forums

Coaching v Talent

RVACane said:
It’s more than one play.
Click to expand...
king is the problem. no one wants to admit it. Lashlee can design whatever the kid has no instincts. 4th and goal on 1? a real qb runs up and just pushes it in. this kid is clueless. locks onto a wr and throws a fastball. he gets sacked alot because of bad decisions.
 
Advertisement
supacane said:
Pure facts. Clemson went away from over paying Bowden to trying a young Dabo who was impressive with his interview. He proved yearly to address problems that popped up. Making good hires below him and recruiting high level players after showing improvements on the field. That is important in convincing kids you are moving in the right direction.
Click to expand...

Correct.
 
supacane said:
I will excuse the Bama game as they are in another league. Last season we lost to Clemson 42-17 think was the score. People excuse is to point to stars and say we are over matched. We had some infusion of talent that made us close the gap on them and they lost some players in the offseason. But they bring in top recruiting classes yearly. So largely its the same gap from last season to this

Anyway Clemson has 10 5 stars, 41 4 stars and 30 3 stars. For us its 2 5 stars, 43 4 stars and 38 3 stars. Thats basically the roster comparison that is a 42-17 gap for Miami coaches. (BTW UGA roster is as close to Bama as Clemson is to us. UGA-Clemson was 10-3, UGA would beat us into a coma)

Now remember our roster breakdown for us and consider we are -7 v App St at home. App St as.1....yes 1 4 star and 44 3 star players. I guess everyone else is unranked.

What is my point? There are two ways to either beat teams or challenge them. You can either be so much better than them where basic plays will still beat them even if they figured its coming, or you can scheme and coach beat them where it bamboozle them and equalize the talent gap if they are better than you talent wise.

When you combine both you get Bama.

When you cant even make a game competitive and your first instinct is to cry about who we don't have, it means you make no difference as a coach and i could coach the team to the same result as only the players you have matters. The coaches job is to make the whole bigger than the sum of its parts. We don't have that. No evidence of that yet.

App St coaches will coach and close the talent gap with us according vegas. For some reason though, every time we play an opponent thats better or favored not only do it turn out the way the betting line says....its worse. See Saturday against Bama, Clemson, LSU , UNC etc, and also on the other hand when vegas favors us bar a few times where the opponent is dumster juice, FSU and Louisville, the underdogs against us manage to make the game closer than the pre game line. Our coaching staff is not giving us any type of edge against any team. Matter of fact they are a net negative.

If we don't see drastic improvements for the rest of the season starting this Saturday, know that nothing is changing. If we are still struggling with App St and Mich St, UVA etc. nothing has changed . I gave Diaz slack because he seems amenable to changes and has gotten a little better recruiting. At some point the changes have to show on the field. Political speeches sounds nice until you see the bill. The bill so far needs to be repealed.

And please dont give me no cr@p about who will come blah blah. Plenty of coaches would love to run through the ACC with the 13th ranked roster in the nation and then a chance to recruit Miami and make it better after they beat Duke, GT and UVA to sleep and give UNC an *** kicking for throwing down the U. I hold my powder till season's end to decide.
Click to expand...
You raise an interesting point.

One sure fire way for UM to fund improvements in the football program would be to put aside a couple percent of the endowment and use it to bet against UM football in big games. They'd make a fortune, and could reinvest the proceeds back into better coaches and infrastructure. I mean, if that were legal, I guess.
 
apex_predator said:
This makes no sense. Nebraska as an example doesn't prove that talent is more important than resources. If anything it proves the importance of evaluations. Nebraska has resources, and were recruiting at a top 20 level. The issue is they've been recruiting the wrong players, which is why they were one of the biggest losers in the transfer portal this offseason.

https://saturdaytradition.com/nebra...ootballs-biggest-losers-from-transfer-portal/

But for every Nebraska, I can give you Iowa, Iowa. St, Mich St, Baylor, TCU, Wisconsin, U of W, Wash St, etc. These are all programs that have drastically outperformed their recruiting rankings over the yrs. Why is that?

No one is arguing that a higher level of resource allocation guarantees you a NC. There are no guarantees in life. It's about maximizing the probability for making the right HC hire, and giving yourself the best chance to win.
Click to expand...
There was a time I would get attacked for bringing up that word.
 
Go Canes!! said:
It’s been shown King made the wrong read on that 3rd down play. He should have made the throw to Rambo in the flat.

Not sure what he was thinking there.
Click to expand...
People forget he started out as a receiver in college even though he played qb in high school. I would love to give Van Duke or Garcia a chance to get future started.
 
Advertisement
RVACane said:
I mean you’re being measured and logical. I think the horror of seeing that 3rd and 7 run up the Bama middle Lashlee run run pass offense is just bewildering to the point where a lot of us who expected a big loss and were prepared to look past this game, just can’t. That will be engrained in my brain like the Coley halfback pass in the snow and Dan Enos’ soggy unlamented ink running play sheet.
Click to expand...
That was awful but the back to back bubble screens is what got me heated.
Go Canes!! said:
It’s been shown King made the wrong read on that 3rd down play. He should have made the throw to Rambo in the flat.

Not sure what he was thinking there.
Click to expand...

Still, why would a handoff even be an option in that situation?

This is the drawback of calling rpo on 3rd & Long. This is why I always want as many straight playaction run fakes as rpo. If it’s a play that the qb isn’t given the option to hand off, you reduce the chances of him making a bad decision for whatever reason.

If it really was rpo, handing off on 3rd & Long is so dumb I could only reasonably guess it was nerves.
 
TruCane81 said:
Still, why would a handoff even be an option in that situation?

This is the drawback of calling rpo on 3rd & Long. This is why I always want as many straight playaction run fakes as rpo. If it’s a play that the qb isn’t given the option to hand off, you reduce the chances of him making a bad decision for whatever reason.

If it really was rpo, handing off on 3rd & Long is so dumb I could only reasonably guess it was nerves.
Click to expand...
Exactly!!!

Why is it even an option here and a lot of other plays. So many Second & third down runs last year where he will just not take the passing option.

Just be done with the RPO if he is making the wrong decisions in year two. The OC has to take some blame here as well.
 
nycane said:
king is the problem. no one wants to admit it. Lashlee can design whatever the kid has no instincts. 4th and goal on 1? a real qb runs up and just pushes it in. this kid is clueless. locks onto a wr and throws a fastball. he gets sacked alot because of bad decisions.
Click to expand...
Interesting take. Its a position most refuse to acknowledge because we so desperately want to believe he is our true leader who can produce the results that prior QBs failed to deliver. Yet, there is evidene to support your contention
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
NE Canes said:
Exactly!!!

Why is it even an option here and a lot of other plays. So many Second & third down runs last year where he will just not take the passing option.

Just be done with the RPO if he is making the wrong decisions in year two. The OC has to take some blame here as well.
Click to expand...

We forget that King hasn’t played spring ball the last 2 years. He is a smart, hard working kid but those missed reps are showing.

I would go check with me and help him out more. Adjust the calls so that though action is the same, more of the decisions are predetermined.
 
I wasn't interested in working today so I did some data collection/analysis of rosters. It isn't weighted by the starters or two-deep to determine the actual impact of the talent on the performance on the field. For example, Miami has a good number of younger 4-5* kids that aren't on the two-deep.

Conclusions:
LSU will likely fire their coach.
Clemson isn't as far away as people have made them out to be.
SEC has 50% of the 5* kids in the country.
If we drop a game before the ACCCG, it will be to a lesser talent (potentially more experienced) team

Bama - 61 4* kids, 14 5* kids = 75
OSU - 51 4* kids 16 5* kids = 67
UGA - 46 4* kids, 19 5* kids = 65
OU - 46 4* kids, 7 5* kids = 53
Clemson- 41 4* kids, 10 5* kids = 51

MIAMI - 43 4* kids, 2 5* kids (both true freshmen) = 45

FSU - 30 4* kids
UNC - 27 4* kids, 2 5* kids (sophomore/freshman) = 29 4-5*
NCSt- 15 4* kids
GT - 15 4* kids
VT - 14 4* kids
Pitt - 12 4* kids
Mich State- 11 4* kids
UVA - 5 4* kids
Duke - 1 4* kid
App State - 1 4* kid (So WR)

Some other ranked teams:
Florida = 51 4*, 6 5* kids = 57
Texas 47 4*, 5 5* kids - 52
LSU - 43 4* kids, 6 5* kids = 49
aTm - 43 4* kids, 5 5* kids = 48
Oregon - 44 4* kids, 4 5* kids = 48
USC - 44 4* kids, 2 5* kids 46
Notre Dame- 44 4* kids, 1 5* kid = 45
Penn State - 42 4*, 1- 5* kid = 43
UCLA - 21 4* kids
Iowa - 10 4* kids
Cinni- 7 4* kids
Iowa State - 4 4* kids
 
Our coaching hiring is on par, or even slightly below that of UNC’s. Mack Brown was a Richt level hire. (Arguably greater since he won a title)
Butch was a hire half this board wanted at the time.
Fedora was a Golden type hire. Arguably better.

Until we start out-hiring the likes of UNC, I’m not expecting a higher ceiling than them.
 
Advertisement
90scane said:
I wasn't interested in working today so I did some data collection/analysis of rosters. It isn't weighted by the starters or two-deep to determine the actual impact of the talent on the performance on the field. For example, Miami has a good number of younger 4-5* kids that aren't on the two-deep.

Conclusions:
LSU will likely fire their coach.
Clemson isn't as far away as people have made them out to be.
SEC has 50% of the 5* kids in the country.
If we drop a game before the ACCCG, it will be to a lesser talent (potentially more experienced) team

Bama - 61 4* kids, 14 5* kids = 75
OSU - 51 4* kids 16 5* kids = 67
UGA - 46 4* kids, 19 5* kids = 65
OU - 46 4* kids, 7 5* kids = 53
Clemson- 41 4* kids, 10 5* kids = 51

MIAMI - 43 4* kids, 2 5* kids (both true freshmen) = 45

FSU - 30 4* kids
UNC - 27 4* kids, 2 5* kids (sophomore/freshman) = 29 4-5*
NCSt- 15 4* kids
GT - 15 4* kids
VT - 14 4* kids
Pitt - 12 4* kids
Mich State- 11 4* kids
UVA - 5 4* kids
Duke - 1 4* kid
App State - 1 4* kid (So WR)

Some other ranked teams:
Florida = 51 4*, 6 5* kids = 57
Texas 47 4*, 5 5* kids - 52
LSU - 43 4* kids, 6 5* kids = 49
aTm - 43 4* kids, 5 5* kids = 48
Oregon - 44 4* kids, 4 5* kids = 48
USC - 44 4* kids, 2 5* kids 46
Notre Dame- 44 4* kids, 1 5* kid = 45
Penn State - 42 4*, 1- 5* kid = 43
UCLA - 21 4* kids
Iowa - 10 4* kids
Cinni- 7 4* kids
Iowa State - 4 4* kids
Click to expand...
I didn't wanna put all those teams in there but all those teams like Texas A&M has slightly above us talent. Yet when they get on the field its scores like 62-24 UNC. Which is abominable. Like I said if we continue to wibnle wabble with the ACC coastal i don't wanna hear nothing from Diaz.
 
More data:
QB
1 3* kid starting
2 4* kids are sitting (1 on 2-deep)

OL
2 4* kids starting at OG
2 2* kids starting at OT
1 3* kid starting at OC
6 4* kids are sitting (2 are on the 2-deep)

TE
1 4* starting
1 4* kid on the bench (1 on 2-deep)

RB
1 4* kid starting
4 4* kids on the bench(1 on 2-deep)

WR
2 4* starting
1 3* starting

5 4* kids sitting: Pope, Redding, 3 freshmen (1 on 2-deep)

Offense
6 4* kids starting
18 4* kids sitting, 6 on 2-deep

DT
1 - 4* starting
1 - 3* starting
2 4-5* kids sitting (LT/Roberts)

DE
2 - 4* starting
2 4* kids sitting (1 on 2-deep)

LB
1 4* starting
2 3* starting

3 4* kids sitting (1 on 2-deep)

DB
4 4* starting
7 4* kids sitting (4 on 2-deep)

8 4* kids starting
14 4-5* kids sitting, 6 on 2-deep

14 4* starters
12 4* on 2-deep
26 of 46 blue chippers have cracked the two-deep.

**Laurance Seymore wasn't ranked in the 247 roster I was using which gets us to 46.
 
Lispy Diaz never will get another pass from me not after his D gives up an average of 48 points over 3 games. If the defense was performing well and the offense ok perhaps he has the wrong guy. This is his debacle and train wreck it’s going to get even worse before it gets better,
 
Advertisement
nycane said:
king is the problem. no one wants to admit it. Lashlee can design whatever the kid has no instincts. 4th and goal on 1? a real qb runs up and just pushes it in. this kid is clueless. locks onto a wr and throws a fastball. he gets sacked alot because of bad decisions.
Click to expand...
hes not an nfl qb they will see in the draft, hes an amazing dude and a good athlete.
 
RVACane said:
I mean you’re being measured and logical. I think the horror of seeing that 3rd and 7 run up the Bama middle Lashlee run run pass offense is just bewildering to the point where a lot of us who expected a big loss and were prepared to look past this game, just can’t. That will be engrained in my brain like the Coley halfback pass in the snow and Dan Enos’ soggy unlaminated ink running play sheet.
Click to expand...
Honestly that’s right about where I am lol had this chalked up as a loss but to not only lose, but get absolutely mollywhopped and look like our coaches are coaching scared was just mind boggling to me.
 
Go Canes!! said:
It’s been shown King made the wrong read on that 3rd down play. He should have made the throw to Rambo in the flat.

Not sure what he was thinking there.
Click to expand...
So our options were throw it short of the sticks or run it? And that's on the QB and not the guy whose calling the plays and who put the gameplan in?
 
supacane said:
im not sure about that one. That one is an instance where i think just running up to the line is hurting a team when they should focus on getting the right play for the situation
Click to expand...
They said they worked on that play all off-season. Lol With a 5'8 180 lb QB coming off an ACL injury Lashlee actually thought that was a good idea to have that play in his back pocket.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top