Discussion in 'Football' started by BranMart, Jul 15, 2019.
ACC ANALYSTS RANKINGS
That’s more of an indictment on the DL than the DBs.
I can’t get too mad. This is just based off of opponent and pace adjusted numbers from last year, and we were not good last year on a per-down basis. Sure, it was mostly a scheme thing, as we did well defending 20+ yd passes. At the same time, we allow 43% 3rd and long conversion. That screams no pressure and 10yd cushion in the secondary, which is what our eyes told us was happening last year.
Hopefully with a more aggressive scheme, we can stop giving up everything underneath. I think we’re better than we’re getting credit for, but these are objective rankings, not based on a “gut feeling” or “the eye test” or some other subjective means.
You and everyone here know that. But someone who’s job it is to know, doesn’t..
That’s all I need to know about this clowns opinion on anything football related.
The only debacle in Minnesota was keeping him around. Wasted time.
Is he insinuating that CPJ left the cupboard bare?
...but maybe he didn't account for this:
Let's tomahawk those doubters!
Dumb bc he’s not accounting for new coaching?
That he's justifying low DB ratings by pointing to things that aren't squarely on the DBs. And yes, I think it's also dumb to put so much weight on last year's stats if you're trying to provide preseason projections rather than retrospective analysis of the prior season.
I do not want anything other than the absolute worst said about us this preseason. It is the best case scenario and I hope it continues.
Can only go UP from lowest expectations.
DBs are not worst but other rankings are possible.We lost a bunch of starters and then the best OL and DL. So not good at a glance..
What else would you look at? Recruiting rankings? That won’t help us either. These ranking make perfect sense from an outside perspective given last year’s performance, returning contributors and questions about the new schemes. Don’t worry about it though because they don matter in the least.
We should be ahead of FSU's O line at least. They're rubbish. We are bringing back guys — Lee, Cooper, Hansen, Quinney — who have played a lot, albeit in a different system. But they have played and they're smart enough to pick up a new system pretty quick. Other teams change coordinators and schemes too.
And everybody cut blocks (I just rewatched the Pats-Chiefs AFC championship game and lo and behold, I saw cut blocks, especially in short yardage situations). We're just not going to do it as much as we have.
I too think the DBs are vastly undervalued. The areas where we probably do earn low rankings are QBs (new system for Lucas and we have intriguing but untried prospects for the most part in Graham and Yates), receiver (where we have numbers but....) and D line.
Who is Hale working for now anyway? Wasn't he cast aside by the Mother Ship in another ESPN purge of salaries?
He´s not a CPJ fan either. It blows my mind when analysts (or fans in general) downplay Johnson´s accomplishments on one hand, but then act like we have the worst players in P5. If that´s the case, then how the öööö did we win 7 games last year and nearly win the division?
While Johnson is a genius when it comes to his system, I think we had a lot of other problems and some pretty subpar assistant coaching. Even as a huge CPJ fan, I think we may end up coming out on top when it comes to overall coaching. And since the old staff would likely have won 6-8 games, I think it´s absolutely absurd to predict 3 wins for the new one.
We're 8th in his position ranking of RB's, yet we are one of only 8 schools in NCAA with 2 RB's on the Doak Walker Award watch list. SMH.
Yeah, I thought it funny that he ranked our DBs so low based on past performance, but didn't rank our RBs high based on past performance.
It's obviously cause That past performance was all system and no ability. Also that system was old and doesn't work.
He is teaching me something about writing. All you have to do is take the most serious fanbases, and either badly overrank them or badly underrank them to get clicks. If he had put us in the 8-10 range on most units (which is where a 7 win team should likely be), then this thread would have two posts if (it was even started).
If someone made a chart like that where half our units were top 3 we would overdiscuss that too, btw.