- Oct 13, 2011
I will be very surprised if we win out.
I would bet against us winning out, but it's possible. I also don't expect a 2013-type collapse unless King gets hurt. He's too steady, and we don't have a D'Onofrio defense.
2017 is a much more likely possibility, but that season was a step forward. We finished #13 (highest ranking since 2004) and signed a top 10 class. The problem is that we didn't make adjustments and took a massive step back the following year. We will see how this season plays out.
That’s fine, I’m not here to say much other than that yet. Just refuting the claim that we’re 5-1 because we got to play the teams we beat last year. It’s a coincidence and if we had played the bad teams from 2019 we lost to instead no one would think that’s more impressive.I think there's 100% agreement that we've "improved" from last year.
However, last year was probably the worst Miami team since the 1970s. "Improvement" from last year is hardly anything to be happy about.
If you think evaluation ‘hit rate’ is shown by having some fringe nfl kids, then we just disagree completely. I think the purpose of evaluations is to find kids who can help us win AT MIAMI. That’s the goal, the job of the coach, and the point of recruiting. Our evals have been mediocre at best since Butch left. Fringe nfl roster kids don’t prove much, but we’ve had this debate and it’s probably tired already.Nobody has ever denied our roster deficiencies compared to the elite teams. However, people like myself have focused on our roster supremacy compared to the rest of the ACC. And every single time an objective third party like ESPN performs a talent analysis, it supports our view.
This year is a perfect example. We're 5-1, and many are focusing on the poor quality of our opponents. But that's always been the case. Miami has a better roster than nearly every team in the conference. The roster has clear flaws. Other teams have much deeper flaws. The difference now is that we have systems that fit the players on both sides of the ball.
Your rallying cry has always been "evaluations." Well, a third party looked at the issue, and found that Miami had the greatest percentage of NFL players from its blue-chip prospects. Number one in hit rate. And the five teams behind it are the best programs in football. As is always the case, Miami is the outlier.
The response is usually, "where are the first rounders?" And it's a fair question. But it has very little to do with evaluations. During ESPN's sample period, Miami missed on Calvin Ridley, Jerry Jeudy and Chris Henderson. That had nothing to do with evaluations. We found them early, offered them early and recruited them like crazy. Unfortunately, we were a bad program that misused our talent. So they went elsewhere.
Which brings us back to the blueprint of success that we've laid out for years. First step is utilizing our current NFL talent in a way that consistently beats inferior conference opponents. Think early Clemson. Second step is building our depth with local talent similar to Charlie Strong-era Louisville. The next step, once we've had some success, is landing the local first rounders that have been going to Alabama and Georgia. The final step is recruiting nationally from a position of power.
It's never just one thing. But talent has always been last on the list of the problems.
You gotta win games or put up insane numbers to be an All-American. Rousseau was a monster but we won 6 games.The all american thing isn't all on the coaches and players. I believe Jaquan Johnson was an All American level Safety and was snubbed. Rousseau also should have made All American last season. The Miami bias is real and factors in to that particular metric more so than others.
There is an obvious data flaw in this type of analysis that needs to be noted. It's fundamentally a corrupt methodology for assessing how schools did, because it is measuring outcomes relative to ratings. That only works if the ratings aren't systematically skewed by the schools involved. But we know for sure they are. Ratings are biased by schools with big and active fan bases (that's how the sites work). Essentially, kids from some of these schools are consistently overrated, and by contrast, as we ALL KNOW, kids heading to Miami often get a bit of a negative ratings hit, at least at the top end of the ratings system. So if that's right, then Miami 'ratings' understate the talent it brings in (all else equal here, evals are a separate topic); and Tennessee, Fla State and Texas kids are over-rated, and hence their outcomes look worse relative to ratings and ours better, again, relative to ratings.Which college football teams bring in five- and four-star prospects but don't maximize their potential?www.espn.com
i won't copy and paste the whole thing, but here's some of the more interesting data:
NFL draft selections
Unfortunately I feel we are headed down the same path with Diaz as we did with Richt after the 2017 season and 2018 class.
Correct. Not to mention, we played most of this time with too many entirely vacant scholarships (not counting walk-ons who get given a scholarship when the staff fails to use it on a recruited kid).Of the 9 players drafted in that time span 7 came from the 2015 class. If you combine the two preceding and two succeeding years we had 6 players drafted total.
We've experienced an uptick with 14 players drafted these last three years and yet we've managed to go 13-13 the last two years. How much is that due to coaching and underperforming over sheer roster imbalance as ESands is saying? What good is a fourth round safety, a sixth round DE, and a 7th round WR if you have Malik Rosier as your QB? If you have one of the worst OL's in the nation? If for the second year in a row you have one of the worst WR cores this school has ever seen?
I don't really buy the Miami has such a talent advantage over everyone in the Coastal argument anymore. You can point to 14 guys drafted, 10 of which were taken in the 4th round or later, and say I'm wrong. Or you can point to the other 52 guys those 14 had to play with and realize that a few talented players surrounded by an average team doesn't really make you special.
The difference is Richt had been doing things his way for 20 years. And as I said in another thread, that 2017 team was really an 8 win team but for 2 one in a mill catches. That would have been a linear decline of 9,8, and then 7 wins, with it bottoming out at 6 with Diaz. Since Diaz was DC does he get some of the blame? Sure. But defense was actually consistent and reliable. The rot really came from the offense. On the defense, I think the main issue is the coaching change. Baker is just not as good a DC as Diaz was. I don't see the laziness and lack of effort from that side of the ball. For Christ's sake, we have DB who gets kicked out of virtually every game because he's trying to kill someone. The culture on defense is pretty good, they just need a better coordinator.
Anyways, back to the point, whereas I had zero confidence Richt would reinvent himself, I don't think Diaz has developed his HC identity yet so there is still some hope that he will bring in a better staff and prevent Miami from backsliding next year.
I think the purpose of evaluations is to find kids who can help us win AT MIAMI.
Yet then you intentionally, provocatively troll nfl stats like we have an Alabama style roster. We don’t, and haven’t.
There's a HUGE difference between a dominant first round kid and a 6th round pick.
Additionally, your ‘blueprint for success’ IMO omits the foundation of recruiting. ‘Build roster depth with local talent’. Okay, which kids? Why? What are you looking for by position, by unit, by class, by character and attitude? Recruiting evals require identifying your criteria, assessing kids, making trade-offs, taking calculated risks. And doing all this with structure and process, and data systems as well, in this day and age. There is no evidence we do any of that beyond the most rudimentary way.
I continuously point out that the ‘nfl kid in 6 years’ standard would lead you to think we had an nfl left tackle last year if Zion makes it down the road. But that argument would be specious. We had a 2* true frosh who wasn’t remotely ready, and nothing about his future will change that after the fact.
We've had plenty of those kids, and we didn't win with them. That's why our head coaches are unemployed and our players are employed. The same players who couldn't play defense in 2015 learned pretty quick in 2016. The same thing is happening on offense this year.
We don't have an Alabama-style roster. Nobody thinks we do. The question should be, "Why does a .500 program keep showing up on NFL lists next to Alabama, Georgia and Ohio State?" We're always on these lists, and we're always the outlier.
And there's a huge difference between a 6th Rounder and a plumber. If producing average pros was easy, every school would do it.
Since you asked, I would focus on length, toughness and twitch. Those are the three characteristics that are most difficult to develop.
That same offense had a future NFL RB running for less than 700 yards and a future NFL WR putting up less than 600 yards. Both were upperclassmen. The system dragged everyone down from the top of the roster to the bottom.
It's not normal to struggle this way. Look again at the numbers in the OP. The teams that missed on their blue-chippers were perennial underachievers like FSU, Tennessee, Texas and USC. The teams that hit on their blue-chippers were the absolute cream of the crop, plus Miami.
There is a unique disconnect between our program's ability to produce pros and the performance on the field. If we can close that gap, we will be able to fill the gaps on the roster.
I just can’t understand why you’re not more interested in thinking about how we can get better at getting the right roster talent, and managing it effectively.
Sigh. Who are these plumbers who play for other top teams?
I agree with most of your post. But to the bold part I would add players development, motivation and leadership. Basically better all over coaching. I firmly believe at Miami where HS talent is abundant, scheme and leadership at the coache's level is what has been missing during all those years of mediocrity. Maybe apart of FSU lately, arguably we are the most underachieving program in college football.This goes to a long-running debate I've had with @Ethnicsands.
Yes, evaluations can always improve. But the biggest problem by far is the deployment of these players at the college level.
47.3% of our blue chips got drafted. That is the highest rate on the list. For perspective, the next five schools are Ohio State, Clemson, Alabama, LSU and Georgia. Everyone would agree those are the five best programs in the nation.
But we got very little out of those guys in college, largely due to scheme issues. We produced zero All-Americans and two All-Conference guys. The other teams in that category are underachievers like Texas, Tennessee, FSU and USC. Tellingly, the top producers of All-Americans are the schools behind us on the NFL list: Alabama, Clemson, LSU, Ohio State and Georgia. They turn players into production.
The most surprising stat for me was the transfers. Miami had the lowest percentage of transfers of the 14 schools.
Dorsey had the longest NFL career of any QB we've produced in the last 30 years.We have no greater example than Ken Dorsey. Great college player, but not athletically gifted enough to make it in the NFL.
Dorsey had the longest NFL career of any QB we've produced in the last 30 years.
Before that, it was Craig Erickson. Before that, Steve Walsh. All of those guys won titles.
Yet nobody in their right mind would point to Dorsey as an example of our NFL production.
He was great in college and did absolutely nothing at the next level. They took a flier with his 7th round pick.