Started By
Message
re: Georgia Separating Itself from the East
Posted on 12/20/16 at 12:44 pm to ScarletFire
Posted on 12/20/16 at 12:44 pm to ScarletFire
quote:
I've said 2 or 3 times just in this thread that the recruiting composite isn't an exact science, but its a good general guideline.
I responded by saying it is not a good general guideline when discussing the qualities and deficiencies of a roster, and you never explained away the reasoning.
This post was edited on 12/20/16 at 12:45 pm
0
Posted on 12/20/16 at 12:48 pm to ScarletFire
quote:
the recruiting composite isn't an exact science, but its a good general guideline.
Not really as it's only numbers and doesnt' actually apply to real life.
For instance..Mecole Hardman, Ben Cleveland, Charlie Woerner, Elijah Holyfield, Chauncey Manac, and Jaleel Laguins were all rated either 4* or 5* in last year's recruiting class. According to your "most talented teams" list all those guys would count and it would elevate UGAs "overall talent", so you can say how talented we are and try to extrapolate to the results we should have last season. What it doesn't' do is realize that over half those guys redshirted and the others that played either only played as gunner on ST or in a couple random plays in mop up duty. Sure they are on the roster and make up the "talent" on the team, but they are essentially irrelevant as to our play on the field in 2016.
That's why it's a stupid metric to keep referencing.
Posted on 12/20/16 at 12:58 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
For instance..Mecole Hardman, Ben Cleveland, Charlie Woerner, Elijah Holyfield, Chauncey Manac, and Jaleel Laguins were all rated either 4* or 5* in last year's recruiting class. According to your "most talented teams" list all those guys would count and it would elevate UGAs "overall talent", so you can say how talented we are and try to extrapolate to the results we should have last season. What it doesn't' do is realize that over half those guys redshirted and the others that played either only played as gunner on ST or in a couple random plays in mop up duty. Sure they are on the roster and make up the "talent" on the team, but they are essentially irrelevant as to our play on the field in 2016.
So you have no 3 star or lower players that are solid contributors? Guys like that are what keep the metric balanced. But, the far and away number 1 team in the country is also far and away number 1 on the composite, go figure
ETA: Anyway the point is the metric uses the talent available to you, it isn't 247's fault they don't play. If you want a better one to potentially prove your point, make one that only uses starters
This post was edited on 12/20/16 at 1:02 pm
Posted on 12/20/16 at 1:31 pm to gatorhata9
How many 5*s do we end up with? I can remember when we would be lucky to get one in a class...
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:12 pm to ScarletFire
quote:
If you want a better one to potentially prove your point, make one that only uses starters
The NFL draft is a better gauge, but you keep on ignoring that point about the upcoming draft.
What might be the best gauge is looking at the talent and experience playing at specific positions.
Both will prove my points:
1. how low our talent level was at OL, WR, and DB.
2. how young we were at QB, TE, DB, and ILB.
3. how weak our senior class is.
The burden is on you to prove these points wrong. So far, you haven't been able to do it.
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:16 pm to djsdawg
quote:
The burden is on you to prove these points wrong.
False. Unless you prove me wrong, I'm going to go with the experts. So its on you.
quote:
The NFL draft is a better gauge, but you keep on ignoring that point about the upcoming draft.
Because there are plenty of superstar players who aren't eligible for the draft this year, or simply won't go. All 4 of the guys who just said they are staying at UGA for their senior seasons had a good to great chance of being drafted. Only Bama and Ohio St are churning out tons of picks year in and year out anyway, so its not as good of a gauge as you think.
quote:
What might be the best gauge is looking at the talent and experience playing at specific positions. Both will prove my points: 1. how low our talent level was at OL, WR, and DB. 2. how young we were at QB, TE, DB, and ILB. 3. how weak our senior class is.
None of that proves that the 2013 class was a flop, if anything all it proves is my point that the university and coaching staff doesn't know how to handle 18-19 year olds, not that they did a poor job in the initial recruitment
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:23 pm to ScarletFire
quote:
Maybe the coaching staff felt like there would be depth issues and wanted to sign more guys, and there were some misses that they thought they would land so they went with filler? Was it a weak year in the state of GA?
I attempted to go in depth by asking you to take a look at the 2013 class. You either never did, or you did and realized just how crappy the class was from a quality standpoint, so you didnt want to admit it, which seems to be your thing.
Did you forget we played the 2012 SECCG with 68 scholarship players? It was a critical class to make up for that issue. The GA class was top heavy with Rueben Foster, Nkemdiche, Monty Adams, Carl Lawson, Vonn Bell, and Kamara as the top 6. We also missed on Tunsil, North, Henry, and Matthew Thomas nationally.
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:34 pm to ScarletFire
quote:
So you have no 3 star or lower players that are solid contributors? Guys like that are what keep the metric balanced.
Dude you're talking about some list that compiles star rankings to determine the "most talented teams", which you keep referencing that has us 6th.
Can you prove that this metric balances itself out by low ranked players outperforming their star ranking? Because I doubt that's how it works. Us humans can use a brain and see that guys often play better than their Hs ranking, but the 247 list that you continually keep mentioning in here doesn't do that, it's just a list of star rankings over a recruiting cycle.
So no...the 3 star players we have that have contributed wouldn't be a factor here.
quote:
Anyway the point is the metric uses the talent available to you, it isn't 247's fault they don't play.
So now you've already backtracked. Yeah, the talent "available to us" is simply whoever is ON the roster. But usign my example, and using a teeny tiny bit of brain computing power, you'd see that simply have 4 or 5 star guys doesn't mean shite if they're redshirting or haven't even gotten the chance to play. And your'e right, it's not 247's fault they dont' play, but they also shouldn't be included in how incredibly crazy talented we are when those guys aren't even seeing the field.
quote:
If you want a better one to potentially prove your point, make one that only uses starters
You're the one that loves these computer formulas so much, why don't you find one?
This post was edited on 12/20/16 at 2:39 pm
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:36 pm to djsdawg
quote:
attempted to go in depth by asking you to take a look at the 2013 class. You either never did, or you did and realized just how crappy the class was from a quality standpoint, so you didnt want to admit it, which seems to be your thing
Keep assuming, jumping to conclusions is great exercise I hear.
quote:
The GA class was top heavy with Rueben Foster, Nkemdiche, Monty Adams, Carl Lawson, Vonn Bell, and Kamara as the top 6. We also missed on Tunsil, North, Henry, and Matthew Thomas nationally.
So you just admitted that the staff did what they could after missing on guys? You act like the staff took the guys you got and didn't recruit anyone else rated higher, yet they STILL were one of the top classes in the nation taking basically all backup plan commits apparently
I know you were probably a spoiled child from Athens or the Atlanta suburbs, but sometimes you don't get things handed to you in life and have to make do with the best that you can get. Recruiting is the same way. Look at how Gunner Kiel flipping at the last minute and other QB recruits not working out did to LSU. It wasn't because they didn't recruit well.
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:39 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
Can you prove that this metric balances itself out by low ranked players outperforming their star ranking? Because I doubt that's how it works. Us humans can use a brain and see that guys often play better than their Hs ranking, but the 247 list that you continually keep mentioning in here doesn't do that, it's just a list of star rankings over a recruiting cycle. So no...the 3 star players we have that have contributed wouldn't be a factor here.
It isn't a factor in the composite, but when you use your brain it is a factor from a practicality standpoint. Sure, the 5 star corner may be on the bench this year, but if the 3 star in his place performs well, does it matter? No. Then, in that situation, the composite does balance itself out based on younger 4-5* guys being on campus but not contributing yet, while other guys that "shouldn't" be as good based on rating are.
This post was edited on 12/20/16 at 2:40 pm
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:42 pm to ScarletFire
quote:
So you just admitted that the staff did what they could after missing on guys? You act like the staff took the guys you got and didn't recruit anyone else rated higher, yet they STILL were one of the top classes in the nation taking basically all backup plan commits apparently
1) It was their job to not miss on those guys.
2) We would have been better off if they hadn't taken the filler. We wouldn't be burning scholarships on players with no hope of ever contributing. UGA could have recovered faster. Nevermind the guys who couldn't stay in school.
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:45 pm to ScarletFire
quote:
It isn't a factor in the composite,
yet you keep mentioning it.
quote:
Sure, the 5 star corner may be on the bench this year, but if the 3 star in his place performs well, does it matter?
Not in real life, but according to teh "most talented" list that you cling to so dearly it would matter, considering that's one of our starters that is but a lowly 3*.
This trainwreck partially started with you continuing to clainm that UGa was the "6th most talented team in the country" this year. Now you find new ways to try to dance aroudn that.
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:46 pm to Crowknowsbest
quote:
1) It was their job to not miss on those guys.
And based on evidence 2013 seemed to be the outlier in this regard. I'm not arguing that they did a great job, but it sounds like they did what they could.
quote:
2) We would have been better off if they hadn't taken the filler. We wouldn't be burning scholarships on players with no hope of ever contributing. UGA could have recovered faster. Nevermind the guys who couldn't stay in school.
And potentially play walk ons at several positions because of depth issues? A tier 1 SEC head coach isn't going to risk that.
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:47 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
This trainwreck partially started with you continuing to clainm that UGa was the "6th most talented team in the country" this year. Now you find new ways to try to dance aroudn that.
I'm not dancing around it, because according to 247 UGA was the 6th most talented team this year. it may not be true in actuality, but it is a fact according to 247 you are. Its your choice to argue that
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:48 pm to ScarletFire
quote:
And potentially play walk ons at several positions because of depth issues? A tier 1 SEC head coach isn't going to risk that.
We've already played walk-ons over a lot of them.
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:48 pm to ScarletFire
quote:
False. Unless you prove me wrong, I'm going to go with the experts. So its on you.
Sorry, but you seem confused as to how discussions work. Lets review:
1. You brought up the 247 roster composite.
2. I discredited the composite by pointing out that the 247 "experts" dont have a system to analyze the quality of a roster from an experience and dispersement view.
3. Now its your turn to either figure out a way to analyze those factors or explain why both flaws aren't a big deal.
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:52 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Sorry, but you seem confused as to how discussions work. Lets review: 1. You brought up the 247 roster composite. 2. I discredited the composite by pointing out that the 247 "experts" dont have a system to analyze the quality of a roster from an experience and dispersement view. 3. Now its your turn to either figure out a way to analyze those factors or explain why both flaws aren't a big deal.
I'm aware of how they work. Its not a discussion. I think the composite matters, you obviously don't. Not really a discussion to have, nor do I want or need to prove my point to someone online
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:53 pm to ScarletFire
quote:
Because there are plenty of superstar players who aren't eligible for the draft this year, or simply won't go. All 4 of the guys who just said they are staying at UGA for their senior seasons had a good to great chance of being drafted. Only Bama and Ohio St are churning out tons of picks year in and year out anyway, so its not as good of a gauge as you think.
If you want to talk about folks who are much more likely to be real experts, then we are gonna have to use the NFL draft to analyze the quality of our 2016 senior class. I bet Bama has more 1st round picks than UGA has picks overall.
Since so many stars either aren't eligible or simply won't go, then that should help move up the UGA guys who are in the draft, right?
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:56 pm to ScarletFire
quote:
None of that proves that the 2013 class was a flop
I said it would prove 3 things:
1. how low our talent level was at OL, WR, and DB.
2. how young we were at QB, TE, DB, and ILB.
3. how weak our senior class is.
How does it not prove these things?
Posted on 12/20/16 at 2:57 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Since so many stars either aren't eligible or simply won't go, then that should help move up the UGA guys who are in the draft, right?
Are you insinuating that there aren't a lot of very good freshmen and sophomores in the country?
quote:
If you want to talk about folks who are much more likely to be real experts, then we are gonna have to use the NFL draft to analyze the quality of our 2016 senior class.
Lots of great college players do little to nothing in the NFL
Page 5 of 10
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News