Post-2016 NFL Draft - GT Players

[GaTech4ever]

There's a significant difference in guys getting a shot because they played a ton of snaps in the ACC and were obviously high-character/intelligent athletes coming from a school like Tech, and guys getting a shot because NFL teams legitimately think they are going to stick because of their talent.

I'm not saying that NFL teams will bring in anyone for a camp or practice squad, but just because guys like Cummings/Dieke/Johnson/Young got a shot (or are still in the process of trying to stick) does not mean they were legitimate NFL talents in college, or that they were legitimate NFL talents in college that we squandered away. How many NFL-caliber plays did any of those guys make compared to guys like Gotsis or White?

 

[jeffgt14]

@PBR549
I don't agree with @33jacket much, but you have to admit it's hard to blame our struggles on D on just talent when all of our graduating starters make NFL rosters.

It's been like this for a few years now. I think the only exception was Green who was hurt.

I really wish someone would ask cpj about this.

Depth has always been our problem on D. You can usually notice this in every game when we come out strong for the first 2-3 series and then start getting beat.

 

[Milwaukee]

I'm not saying that NFL teams will bring in anyone for a camp or practice squad

Yes you are.

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

Even though we only had 2 players picked in the draft there are still guys that might be going to teams.

Gentlemen, start your concussions!

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

We had our best talent, Gotsis, a DE playing DT. Most talented group was the secondary and I think it was very talented as a whole. But the D did have some major holes in it and those get exploited bad. In particular our rush off the edges and lack of quality blitzers at LB. Put an NFL squad behind that and they will struggle also.

 

[stingyoa$$]

There's a significant difference in guys getting a shot because they played a ton of snaps in the ACC and were obviously high-character/intelligent athletes coming from a school like Tech, and guys getting a shot because NFL teams legitimately think they are going to stick because of their talent.

I'm not saying that NFL teams will bring in anyone for a camp or practice squad, but just because guys like Cummings/Dieke/Johnson/Young got a shot (or are still in the process of trying to stick) does not mean they were legitimate NFL talents in college, or that they were legitimate NFL talents in college that we squandered away. How many NFL-caliber plays did any of those guys make compared to guys like Gotsis or White?

I think all the guys mentioned above made some great plays. Can you define a "NFL caliber play"?

 

[GaTech4ever]

Yes you are.

No I'm not. I'm saying if you start 2+ years at a school like GT and get 99% of the snaps, you're likely to at the very least get a look.

If you watched those guys over their careers and thought they could play in the NFL, then We have to agree to disagree. Not every NFL team brings guys in with the expectation of them ever making the roster. It's called being a camp body, and an intelligent football player with a lot of experience and no off-field issues is a great candidate for that.

 

[GaTech4ever]

I think all the guys mentioned above made some great plays. Can you define a "NFL caliber play"?

I have no doubt that made some great plays. I was asking "how many" not saying "none". I'm sure they made a few good/great plays. NFL-caliber players do it more than a few times.

 

[GaTech4ever]

Yes you are.

Just ask yourself, how many times in the past few years did you watch someone on our D and think to yourself, "Man, that guy is next-level good." I'd guess not very often, other than Gotsis and White. I did not watch our D and see a significant amount of NFL talent that was simply receiving underwhelming coaching.

 

[orange14]

"Next level good" IS hard to define in the heat of a game! So it is hard to define just looking at plays.There are the obvious ones like Thomas before and Smelter. But Golden also made a heap of great plays. At times, there were others. But a pivotal play might get you noticed - but might not generate an NFL chance.
Many of GT players play better than advertised but just don't have the measureables. I think that looks like good coaching.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

If we wish to be honest in evaluating "Next level good", we need to count those who actually made active rosters, not rookie camp tryouts or practice squads, and stuck with teams for at least a year or more. The numbers drop off significantly when you do that.

 

[AE 87]

Let's clarify some issues.
HS - lot's of guys play hs football and are typically better than those who don't
College -.HS players who get college schol are typically better than those that don't
D1 - those who get D1 schol typ better than others
NFL Camp - those who make a camp are typically better than those who don't.
NFL season roster- typically the best

Typically not necessarily.

 

[GaTech4ever]

If we wish to be honest in evaluating "Next level good", we need to count those who actually made active rosters, not rookie camp tryouts or practice squads, and stuck with teams for at least a year or more. The numbers drop off significantly when you do that.

Thank you.

 

[AE 87]

Thank you.

No one was suggesting that making a 90 man roster was the same as sticking on 53 man roster for a couple of years. The point was that making the 90-man roster was better than not making it.

Let's look at some numbers. We had 2 guys drafted from our D. If half the 256 players drafted were Defenders, that's a 128. If only players from Pwr 5 teams were drafted, that's 2 per team. Now, in reality, there are 128 FBS schools not just 64 and 125 FCS schools in addition. So, by this back of the envelope calculation, we're over-represented in terms of drafted defenders.

When we expand to include undrafted free agents, we have (by a quick count) an additional 434 players signed or 730. Again, over-assuming that half are defenders, we have 365, which, again, if all came from pwr 5 teams would be 6 per 64 teams. So, we again hit what would've been average if only pwr 5 teams were included. So, when you consider that players are coming from a much larger pool of teams, our number suggests we're over-represented in defenders signing NFL contracts.

That's over half of our starting line-up from last year, and yet our D was #50 in ppd efficiency. Moreover, that is #50 of 78 teams that played more than 2 Pwr 5 opponents. We were above average in representation in the NFL draft and in the whole NFL signing class but below average in efficiency. That was my point.

 

[GaTech4ever]

No one was suggesting that making a 90 man roster was the same as sticking on 53 man roster for a couple of years. The point was that making the 90-man roster was better than not making it.

Let's look at some numbers. We had 2 guys drafted from our D. If half the 256 players drafted were Defenders, that's a 128. If only players from Pwr 5 teams were drafted, that's 2 per team. Now, in reality, there are 128 FBS schools not just 64 and 125 FCS schools in addition. So, by this back of the envelope calculation, we're over-represented in terms of drafted defenders.

When we expand to include undrafted free agents, we have (by a quick count) an additional 434 players signed or 730. Again, over-assuming that half are defenders, we have 365, which, again, if all came from pwr 5 teams would be 6 per 64 teams. So, we again hit what would've been average if only pwr 5 teams were included. So, when you consider that players are coming from a much larger pool of teams, our number suggests we're over-represented in defenders signing NFL contracts.

That's over half of our starting line-up from last year, and yet our D was #50 in ppd efficiency. Moreover, that is #50 of 78 teams that played more than 2 Pwr 5 opponents. We were above average in representation in the NFL draft and in the whole NFL signing class but below average in efficiency. That was my point.

I appreciate you taking the time to pull those numbers and they do provide insight I wouldn't have otherwise. However, I am sticking with my opinion that having two defenders drafted isn't going to make a defense significantly more efficient. Especially when those two will likely be the only defenders drafted who got significant playing time in 2015 (I'd add AJ Gray, who is great but probably got about the 5th most PT of anyone in our secondary, and maybe Freeman/Gamble, who didn't play like true NFL prospects in 2015).

It goes deeper than having two guys drafted and a few others be essentially camp bodies (I hate how that sounds but don't know any other way to put it). Even some of our defenders who did get drafted in the past few years like Thomas and Watts have less than 10 tackles combined in their NFL careers. Guys like Attaochu and Gotsis stick out SO MUCH on our D because they are on a completely different level than everyone else. I do not think that Roof has had much talent as it may seem by merely looking at our best players who got drafted, and our UDFA who don't stick in the NFL.

I agree with you that UDFA are obviously better than guys who don't get picked up, but I also think that some of our UDFA get looks because of the intangibles I previously mentioned - not on-field productivity. And I have more respect for those guys than the 5* uga UDFA who didn't do much in college but is still living off his name. I do believe that if a guy like Saban was coaching the D we'd be more efficient than we are now with Roof, so I'm not saying coaching isn't a factor. I just believe that the talent (or lack thereof) is a bigger issue than coaching and could be why we are so vanilla. Like you said, this year's results will show a lot.

 

[AE 87]

I appreciate you taking the time to pull those numbers and they do provide insight I wouldn't have otherwise. However, I am sticking with my opinion that having two defenders drafted isn't going to make a defense significantly more efficient. Especially when those two will likely be the only defenders drafted who got significant playing time in 2015 (I'd add AJ Gray, who is great but probably got about the 5th most PT of anyone in our secondary, and maybe Freeman/Gamble, who didn't play like true NFL prospects in 2015).

It goes deeper than having two guys drafted and a few others be essentially camp bodies (I hate how that sounds but don't know any other way to put it). Even some of our defenders who did get drafted in the past few years like Thomas and Watts have less than 10 tackles combined in their NFL careers. Guys like Attaochu and Gotsis stick out SO MUCH on our D because they are on a completely different level than everyone else. I do not think that Roof has had much talent as it may seem by merely looking at our best players who got drafted, and our UDFA who don't stick in the NFL.

I agree with you that UDFA are obviously better than guys who don't get picked up, but I also think that some of our UDFA get looks because of the intangibles I previously mentioned - not on-field productivity. And I have more respect for those guys than the 5* uga UDFA who didn't do much in college but is still living off his name. I do believe that if a guy like Saban was coaching the D we'd be more efficient than we are now with Roof, so I'm not saying coaching isn't a factor. I just believe that the talent (or lack thereof) is a bigger issue than coaching and could be why we are so vanilla. Like you said, this year's results will show a lot.

Fair enough. I can't argue against a faith position. And I'm not saying that you're necessarily wrong.

However, it seems that you're responding to me as if I'm saying that our D has been loaded with NFL all-stars and refuting that position. I'm not saying that.
I'm also not saying that based on these NFL signings that we should've expected a Top 10 or Top 20 D. I'm saying that we have reason to have expected better than average, say top 40.
More to the point, I was saying that this data makes it harder to argue that it's just talent and that Roof is maximizing returns. Here again, is what I said ...

@PBR549
I don't agree with @33jacket much, but you have to admit it's hard to blame our struggles on D on just talent when all of our graduating starters make NFL rosters.

It's been like this for a few years now. I think the only exception was Green who was hurt.

I really wish someone would ask cpj about this.

 

[GaTech4ever]

Fair enough. I can't argue against a faith position. And I'm not saying that you're necessarily wrong.

However, it seems that you're responding to me as if I'm saying that our D has been loaded with NFL all-stars and refuting that position. I'm not saying that.
I'm also not saying that based on these NFL signings that we should've expected a Top 10 or Top 20 D. I'm saying that we have reason to have expected better than average, say top 40.
More to the point, I was saying that this data makes it harder to argue that it's just talent and that Roof is maximizing returns. Here again, is what I said ...

Fair. I agree that we should be Top 40, and I will reiterate (and I'm sure you agree) that depth always seems to be the biggest issue on D. It isn't a matter of not having good players, the problem is the significant drop off from our good players to everyone else.

I guess it just comes down to this - I don't think our defensive coaches are good enough to maximize the talent we do have, and I don't think our players on D are good enough to make the coaches look better than they are.

 

[AE 87]

Fair. I agree that we should be Top 40, and I will reiterate (and I'm sure you agree) that depth always seems to be the biggest issue on D. It isn't a matter of not having good players, the problem is the significant drop off from our good players to everyone else.

I guess it just comes down to this - I don't think our defensive coaches are good enough to maximize the talent we do have, and I don't think our players on D are good enough to make the coaches look better than they are.

Sorry. I don't see sufficient evidence to say that the main problem on D is depth. It could be, but my take on the data leads me to put more weight on the foot that says we're not maximizing our talent as the biggest problem.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I appreciate you taking the time to pull those numbers out of your ***.
.

Fify.

 

[AE 87]

Fify.

What numbers do you question?