NashvilleGator

Recent Comments
"number of players" in the last paragraph should be "number of elite players."
Kirby, I don't have a huge disagreement with your analysis, but -- especially with respect to wide receivers and running backs -- your analysis highlights my main observation about the 52% BCR threshold and the diminishing returns from each additional increment of BCR. Clearly, Georgia has the higher rated offensive line. But the key question isn't whether Georgia's O-line is better. It's whether Florida's O-line is good enough. I believe it will be. Of Georgia's 11 receivers ranked as elite, only three can be on the field at one time. Florida puts two top 100 guys plus Kadarius Toney on the field. With a couple of elite true freshmen in the wings. At tight end, Pitts will be a consensus All-American. Georgia always has great running backs. But typically these days, only one at a time is going to be on the field, with one other seeing meaningful playing time. Florida has a hopefully healthy Lingard and Dameon Pierce is a very solid running back. Malik Davis was magical in his true freshman season but hasn't been the same since his injuries. Whether he can be again remains to be seen. I'm sure Georgia's defense is superior on paper too. But the same general arguments apply. Again, Georgia was superior to LSU on paper in every way last year, including at the quarterback position. Didn't matter. As for my comment about Georgia high school player ratings, it's just a vague suspicion. The underlying reason for the suspicion is the number of players per 100,000 population. But I just checked this and Louisiana actually ranks #1 in that metric (Georgia is #2... Alabama, Florida and Maryland are #3, #4 and #5 respectively) so maybe it's no big deal. It would be interesting to look at state by state outcomes (ratings vs. the draft).
There is nothing magical about the Air Raid offense. A true Air Raid spreads the field (most SEC offenses strive to do this today), runs at a high tempo and throws the ball a lot. There is nothing unique about the route concepts. On the plus side, it's a lot of fun to watch. Also, Throwing the ball more often and -- in particular -- throwing the ball quickly to short/shallow routes can offset talent disparities along the line of scrimmage. On the minus side, the defense knows you're going to be one dimensional and can line up accordingly. While you can negate superior talent on the line of scrimmage with quick throws, In 2019, Washington State threw the ball 77% of the time. Almost eight out of every 10 plays. The average FBS team threw the ball 45% of the time. And Washington State was sixth worst in FBS in interceptions thrown, at 16. They ranked 50th in pass attempts per interception, so their interception rate was not just due to throwing more often. In 2019, all four CFP finalists and Alabama finished ahead of Washington State in yards per game. And with the exception of LSU, which threw 52% of the time, Ohio State, Clemson, Oklahoma and Alabama all threw less than 50% of the time. Ohio State threw the least, at 38%. I'm excited to see Leach's offense, but I suspect the SEC's better defenses will eat it alive.
Kirby, more of the Georgia offensive linemen are top 250, but Florida's talent level has been increasing in each of the last two recruiting classes that it is now good enough to withstand key starter injuries. Incidentally, while it's a different subject for another day, I've long suspected there is high school player ratings inflation within the state of Georgia. Leghumper, no. I'm only concerned with the 85 full scholarship limit and the players within that group. Having a bunch of extra guys for your practice squad does not add meaningful value. And the occasional walk-on/non-scholarship scholarship diamond in the rough who turns into a starter is a rare bird indeed. While we're on the subject, this is precisely why the 85 scholarship limit is used to calculate measures like BCR or the 247 Composite roster rankings. If you used the headcount of every kid on the team, the percentages and scores would not be apples-to-apples. And if you used actual scholarships other than 85 it would also not be apples to apples. This is your cue for a joke about apples.
Marsh, and he starts strong out of the gate this morning. Arrow is definitely in the zone.
Silly rabbit. Trix are for kids! (I just felt like saying that. It has about as much relevance as your comment and is almost as silly.)
2019 LSU had Burrow and a ton of great football players who are gone. No team in college football will match LSU’s 2019 offense next season, but LSU can potentially be the second best offense in the West, after Alabama. What makes me think Brennan can be good, if not great, is that Orgeron did not shop for a transfer quarterback this off-season.
Good points but I don’t necessarily think he’s doomed. He’s got 12 regular season games a year and LSU, Alabama and Auburn are just three. He could win 7-9 games a year. Costello’s good but he may not have the receivers for his offense in Years 1 and 2. He’s probably going to have a terrible defense because he’s going to get out-recruited in-state by Kiffin for the front seven guys.
Sure Leghumper. Everybody knows MSU is a football blue blood program.
Leghumper, I can handle the guzzintas just fine. Arrowflight, you're killing me today. I've been laughing out loud at my desk.
"We're too focused on trying to catch up with Bama..." Ah, if only that were true.
Mullen's recruiting has been pretty well balanced. We can do qualitatively better at running back but the numbers are good and I think we'll be in good shape if Lorenzo Lingard is healthy. Florida has 16 scholarship offensive linemen for 2020; 15 is the typical target (Georgia is at 15 for 2020).
Oh my, defaulting back to the leather football helmets era argument again. Actually, the all-time series lead is only "double digits" at 10 if you include Georgia's win over Florida Agricultural College in 1904. Florida has won more of the games played since 1939. But yes, Georgia has won the last three!
Leghumper, what I know is that you're engaging in distraction and making a reductio ad absurdum argument. And incidentally, the top 100 cutoff changes from year to year based upon the 100th guy's rating. Over the last few years, it's ranged from 0.952 to 0.956. But as I've said before, I don't think ratings precision means much.
Actually, the only comparison that would be somewhat valid is Mullen's first two years at a major program versus Kirby's first two years at Georgia. And even that wouldn't be completely valid because Kirby took over a better roster.
Not during Nick Saban's run at Alabama, he didn't. Come on, Leghumper. Don't be ridiculous.
If you think Kirby would have won the SEC West at Mississippi State you are truly delusional.
You're right. The curve ain't flattenin'. It's trending sharply upward in the last two years.
Well, I would say the brainwashing is coming along just fine with your grandson.
There are times when percentages are misleading. Like when you fail to note that Florida produces 44-45 blue chip high school players every year, three times the number likely to be recruited to any single school. And when you fail to note that the percentages are skewed by two of the bog three Florida schools currently being down, which affects the overall number of players who stay in-state.
There may be a coherent thought hidden behind this comment, but I can't figure out what it is.
@Georgia Boi912, I'm just curious how much "hardware" you think Kirby would have won as head coach at Mississippi State during the years Mullen coached there. When will Georgia fans ever stop using that meaningless analogy.
Just for the record, In that same 40 year period, Florida has seven SEC titles, 12 division titles and three national championships. As for fairy tales, the myth that Kirby played a soft defense in the fourth quarter (and misuse of the term "prevent" defense) continues to be hilarious. Had Kirby been in a true prevent defense, Florida would have likely scored much faster. Use some common sense.
So now Corch is into the Blue Chip Ratio. So here's the funny mathematical thing about the BCR: Once you've hit around 52% BCR, an opponent's higher BCR ratio doesn't matter that much. Let me explain. Once you have a 52% BCR, you theoretically have elite players (4-stars or better) across your two deep. (22 x 2)/85 = 52%. (As an aside, kickers, punters and long snappers are almost always rated 3-stars or less, so they don't matter in this calculation.) Obviously, this assumes balanced recruiting and it's never going to be perfectly accurate. So an opponent that's stacking up elite talent (Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State) north of a 70% BCR isn't really gaining a proportional advantage over an opponent with elite 1s and 2s across the board. Because many of those guys -- regardless of their talent rating -- are 3s who won't see the field in a given year. Perfect example? LSU's 2019 BCR was 55%. Georgia's was 67%. Leghumper would likely argue that the percentage of top 100 elite players makes a difference, but it doesn't seem to. Probably because a non-trivial number of top 100 guys don't play to their ratings. Transcendent players make a difference (Watson, Tebow), but they are few and far between. For those of you keeping score at home, Florida's 2020 BCR should be 58%. Georgia's should be 79%. These figures do not include recent elite, non-senior transfers like Justin Shorter and J.T. Daniels, who may not receive waivers. These figures also do not include 3-stars who have demonstrated an elite level of play, like Kyle Trask for Florida and Eric Stokes for Georgia. Also, if you're doing your own counts, 247's 4-star floor is not 0.90. It's 0.8901 (i.e., > 0.89). So to summarize, in Georgia fan-speak, once a team's BCR exceeds about 52%, any real or imagined "gap" don't matter much.
I ran into a goal post once. I wish it had moved.