It's hard to tell if you are making the point that the team this year was more talented that the "recruiting advantage" teams. This team had more talent than maybe 3 teams on that list, which was easy to tell for folks who know what they are watching.
I will make it clear. I believe we were either equal or ahead on athletic talent compared to 7 teams on our schedule, and one of our wins was against a team (UNC) who has been out recruiting us.
Sure, you can look at Notre Dame and think “we have to improve our recruiting to compete with these guys”. There is no need to say that about Boston College.
The OL was not very good. As O'Leary said, the farther you are from the ball the sooner you can play. We should have had Jr and Sr linemen left over from Johnson, but we only had one--Minihan--who played consistently. We played a walk-on, Lay, two transfers, Minihan and a freshman who is a Collins recruit. Due to injuries we also played a true freshman. People who think you can just "coach them up" don't know a football from a pumpkin. A walk on and freshmen were able to beat out Johnson signees who are on scholarship.
I have defended a number of decisions that Collins has made, including taking a lot of transfers last season instead of offering more high school players.
Collins was hired in 2018, had some control over his first recruiting class, two full recruiting classes since then has pulled in transfers in almost every season, and if he didn’t know the needs at OL and DL in 2018, he certainly knew them before the first game of his first season. He is supposed to be a master recruiter and talent evaluator. He has had time to plan and act.
There is no indication that he’s had more injuries or worse luck than any of his opponents. No one expected him to put together a mid-1980’s Washington Redskins offensive line in one season, but three years is enough to have a near-average line. He is in control of the roster. If he needed to recruit 7 linemen a year, he has the power to do that.
If transfers haven’t worked out, he placed the bets and is responsible for them coming in or not.
A number of posters have said it takes longer to build a team. Other coaches have gotten results faster.
Overall, he’s had time to build a team. Successful coaches usually show a turnaround in year 2 or year 3. He has not.
Since you brought up O’Leary, the team went 1-10 in 1994 when he took over for Lewis during the season. He went 6-5 the next season, and played 4 top 25 teams (winning against one).
If we just look at the ACC standings,
- We were tied for last in 2021 (we get the tiebreaker against Duke, so maybe second to last)
- We came in ahead of Duke and Syracuse in 2020
- We came in last in 2019
Surely, there’s an intermediate state in building an offensive line between coming in last and being a playoff-caliber team. I am not seeing a significant improvement in line play. Where has our line progressed since 2019?
The DL is the same. The top three tacklers yesterday were DBs. Why? Because the DL isn't good enough to keep the OL off the LBs, so the DBs made tackles after significant gains. Games are won or lost at the LOS, and we are not very good there. We have 3 DT commits that we deperately need.
It’s good that we have 3 DT commits that we need. Collins was brought here to recruit.
For what it’s worth, I think we’re getting good play out of the DEs.
We had two DT’s out sick on Saturday. But I don’t see how it’s an argument in Collins’ favor that DL play isn’t satisfactory after 3 years. I could even understand last season, but three seasons in, he owns it.
As the OP notes, the DBs are slow. Their recovery time is just awful as you know if you have watched good teams play. We don't have even one shut down corner. This is one place where the coaching was subpar, but 2 of the 3 coaches who were dismissed coached DBs, so this has been addressed.
As the OP says, the biggest problem with this team is the lack of talent--and that's the biggest problem by far. If Collins was fired we would have a tough time finding a better recruiter to replace him. Firing him would be a mistake for this reason. People seem to forget that he has only had 2 recruiting classes, and you don't win with first and second year players.
Don't point to 247 and say we have the 30 something-th best talent. Most of that rating is due to transfers that haven't contributed all that much. The poster child is Clayton. He is a good man, but he was not a 5 star player. He only played in two games, and it's not because he was hurt. There are other examples, although some will likely contribute in the future.
This makes no sense. Collins is here for team-building. Transfers aren’t forced on Collins. If they aren’t working out, then who is responsible? {That’s rhetorical}
The other reason for that ranking is due to Collins recruits who will contribute in the future, but who are too young now. Again, you don't win with first or second year players, especially on the LOS. However, this team was better than last year's team, and there is improvement. Much of this is due to younger players getting better, and who will be even better in the future. We were devastated by injuries as the season went along, and we have no depth. So yes, we looked really bad at the end of the year, when the talent was even less due to injuries and no depth.
Better in what way? It’s not just wins and losses, it’s hard to find a place where we’re doing better in PFF grades or yards per attempt or other areas.
If you did a film breakdown, where would we look technically better?
Enough other teams do well with young players on the line. NC State starts a freshman and two sophomores on the offensive line, and came in second in the ACC Atlantic this year. Wake Forest has plenty of underclassmen on the two deep. Miami has two sophomores starting on the OL.
The typical poster on this board's knowledge doesn't go much deeper than than knowing who the head coach is and whether we won or lost. Therefore, they assume that since we lost it's the head coach's fault. The issue is a lot more complex than that. And no, Clemson (and others) haven't built their program based on "coaching them up." And neither did Paul Johnson, who was 20-7 his first two years with the outstanding recruiting class of 2007 that Gailey brought in, but then with his own subpar recruiting was 54-54 vs FBS. Take away the miracle of 2014 and he was 44-51 vs FBS for 8 of his last 9 years. He won when he had good players, and lost when he didn't. Then he left the cupboard bare and walked off. It takes more than 2 years of recruting to overcome the talent deficit, but it's happening. Give it time.
There are posters on this board with various levels of expertise and experience playing. Some agree with you and some disagree with you. There are a number of knowledgeable posters who disagree with you.
Other programs definitely coach their players up. If you compare Clemson with FSU or Miami, it’s not just recruiting—it’s a difference in coaching. Recruiting is a huge thing, but it’s not the only thing. And if Clemson hadn’t coached their players up, they’d never have beaten Alabama. If Alabama hadn’t coached their players up, they’d have lost to other teams that had outrecruited them.
With Johnson, you took away the year that hurts your case, but you kept the year that helps it the most. If you’re going to throw out an outlier, 2015 was an unusually injury-laden and unlucky year. I agree that the last few years were trending down, but returning production is an argument for 2019, not 2020 or 2021. You can find plenty of teams that turn their fortunes with a recruiting class or two, including on the lines. While “get old, stay old” works really well for BYU, it’s not the only way to field a competitive team.
After three years, if we were towards the middle in points, or yards, or sacks, or other indicators of progress, I might agree with you. These have been three of the worst years of defense we’ve seen in the past 20 years—possibly longer. After the last two games, we might be worse than 2019.
