Welcome To Head Coaching, Brent Key

[yellowbritchies]

Nah, the PJ fan club are wins first people. His offense got us plenty of big wins. No one cares about yardage in a loss.

The anti-PJ people want wins too. They just saw a consistent slide in wins and figured that was the path to oblivion.

Even the clown supporters want wins. They thought the juice was the way to do it. It just turned out that he recruited at CPJ levels with a much bigger budget. The gems he did get were soft and bolted hoping for an easier path.

So here is Key. He righted the ship. Yes, he let some games get away from him. But at least he stopped the downward slope. They better pay for some coordinators. No more bargain basement hires. Pay for a staff. Key better be willing to clean house (even if they are alumns) if that is what is needed. This team has 8 wins in them next year. No more ööööing around. Set the bar above just making a bowl. 8 wins should be the minimum.

Please add, recruit,recruit,recruit !!!

 

[Vespidie]

Well, he may prove to be a very good coach, but ugag is laughing at us privately.

Not sure about this, however I’d be willing to bet they were laughing their collective assses off reading the antics taking place on this board during the process. Hell….I certainly was.
Yooze guys are some funny dudes.

 

[wreckless]

Head Coach Brent Key

21st Head Coach in Georgia Tech Football History

ramblinwreck.com

 

[Akinji07]

The whiny people here are not Engineers. They are sidewalk fans and Lawyers.

This is not your best moment.

 

[Vespidie]

Woah, easy with the sidewalk slurs.

GT fan whining has been a thing since at least 1973.

 

[gtchief]

Even the clown supporters want wins. They thought the juice was the way to do it. It just turned out that he recruited at CPJ levels with a much bigger budget. The gems he did get were soft and bolted hoping for an easier path.

Nah. There’s a difference in getting ranked in the 40’s with 15-16 commits vs 40’s-50’s with 22+ commits. Those sub-20 commits classes before were sometimes in the 60’s or higher (2013,2016).

 

[Jacketzrus]

Nah. There’s a difference in getting ranked in the 40’s with 15-16 commits vs 40’s-50’s with 22+ commits. Those sub-20 commits classes before were sometimes in the 60’s or higher (2013,2016).

Win loss records outside of top 15 ranked classes show it's an absolute crap shoot.

 

[gtchief]

Win loss records outside of top 15 ranked classes show it's an absolute crap shoot.

The correlation is with number of blue chips. Surprise, more is usually better. 50% is the magical number. And that didn’t even refute what I said, just an attempt to move goalposts by treating recruiting as the only variable determining W/L.

 

[Jacketzrus]

The correlation is with number of blue chips. Surprise, more is usually better. 50% is the magical number. And that didn’t even refute what I said, just an attempt to move goalposts by treating recruiting as the only variable determining W/L.

Any team can get a few blue chips.

When you're in the top 15, you get those blue chip skills position guys, but you also get a ton of blue chip line players. You also get depth as your backups are blue chips if you can sustain that level of recruiting.

That's why recruiting outside of top 15 is a crap shoot.

 

[stinger78]

The correlation is with number of blue chips. Surprise, more is usually better. 50% is the magical number. And that didn’t even refute what I said, just an attempt to move goalposts by treating recruiting as the only variable determining W/L.

Top 40 by what metric? One that parses rankings out to 4 decimal points? That is completely ludicrous.

Certainly, the team that recruits and develops more blue-chip players should win more. Do that several years in a row and that team should win a lot more. Evaluating blue-chip players is a good bit of a crap shoot in many cases, though.

 

[gtchief]

Any team can get a few blue chips.

When you're in the top 15, you get those blue chip skills position guys, but you also get a ton of blue chip line players. You also get depth as your backups are blue chips if you can sustain that level of recruiting.

That's why recruiting outside of top 15 is a crap shoot.

I don’t really care if you discredit the rankings. Excuse away. But the numbers are what they are and they aren’t particularly close.

 

[gtchief]

Top 40 by what metric? One that parses rankings out to 4 decimal points? That is completely ludicrous.

Certainly, the team that recruits and develops more blue-chip players should win more. Do that several years in a row and that team should win a lot more. Evaluating blue-chip players is a good bit of a crap shoot in many cases, though.

The system everyone looks at, yes. If you have a better metric on hand it sounds like a good business opportunity. In the meantime it’s more reliable than team homers trying to rationalize their low rankings

 

[Jacketzrus]

I don’t really care if you discredit the rankings. Excuse away. But the numbers are what they are and they aren’t particularly close.

These are 2018 rankings followed by 2021 win-loss record from 247. I did 2018 recruiting class and 2021 win loss because that shows the class to develope.

after top 15 recruiting rankings, it is certainly a crap shoot as I tried to tell you earlier.

16. Washington 4-8
17. Texas A&M 8-4
18. South Carolina 7-6
19. UCLA 8-4
20. North Carolina 6-7
21. Tennessee 7-6
22. Michigan 12-2
23. Nebraska 3-9
24. Virginia Tech 6-7
25. TCU 5-7



26. NC State 9-3
27. Mississippi State 7-6
28. Maryland 7-6
29. Baylor 11-2
30. Louisville 6-7
31. Michigan State 11-2
32. Ole Miss 10-2
33. Utah 10-3
34. Oklahoma State 11-2
35. West Virginia 6-7
36. Arizona State 8-5
37. Kentucky 9-3
38. Minnesota 9-4
39. Iowa 10-3


40. Stanford 3-9
41. Vanderbilt 2-10
42. California 5-7
43. Missouri 6-7
44. Georgia Tech ughhhh 3-9
45. Arkansas 8-4
46. Wisconsin 9-4
47. Washington State 7-6
48. Pittsburgh 11-3
49. Cincinnati 13-1
50. Indiana 2-10
51. Syracuse 5-7
52. Purdue 9-4

I hope this opens some people's eyes as to how unimportant and unimpressive a top 25 class really is, if you're not in the 1-15 range.

 

[Milwaukee]

These are 2018 rankings followed by 2021 win-loss record from 247. I did 2018 recruiting class and 2021 win loss because that shows the class to develope.

after top 15 recruiting rankings, it is certainly a crap shoot as I tried to tell you earlier.

16. Washington 4-8
17. Texas A&M 8-4
18. South Carolina 7-6
19. UCLA 8-4
20. North Carolina 6-7
21. Tennessee 7-6
22. Michigan 12-2
23. Nebraska 3-9
24. Virginia Tech 6-7
25. TCU 5-7



26. NC State 9-3
27. Mississippi State 7-6
28. Maryland 7-6
29. Baylor 11-2
30. Louisville 6-7
31. Michigan State 11-2
32. Ole Miss 10-2
33. Utah 10-3
34. Oklahoma State 11-2
35. West Virginia 6-7
36. Arizona State 8-5
37. Kentucky 9-3
38. Minnesota 9-4
39. Iowa 10-3


40. Stanford 3-9
41. Vanderbilt 2-10
42. California 5-7
43. Missouri 6-7
44. Georgia Tech ughhhh 3-9
45. Arkansas 8-4
46. Wisconsin 9-4
47. Washington State 7-6
48. Pittsburgh 11-3
49. Cincinnati 13-1
50. Indiana 2-10
51. Syracuse 5-7
52. Purdue 9-4

I hope this opens some people's eyes as to how unimportant and unimpressive a top 25 class really is, if you're not in the 1-15 range.

Wait a minute. You mean to tell me the 16-25 classes don’t perform as well as 1-15 over a cycle?
Get back!

 

[gtchief]

These are 2018 rankings followed by 2021 win-loss record from 247. I did 2018 recruiting class and 2021 win loss because that shows the class to develope.

after top 15 recruiting rankings, it is certainly a crap shoot as I tried to tell you earlier.

16. Washington 4-8
17. Texas A&M 8-4
18. South Carolina 7-6
19. UCLA 8-4
20. North Carolina 6-7
21. Tennessee 7-6
22. Michigan 12-2
23. Nebraska 3-9
24. Virginia Tech 6-7
25. TCU 5-7



26. NC State 9-3
27. Mississippi State 7-6
28. Maryland 7-6
29. Baylor 11-2
30. Louisville 6-7
31. Michigan State 11-2
32. Ole Miss 10-2
33. Utah 10-3
34. Oklahoma State 11-2
35. West Virginia 6-7
36. Arizona State 8-5
37. Kentucky 9-3
38. Minnesota 9-4
39. Iowa 10-3


40. Stanford 3-9
41. Vanderbilt 2-10
42. California 5-7
43. Missouri 6-7
44. Georgia Tech ughhhh 3-9
45. Arkansas 8-4
46. Wisconsin 9-4
47. Washington State 7-6
48. Pittsburgh 11-3
49. Cincinnati 13-1
50. Indiana 2-10
51. Syracuse 5-7
52. Purdue 9-4

I hope this opens some people's eyes as to how unimportant and unimpressive a top 25 class really is, if you're not in the 1-15 range.

I think it’s a little reductive to draw W/L conclusions on a single (albeit important) variable when you haven’t even taken things like coaching, SOS, facilities, injuries, transfers etc into consideration. Not to mention only looking at one class.

 

[GTRules]

Not really pleased with Batt on this decision. To my knowledge he/Tech only zoned it on 2 FCS coaches, Chadwell & Willie and from what has been discussed both ( without saying it ) turned us down. I don't think Batt talked to any current FBS coaches. I'm not saying that Key can't be good, but he was the OL coach for 4 years and they were somewhat lacking. I hope he stands up to his assistants and makes the changes that must be made for his success! I'm still trying to figure out the Sims decision to bolt since he was a 3 year starter. We know he had some issues , maybe Key will talk him back in, he could be valuable.

Found the problem.

 

[Jacketzrus]

Wait a minute. You mean to tell me the 16-25 classes don’t perform as well as 1-15 over a cycle?
Get back!

The point is the results are very similar from 16-50.
It's like a cliff after 15

 

[Jacketzrus]

I think it’s a little reductive to draw W/L conclusions on a single (albeit important) variable when you haven’t even taken things like coaching, SOS, facilities, injuries, transfers etc into consideration. Not to mention only looking at one class.

Feel free to do other classes. I'll save you some trouble, they are very similar.

Now of course you're right that there are many other variables, but I believe this to be the most concise way to look at it.

 

[gtchief]

Feel free to do other classes. I'll save you some trouble, they are very similar.

Now of course you're right that there are many other variables, but I believe this to be the most concise way to look at it.

That doesn’t really conclude that recruiting is the reason for their win/losses. Texas A&M this year is a simple example.

 

[coit]

Who said I wasn't an engineer?

Well I will say that you apparently don’t know what “virtually none” means.