What if CPJ had Bama or Climpsuns players...?

[grandpa jacket]

Go look at the rankings yourself, I just posted 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 and understand how rankings are arrived at. Tech doesn't sign 30 players a year for one.

How many of the teams ranked above us for those years signed 30 players a year.

 

[OldJacketFan]

How many of the teams ranked above us for those years signed 30 players a year.

In '16 and '18 (so far) every team in the ACC signed more players that Tech. In '15 and '17 Tech hit the conference average of signees. In '18, 7 teams have more commitments than Tech lead by 24 at Va Tech, in '17, 1 had more (Va Tech) and 2 had the same#, in '16 every school had more commitments lead by Louisville with 28, in '15 Tech lead with 27, not coincidentally had its highest rated class.

 

[grandpa jacket]

In '16 and '18 (so far) every team in the ACC signed more players that Tech. In '15 and '17 Tech hit the conference average of signees. In '18, 7 teams have more commitments than Tech lead by 24 at Va Tech, in '17, 1 had more (Va Tech) and 2 had the same#, in '16 every school had more commitments lead by Louisville with 28, in '15 Tech lead with 27, not coincidentally had its highest rated class.

So why are we signing less, could it be they are on our offer sheet waiting for a better offer. Some of these years we signed a low number we offered prospects who were projects at the end i.e. Brad Stewart. If we continue down this road 5.6 wins is all we can expect.

 

[OldJacketFan]

So why are we signing less, could it be they are on our offer sheet waiting for a better offer. Some of these years we signed a low number we offered prospects who were projects at the end i.e. Brad Stewart. If we continue down this road 5.6 wins is all we can expect.

Why is Tech signing less in a given year? Seriously? You do know the maximum amount of scholarships is 85? and some are 2* projects like Clinton Lynch

 

[grandpa jacket]

Why is Tech signing less in a given year? Seriously? You do know the maximum amount of scholarships is 85? and some are 2* projects like Clinton Lynch

85 for everybody, not just GT

 

[grandpa jacket]

In '16 and '18 (so far) every team in the ACC signed more players that Tech. In '15 and '17 Tech hit the conference average of signees. In '18, 7 teams have more commitments than Tech lead by 24 at Va Tech, in '17, 1 had more (Va Tech) and 2 had the same#, in '16 every school had more commitments lead by Louisville with 28, in '15 Tech lead with 27, not coincidentally had its highest rated class.

Here is a stat for you, going back 5 years we have been out recruited by Vandy four out of five times, that tells me all i need to know.

 

[OldJacketFan]

Here is a stat for you, going back 5 years we have been out recruited by Vandy four out of five times, that tells me all i need to know.

And what is Vandy's record vs Tech?

 

[g0lftime]

Bryant was running the wishbone front 1971 and at least until 1979. He won 3 national championships while using it. He also had some great defenses. He didn't seem to have problems recruiting while using it. He did say in his personal notes that you also had to have a QB that can pass. There were several top teams running it in the 70's and even the 80's. Oklahoma for example. Given good athletes and coaches the TO can be good at the highest levels. Saban was asked why he didn't run it. He said he doesn't know how to coach it and the spread passing offenses have changed the game. I also believe that the refs now allow holding that was not allowed in the past.

 

[grandpa jacket]

And what is Vandy's record vs Tech?

If you want to measure us to Vandy, you have proved my point, if we dont change the train is leaving the station and we are not gonna be on it. Before you say that was what i was doing, i will say this. Is this where we want to be as a program

 

[OldJacketFan]

If you want to measure us to Vandy, you have proved my point, if we dont change the train is leaving the station and we are not gonna be on it.

I'm not the one that brought up Vandy. You are so hung up on star ratings that you fail to see the progress in the quality of SA Tech is bringing. Fine you have your opinion.

 

[okiemon]

I'm not the one that brought up Vandy. You are so hung up on star ratings that you fail to see the progress in the quality of SA Tech is bringing. Fine you have your opinion.

I'll concede your point if the focus is on "student". If it's on "athlete", I need a little more evidence of progress.

 

[first&ten]

I honestly believe he could have won at least one if not more national titles at GT. CPJ is one of the best in the business, people just don't know it because of all the limitations he has to put up with. Idk of another coach in the country that gets more out of his kids for what their rankings are. It's honestly incredible imo. Some might not agree with rankings and thats fine, but still no other coach that I know of does what he does according to those rankings.

And you do know why he can't get better rated players? It's because of him (smarmy attitude towards players) and the TO, which most top rated players do not want to play in. It's really that simple.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

Hypothetical that will never happen, but yes, in my mind, he wins the NC and he wins easily.

 

[GT_05]

And what is Vandy's record vs Tech?

I think we beat them 38-7 during our last meeting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[laoh]

Well the ACC is arguably the best football conference in the country. And our permanent crossover is the National Champion Clemson. And our permanent rival is who should compete for it every year georgia. And our recruiting classes are in the bottom third of the ACC. And our spending is in the bottom third of the ACC. So to average almost 8 wins a season is a monumental beat down of what we have to deal with.

Just think about next season's schedule:
* We play 3 Top 7 teams from this year, including 2 in the CFP (Clemson, georgia, Miami).
* We play @ USF. A team who won 9 games (and has a chance to win 10) and their only 2 losses were by less than 1 score.
* We play @ Louisville. A team who despite having what most would call a bad year still won 8 games (and has a chance to win 9).
* We play @ Virginia Tech. A team who won 9 games (and has a chance to win 10).
Even if we ran the table on our other 6 games, we'd have to win 2 of these games to win 8. Given that we probably won't run the table, then you're looking at having to win at least 3 of these.

Yeah this is sobering once you break it down like this and assess rationally. Hope we get a few lucky breaks going our way next year!

 

[GTL]

And you do know why he can't get better rated players? It's because of him (smarmy attitude towards players) and the TO, which most top rated players do not want to play in. It's really that simple.

No, it’s not. You’ve totally, completely fabricated that crap. Why?

 

[danny daniel]

Glad u have come around. We should always have around 19 OL on ship at any one time. Been saying it since cpj has been here. He needs to recruit numbers on the line. Injuries. Attrition. And some dont pan out. Its the hardest position on the team to project, evaluate and grow physicality. Hence u need to throw more at it. 19 out of 85 is the same as 5 out of 22. Makes. Sense to me.

He needs to build to that. And hasnt. Has largely ignored it.

Cpj has remained status quo on O for the most part. He has tried to change other aspects of the team. But. This needs a tweak. He needs to evolve. 15 is not enough. Simple.

I agree with 19 vs the 15 but part of the problem is CPJ (or Sewak?) has a mind set to only play 7 or 8 as long as we are in the 65 plays or less range, and that mindset does not build depth. For example after 3 years in the system Stickler had no real game experience and was pressed into a starting role. Same is happening with the Morgans. He burned a RS in mid year in one game with a frosh guard and then he sat. There were 4th Q games (Clemson, Duke, UGA) where we should have built some OL depth (and QB for that matter).

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

Back to the question posted by the OP -

CPJ would likely tell a lot of them they don't fit his system and he would release them to another school.

"Don't need them,
Don't want them."

 

[iceeater1969]

I agree with 19 vs the 15 but part of the problem is CPJ (or Sewak?) has a mind set to only play 7 or 8 as long as we are in the 65 plays or less range, and that mindset does not build depth. For example after 3 years in the system Stickler had no real game experience and was pressed into a starting role. Same is happening with the Morgans. He burned a RS in mid year in one game with a frosh guard and then he sat. There were 4th Q games (Clemson, Duke, UGA) where we should have built some OL depth (and QB for that matter).

Very clear presentation.
Will Bryan is my favorite line man because he has grit, and does what ever the team asks.
With two seniors leaving and marshall injured, he slimmed down to 280 . Imo he could have been a solid guard at 300. I guess he slimmed down so he could play guard and tackle. Thats what he did the first 3 4 games. He rotated with sham and stick and then about mid year sham was given the start and stick got more time ( I may check some rush stats by game in off season. ) .
Next year will Bryan be required to stay slim in case needed as o t. I hope not.
I think we need him big ( 310) and nasty in the middle .
WITH marshall back we could be good w all proven upper class ol.

Surely , we can get some rotation going in the ol during the 18 season.

 

[Skeptic]

Heard announcer say dabo plays 8-9 w r.

We play 2 and maybe three because ours don't need rest.

This is first year the dl started rotating players from the beginning of the game.

Clemson doesn't routinely play near that many. In a beatdown, yes because Swinney is getting his bench all the playing time he can. (Against Miami he used 71 players and was three deep at QB in the fourth quarter.) But routinely it is rotation of 3-4, but they are outstanding receivers with sprint speed. I take your comment that our guys don't need rest as a sardonic criticism of our passing. Because to suggest our guys don't run down the field on ever play and, most importantly, don't engage to block on every play, is kind of nutty. Clemson's guys block too, and if you have ever done it you know you'd rather run free down the field than get into hand to hand combat with mean buys on defense.