Sagarin Preseason Rates : #30 Tech goes 9-3

Buzzilla

Buzzilla

I'm all out of bubblegum
Joined
Dec 31, 2001
Messages
807
This is often how smart betters assess value in a line. That is VERY encouraging to see. I've been saying all along that we would be better than many have talked about it. I don't think we'll go 9-3 but 7-5 and a bowl game is certainly not out of the question.
drinking.gif
 
The thing about Sagarin though is he takes into account the last three years and averages them. His ratings are rarely right until about the fourth or fifth game of the season.

Hopefully though he has us pegged right.
 
Hopefully he's wrong about the UGAg thing. I hope we beat them like we beat Navy a few years ago.
 
For what its worth, with our rating of 79.91, and adjustments for home field advantage(3.36)this is how it plays out with jeff's numbers.

We lose to FSU 90.72 by 14
We lose to UGA 86.85 by 4
We lose to UVA 77.87 by 1
We beat Auburn 82.24(less than 1)
We beat MD 81.59 by 1 or 2
We beat NCST 81.06 by 2
We beat CU 78.17 by 5
We beat UNC 73.35 by 9
We beat Wake 72.72 by 5
We beat BYU 71.74 by 5
We beat Vandy 63.59 by 12
We beat Duke 59.15 by 16

ANYTHING LESS AND ITS TIME FOR A NEW COACH...lol.
 
Clemson was a big suprise this year, but yeah, we should've beat Duke and probably BYU too. Oh well.

Here's to next year. We finished the year strong, after all.
 
"Finished the year strong?"

I would hardly call our finish strong. Yes, we won the bowl 52-10. It was against Tulsa. Not a very good team. The best team they beat was Hawaii, and that score was 27-16. As Georgia Tech, we are supposed to beat the Tulsa's of the world 52-10 or worse. The gameplan of simply run, run, run, run would not have worked against the majority of the bowl teams. Our starting QB consistently over or under-threw his receivers. Our defense was stout, but again, it was against TULSA. A team that went 1-10 a year ago.

As for the end of the regular season, we lost 3 of our last 4 games, including a pounding at the hands of DUKE and our 3rd consecutive loss to the rednecks from the east.

I'd hardly call that a strong finish. Here's to next year. Hopefully it'll be better than the last two.
 
Well forget Duke, they had all the momentum and we were coming off a long layoff. Virginia was one of those games where you just don't play well and tip your cap to the other team. We would have beaten or nearly beaten UGA were it not for their flawless execution. If play the UGA team who played Purdue in the second half, our game probably goes to OT. Just be proud of the effort and let's get ready for '04.
 
I disagree very much with your accessment that we should beat TU 52-10. Vegas had us by 7. We lost to a similar team from that conference last year. Hawai beat Bama. Freso beat UCLA. The WAC was 3-0 not counting our game.I am not trying to make them a giant by any means, but,conclusion, it was a game we should have won, but definately not dominate like we did. Kudos to the team for their performance in this game. One we could all relax in. Really the Vegas line says it all. These people are the real objective experts who put money on the line. We overperformed in this game by around 35 points.
 
Techgold,

You explained my post perfectly. Based on where our program is and has been for the past 2 years under Gailey, it has become acceptable for our team to only be a 7 point favorite over the Tulsa's of the world. Tech, as a program, SHOULD be head and shoulders above those teams, i.e. 52-10.

I'm not saying that our team won't or should not lose games. We are not the type of school that, in the days of 85 scholarships, will finish consistently in the top 10. However, we should be a team that CONSISTENTLY finishes at or in the top 25 year in and year out. Yes, that would include, on average, a couple of losses each year. Every 2-4 years we would be expected to rise above the top 25 to finish in the top 15 or top 10.

Those types of teams SHOULD be expected to beat and should beat the Tulsa's and the Fresno States of the world.

The VEGAS line only says what people expect from your team in the here and now based on how the team is playing recently.

I guess what I'm saying is that beating Tulsa 52-10 shouldn't be labeled as overperforming; it should be expected. And the fact that expectations have dropped low enough to where we accept and are excited about being a 7 point favorite over Tulsa is simply ridiculous.

rant.gif
 
I called it a strong finish simply because anytime you win like that in a bowl game it has to give you lots of momentum and energy going into spring practice, which is probably where next season will be determined. If we can refine the talent we have (Reggie, etc) than we're good. And Tulsa wasn't that bad - we shut them down, but look how they played against a top 20 team in Boise State, for instance.
 
The Tulsa victory was significant. It was significant in that
A) we did not LOSE the game...which would have been a VERY negative thing for our program at this point,
B) we won big over a bowl team...allbeit a weak bowl team...but a bowl team non the less, and
C) we did win impressively, with our upside potential being the unknown, which is certainly better than the reverse...re: last year.

It is worth noting that the final score exceeded the predictions of everyone in the GT prediction contest. Congrads to Chan and the Team on an excellent win!
 
If we go 9 - 3, I'll run naked down Peachtree!
South Georgia, uh, Dog
 
Hedgeplague...

I think it sets us up for continued improvement record wise for 2004..7-6 this past season exceeded all the negative people on this board that said we would do no better than 2 to 3 wins...2004 looks like a better year yet....
 
Originally posted by BLACK WATCH:
Hedgeplague...

I think it sets us up for continued improvement record wise for 2004..7-6 this past season exceeded all the negative people on this board that said we would do no better than 2 to 3 wins...2004 looks like a better year yet....
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">BW I must agree with you here. I said 4 wins, and everything else was gravy. Our record was much better than I expected.

However, I won't say that 2004 looks like a better year. I don't think it would be a worse year, but we will have just as many severe losses from our roster that flunkgate produced this year.

The unknown factor once again is injuries. We didn't have them this year. Can we get that lucky next year?
 
I dont see it that way Beeserk...Im sure Gailey sees it differently too...For anyone that has coached or played the game...They will tell you that anytime you play a TRUE FROSH.at QB and several on the Dline you WILL be better the following year as experience is EVERYTHING..Especially if you are talented and Reggie and our Dlineman are....This still is a very young team at the more important positions and should be getting better each year....Like i said , barring a rash of injuries I see 8 to 9 wins as a realistic goal...Flunkgate will STILL hurt this upcoming year, as we replace those 10 with again, TRUE frosh...BUT,I think we will be improved and 2005 and 2006 should be breakout years...Much like the pattern Hewitt followed....What,this is Hewitt's 5th year??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top