached the Jackets. Out of the blue, pretty late in the game, Lenny Snow took a simple isolation play and ran 50 or so yards to beat them. A friend of mine whose dad played at Tech was outside their locker room and was amazed to see their players crying as they came out. It's just one of those things. I would hesitate to say that until very recently, Clemson was equal to Georgia in athletes. Georgia seemed to always beat them and just had more depth down through the years. I don't know that anyone we play consistently beats us like UGA. Miami always gives us fits and of course, FSU until recently. Virginia Tech has whipped us pretty good thanks to Coach Foster but we have had our moments against all those teams.

 

[AE 87]

Since 2000, georgie has had about 90 kids drafted into NFL. CU has had about 50.

We've had 35.

Let's not make this more complicated than it need be.

 

[4shotB]

Since 2000, georgie has had about 90 kids drafted into NFL. CU has had about 50.

We've had 35.

Let's not make this more complicated than it need be.

now that is interesting data. Assuming both of are numbers are correct (to be totally transparent, I have to admit I got my data straight off the internet via Google) then Clemson has had 45 players out of 50 draftees make an NFL roster whereas Ga. has had 50 out of 90. Clearly Ga. then indeed has had better talent (using total number of draftees as a benchmark, which I think is a better indicator than recruiting rankings). In my mind, I've always thought of Uga as Clemson in red uniforms and vice versa.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

But the fact remains, UGA has had a psychological advantage over Tech since Dooley. If the two teams are fairly even going into this game you can almost always give a slight edge to Georgia. If either team is going to win in an upset it will more often be Georgia.

 

[AE 87]

But the fact remains, UGA has had a psychological advantage over Tech since Dooley. If the two teams are fairly even going into this game you can almost always give a slight edge to Georgia. If either team is going to win in an upset it will more often be Georgia.

I disagree.

I think the raw talent differential has been significant, especially in depth. Yet, almost every game has been competitive. To me, that suggests that we're psychologically up and ready and in those games.

A few years ago, we beat Cuse 50+ to 0. To me, that's what being beaten psychologically looks like.

Of course, this is just my opinion. I just resist the habit of some to grant their opinions the status of facts.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

I disagree.

I think the raw talent differential has been significant, especially in depth. Yet, almost every game has been competitive. To me, that suggests that we're psychologically up and ready and in those games.

A few years ago, we beat Cuse 50+ to 0. To me, that's what being beaten psychologically looks like.

Of course, this is just my opinion. I just resist the habit of some to grant their opinions the status of facts.

That's fair.

Mine is simply an opinion also. I have not actually checked data points on this. Someone with the time could check it. Kinds of things I would want to know would be what were the rankings of the respective teams prior to the game, how wide a spread was there in the rankings of the teams as well as getting an average of the spread over several decades in this game, as well as simple won / loss records of the two teams prior to playing. Anecdotal evidence for me is certainly tainted by the fact that I can recall several games over the years in which I felt like we were the better team and lost.

It would actually make me feel much better to learn it was simply a talent disparity every time.

 

[redmule]

The 70's was when the monkey got on our back vs uga and we haven't gotten it off yet. We won in 70, 74, and 77. We were one play from winning in 71, 73, 76, and 78. With just one less fluke play in 76 and 78, or more neutral officiating, Pepper would have taken four of five from Dooley. Dooley would have been fired, and 1980 would have never happened in athens. Lots of games since then would have been different. We had a chance to get back on top in the 90's when those people had Goff and Donnan. But Homer passed on making O'Leary or Friedgen the HC. Smart may give us the chance again.

 

[Eastman]

Could another factor be the time of year that the two teams play? Over the course of a season many injuries occur and players just get banged up. Having more depth allows you to spread the nagging injuries out and where season ending injuries occur, having a deeper bench has got to help.

 

[Milwaukee]

It would actually make me feel much better to learn it was simply a talent disparity every time.

It's a talent disparity. A big one. #recruiting

 

[Skeptic]

Under CPJ, believe our record vs Clemson is 5-4.

Well, there you go. Reason enough for a Clemson fan to want him fired.

 

[cuttysark]

Let's make it even simpler: Whoever wins the final recruiting rankings ought to be immediately Crowned the National Championship Game Winner and given the Dr. Pepper Trophy. I love the "Stars Recruiting System!"

Then every team can just play the regular season games for fun since the rankings will have already established who gets to go to which Bowl game.

 

[AE 87]

Let's make it even simpler: Whoever wins the final recruiting rankings ought to be immediately Crowned the National Championship Game Winner and given the Dr. Pepper Trophy. I love the "Stars Recruiting System!"

Then every team can just play the regular season games for fun since the rankings will have already established who gets to go to which Bowl game.

LOL. Where did this nonsense come from?