Overachievers

TooTall

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,356
Location
Vidalia
From Rivals.com
https://n.rivals.com/news/overachiever-or-underachiever-ranking-all-power-five-teams

Something that we have known for a while is getting published. Say what you will about our offense, but we are doing better that most with more. But, it could be said that our "overachieving" is a result of our offense. Thoughts?
Except for you Mark Bradley, you get no comment. https://www.myajc.com/blog/mark-bra...the-top-overachieving/4oNryzX4gGWHheVGziOXEL/ (open in incognito mode if need be)
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
Georgie #52. LOLOLOLOLOLOL. In Kirby "Smart"s first year, he had ONE SINGLE GUY get drafted. How many 5*s are in their 2018 recruiting class? 8?

41% graduation rate. 40 arrests in the last 6 years (not a typo). They are an undisciplined "me first" bunch who are out of control. They can win a lot of games because their schedule is so weak, but they pump out a lot of risky prospects.

Georgie was ranked BELOW BOSTON COLLEGE. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
 

TooTall

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,356
Location
Vidalia
Playa Gotta Play.jpg

Just a bunch of uga fans walking around with eyes and ears covered hollering about almost beating the SEC West runners-up when someone suggests that Mark Richt was a great recruiter, but last years team was all Kirby's guys.
 

Blumpkin Souffle

Bidly Biddington III
Messages
1,367
Also interesting to me was the fact that only three SEC teams were more than 0.050 above zero in this analysis. Meaning the majority of them play at or below their perceived talent level.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
Also interesting to me was the fact that only three SEC teams were more than 0.050 above zero in this analysis. Meaning the majority of them play at or below their perceived talent level.

The SEC (especially the SEC East) has been a pretty terrible conference the last decade. Alabama has been world beaters, and there are typically 3 or 4 other really good teams, but it seems like 2/3rds of their conference is *** every year. And that's amazing considering 10+ of them usually rank in the top 25 in recruiting rankings.

For example, last year the SEC had teams ranked 1, 7, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 25, 27, 30 in recruiting by Rivals. 11 SEC teams definitely won't finish in the top 30 next year. Typically its half that. And amazingly 5-6 SEC teams either get upset by FCS type OOC teams or barely escape it.
 

Dirty Jacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
103
Georgie #52. LOLOLOLOLOLOL. In Kirby "Smart"s first year, he had ONE SINGLE GUY get drafted. How many 5*s are in their 2018 recruiting class? 8?

41% graduation rate. 40 arrests in the last 6 years (not a typo). They are an undisciplined "me first" bunch who are out of control. They can win a lot of games because their schedule is so weak, but they pump out a lot of risky prospects.

Georgie was ranked BELOW BOSTON COLLEGE. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

I mean eff uga and all but bro, they played for a natty a few months ago....so...y a
 

jgtengineer

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,069
This further confirms that despite being a crotchety old butt hole, Cutcliffe can really really coach.

He can. I honestly think part of the crotchety bit is because he really wanted the tech job and because johnson was Radokovich's first pick he got miffed for not being given a shot
 

Sideways

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,589
From Rivals.com
https://n.rivals.com/news/overachiever-or-underachiever-ranking-all-power-five-teams

Something that we have known for a while is getting published. Say what you will about our offense, but we are doing better that most with more. But, it could be said that our "overachieving" is a result of our offense. Thoughts?
Except for you Mark Bradley, you get no comment. https://www.myajc.com/blog/mark-bra...the-top-overachieving/4oNryzX4gGWHheVGziOXEL/ (open in incognito mode if need be)
From Rivals.com
https://n.rivals.com/news/overachiever-or-underachiever-ranking-all-power-five-teams

Something that we have known for a while is getting published. Say what you will about our offense, but we are doing better that most with more. But, it could be said that our "overachieving" is a result of our offense. Thoughts?
Except for you Mark Bradley, you get no comment. https://www.myajc.com/blog/mark-bra...the-top-overachieving/4oNryzX4gGWHheVGziOXEL/ (open in incognito mode if need be)


It was an interesting study. Going back to just 2008 does help some teams, notably Clemson, and hurts others like probably California. My own take is spread over a longer time period and is strictly stream of consciousness with no attempt at trying to justify my impressions with data:

Tech at #9 Seems about right. I think of Tech as a bit of an overachiever compared to the actual talent we manage to get.

Auburn at #11 Disagree a bit on this. I know Auburn operates under a bit of a handicap sharing the stage with mighty Bama in the Yellowhammer State but many teams would kill to get the caliber of players they routinely get. In my opinion, something of a slight underachieving program

Virginia Tech at #12 This one is controversial. Virginia Tech has had very good talent in years past but not consistently and at the level of the true elite factories. I really regard them as slight over achievers but maybe not deserving of their lofty ranking

Clemson at #20 To be sure, only going back to 2008 definitely helps the Tigers but historically they have been a bit of an underachieving program and not the overachieving program suggested by this ranking. They have always been able to get superior talent going back to the 1980s and really don't have a whole lot to show for it. Nevertheless, a very good program on the upswing for sure.

FSU at #21 They cannot be serious. FSU has more talent year in and year out than they know what to do with. I know it is sometimes lopsided with skill position players but when was the last time Tech had a player who was like that dude that played quarterback a few years ago the one they called the "X Man" Xavier something or another. That guy was a Mr. Football AND a Mr. Basketball in the state of Florida. They have had Christ alone knows how many five stars that were busts over the years. I know they have had their problems but a lack of talent isn't one of them. I mean, gee whiz, they ought to be a poster child for an underachieving program relative to their recruiting.

UGA at #52 If anything, it probably should be lower. They too benefit from it only going back to 2008. Total dominance of a fertile recruiting area, all the money needed to build a program, buy coaches, players too for that matter, the very definition of a football factory and what do they have to show for it? One national championship and a handful of conference championships and a boatload of Fulmer Cup awards. Definitely an underachieving program. In my mind, about as bad or worse than FSU.

Florida at #55 Could be worse. Back in the day, the Gators routinely mismanaged abundant talent. One year they had 9 players drafted to the NFL and won, I think, two or three games. Where else, would a team achieve the heights of being ranked number one in the nation for the very first time and a week later lose to a pretty decent but nothing special Georgia team. To be sure, the Gators have won more national championships since 1990 than Georgia has won conference championships (or at least it seems that way) and they have played in the SEC championship game more times than I care to remember but this is a team that can waste talent with the best of them.

UNC at #61 The Tarheels manage to do less with more talent than just about anyone. They have not sniffed a conference championship in a generation and to the best of my knowledge have never played in the ACC championship game. Plenty of talent compared to most of their competition. Tech, UVA, Wake, Duke, NC State, all manage to do as well or better with markedly less talent. Kind of pitiful in a way but I don't feel sorry for them. Any thing bad happen to those baby blue snobs. Well, they probably got it coming.
 

swampsting

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,881
Sideways what has hurt FSU in recent years is their O line - and their O line recruiting, which may be part and parcel of it - has been pathetic. They have had top rated skill guys and a ton of very highly rated defenders. But their O line has been their Achilles heel in recruiting and on the field. I looked this up a few months ago, just how deficient their O line recruiting had been (and they're trying to get the same oranges as everyone else while we're going for apples, the guys who fit our system). Can't remember what I did with my research but I recall that their O line recruiting had not been nearly as star studded as the recruiting for their other positions.
Agree about UNC. Though the study in question covers 2008 on, I saw the 99 team, with Julius Peppers and about 5-6 other guys who played in the NFL, and they got boatraced at home by Furman that year. (that was a good Furman team. ask PJ)
I'll say Auburn has underachieved too. They have recruited well, especially when they got Carl Lawson and Montravius Adams. And they recruit Georgia and Florida particularly well, and have over time..
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
.... Are you being facetious?

Uh, that’s what this thread is about. Go back and look at the formula. Georgia ranked #52 out of 65. They are ranked below Boston College. They had 1 player drafted in 2017. I’m not saying they’re a bad actual football team or that we’re better or any of that. I’m just pointing out why they scored so terrible.
 

ilovetheoption

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,816
Uh, that’s what this thread is about. Go back and look at the formula. Georgia ranked #52 out of 65. They are ranked below Boston College. They had 1 player drafted in 2017. I’m not saying they’re a bad actual football team or that we’re better or any of that. I’m just pointing out why they scored so terrible.
Dont think so, dude. The article is about Under and Over achieving compared to how many NFL players they have.

Duke is number 1 not because they have the most NFL players. Duke is number one because they have won a lot without NFL players.

Georgia is low because they have a ton of talent but haven't won commensurate with the talent level that they have.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
Dont think so, dude. The article is about Under and Over achieving compared to how many NFL players they have.

Duke is number 1 not because they have the most NFL players. Duke is number one because they have won a lot without NFL players.

Georgia is low because they have a ton of talent but haven't won commensurate with the talent level that they have.

Ha! I guess this is one of this times I need to spend time to actually read all the fine details. Like finishing ranked...Georgia hasn’t even finished ranked 2 of the last 5 years. I stopped reading after the first part which was wins. I totally misread the article which I thought was about how highly ranked their recruits were and how much they were winning compared to actually getting to the NFL.
 
Top