Where the Program stands

[forensicbuzz]

Ugh.

We continually seem to trigger feelings without meaning to.

My only point was that Ross’s teams, even when losing, looked better prepared and sharper. That just seems to me to be empirically true.

Thus I was affirming the previous post which suggested comparing Collins to Ross was foolish which is an opinion that I share.

Now, the only caveat is that if we win a national championship this year then I will admit the comparison is more on point. Still, in the first three years, I see a stark difference just in how each coach handled themselves on the sidelines.

I agree there is no comparison. My point was that Ross knew how to and had the chops to bring in two pretty damn impressive coordinators. Had Collins been able to (and capable of) bringing in that caliber of coordinators from the start we might be in a different place today. It was merely a whistful musing.

 

[forensicbuzz]

"I have never defended CGC, ever..."
LOL!

I can't tell if you're laughing at my proper grammar or if you think I've actually defended CGC. If you think I have, I challenge you to show me where.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

I agree there is no comparison. My point was that Ross knew how to and had the chops to bring in two pretty damn impressive coordinators. Had Collins been able to (and capable of) bringing in that caliber of coordinators from the start we might be in a different place today. It was merely a whistful musing. Ah, now I see.

 

[Vespidae]

My point was that Ross knew how to and had the chops to bring in two pretty damn impressive coordinators. Had Collins been able to (and capable of) bringing in that caliber of coordinators from the start we might be in a different place today.

I wonder if that was the plan all along? As long as GT had to flip the roster, it made no sense to spend beaucoup bucks to bring in top flight coordinators. Wait until the greatest transformation in the history of Earth is complete, then upgrade the staff. I think that fit in well with the reduction in legacy costs as well, meaning ... bring them in when we can afford them.

Just a thought. I have no idea of what TStan or Geoff were thinking.

 

[slugboy]

Ariticle on challenges of preparing transfer portal players for the season.

The Consequence of College Football’s Transfer Craze: Coaches Are Unsure About Their Teams

A record number of players switching teams after a tumultuous offseason filled with coaching changes is presenting an unexpected challenge ahead of training camp.

www.wsj.com

I don’t have a WSJ subscription (sad! aren’t all Tech grads supposed to have one?).

Without cutting and pasting the text, what’s the gist of the article?

 

[iopjacket]

I agree there is no comparison. My point was that Ross knew how to and had the chops to bring in two pretty damn impressive coordinators. Had Collins been able to (and capable of) bringing in that caliber of coordinators from the start we might be in a different place today. It was merely a whistful musing.

Ralph Friedgen worked for Bobby Ross when he was Head Coach at The Citadel and Maryland. Ross had a good eye for talent in hiring O'Leary. George was DC/DL coach at Syracuse for two years before coming to GT. IMHO Bobby Ross was a great coach and I wish he stayed at Tech.

 

[bobongo]

I wonder if that was the plan all along? As long as GT had to flip the roster, it made no sense to spend beaucoup bucks to bring in top flight coordinators. Wait until the greatest transformation in the history of Earth is complete, then upgrade the staff. I think that fit in well with the reduction in legacy costs as well, meaning ... bring them in when we can afford them.

Just a thought. I have no idea of what TStan or Geoff were thinking.

It does seem that recruiting was the first priority in putting together the staff after Paul left. Considerations of coaching ability took a back seat.
Like you said, we don't know what they were thinking but the staff was a lot better at bringing them in than coaching them up.
Then came the 3 three-win seasons and the NIL and recruiting took a hit, unfortunately, by the time we could get some decent coaches in here.
Or so it seems to me.

 

[slugboy]

Here’s another point of view (or a different way of organizing it):

The recruiting model of success is based on the following pattern:

1. Get (potential) star players
2. Put them in positions where they look great
3. Have future starts see (2), so they want to come here and look great
4. Lather, rinse, repeat.

We’ve had some success at (1). Sims is still a potential star player, and we’ve recruited other QBs with a lot of potential. We’ve had MULTIPLE running backs who could be stars, including one who would be on Heisman watch. We have a couple of very good backs now.
We’ve had players at WR and in the secondary and at DE that look the part.
We’ve been weak at recruiting a star LB, which is kind of weird since our HC and chief recruiter was a LB in college and a defensive coach.
So, it’s a mixed review at (1).

At (2), it’s anything but mixed. We aren’t putting together highlight reels for our players, especially on defense. We often argue about the reasons, but this section of the drive train has been broken. Hopefully, it’s been fixed through the recent coaching replacements. I'm in "wait and see mode" for this section.
Hearing from the ACC media days that the OL looks more consistent than in years past is a great thing. I'd like to hear the same about the defense as a whole.

Stage (3) hasn't been that bad, considering. We're still doing a pretty good job bringing in talent.

We've talked about lack of attention to detail in other threads. In my opinion, this team has above-average talent for the ACC. However, if you get ratings for each of the position groups from reporters or other coaches, each group would get ranked near the bottom. As a QB, Sims is getting rated near the bottom by our ESPN writers. Long needs to put Sims in a position to look really good (or one of the other QBs).

So:

1. Getting talent in: Good enough to win, but not as good as hoped for. Better than we’ve done in years
2. Putting talent in a good position: For the last three years, terrible. For this year? Completely unknown.
3. Showing off our talent: For the last three years, terrible. For this year? Completely unknown.

It's really weird to answer "Where does the program stand?" with "It's really unclear", but it's really unclear. It all comes down to how much of a difference the new coaches make. We have very little visibility into that.

 

[CheCha54]

I don’t have a WSJ subscription (sad! aren’t all Tech grads supposed to have one?).

Without cutting and pasting the text, what’s the gist of the article?

Let's see if this works.
[MOD NOTE]@CheCha54 I deleted the text. Don’t copy and paste paywall text here.

Writing your own summary in a paragraph == fair use

Copying paywall article == not fair use

Appreciate the intent. Execution was the issue. It needs to be in your own words
[/MOD NOTE]

 

[GT33]

Ross had prior success as a HC.

That was only half the discussion.

It's the only half that mattered. He was 39-19 at Maryland. He was 1st 3 times, 2nd once and 5th one time. We'd kill to be any of these, even 5th now. We didn't hire anyone near the caliber of Bobby Ross, not even close. It's like comparing Nick Saban to Curtis Walker.

 

[cthenrys]

It does seem that recruiting was the first priority in putting together the staff after Paul left. Considerations of coaching ability took a back seat.
Like you said, we don't know what they were thinking but the staff was a lot better at bringing them in than coaching them up.
Then came the 3 three-win seasons and the NIL and recruiting took a hit, unfortunately, by the time we could get some decent coaches in here.
Or so it seems to me.

Remember all the posts about “Jimmies and joes” being more important than X’s and O’s. You gotta have balance but there were more than a few who trumpeted that this staff would be successful just because of better talent. That approach has failed.

 

[forensicbuzz]

It's the only half that mattered. He was 39-19 at Maryland. He was 1st 3 times, 2nd once and 5th one time. We'd kill to be any of these, even 5th now. We didn't hire anyone near the caliber of Bobby Ross, not even close. It's like comparing Nick Saban to Curtis Walker.

It's not the only half that mattered. The discussion evolved in a wholly different direction.