USA TODAY: First-half grades for first-year coaches in college football

gtchief

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Joined
Jul 4, 2015
Messages
2,845
https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...rst-year-coaches-after-first-half/3984556002/

D
Tom Arth, Akron (0-6)

Walt Bell, Massachusetts (1-6)

Geoff Collins, Georgia Tech (1-5)

All three teams have been worse than expected, which is a statement in itself. Arth inherited a program on the downswing and wasn't pegged to do more than win just a handful of games in his first season. The former John Carroll and Chattanooga coach has still overseen the only winless team in the FBS, with bad losses to Massachusetts and Kent State in the Zips' last two games.

Bell's lone win came against Akron, joining losses to Rutgers (48-21) and Southern Illinois (45-20), and the defense has been by leaps and bounds the worst in the country. Collins is undertaking a full-scale rebuild and upgrade of a program on the heels of the Paul Johnson era, and while the Yellow Jackets were supposed to bring up the rear in the ACC few could've guessed the first half would include a loss to The Citadel and three conference defeats by a combined 72 points.
 

Deke

Everybody relax, I'm here.
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
6,761
Hard to argue being any higher at this point. I think a win over Citadel gets us a C or C-, and a win over Temple gets us to C+ or B- territory (given the expectations that this was a rebuilding year). The point deficit against conference opponents is rough though, and I kind of wish I hadn't seen it totaled up like that.
 

gtchief

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Joined
Jul 4, 2015
Messages
2,845
Hard to argue being any higher at this point. I think a win over Citadel gets us a C or C-, and a win over Temple gets us to C+ or B- territory. The point defecit against conference opponents is rough though, and I kind of wish I hadn't seen it totaled up like that.
They gave Les Miles a B so with a win over The Citadel I think we'd already be in the C+/B- range. Besides that the only major blip outside of expectations was the 2nd quarter of Duke imo.
 

smokey_wasp

Dodd-Like
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
5,423
6-6 would probably get him ACC COY. No question we have performed at the bottom end of expectations, so you can't really justify anything higher. Of course, it's also totally irrelevant. Signing day grade is all that matters at this point.
 
Last edited:

Ed Sawyer

I eventually banged Lucy Matthews.
Joined
Jul 26, 2014
Messages
536
Looks like he sees it as a huge transition AND Geoff is sucking at it. He'd be considered a moderate on Stingtalk.
 

Walton

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
394
Except for Citadel, nothing unexpected as happened. So it likely deserves a D but that is basically because the program is the equivalent of a Business major that has to take Dynamics for some reason: D is about as good as he can do, so he would be happy with the D and move on to what he does well.
 

georgytech

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
122
D is about right but Mack Brown is graded waaaaay to high. I think this regime needs at least a break even record next year & in year 3 at least 8 wins. Year 4 we should be at 10 wins minimum.
 

WracerX

Dr. Dunkingstein
Joined
Feb 24, 2004
Messages
15,474
Except for Citadel, nothing unexpected as happened. So it likely deserves a D but that is basically because the program is the equivalent of a Business major that has to take Dynamics for some reason: D is about as good as he can do, so he would be happy with the D and move on to what he does well.
Citadel was an enormous clusterfuck.

Not scoring an offensive point against Temple was a generational low.

Being 0-6 ATS is bad.

Considering the injuries I would say a D is fair or a little generous but not far off.
 

Yukonwreck

Dodd-Like
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
6,037
Citadel was an enormous clusterfuck.

Not scoring an offensive point against Temple was a generational low.

Being 0-6 ATS is bad.

Considering the injuries I would say a D is fair or a little generous but not far off.
We are likely going 1-11 this year. We are 18 point underdogs to Miami, a team I thought we might beat before the season began. There were people on this board talking about going to a bowl game, so I would say we are far, far below even the realistic expectations. I felt 6-6 was possible. It is a tough situation. The staff has to look the older players on team straight in the face and say we need you guys now, but as soon as we can, we are definitely going to replace you. Keeping morale up is difficult. I am sure that get tired of hearing or reading about how undersized and slow they are.
 

GoGATech

Big Dummy
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
8,133
There were people on this board talking about going to a bowl game, so I would say we are far, far below even the realistic expectations. I felt 6-6 was possible.
Fan expectations and reality are two totally different things. Those were possible expectations for this year, but highly unlikely.
 

GT65_UGA89

doesn't wear a mask
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
8,878
Fan expectations and reality are two totally different things. Those were possible expectations for this year, but highly unlikely.
For sure. I’m optimistic, and thought that 6-6 was an outside possibility, due primarily to there not being any outstanding teams in the Coastal. However, once the season started and I saw our OL DL play, as well as attrition, I soon realized 6-6 was unrealistic and that 3-9 was more likely a peak expectation.
 

GoGATech

Big Dummy
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
8,133
For sure. I’m optimistic, and thought that 6-6 was an outside possibility, due primarily to there not being any outstanding teams in the Coastal. However, once the season started and I saw our OL DL play, as well as attrition, I soon realized 6-6 was unrealistic and that 3-9 was more likely a peak expectation.
I agree. People have to learn how to adjust expectations. Our OL is worse than I thought, mainly because of the injuries and inexperience. DL lacks experience and depth and it shows more than I thought it would also. I also thought we would run a lot more option-type stuff that we "should" be able to run well, but it's apparent that the staff has decided to "rip the bandaid off" and move the transition along as fast as possible. This is detrimental to immediate success, but will help in the long run. Our guys are drinking from a fire-hose right now. It will get better.
 

WracerX

Dr. Dunkingstein
Joined
Feb 24, 2004
Messages
15,474
I agree. People have to learn how to adjust expectations. Our OL is worse than I thought, mainly because of the injuries and inexperience. DL lacks experience and depth and it shows more than I thought it would also. I also thought we would run a lot more option-type stuff that we "should" be able to run well, but it's apparent that the staff has decided to "rip the bandaid off" and move the transition along as fast as possible. This is detrimental to immediate success, but will help in the long run. Our guys are drinking from a fire-hose right now. It will get better.
OL injuries put us in a hurt. And I agree the staff has decided to transition the offense without trying to match it to our personnel. That is why it is a generationally bad offense. Maybe worse. I have only been a Tech fan since 1992 and this is the worst offense I’ve seen.

I still have hope the staff is building for year 3.
 
Top