There’s not a single coach on this staff

GT98

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jan 29, 2002
Messages
4,212
Temple conf schedule:

Tulsa
ECU
@navy
Cincinnati
@UCF
@Houston
USF
@Uconn

GT's conference schedule might have been a tad more difficult but not by much.
Sagarin has Temple’s strength of schedule at 79.

GT’s was 61. So, about 20 places different.
 

Techbert

Dodd-Like
Joined
Aug 13, 2002
Messages
24,569
Here's my assessment of today's game. I am staying away from sideline personalities and scheme, as they don't matter moving forward and I do not think they were relevant to the final score.

I expected to lose. I expected us to be flat. Has nothing to do with scheme or opponent, and very little to do with Paul. It was the staff's curtain call, and the players would have to feel it. Older players know their time is over, and younger players just want to get on with the new regime. Human nature. Sometimes you will have an interim coach come in, take the shackles off the disciplines the team had stayed under, and have good success for a single game, but we did not have that. Sure, both coaches and players were on audition for the future, but that does not translate into team success. Not in college. Not anywhere else in football.

If anything, it was not as bad as I feared. It could have been 51-7, but was not. The players did not give up, and did not point fingers.

Granted, they did not come out ready to "win one for Paul" but that is rarer than you think and essentially never happens for a disciplinarian coach like Paul. It will sometimes happen for a player's coach, but that is not the way to bet. (The Temple bowl will be instructive for this, as the outgoing coaches qualify as player's coaches.)

Also, I thought Minnesota came well prepared, so give credit where credit is due.

The weaknesses of the team, IMHO, and feel free to dispute this if you wish, are
* Senior and upper class depth and talent
* Athleticism on offense
* Technique on defense

The strengths of the team, and feel free to dispute this if you wish, are
* Athleticism and enthusiasm of the younger players

One positive observation is that Oliver looked quick through the hole. Sure, he came in late in the contest and was rested so was going to look quick in comparison, but I think he was quick through the hole by any standard. He could compete to start at running back next year.

I think the seniors and the juniors who will not be back next year were essential to the wins we found this year, but few will be missed next year. We will need Braun's leadership, but it will be a young team all over the board.

I am sure the signees have gotten the message already to work on strength/conditioning and come in ready to play. I don't see a lot of redshirt opportunities. But they will be looking up at some talented sophomores for the most. Still, we need them to play a lot of snaps.
 

BackstreetBuzz

GT fan for 60+ years
Joined
Oct 25, 2003
Messages
1,325
We were favored in 10 of 13 games this year. Our problem was more X’s and O’s than Jimmy’s and Joe’s.
 

thwg

Damn Good Rat
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Messages
1,454
Sagarin has Temple’s strength of schedule at 79.

GT’s was 61. So, about 20 places different.
We were comparing conference schedules. temples SOS is actually the same or a little more difficult. Our OOC was quite a bit more difficult than theirs.
 

savbandjacket

Dr. SBJ
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
29,099
Sagarin has Temple’s strength of schedule at 79.

GT’s was 61. So, about 20 places different.
I would guess that when you look at the final calculation, there is not a whole lot of separation in that middle range of schedule strengths and the actual separation between 61 and 79 is rather insignificant.
 
Top