Quez Jackson Declares for the Draft

[ilovetheoption]

We just need need some of the young players to get earn more playing time.

Fixed it for you

 

[iceeater1969]

After the lay down in detroit plus the new coach, this site went into poster hell.
The mods tried. But.....

Basically a post is too short too put all the nice stuff that shows purpose and softens the rough edges

Gt Folks should just assume the best about the poster and that he did not take time to put all the blah blah.


I look forward to info from posters as well as opinions.


It will be what it will be.
Now
Cgc will close recruiting the portal or he wont. We are in the ATL which is where there are a lot of recruits who went off to far away schools . The portal plays to gt advantage. Lets see if cgc can finish w some key players.

 

[CuseJacket]

I agree, it should have been handled off-line. The problem with handling things off-line is that others, who may have the same complaints, may feel like they're all alone in their grievances (I probably am this time, but you get the point). By airing it publicly, others may be moved to voice their complaints about over-moderation. It's a pendulum and hopefully, it's swinging back towards to middle now. I've been here a long time and I've never seen moderators go after much more than personal attacks.

Per the comment in question: Posts #28, 29, and 30 were about Eley and then playing time in general. It was in reference to Eley coming back to play again next year and someone posting that Eley shouldn't be starting (or at most being a 3rd down LB). It was peripherally relevant to the original thread about players coming and going (or staying), but it had nothing to do with Quez Jackson declaring for the NFL draft.

It's all good. I just wanted to vent my frustration regarding the coaching ability of our head coach but didn't want to crap all over our program by continuing to drag down the coaching staff after we've already made changes and nothing else is going to happen before next season. No, really, my 5 kids are all home from college and we're butting heads about house rules. I'm generally ornery today. My 19-year-old doesn't understand why I won't let her drink screwdrivers in the middle of the afternoon on Christmas Day in front of her 13-year-old brother and sister after she got drunk last year drinking mamosas on Christmas Day last year. I can't imagine how I became that far out of touch.

Please move this post to the most appropriate thread (or just delete it after everyone has had a chance to read it!!!).

I'd rather you come up for some good bourbon!

Hopefully, all the mods know most of what I've said is tongue-in-cheek. Remember, I'm emoji-challenged, so it's hard to express sarcasm and tic when we're all so ready to take the worst interpretation of what was actually said.

I believe I moved the posts. If you look at the quoted thread, it originated from posts re: Quez’s decision to enter the draft. We had two threads of the same ilk going in two spots.

Whether or not you agree with the decision to move the Quez OP and replies to this thread, I am happy to provide an explanation for the decision.

 

[kg01]

I'd rather eat Mayfield ice cream from your freezer than copy anything from you.

Lies.

Plus, this is now the thread where we complain about mods moving posts now. Maaaan, I can't stand @slugboy . What a tool, amirite?

..... sarcasm?

 

[slugboy]

Lies.

Plus, this is now the thread where we complain about mods moving posts now. Maaaan, I can't stand @slugboy . What a tool, amirite?

..... sarcasm?

 

[g0lftime]

AJC said he had two years of eligibility left. I sure hope he will graduate before he leaves. He had a good year and was recognized as second team ALL ACC. Probably figured now was a good time to leverage that recognition. Wish him well and thanks for the effort.

 

[bobongo]

Quez Jackson’s Pro Football Focus rankings this season (his rank out of the total LBs ranked):

Run Defense rank: 742 out of 767
Pass Coverage rank: 641 out of 692
Pass Rush rank: 103 out of 257
Overall rank: 740 out of 759

Number of tackles: 3rd in the ACC

I don't get it. How could he rank so low in the Pro Football Focus yet be 3rd in the ACC in tackles? I believe the tackles more than the ranking.
I guess we'll find out how much of his "ranking" is on him and how much of it is on his coaching.

 

[slugboy]

I don't get it. How could he rank so low in the Pro Football Focus yet be 3rd in the ACC in tackles? I believe the tackles more than the ranking.
I guess we'll find out how much of his "ranking" is on him and how much of it is on his coaching.

It’s also where you tackle and where you’re “supposed” to be. I’m not saying the PFF crew got it right, but if you’re supposed to make a tackle for no gain but you make it for a 5 yard gain, your tackle total “remains the same” and probably increases but your grade goes down.

A poor defense will have players with higher tackle totals because they give up more first downs. A great D has a lot of “3 and outs”, so it has lower tackle numbers.

You’ll notice that UVA has the tackle leader, and Syracuse is #2, and they aren’t great defenses. It’s top-heavy towards weak defense.

I get more from the “tackles for loss” stat, or yards per play or points per play.

https://theacc.com/stats.aspx?path=football&year=2021

 

[LargeFO]

AJC said he had two years of eligibility left. I sure hope he will graduate before he leaves. He had a good year and was recognized as second team ALL ACC. Probably figured now was a good time to leverage that recognition. Wish him well and thanks for the effort.

Ajc wrong. He played 18-21 so he could have done the covid year for 22 but that’s it.

 

[bobongo]

It’s also where you tackle and where you’re “supposed” to be. I’m not saying the PFF crew got it right, but if you’re supposed to make a tackle for no gain but you make it for a 5 yard gain, your tackle total “remains the same” and probably increases but your grade goes down.

A poor defense will have players with higher tackle totals because they give up more first downs. A great D has a lot of “3 and outs”, so it has lower tackle numbers.

You’ll notice that UVA has the tackle leader, and Syracuse is #2, and they aren’t great defenses. It’s top-heavy towards weak defense.

I get more from the “tackles for loss” stat, or yards per play or points per play.

https://theacc.com/stats.aspx?path=football&year=2021

I'm talking not about the overall defense, but Quez. Tommy Nobis unofficially had 296 tackles (a record that will never be broken) in 1966 on a horrid defense, but he was obviously a stellar linebacker. If individual rankings are lowered because one played on a bad defense, the rankings are bogus. It isn't Quez's fault he had to make so many tackles.

 

[iceeater1969]

Ajc wrong. He played 18-21 so he could have done the covid year for 22 but that’s it.

I thought he had a rs year and a covid year.
Just thinking how much we need him here w his buddy and long time lb coach Thacker. Sure is small for nfl lb. Thought he could get bigger and then try nfl.

Lb is a glaring gap after next year unless freshmen ballbout.
Remind me who is the lb coach

 

[JacketOff]

But I'm talking not about the overall defense, but Quez. Tommy Nobis unofficially had 296 tackles (a record that will never be broken) in 1966 on a horrid defense, but he was obviously a stellar linebacker. If individual rankings are lowered because one played on a bad defense, the rankings are bogus.

Would it not make sense that the best player on a bad defense would have the most tackles? Especially at LB? His individual ratings aren’t being lowered because of the quality of the team’s defense, but his individual tackle numbers may be inflated because of the poor quality.

 

[iceeater1969]

But I'm talking not about the overall defense, but Quez. Tommy Nobis unofficially had 296 tackles (a record that will never be broken) in 1966 on a horrid defense, but he was obviously a stellar linebacker. If individual rankings are lowered because one played on a bad defense, the rankings are bogus.

Thanks for posted opinion w number somewhere near by.
My eye test shows the defense for ucf, louisville seem way faster to hole.

Free seats to nose bleed falcon game watching nobis and claude humphrey sure impressed this small town boy.

 

[slugboy]

I'm talking not about the overall defense, but Quez. Tommy Nobis unofficially had 296 tackles (a record that will never be broken) in 1966 on a horrid defense, but he was obviously a stellar linebacker. If individual rankings are lowered because one played on a bad defense, the rankings are bogus. It isn't Quez's fault he had to make so many tackles.

It’s a better to have a lot of tackles than a lot of missed tackles, but it’s still a bad stat to use. It gets inflated when you’re on a bad defense, so it’s not apples to apples compared to other linebackers. It doesn’t differentiate between a tackle for a loss and one for a 15 yard gain. It doesn’t say if the runner got 5 yards after contact.

 

[bobongo]

Would it not make sense that the best player on a bad defense would have the most tackles? Especially at LB? His individual ratings aren’t being lowered because of the quality of the team’s defense, but his individual tackle numbers may be inflated because of the poor quality.

Of course it would make sense. He might just be the best of all the bad players. Or he could be a good player on a bad team. Or, he could be a good player on a badly coached team.

 

[bobongo]

It’s a better to have a lot of tackles than a lot of missed tackles, but it’s still a bad stat to use. It gets inflated when you’re on a bad defense, so it’s not apples to apples compared to other linebackers. It doesn’t differentiate between a tackle for a loss and one for a 15 yard gain. It doesn’t say if the runner got 5 yards after contact.

But would it necessarily be a player's fault he had to make a tackle downfield? Maybe he's the stopper. Seems like if yardage gained before the stop is figured in, the player is being punished for the bad defense he's on. Or maybe the whole idea of trying to quantify a defensive player's "stats" is suspect. Maybe the eyeball test is best.

 

[slugboy]

But would it necessarily be a player's fault he had to make a tackle downfield? Maybe he's the stopper. Seems like if yardage gained before the stop is figured in, the player is being punished for the bad defense he's on. Or maybe the whole idea of trying to quantify a defensive player's "stats" is suspect. Maybe the eyeball test is best.

There are some useful defensive stats.

Here’s an analogy, though: if you take 9 years to graduate high school, you might set the record for most exams taken at your school, but that doesn’t mean you’re a good student—you probably have a lot of F’s and D’s. What PFF is trying to do is give you the exam grades.

 

[roadkill]

There are some useful defensive stats.

Here’s an analogy, though: if you take 9 years to graduate high school, you might set the record for most exams taken at your school, but that doesn’t mean you’re a good student—you probably have a lot of F’s and D’s. What PFF is trying to do is give you the exam grades.

Your analogy is painfully close to home for my Tech experience.

 

[bobongo]

There are some useful defensive stats.

Here’s an analogy, though: if you take 9 years to graduate high school, you might set the record for most exams taken at your school, but that doesn’t mean you’re a good student—you probably have a lot of F’s and D’s. What PFF is trying to do is give you the exam grades.

That analogy compares an individual circumstance to team circumstance. Apples and jackfruit.

 

[forensicbuzz]

It’s a better to have a lot of tackles than a lot of missed tackles, but it’s still a bad stat to use. It gets inflated when you’re on a bad defense, so it’s not apples to apples compared to other linebackers. It doesn’t differentiate between a tackle for a loss and one for a 15 yard gain. It doesn’t say if the runner got 5 yards after contact.

This was what I saw with Curry. He had a ton of tackles, but they always seemed to be 5-10 yards past the LOS. I could never tell if that was because he came across the field and made the tackle or got blown backwards and finally made the tackle. I don't have the time or film to evaluate this, so it seems these ratings take that type of stuff into account.

I remember many of the tackles Francis Kallon made were 5 yards beyond the LOS. He got pushed back and then made the tackle. I hated seeing DL making tackles downfield when the run was up the middle. I also hate to see the FS and SS making a ton of tackles unless they're run blitzing (which we didn't seem to do much of).