Home General
Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:

- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)

- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans

- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum

- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.

Kirby may have a slow simmering Will Muschamp problem

124

Comments

  • tfk_fanboytfk_fanboy ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @Bankwalker said:

    @BiffLowman said:

    @pgjackson said:
    Two coaching legends failed to do anything with SC. i doubt Muschamp is going to be any better.

    For the sake of argument, is Lou Holtz a "coaching legend"? He had good years, yes, but I think an argument can be made that he isn't a legend. He had a 249-132-7, .651 Win%, but he also had 8 losing seasons...with one of them being 0-11.

    Thoughts?

    https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/coaches/lou-holtz-1.html

    Only coach to take 6 programs to a bowl (and before there were a zillion bowls), and to have 4 different programs finish in the Top 20 (they didnt always rank the Top 25 - something that was probably done as a participation trophy for millenials).

    the AP has done top 25 since 1989

    don't worry, the scary millennials won't get you on the internet. you are safe. especially when you can't spell millennial correctly

    "While the AP Poll currently lists the Top 25 teams in the nation, from 1936 to 1961 the wire service only ranked 20 teams. From 1962 to 1967 only 10 teams were recognized. From 1968 to 1988, the AP again resumed its Top 20 before expanding to the current 25 teams in 1989."

  • JoelSidneyKellyJoelSidneyKelly ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @BiffLowman said:

    @pgjackson said:
    Two coaching legends failed to do anything with SC. i doubt Muschamp is going to be any better.

    For the sake of argument, is Lou Holtz a "coaching legend"? He had good years, yes, but I think an argument can be made that he isn't a legend. He had a 249-132-7, .651 Win%, but he also had 8 losing seasons...with one of them being 0-11.

    Thoughts?

    https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/coaches/lou-holtz-1.html

    Lou Holtz? I thought @pgjackson was talking about Sparky Woods.

  • amacdad101amacdad101 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    IDK who we play, how many "stars" they have, how much "beef" is on the line...all I care about is a W at the end of the day...carry that to the locker room and you will have done your job as a team...GO DAWGS!!!

  • JayDogJayDog ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @PharmDawg2054 said:

    @JayDog said:
    We should not be deluded by "star" ratings and talent gaps. That is not science. A lot of unheralded players are late bloomers. Many 4 and 5 stars don't live up to potential. But then again, with proper attitude and coaching--those "stars" may actually mean something. How many championships has Ohio State won with all their 4 and 5 star recruits? The point is--we don't know how good a team will be until they play the games.

    The above is just as true for Georgia as it is for SC. I don't think we should worry about SC any more than any other team. Every team can beat you on a given day. I believe our talent will make a difference because I believe in our coaching staff. So don't worry about the other guy. Take care of your own business--it's all you can do.

    In

    https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2613145-do-top-10-recruiting-classes-really-equal-championships

    https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/8/22/17606048/blue-chip-ratio-2018

    https://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2018/7/26/17607382/blue-chip-ratio-recruit-national-title-championship-playoff

    https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/history-shows-national-titles-require-great-not-just-good-recruiting-over-4-years/

    None of those articles mean SC, or any other team in the SECE, can't beat us with their 3 and 4 star guys. Put our talent at Vandy. Do you think they will suddenly become Alabama, or last year's Georgia, on the field? We can't prove it, but I guarantee you they would not. It takes more than pure talent to play for championships--including a little luck. What good are those stars then?

  • JayDogJayDog ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @JayDog said:

    @PharmDawg2054 said:

    @JayDog said:
    We should not be deluded by "star" ratings and talent gaps. That is not science. A lot of unheralded players are late bloomers. Many 4 and 5 stars don't live up to potential. But then again, with proper attitude and coaching--those "stars" may actually mean something. How many championships has Ohio State won with all their 4 and 5 star recruits? The point is--we don't know how good a team will be until they play the games.

    The above is just as true for Georgia as it is for SC. I don't think we should worry about SC any more than any other team. Every team can beat you on a given day. I believe our talent will make a difference because I believe in our coaching staff. So don't worry about the other guy. Take care of your own business--it's all you can do.

    In

    https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2613145-do-top-10-recruiting-classes-really-equal-championships

    https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/8/22/17606048/blue-chip-ratio-2018

    https://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2018/7/26/17607382/blue-chip-ratio-recruit-national-title-championship-playoff

    https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/history-shows-national-titles-require-great-not-just-good-recruiting-over-4-years/

    None of those articles mean SC, or any other team in the SECE, can't beat us with their 3 and 4 star guys. Put our talent at Vandy. Do you think they will suddenly become Alabama, or last year's Georgia, on the field? We can't prove it, but I guarantee you they would not. It takes more than pure talent to play for championships--including a little luck. What good are those stars then?

    Let me add one more thing--without the coach, the facilities, the location--those elite players would not come to UGA, or Bama or OSU. The articles @PharmDawg2054 cite just report what happened for those schools who put everything together for a while.

  • DawginSCDawginSC ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @JayDog said:
    We should not be deluded by "star" ratings and talent gaps. That is not science. A lot of unheralded players are late bloomers. Many 4 and 5 stars don't live up to potential. But then again, with proper attitude and coaching--those "stars" may actually mean something. How many championships has Ohio State won with all their 4 and 5 star recruits? The point is--we don't know how good a team will be until they play the games.

    The above is just as true for Georgia as it is for SC. I don't think we should worry about SC any more than any other team. Every team can beat you on a given day. I believe our talent will make a difference because I believe in our coaching staff. So don't worry about the other guy. Take care of your own business--it's all you can do.

    I disagree. While some unheralded players are late bloomers, the fact is the higher the star rating the more often the player turns into something good. When you're loaded with higher star players, you hit more often.

    Teams who don't land a ton of 5-star guys remember the 5-star busts. We all remember Marquise Elmore. But we forget we miss a lot more on 3-star guys.

    The talent gap does matter. The fact it's widening between us and SC is a good sign that those games won't be as close as the Richt/Holtz and Richt/Spurrier years.

  • tfk_fanboytfk_fanboy ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @DawginSC said:

    @JayDog said:
    We should not be deluded by "star" ratings and talent gaps. That is not science. A lot of unheralded players are late bloomers. Many 4 and 5 stars don't live up to potential. But then again, with proper attitude and coaching--those "stars" may actually mean something. How many championships has Ohio State won with all their 4 and 5 star recruits? The point is--we don't know how good a team will be until they play the games.

    The above is just as true for Georgia as it is for SC. I don't think we should worry about SC any more than any other team. Every team can beat you on a given day. I believe our talent will make a difference because I believe in our coaching staff. So don't worry about the other guy. Take care of your own business--it's all you can do.

    I disagree. While some unheralded players are late bloomers, the fact is the higher the star rating the more often the player turns into something good. When you're loaded with higher star players, you hit more often.

    Teams who don't land a ton of 5-star guys remember the 5-star busts. We all remember Marquise Elmore. But we forget we miss a lot more on 3-star guys.

    The talent gap does matter. The fact it's widening between us and SC is a good sign that those games won't be as close as the Richt/Holtz and Richt/Spurrier years.

    there are some who don't understand odds and percentages

    they operate under a few misguided notions like if all 5*s aren't studs/if any are busts there you can't rely on rankings, or if any team with less recruiting talent beats a team with more then it proves star ratings don't matter, or "any given saturday", etc

    it has to be all or none for some folks. they struggled with nuance, statistics, and common sense

  • JayDogJayDog ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @tfk_fanboy said:

    @DawginSC said:

    @JayDog said:
    We should not be deluded by "star" ratings and talent gaps. That is not science. A lot of unheralded players are late bloomers. Many 4 and 5 stars don't live up to potential. But then again, with proper attitude and coaching--those "stars" may actually mean something. How many championships has Ohio State won with all their 4 and 5 star recruits? The point is--we don't know how good a team will be until they play the games.

    The above is just as true for Georgia as it is for SC. I don't think we should worry about SC any more than any other team. Every team can beat you on a given day. I believe our talent will make a difference because I believe in our coaching staff. So don't worry about the other guy. Take care of your own business--it's all you can do.

    I disagree. While some unheralded players are late bloomers, the fact is the higher the star rating the more often the player turns into something good. When you're loaded with higher star players, you hit more often.

    Teams who don't land a ton of 5-star guys remember the 5-star busts. We all remember Marquise Elmore. But we forget we miss a lot more on 3-star guys.

    The talent gap does matter. The fact it's widening between us and SC is a good sign that those games won't be as close as the Richt/Holtz and Richt/Spurrier years.

    there are some who don't understand odds and percentages

    they operate under a few misguided notions like if all 5*s aren't studs/if any are busts there you can't rely on rankings, or if any team with less recruiting talent beats a team with more then it proves star ratings don't matter, or "any given saturday", etc

    it has to be all or none for some folks. they struggled with nuance, statistics, and common sense

    Sorry, I was not suggesting that talent doesn't matter. The point you guys are missing is that if you put all that talent on a team like Vandy without the right coach and program, they will not win championships. Vandy could never recruit them in the first place because of other missing pieces that would make them successful. Do you dispute that? The percentages are not hard to understand. Counting the number of 5 stars on championship teams doesn't account for other variables that make THAT PARTICULAR TEAM successful. When a team has a lot of 5 stars, they got other things happening right as well. If star rating is ALL that matters--then Vandy would win those championships if we put our talent on their team.

  • JoelSidneyKellyJoelSidneyKelly ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @JayDog said:

    ...if you put all that talent on a team like Vandy without the right coach and program, they will not win championships.

    The converse is also true: Bill Belachick can't coach Vandy to a championship because inevitably they will have to face a team of 240 lb guys that can run a 4.4 40... in Athens, GA.

    It takes three things to have a great college football team: acquisition, development, and construction (play calling). They are listed in order of importance.

  • DawginSCDawginSC ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @JayDog said:

    @tfk_fanboy said:

    @DawginSC said:

    @JayDog said:
    We should not be deluded by "star" ratings and talent gaps. That is not science. A lot of unheralded players are late bloomers. Many 4 and 5 stars don't live up to potential. But then again, with proper attitude and coaching--those "stars" may actually mean something. How many championships has Ohio State won with all their 4 and 5 star recruits? The point is--we don't know how good a team will be until they play the games.

    The above is just as true for Georgia as it is for SC. I don't think we should worry about SC any more than any other team. Every team can beat you on a given day. I believe our talent will make a difference because I believe in our coaching staff. So don't worry about the other guy. Take care of your own business--it's all you can do.

    I disagree. While some unheralded players are late bloomers, the fact is the higher the star rating the more often the player turns into something good. When you're loaded with higher star players, you hit more often.

    Teams who don't land a ton of 5-star guys remember the 5-star busts. We all remember Marquise Elmore. But we forget we miss a lot more on 3-star guys.

    The talent gap does matter. The fact it's widening between us and SC is a good sign that those games won't be as close as the Richt/Holtz and Richt/Spurrier years.

    there are some who don't understand odds and percentages

    they operate under a few misguided notions like if all 5*s aren't studs/if any are busts there you can't rely on rankings, or if any team with less recruiting talent beats a team with more then it proves star ratings don't matter, or "any given saturday", etc

    it has to be all or none for some folks. they struggled with nuance, statistics, and common sense

    Sorry, I was not suggesting that talent doesn't matter. The point you guys are missing is that if you put all that talent on a team like Vandy without the right coach and program, they will not win championships. Vandy could never recruit them in the first place because of other missing pieces that would make them successful. Do you dispute that? The percentages are not hard to understand. Counting the number of 5 stars on championship teams doesn't account for other variables that make THAT PARTICULAR TEAM successful. When a team has a lot of 5 stars, they got other things happening right as well. If star rating is ALL that matters--then Vandy would win those championships if we put our talent on their team.

    Honestly... even with their coaches Vandy would likely win the east if we traded talent.

    Jimmies and Joes > X's and O's.

  • PharmDawg2054PharmDawg2054 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @JayDog said:

    @PharmDawg2054 said:

    @JayDog said:
    We should not be deluded by "star" ratings and talent gaps. That is not science. A lot of unheralded players are late bloomers. Many 4 and 5 stars don't live up to potential. But then again, with proper attitude and coaching--those "stars" may actually mean something. How many championships has Ohio State won with all their 4 and 5 star recruits? The point is--we don't know how good a team will be until they play the games.

    The above is just as true for Georgia as it is for SC. I don't think we should worry about SC any more than any other team. Every team can beat you on a given day. I believe our talent will make a difference because I believe in our coaching staff. So don't worry about the other guy. Take care of your own business--it's all you can do.

    In

    https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2613145-do-top-10-recruiting-classes-really-equal-championships

    https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/8/22/17606048/blue-chip-ratio-2018

    https://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2018/7/26/17607382/blue-chip-ratio-recruit-national-title-championship-playoff

    https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/history-shows-national-titles-require-great-not-just-good-recruiting-over-4-years/

    None of those articles mean SC, or any other team in the SECE, can't beat us with their 3 and 4 star guys. Put our talent at Vandy. Do you think they will suddenly become Alabama, or last year's Georgia, on the field? We can't prove it, but I guarantee you they would not. It takes more than pure talent to play for championships--including a little luck. What good are those stars then?

    Sure these teams full of talent are capable of getting beat, especially by a rival school... it happens all the time

    But what does not happen is winning a national title without those 4 and 5 star players

  • JayDogJayDog ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited August 2018

    Sure these teams full of talent are capable of getting beat, especially by a rival school... it happens all the time

    Which was my original point @PharmDawg2054

  • UnderDog68UnderDog68 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @pgjackson said:
    Two coaching legends failed to do anything with SC. i doubt Muschamp is going to be any better.

    Spurrier got them to an SECCG and got them to their only 11-win seasons. He also beat UGA 3 times in a row for the first time ever. While not getting any hardware, he was still a big thorn in our collective sides, and did way better than Lou Holtz.

  • pgjacksonpgjackson ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @UnderDog68 said:

    @pgjackson said:
    Two coaching legends failed to do anything with SC. i doubt Muschamp is going to be any better.

    Spurrier got them to an SECCG and got them to their only 11-win seasons. He also beat UGA 3 times in a row for the first time ever. While not getting any hardware, he was still a big thorn in our collective sides, and did way better than Lou Holtz.

    Exactly. 1 SECCG appearance. That's it. Three 11-win seasons is good, but still nothing to show for it. That was my point. They had two HCs with NC credentials and both failed to win anything significant. I'm not sure Muschamp is the guy. Heck, I'm not sure anyone is "the guy" at SC.

  • UnderDog68UnderDog68 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    But for SCAR......That's over-achieving. You're correct about one thing, though....They've had some coaches come thru there that have done great at other schools and seen their careers die at SCAR. Paul Deitzel won a title at LSU....Didn't do jack there. Same with Holtz, and to a certain extent....same with Spurrier.

Sign In or Register to comment.