Talent

[takethepoints]

Before anyone goes all technical about this, I know that football scores are not transitive properties.

Now, to get back to business. We've had a lot of threads recently lamenting a talent gap between Tech, Miami, Clemson, and Ugag. Most of these had the good intention of focussing us on the need to put more funding into the football program and Laws knows we need to do that. Right now.

I'm betting that a lot of people here watched Clemson and Miami play last night. It's a different context and it wasn't in the slop, but we looked a lot better against the Tiggers then Miami did last night. We scored 10 points against them and rushed for 198 yards in our game. They beat us, but they didn't run us off the field like they did da U last night.

Now, consider our game against Miami. They beat us by one point in the last 10 seconds on a play that was a pure miracle for them.

What lessons do I draw from this? First, Clemson is the new FSU. They have opened a true talent gap between their program and the rest of the conference, just like the Crimonoles. (Aside: I'm betting that the next coach at FSU will have a tougher time then Jimbo did.) Second, that Ugag had a pretty good team this year, but also played a so-so schedule with a largely senior group. Next year will tell the tale of whether Smart can keep it up over there. Right now, I like our chances next year. Third, I don't see - yet - any breathtaking difference between us and Miami. Could be that Richt will get them back all the way, but right now they are a pretty good team - like us - that had - unlike us - a lot of luck this year.

I'm not saying that the concerns about support for the football program are misplaced; they are shared by everyone here and by our athletic department as well. What I am saying is that the talent gap with all our opponents - except Clemson - is, imho, not as great as we think. Continuing to recruit wisely, upping our efforts, and working at it can get us on a more even footing pretty quickly.

 

[joehamiltonfan14]

I appreciate the thread @takethepoints ... however the talent gap is large. The number of 4 and 5 Star players on those teams versus ours is something in the range of 45-50 versus 4 for us. Recruiting rankings do matter - there’s a reason the best programs continue to stockpile 4 and 5 Star talent.

Are we able to have some good seasons and occcasionally beat those top teams when they are down and we are up? Yes (see 2014, GA last year) but by and large we are fighting a losing battle. When Clem and GA are playing to their full potential a GT victory is extremely rare.

I’m not happy about this at all. I want to see changes that show the Institute is committed to having a championship-level football program. These have been discussed ad nauseum, but this means among other things fewer academic restrictions and more money for recruiting staff and assistant coaches.

Unless we make changes, this will continue and we will have to rely on Clemson and Georgia falling back to earth in order to beat them more than once in a blue moon.

 

[Jacket in Dairyland]

We don't have enough QUALITY depth at many positions ( OL and DL , especially ) . If we have injuries or defections , we are paper thin. IMHO, this is NOT solely a recruiting problem. RECRUITING : we sign too many guys , particularly in the two positions I mentioned previously, who can't improve enough to see the field, get frustrated and transfer, hit their maximum potential in High school, are converts from other positions and have to learn the position from scratch, are overrated at 4 stars ( see Max potential mentioned before). The other problem IMHO is coaching/teaching. This would explain the " missed assignments" CPJ repeats. As I said before, is it the " teacher" or the " student " that is at fault ?
When you combine the RECRUITING with the TEACHING/LEARNING problem you get very inconsistent line play that limits what we are able to do
scheme wise. That in turn, makes us extremely predictable on both sides of the ball.

 

[up state jacket]

We don't have enough QUALITY depth at many positions ( OL and DL , especially ) . If we have injuries or defections , we are paper thin. IMHO, this is NOT solely a recruiting problem. RECRUITING : we sign too many guys , particularly in the two positions I mentioned previously, who can't improve enough to see the field, get frustrated and transfer, hit their maximum potential in High school, are converts from other positions and have to learn the position from scratch, are overrated at 4 stars ( see Max potential mentioned before). The other problem IMHO is coaching/teaching. This would explain the " missed assignments" CPJ repeats. As I said before, is it the " teacher" or the " student " that is at fault ?
When you combine the RECRUITING with the TEACHING/LEARNING problem you get very inconsistent line play that limits what we are able to do
scheme wise. That in turn, makes us extremely predictable on both sides of the ball.

This x's 1 million. Spot on assessment, this is the best thought all football season.

 

[Coloradojacket]

With the exception of a few programs, Bama, Auburn etc, depth is and has been an issue. In Fact FSU is now suffering from this. In my opinion what has caused this is the growth of the Group of 5 teams. Players that used to be really good back ups or moving up their Junior and Senior years don't come to schools like Tech, Duke, UNC, South Carolina etc because they can go to a UCF, USF, App State, and play all 4 years. What is more important to these types of players is seeing the field. 20 years ago these teams were jokes or did not even exist. Now they field programs that can beat Power 5 teams.

 

[iceeater1969]

Next year when Miami or clemson is here spring for a sideline pass from gtaa. You get to walk by the teams as they are warming up. Year before this I got to see Miami. There freshmen wide receivers were the same size as our d e 42. They are not gym rats that transformed their bodies.
With our scheme on offense, our improved recruiting and a little better defense I believe that every year we can be competitive as we lose and in some years we can actually win. To bad they no longer have a bad coach so we can't count on coach beating him. Kijnd of getting that way in a lot o f our opponents.

 

[Jacket in Dairyland]

This x's 1 million. Spot on assessment, this is the best thought all football season.

Thanks ! You know what they say : " Even a BLIND squirrel finds an acorn every once in a while".

 

[dressedcheeseside]

We don't have enough QUALITY depth at many positions ( OL and DL , especially ) . If we have injuries or defections , we are paper thin. IMHO, this is NOT solely a recruiting problem. RECRUITING : we sign too many guys , particularly in the two positions I mentioned previously, who can't improve enough to see the field, get frustrated and transfer, hit their maximum potential in High school, are converts from other positions and have to learn the position from scratch, are overrated at 4 stars ( see Max potential mentioned before). The other problem IMHO is coaching/teaching. This would explain the " missed assignments" CPJ repeats. As I said before, is it the " teacher" or the " student " that is at fault ?
When you combine the RECRUITING with the TEACHING/LEARNING problem you get very inconsistent line play that limits what we are able to do
scheme wise. That in turn, makes us extremely predictable on both sides of the ball.

So did the coaches forget how to teach the system after the '14 season?

 

[jacketup]

So did the coaches forget how to teach the system after the '14 season?

No, the blind squirrel theory applies.

His point about depth is correct. You never know how many players are playing with injuries that impact performance. I am certain that the defense fell off in the latter part of the year because of injuries. It's not binary--in or out. It's losing a step because of a nagging injury--and having no quality backup that allows a player to sit out until healed.

The same thing may be true on offense, but the bigger issue on offense is the lack of enough quality players on the OL. A recruiting issue. Highly rated OL recruits don't want to play in this offense. People have to be blind to not see that. The offense leads to shoulder injuries for OL--something that pass blocking does not incur.

 

[TechTravis]

I appreciate the thread @takethepoints ... however the talent gap is large. The number of 4 and 5 Star players on those teams versus ours is something in the range of 45-50 versus 4 for us. Recruiting rankings do matter - there’s a reason the best programs continue to stockpile 4 and 5 Star talent.

Are we able to have some good seasons and occcasionally beat those top teams when they are down and we are up? Yes (see 2014, GA last year) but by and large we are fighting a losing battle. When Clem and GA are playing to their full potential a GT victory is extremely rare.

I’m not happy about this at all. I want to see changes that show the Institute is committed to having a championship-level football program. These have been discussed ad nauseum, but this means among other things fewer academic restrictions and more money for recruiting staff and assistant coaches.

Unless we make changes, this will continue and we will have to rely on Clemson and Georgia falling back to earth in order to beat them more than once in a blue moon.

The only issue I take with this is I believe the coaches never look at these kids' star rankings. They see really good football players. The recruiting services then attach the appropriate star value on the kid so when the kid blows up in college they can say "we were all in on these kids early." Randy Shannon, when he was coach at "the U", once talked about using the services to evaluate kids. He wasn't the head coach at "the U" very long. These services aren't telling these coaches anything they don't know about these kids when they attach star rankings to them. They're simply creating artificial demand for their product. Get the best kids you can. Don't worry about star rankings.

 

[joehamiltonfan14]

The only issue I take with this is I believe the coaches never look at these kids' star rankings. They see really good football players. The recruiting services then attach the appropriate star value on the kid so when the kid blows up in college they can say "we were all in on these kids early." Randy Shannon, when he was coach at "the U", once talked about using the services to evaluate kids. He wasn't the head coach at "the U" very long. These services aren't telling these coaches anything they don't know about these kids when they attach star rankings to them. They're simply creating artificial demand for their product. Get the best kids you can. Don't worry about star rankings.

While they may not, the correlation of recruiting rankings with periennial power programs is obvious.

 

[TechTravis]

While they may not, the correlation of recruiting rankings with periennial power programs is obvious.

you're absolutely right. But I believe the programs who know how to evaluate talent often end up with the best kids...

 

[a5ehren]

you're absolutely right. But I believe the programs who know how to evaluate talent often end up with the best kids...

The best kids often have 50-75 offers from various FBS schools. Many teams can evaluate talent just fine, but that doesn't mean you can actually get them to show up at your school.

 

[Jacket in Dairyland]

So did the coaches forget how to teach the system after the '14 season?[/QUOTE
Just my thoughts.

No, the blind squirrel theory applies.

His point about depth is correct. You never know how many players are playing with injuries that impact performance. I am certain that the defense fell off in the latter part of the year because of injuries. It's not binary--in or out. It's losing a step because of a nagging injury--and having no quality backup that allows a player to sit out until healed.

The same thing may be true on offense, but the bigger issue on offense is the lack of enough quality players on the OL. A recruiting issue. Highly rated OL recruits don't want to play in this offense. People have to be blind to not see that. The offense leads to shoulder injuries for OL--something that pass blocking does not incur.

Thanks !!!..........I think ???

 

[Lavoisier]

Could be our S&C. Sisk got here right before the 2012 season, maybe we need new blood in that area. I've been a big proponent of player development and honestly think dropping money to recruit 4star kids is wasted when we aren't doing a good job developing the guys we get. We need to take a TCU or Wisconsin approach to this. Develop and learn fundamentals like proper tackling a how to take proper angles will go a much longer way.

 

[okiemon]

We don't have enough QUALITY depth at many positions ( OL and DL , especially ) . If we have injuries or defections , we are paper thin. IMHO, this is NOT solely a recruiting problem. RECRUITING : we sign too many guys , particularly in the two positions I mentioned previously, who can't improve enough to see the field, get frustrated and transfer, hit their maximum potential in High school, are converts from other positions and have to learn the position from scratch, are overrated at 4 stars ( see Max potential mentioned before). The other problem IMHO is coaching/teaching. This would explain the " missed assignments" CPJ repeats. As I said before, is it the " teacher" or the " student " that is at fault ?
When you combine the RECRUITING with the TEACHING/LEARNING problem you get very inconsistent line play that limits what we are able to do
scheme wise. That in turn, makes us extremely predictable on both sides of the ball.

I agree with you, Jacket, except for your including 4 stars - overrated or not - in the “we sign too many” sentence. You can count the 4-stars we sign on one hand or less.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Could be our S&C. Sisk got here right before the 2012 season, maybe we need new blood in that area. I've been a big proponent of player development and honestly think dropping money to recruit 4star kids is wasted when we aren't doing a good job developing the guys we get. We need to take a TCU or Wisconsin approach to this. Develop and learn fundamentals like proper tackling a how to take proper angles will go a much longer way.

We don’t teach how to tackle and take proper angles? FIRE THE WHOLE LOT!!!

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

@takethepoints
The downside to increasing the number of academic exceptions is more drop outs. Which makes balancing classes that much more difficult and robs other players of more reps / experience.

@Jacket in Dairyland
On one hand you assert we are too thin at OL/DL (I happen to agree but I think it's improving) but then you also assert we sign too many players there but lose them for a myriad of reasons. That doesn't really compute to me.

Your other assertions about teaching / coaching assignments and lack of quality of same...Id be interested to hear how you draw that conclusion without attending practices.

With regard to stars....

Elite recruits stand out to everyone. Coaches, services, everyone. Where stars fail to tell the story is in the difference between a "low 4 star" and "high 3 star". The difference is very negligible and based mostly on pure speculation imo.

You say the major power programs get the most stars and have the most success. Ok I agree. But I also very often see those programs sign a 3 star who the next day, without playing a game or attending an additional camp, get jumped up to 4 stars.

Conversely we sign a 4 star, and the next day he's downgraded to a 3, once again without having played an additional game or attending an additional camp. This is fairly brilliant of the services in many ways imo. It's also complete garbage with regards to any actual evaluation of those individual players and why many fans (quite a few Tech fans anyway) disregard the services and with cause.

Our starting lineup is fairly competitive with most teams. Our starting Oline is top notch imo. But the OL has lacked experienced depth. The Dline, particularly DTs, has improved a lot in talent and depth. They just don't compare to elite Dlines like Clemson and still lack a good rush from the edge.

Special teams are too much of a mixed bag but a lot of this was due to some deficiencies in place kicking and adequate kickoffs.

 

[Jacket in Dairyland]

I will try to explain further. Let me say , as I have mentioned in several posts before, I am commenting from afar. I am in Wisconsin. I can't attend practices and must watch the games on TV. So I suppose I should keep my OPINIONS to myself because I am less informed than others on this board. I don't proclaim to be an expert. But I am a HUGE fan of all things Tech, and this forum is my chance to vent or cheer on the team I love.

That being said, let me try to clarify. I feel we sign a number of players, at OL particularly, that never see the field except in blowouts. Perhaps this is getting better, but from the depth charts I see , it appears that very seldom do we have a singular backup at each individual OL position. We seem to have one player who can back up at 2 or more positions. This screams lack of depth to me because we are not truly 2 deep at each position. Same for DL , IIRCC. We have numbers, but not field ready players , at least not at the QUALITY we need.

My comments about teaching come from the constant head shaking by CPJ about missed assignments. I will not question the player's desire on this problem ( should I ? ). IMHO, these problems either stem from players being asked to play a position they are not fully ready to play ( see lack of field ready depth above ) ,or not enough instruction/ reps. I also previously mentioned the recruiting angle here, where a player missed an assignment because he is a step slow, or he is not agile enough, or he lacks proper technique ( because he played DL in HS ?)

WHISKEY, what do you attribute the " missed assignments" comments to ?

 

[Jacket in Dairyland]

What I would like us be able to do , is NOT have to start Freshmen, except in rare instances, because yes they probably will have missed assignments , no matter how good they are. I would like us to be able to recruit OL and DL who played that position in HS , preferably in O and D systems similar to ours , and then spend at least one year getting stronger and learning/being taught by their position coaches. Am I dreaming ? Maybe. But the coaching staff are mostly veterans with lots of experience. CPJ has been doing this a looooong time. I would be curious to know if he is satisfied with what he has to work with , especially on the OL. He would probably say " it is what it is ", right ? When we get a well oiled OL, missing few assignments, the TO , interspersed with occasional SURPRISE passes, where the QB has time to make his reads and the WR gets down the field, is a thing of beauty. At times we have had it. My concern is at this point in CPJ's tenure at GT , why is this more of an issue than it should be ? Resources ? He has kept the same staff, so I would presume he doesn't think it's recruiting or coaching. Next year we COULD be better. But someone pointed out we have 23 seniors after next year. Then what ?? The " we are so young " excuse ? So, we wait for a year , or two , to make it to the ACC championship game again. Maybe Tech will NEVER consistently be in the top 15-25 every year , but something in my Tech psyche just refuses to accept that we cannot do that. That's what Tech is all about, right ? That what I learned, albeit the hard way, from 1968 -1973.