articles
Comments (168)
A time has to come when you reflect on how little you matter. If not keep up the work.
I get the numbers but post the schedule. We've played no good offenses this season. Cal put up their season high against us. Louisville put up their season high (D1). VT, USF, UF are all just bad. Thank God for Cam.
Mario has a history of closing strong. We have a recent history of not recruiting well at DB. Which wins this year?
My gawd...that offensive line haul would be very offensive for the acc. JUST FOLD THE PROGRUM, TOO MANY COLOSSAL GIANTS THAT CAN MOVE gee whiz.
Advertisement
My 7 iron ******* sucks
Doesn't look nearly as good when looking at only in conference results. Small sample size for us (3 ACC games) but think the truth is somewhere in between in conference stats and the pretty rosy picture the stats above show.
Pts per game ( was pulled from the Syracuse vs Pitt game thread which is why Pitt is highlighted)
Yards per game
That's not a fair portrayal to put on Samson. He was injured in year 1 of a developmental year. The kids upside is monumental. Now do we know if he'll reach his potential. No of course not. But he's in year #1 essentially coming out of playing high school competition and receiving coaching that didn't help him previously to transition into this level. Give the kid some time before he's wrote off brother.
my brother in the Lord, I think the fans are criticizing our defense based on the ACC games we have played and not the entire season taking into account: Ball St. FAMU, USF.
verses VT, Miami gave up 394 total yards;
verses Cal, Miami gave up 370 total yards
verses UL, Miami gave up 342 total yards.
Advertisement
Very well said Lance.
The major difference is that Saban was a beast at both recruiting and evaluating. He nailed so many evaluations. That plus being a defensive guru, putting his guys in a position to constantly succeed = longevity and success. He didn’t find just good players. His hits, are NFL 1st rounders. His eye for talent was absurd, and when he wanted someone, he rarely lost that battle.
Mario has not. Not at Oregon, not at Miami (yet). Recruiting, absolutely killing it. Evals…short answer is no. Just not quite there. Not enough dudes that you look at and say “oh this guy can change college football”.
We can go through the list at the end of the season because I want to give younger guys like Malik Bryant a full chance to show off his game (and he’s an example of someone that’s improved since he got to campus, thank you for the position change).
But if you really start going through the list, the emergence (or lack thereof) of young bodies has not related to the stars and portal guys brought in…for every 1-2 hits, there’s 5-6 misses. For every Bain and Mauigoa (which might be the only two at this point), there’s 10+ that can’t quite hack it yet despite being ranked highly. And like you said, it needs to be closer to 50%.
Now I totally get kids need time to develop. I’m not pushing them out the door, I’m not saying Mario is a bad recruiter. That is not true.
Personally, I do think adding more analysts should help with evals. Guys like Frank Tucker etc. I’m just alluding to what we have in front of us right now, particularly guys that should be ready to contribute on the defensive side of the ball, but aren’t. We need more instant-impact, bonafide studs that will play and ball from day 1.
We don’t have many in this 2025 class…yet.
Last edited:
I agree with what you are saying but comparing Mario to the greatest college football coach of all time isn't fair either.
How much of this is a failure to develop rather than a failure to evaluate?
The problem with this, like so many elements of football, is the sheer variance in the data that can occur. It's hard to draw sweeping conclusions that the problem is this or that.
A good coach here might not be successful there. Same with a recruit.
Mario probably isn't greatest of all-time good. I agree there.
The question is what's your threshold? If it's greatest of all-time good, it probably isn't ever getting met. If it's top-10 of FCS, maybe it is getting met.
You'd have to run the analysis, account for confounding variables, normalize where you can, control where you can, and then see where you land.
Something as simple as an injury to the player robbing half a step can be the difference for them. A position coach that teaches it so it clicks for a player could leave before that click moment occurs.
Greg Rousseau gained the weight and Cyrus Moss couldn't. Moss was probably a bad eval, but one could argue he's sound process and just fell victim to the same variance that befalls so many top MLB prospects.
This isn't linear. You get one this year, you might just miss one next year. The result is less important to me then the process. From what I'm told, Miami's process continues to evolve and improve YoY.
Advertisement
Program should build an AI talent analytics tool to munch on film and spit out recommendations. They can slide into my DMs.
I tend not to celebrate mediocrity. Tough standard to uphold I get. Go Canes!
Do you really expect Mario to share everything under the sun?
Advertisement
Also fair, but you can throw Kirby and Sark in there too for now. Just the level you have to be at if we want to be competing for natty’s.
I typed all that and forgot to mention develop.
Totally correct. If anything, it should be more development (although in my explanation, hopefully y’all can deduce that’s what I was alluding to when talking about giving guys a chance to properly grow and mature in a collegiate setting).
Development is absolutely what I should have initially mentioned, not strictly evaluations.
I've got a Ping Zing 2 that was always my go to when I played. You can have it, I don't play anymore. It's kinda heavy though.
You know how it goes, if they're not All-ACC by their Sophmore year they're a JAG. Everyone absolutely develops at the same rate and there's zero examples of players emerging as upperclassmen.
Does that make it sound better?
