Started By
Message
re: Maybe Smart wasn't ready for a head coaching job
Posted on 11/3/16 at 10:32 am to djsdawg
Posted on 11/3/16 at 10:32 am to djsdawg
Again, thanks for sharing these stats. You are making an outstanding contribution to this board. Here are some OL rankings/stats that found interesting: LINK Not surprisingly, there is a strong correlation between teams with good win/loss records and strong OL play. The power success rate is particularly eye catching.
But beyond the statistics, there is a big picture/forest vs trees view of teams that is both intuitive and obvious to me. Beyond the less frequent coaching changes, like Richt being replaced by Smart, the main variable in college football is the players. No team is the same from one season to the next due the very nature of college football. In other words, the one most consistently changing variable is the players; there's a different set of players on every team every season. This and coaching competition (Saban coming into the league for instance) largely explains how even successful coaches like Richt can go from 13-1 in 2002 and win a SECC to a losing season, 6-7, in 2010. Bottom line: the team/set of players Mark had in 2010 weren't nearly as good as the team he had in 2002 relative to the competition.
Yes, this is a case of Captain Obvious but it's also obvious that a first year HC has a lot to learn about being a HC. And the combination of Smart in his first year as our HC, starting a Freshman QB with a team not nearly as talented relative to the competition as the team Richt inherited his first season as our HC, has produced results that no Georgia fan is satisfied with.
But beyond the statistics, there is a big picture/forest vs trees view of teams that is both intuitive and obvious to me. Beyond the less frequent coaching changes, like Richt being replaced by Smart, the main variable in college football is the players. No team is the same from one season to the next due the very nature of college football. In other words, the one most consistently changing variable is the players; there's a different set of players on every team every season. This and coaching competition (Saban coming into the league for instance) largely explains how even successful coaches like Richt can go from 13-1 in 2002 and win a SECC to a losing season, 6-7, in 2010. Bottom line: the team/set of players Mark had in 2010 weren't nearly as good as the team he had in 2002 relative to the competition.
Yes, this is a case of Captain Obvious but it's also obvious that a first year HC has a lot to learn about being a HC. And the combination of Smart in his first year as our HC, starting a Freshman QB with a team not nearly as talented relative to the competition as the team Richt inherited his first season as our HC, has produced results that no Georgia fan is satisfied with.
2
Posted on 11/3/16 at 10:49 am to GurleyGirl
Confirmation bias...
Posted on 11/3/16 at 11:12 am to DawgsLife
quote:
There is not question that the OL is one of the hardest positions to project and to play.
You've said this a few times. I'd say that linebacker is the hardest position to play.
And I wasn't a linebacker.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 11:20 am to RhodeDawg
Depends on your definition of hard. It takes a unique skill set
Posted on 11/3/16 at 11:36 am to RhodeDawg
quote:
You've said this a few times. I'd say that linebacker is the hardest position to play.
And I wasn't a linebacker.
It very well could be physically. There are a lot of demands on LB's. But, a linebacker has a set place to go. A hole to fill. An OLineman has to adjust according to the defensive front presented, then must adjust if the DLine shifts, or the LB's show blitz. Then if the center (Or whoever calls the blocking scheme changes the blocking assignment, he has to adjust then, too in a matter of seconds.
However, if you feel the LB is tougher, that's ok. Defensive positions typically have a "place" to be and their job is to get there. (Except for DB when they have to adjust to formations, routes, etc.) I would put LB at 4th toughest, probably, behind QB, OL and DB. That is based soley on having to adjust before and during the play. Thinking, and moving.
But, keep in mind, I specifically said ONE of the toughest.
I would rank them:
1. QB
2. OL
3. DB
4. LB
I wouldn't quibble at all if somebody wanted to swap 2 and 3, though.
Just my opinion. I played WR mostly outside of high school and played both WR and DB in high school.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 11:38 am to Peter Buck
I'm talking about a prototypical middle linebacker who is acting as the QB of the defense while reading and reacting to an offense while he's surrounded by chaos.
This linebacker has to have incredible vision (maybe better than a QB), an intelligent understanding of the game, and has to react while almost every play is collapsing around him.
I respect an old-school MLB.
This linebacker has to have incredible vision (maybe better than a QB), an intelligent understanding of the game, and has to react while almost every play is collapsing around him.
I respect an old-school MLB.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 11:42 am to GurleyGirl
quote:
starting a Freshman QB
I'm shocked at the number of people that want to throw this excuse out there when we are clearly MUCH better at this position.
quote:
with a team not nearly as talented relative to the competition
You mean like Nicholls and Vanderbilt? name me one game in which we have not struggled outside of North Carolina. Then name the teams we have played that you think have more talent than us. Then we will check and see which of those teams have out recruited us at the OL and WR positions. (The two positions most point to as Richt leaving us in horrible shape)
Posted on 11/3/16 at 11:45 am to RhodeDawg
quote:
I'm talking about a prototypical middle linebacker who is acting as the QB of the defense while reading and reacting to an offense while he's surrounded by chaos.
That is no different than what the center does.
quote:
This linebacker has to have incredible vision (maybe better than a QB), an intelligent understanding of the game, and has to react while almost every play is collapsing around him.
I respect an old-school MLB.
No doubt they play an important part in any successful team. And if we ask 10 knowledgeable fans we could get 10 different answers. I in no way am saying you are wrong, just that we disagree.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 11:49 am to DawgsLife
We can disagree. No biggie.
But I'd add that these days we're asking linebackers to be physical enough to stop a run up the middle while also being athletic enough to cover TEs and slot receivers.
That's a talented athlete, then you add the mental aspect of a good LB reading and reacting to an offense (who has the advantage by knowing what they want to do)... You're talking about a special player. Just my opinion.
But I'd add that these days we're asking linebackers to be physical enough to stop a run up the middle while also being athletic enough to cover TEs and slot receivers.
That's a talented athlete, then you add the mental aspect of a good LB reading and reacting to an offense (who has the advantage by knowing what they want to do)... You're talking about a special player. Just my opinion.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 11:52 am to RhodeDawg
quote:
You're talking about a special player.
No argument there.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 1:01 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
but when we want to compare Richt's recruiting, we are going to compare them to Saban's
We were always told how great a recruiter Richt was. While he did certainly land some top notch players, he wasn't that good at building an overall team, which probably contributed a lot to his 2nd tier status next to the top coaches in the SEC. Hopefully, Kirby will do better at that.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 1:10 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
I'm shocked at the number of people that want to throw this excuse out there when we are clearly MUCH better at this position.
Better, yes, but he does make rookie mistakes. You take the good with the bad.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 2:25 pm to FaCubeItches
quote:
We were always told how great a recruiter Richt was.
Compared to who (Or is it whom?
) Compared to the nation at large, he was, and he got good results when you compare him to the nation at large. However, being in the SEC, we tend to compare him to Saban, which really isn't fair to anybody. nobody will compare favorably to Saban...not even Meyer. (Although he comes closest)
quote:
he wasn't that good at building an overall team,
Outside of Saban and Meyer, nobody does. Even those two had their weaknesses. As for the rest of the SEC? Nope. they don't either. LSU could have possibly won another Naional Championship had it not been for their QB. And lets not forget that they won one of their NC's under Saban and the other one with basically, the team Saban recruited. Richt was usually in the top 10 in the nation recruiting wise, though, and had a year or two in the top 5.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 2:27 pm to FaCubeItches
quote:
Better, yes, but he does make rookie mistakes. You take the good with the bad.
Sure he does, just like we all expected. but for people to use that as an excuse of why we are not good this year is dumb. We are better at QB, and that elevates our WR's a bit. can you imagine what it would be like if Lambert were the QB PLUS we had all those drops. We would be facing 11 men in the box every game and would have never had a good rushing game.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 2:43 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
nd the same could be said for Bill Curry at GT or Franklin at Vandy. Both "great coaches" right?I believe both those guys did it with their 1st sr class...not sure.
Not for curry but is case can be made for Franklin at vandy.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 3:00 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
people to use that as an excuse of why we are not good this year is dumb. We are better at QB, and that elevates our WR's a bit. can you imagine what it would be like if Lambert were the QB PLUS we had all those drops. We would be facing 11 men in the box every game and would have never had a good rushing game.
If better, you are splitting hairs. We atruggle to score tds. Any time you don't have a good qb, it's a good reason for struggles.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 3:15 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Not for curry
"He has taken the worst Big 5 program at the time of his hire to the top 25 this week with his 2nd class of seniors. It takes more than "good" to pull that off. Again, the math just isn't on your side."
Well,using your definition he certainly qualifies.
GT was a shitstorm when he took over.They were actually considering moving down to 1AA. Within
4 or 5 years the ended up being ranked and had a bowl victory.
FYI,neither Curry,Franklin or Leach are elite or great coaches but if I had to choose one it would be Franklin.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 3:31 pm to djsdawg
quote:
If better, you are splitting hairs. We atruggle to score tds. Any time you don't have a good qb, it's a good reason for struggles.
You think Lambert is as good as Eason? Eason is clearly the better QB, imo. He brings to the table what Lambert cannot. As for the TD's...we struggled last year more. 9 points against a very bad Missouri team? 3 against Florida? 20 verses a bad Auburn and one of those TD's was on a punt return? Once Chubb went down we had nothing. Chubb nor Michel is producing like they did last season and we are scoring as much.
Whether people want to admit it or not, our scoring woes are as much a coaching problem as it is a talent problem. The OL isn't helping the matter any, but there are areas offensively in which we are better than last year. RB, QB being two key areas. Houston never got untracked last year and half the posters on this board was wanting to railroad Theus out of town. now all of a sudden they are the best things we had on the OL.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 5:02 pm to DawgsLife
Neither are good. Lambert was better in some ways, Eason better in some ways. Our PPG is currently less than last years poor performance, so Eason hasn't made the O any better in that regard, but our 3rd down conversions are better. Our OL has been bad, but it was better last year. Theus never developed into a 1st round badass, but he was by far better OT compared to this years.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 5:04 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
Well,using your definition he certainly qualifies.
GT was a shitstorm when he took over.They were actually considering moving down to 1AA. Within
In the 4 years prior to the coaches, Tech had a far better winning % than Wazzu or Vandy. They didnt become horrid until year 1 and 2 of Curry, which could be attributed to poor recruiting by Pepper. To his credit, he did improve GTU by year 6 but it didnt last in year 7.
This post was edited on 11/3/16 at 5:08 pm
Page 7 of 10
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News