Yet you felt the need to comment on these 20 pages lol.
I held off until that 20th page - I am proud of myself. lol
At the time, I thought Wommack's first year was saved by players who already knew what they were doing.
Ted is currently making what FSU offered to Kelly. Kelly then got a raise last year to about 300k more than Ted makes.
Just the fact that we forced a field goal means we got a stop in the redzone. I'll trade td's for field goal attempts all day. Bend don't break means you force them to slowly march the entire length of the field, making them be perfect on third down the whole way, which very few teams are. Then the field shrinks in the redzone and defense is easier and you force field goal attempts. Don't give up the big play, don't give up the easy score. Not a bad plan when you have the personnel we have if you ask me. Sometimes you make mistakes and still give up the big play, but it's far less likely than when playing a high risk defense.
AJ Gray. PJ Davis. Just to start.
OK. I think I understand your concern a little better, now that I have read through the last page or so a second time, and specifically your last post after this one. My position is that targeting players to recruit, bringing them in, signing them, and subsequently developing them are inextricably linked and the end result is how well you have recruited.
I get where you are coming from, but I will have to respectfully disagree. What if those 5 stars would have been coached by the one who coached the 2 and 3 stars? How do we know they all wouldn't turn out to be studs? There's just so many questions, but I personally know form experience, that coaching can change the ability of a player majorly. Take Jim Harbaugh, QB's want to play for him because he's knows how to coach them, and he can probably take a duplicate of a kid at another school and coach him up better than most other QB coaches. Some guys just have a nack, they see mechanics in kids form better, they can diagnose things better, and they have a way of just getting guys to understand things better. This is why I say it's coaching. I'll go back to Don brown if the recruiting was so good at Boston college and it wasn't his coaching then how in one year did they go from being ranked in the 90's on D and a year latter in the top 15 with most of the same guys? That just doesn't add up imo, or else they would have been better with the old D coordinator. All the things you mentioned in devolving players ect, is not part of recruiting but it is coaching.
Ok for non factories. If you are claiming factories, who would they be starting for?
I don't think those guys would be starting either, but how do you get Boston college recruits better and it's not just the coaching? Idk if you read my other post but Don Brown took over in 2013 and they ended up being ranked in the 90's one year later they were in the top 15 with pretty much the same players unless he played all his freshman recruits. So how do you go from 90's to top 15 and it not be coaching. I just don't see how we say that's recruiting and not coaching, and every time I mention this it gets ignored.
I think he mean on defense, burden, Devine and JT could all start for a factory school. (JT would be a CB probably)