recruiting classes and off topic posts

[iceeater1969]

CAM, thanks for the data.

If u dig into the history I would like to see the acc coastal for Coach's tenure. If U only do one or 2 acc coastal teams, i would like to see duke and vt. I hate Duke and I see being equal to vt as our first step towards elite.

I really dont care so much about comparing Coach to these 2.

I would like to see our and there baselines so we will know how large a BUMP cgc would need to make to be CLEARLY BETTER. Thanks.

 

[RickStromFan]

Good. Your assignment for today: do the same analysis for all of Paul's 11 years. (Hey, you sorta volunteered, didn't you?) I'm pretty sure that'll restore your perspective.

Tha problem with looking at 2017/18 is that in both years we lost our starting BB right before the season started (Mills) or one game in (Benson). We have Mills in 2017 and we win 9, maybe 10 (Miami, UVA, TN, Duke). With Benson healthy in 2018 we win 9 at least (Duke and Pitt) maybe 10. You can't lose your feature back two years in a row and hope to get what you want out of the O.

Btw, I share your expectations about improved recruiting rankings. We'll have to see if that happens and translates into more wins, but I think they will. Coach is n0 slouch.

Everyone gets injuries every year. Hell, Clemson's starting QB literally left the team 1/3 of the way into their season in 2018 and it ended up OK for them. The teams we finished beneath in 2017/18 surely had some serious injuries as well.

 

[Wreckaholic]

Both coaches have been GTs coaches and I support both. But to compare our situation to Clemson is not naive, it is just downright disingenuous.

Clemson benched their season starter for one of, if not the top QB recruit in the country. In many years you can compare our starters pretty well against the majority of factory teams that we compete against. However, we have always been shy on quality depth.

To try and argue otherwise is ridiculous.

 

[Milwaukee]

Both coaches have been GTs coaches and I support both. But to compare our situation to Clemson is not naive, it is just downright disingenuous.

Clemson benched their season starter for one of, if not the top QB recruit in the country. In many years you can compare our starters pretty well against the majority of factory teams that we compete against. However, we have always been shy on quality depth.

To try and argue otherwise is ridiculous.

I think he was comparing 120 other teams, which just included Clemson in one example as part of the 120. But even then the point remains, even with Clemson.

Every other program in the nation has injuries, attrition, and academic casualties. To try and argue otherwise is ridiculous.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Good. Your assignment for today: do the same analysis for all of Paul's 11 years. (Hey, you sorta volunteered, didn't you?) I'm pretty sure that'll restore your perspective.

Tha problem with looking at 2017/18 is that in both years we lost our starting BB right before the season started (Mills) or one game in (Benson). We have Mills in 2017 and we win 9, maybe 10 (Miami, UVA, TN, Duke). With Benson healthy in 2018 we win 9 at least (Duke and Pitt) maybe 10. You can't lose your feature back two years in a row and hope to get what you want out of the O.

Btw, I share your expectations about improved recruiting rankings. We'll have to see if that happens and translates into more wins, but I think they will. Coach is n0 slouch.

I’m still waiting for “elite” players to start knocking down our door.

 

[smokey_wasp]

I’m still waiting for “elite” players to start knocking down our door.

How do you define "elite"?

 

[Milwaukee]

I’m still waiting for “elite” players to start knocking down our door.

They already started homie.

 

[RickStromFan]

Both coaches have been GTs coaches and I support both. But to compare our situation to Clemson is not naive, it is just downright disingenuous.

Clemson benched their season starter for one of, if not the top QB recruit in the country. In many years you can compare our starters pretty well against the majority of factory teams that we compete against. However, we have always been shy on quality depth.

To try and argue otherwise is ridiculous.

No argument to any of that but pretending we're one of the only teams that deals with injury is also ridiculous. Most teams are shy on quality depth though. Only a few schools have 4-star guys on the bench.

 

[LargeFO]

They already started homie.
View attachment 5393

Elite to him is apparently top 25 overall in the nation.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

How do you define "elite"?

4 and 5 star.

 

[takethepoints]

No argument to any of that but pretending we're one of the only teams that deals with injury is also ridiculous. Most teams are shy on quality depth though. Only a few schools have 4-star guys on the bench.

Quit putting words in my mouth. I would never pretend that Tech was the "only team that deals with injury". Oth, ignoring the effects of injury on team performance - something all to common around here - is untenable. Especially you are doing it for rhetorical purposes only, like some people we know.

Actually, I think our did ok in 2018 (we finished 7 - 5 in the regular season and led the nation in rushing, remember?), but losing Mills was a bummer in 2017. We had quality players waiting in the wings b0th years. Problem = you lose the guy you had been practicing with as a starter in spring and fall suddenly and have to put players in who were a year away onto the field. Our O production fell as a result. No surprise there. And Mills was a giant difference maker. Losing Ratliff and Jordan was tough, but losing Mills was a crusher.

 

[Wreckaholic]

No argument to any of that but pretending we're one of the only teams that deals with injury is also ridiculous. Most teams are shy on quality depth though. Only a few schools have 4-star guys on the bench.

Never said we are the only team that deals with injuries. The impact, as it sounds like you recognize, has to do with not just the program, but can also be related to specific position groups. Personally I dont think the drop off was as huge at the BB position as others. Was it an impact- absolutely. But, I think other factors were more impactful.

In your original post you appeared to paint all injuries across all teams the same by saying "all teams have injuries". Yes they do, but they dont all have the same impact.

 

[RickStromFan]

Quit putting words in my mouth. I would never pretend that Tech was the "only team that deals with injury". Oth, ignoring the effects of injury on team performance - something all to common around here - is untenable. Especially you are doing it for rhetorical purposes only, like some people we know.

Actually, I think our did ok in 2018 (we finished 7 - 5 in the regular season and led the nation in rushing, remember?), but losing Mills was a bummer in 2017. We had quality players waiting in the wings b0th years. Problem = you lose the guy you had been practicing with as a starter in spring and fall suddenly and have to put players in who were a year away onto the field. Our O production fell as a result. No surprise there. And Mills was a giant difference maker. Losing Ratliff and Jordan was tough, but losing Mills was a crusher.

I didn't put any words in your mouth. You are the one who cited "2017/18". Frankly, your claims border on ludicrous. We were 5-6 in 2017. To think that a healthy B-back would've increased our win total by 100% is laughable. A healthy Mills would not have led to victories vs Clemson, Duke, nor the mutts. We were manhandled in all those losses. To think that a healthy Benson in 2018 would've somehow managed victories in the otherwise-listless offensive performances against Pitt and Duke stretches credibility further. Not sure how the health of either would've miraculously created bigger holes to run through?

Some of our fans use the injury bug too often to excuse some of our poor performances. Outside of 2015, when the entire team was injured, it's a crutch more often than not.

 

[RickStromFan]

Never said we are the only team that deals with injuries. The impact, as it sounds like you recognize, has to do with not just the program, but can also be related to specific position groups. Personally I dont think the drop off was as huge at the BB position as others. Was it an impact- absolutely. But, I think other factors were more impactful.

In your original post you appeared to paint all injuries across all teams the same by saying "all teams have injuries". Yes they do, but they dont all have the same impact.

Years like 2015 can definitely be excused due to injury IMO. 2017 and even 2018 as another poster tried to? I disagree with that assertion.

Ex: Look at a game like 207 vs UT. It was a terrible loss but certainly not a loss that could be blamed on injury, as our starters played well enough to win. Additionally, losses to Clemson and the mutts in 17 & 18 weren't going to be reversed if we were at full strength.

 

[Animal02]

Both coaches have been GTs coaches and I support both. But to compare our situation to Clemson is not naive, it is just downright disingenuous.

Clemson benched their season starter for one of, if not the top QB recruit in the country. In many years you can compare our starters pretty well against the majority of factory teams that we compete against. However, we have always been shy on quality depth.

To try and argue otherwise is ridiculous.

Depth will always be an issue.....not as many will be willing to ride the pine waiting there turn, putting up with Tech's academics when they could watch grass grow for a degree up the road.

 

[smokey_wasp]

4 and 5 star.

So the borderline 4's and top 50 in-state guys (that we hadn't been getting, previously) don't do it for you and obviously, Jamious doesn't, either, even though he qualifies.

I'd say the blue chips have actually been beating down our door, if you've paid attention to who has visited. If you wonder when they'll sign, that doesn't happen until December. I would think the "wait and see" crowd might want to hold off on throwing cold water on this thing, especially when all indications thus far have been positive.

As for 5 stars, there are 26 in the whole country. I know Collins is going to make it a long-term goal to get one. Getting one in this class would be tough for any first year staff, as those guys have been recruited for years. But who knows.

 

[Cam]

Good. Your assignment for today: do the same analysis for all of Paul's 11 years. (Hey, you sorta volunteered, didn't you?) I'm pretty sure that'll restore your perspective.

Tha problem with looking at 2017/18 is that in both years we lost our starting BB right before the season started (Mills) or one game in (Benson). We have Mills in 2017 and we win 9, maybe 10 (Miami, UVA, TN, Duke). With Benson healthy in 2018 we win 9 at least (Duke and Pitt) maybe 10. You can't lose your feature back two years in a row and hope to get what you want out of the O.

Btw, I share your expectations about improved recruiting rankings. We'll have to see if that happens and translates into more wins, but I think they will. Coach is n0 slouch.

I wish I could look at the entirety of the 11 years, but 247 cuts the team talent rankings off at 2015. It gets a bit tricky before that because they stop tracking people who weren't currently on the roster in those years, but maybe I could do an averages thing. I don't have the time right now (pesky job getting in the way), but I will try to just dump everything into a spreadsheet and sort it out sometime in the near future.

In the meantime, seems like our recruiting rankings have pretty much been consistent over the last couple years and so have our performance rankings. Surprisingly, the 2015 team wasn't really that bad. Kind of makes sense since we had 6 close losses that season. Out of 65 Power 5 teams, here's how we ranked in each of those 4 seasons:
2015: 49th in recruiting, 45th (64 overall) in F/+
2016: 50th in recruiting, 34th (43 overall) in F/+
2017: 54th in recruiting, 44th (67 overall) in F/+
2018: 50th in recruiting, 54th (83 overall) in F/+

Last year really was just plain bad, it was CPJ's worst team (though not the worst record). I agree with you that if we dipped further back, we'd see the system as a great equalizer and I certainly believed in those earlier years we had a chance in every game. We actually had a really good run from 2011-2014, with F/+ rankings of 55th, 37th, 34th, and 8th overall, respectively. We had every reason to believe we were turning a corner, especially with our highest ranked recruiting class (39th) in 2015. But for whatever reason, in the four years following the Orange Bowl we have trended backwards and mostly stagnated as a program. Maybe it was Bobinski, maybe CPJ lost his fire, or maybe it was teams around us simply getting better at exploiting our weaknesses. I blame the financial choke-hold Bobinski put on the program whilst not capitalizing on momentum. Whatever it was, I think the early signs are that we're trending back in the right direction under Geoff Collins. And that's not meant to be a knock on CPJ, just a show of my confidence in Collins and his staff.

 

[ncjacket79]

I didn't put any words in your mouth. You are the one who cited "2017/18". Frankly, your claims border on ludicrous. We were 5-6 in 2017. To think that a healthy B-back would've increased our win total by 100% is laughable. A healthy Mills would not have led to victories vs Clemson, Duke, nor the mutts. We were manhandled in all those losses. To think that a healthy Benson in 2018 would've somehow managed victories in the otherwise-listless offensive performances against Pitt and Duke stretches credibility further. Not sure how the health of either would've miraculously created bigger holes to run through?

Some of our fans use the injury bug too often to excuse some of our poor performances. Outside of 2015, when the entire team was injured, it's a crutch more often than not.

Look you assuming that having Mills or Benson healthy would have made no difference is just as wrong as assuming they would have won any particular game. Fact is none of us know. But I will say that a single player can impact the team chemistry and performance more than simply looking at stats. You can’t assume everyone on the team would have played the same if a different back had been in the lineup any more than you can assume CPJ would have called the same game.

 

[RickStromFan]

Look you assuming that having Mills or Benson healthy would have made no difference is just as wrong as assuming they would have won any particular game. Fact is none of us know. But I will say that a single player can impact the team chemistry and performance more than simply looking at stats. You can’t assume everyone on the team would have played the same if a different back had been in the lineup any more than you can assume CPJ would have called the same game.

maybe 1-2 wins but not 5 in 2017 and not a victory against Clemson, Duke and the mutts. We were dominated those games. 1 more running back would not have translated to victory there.

 

[iceeater1969]

They already started homie.
View attachment 5393

In some the dark water runs deep.