60 years since GT left the SEC

stinger78

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,266
One of the all-time bad administrative decisions in sports imo...

the raging A-holes of the sec are discussing (as they do)

Why would you post that trash in here? Do you drop trash in the floor at your home?
 

Bogey

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,716
It was not a bad decision when Dodd made it considering all the things that were happening at the time that would be affecting our football program in the future. It didn't work out like he planned, but I hate it when people try to judge him using their 20/20 hindsight in today's world.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,755
I hear people on this site say all the time it was a bad decision. Bad or not, it was a principled decision. The current college football landscape today presents us with an almost identical choice. Do we hold out for the notion of true student athletes or do we go the semi-pro route? The SEC, beginning with Bama back in Dodd’s day, has continuously moved in a direction that is totally incompatible with Tech’s values. I’m OK if people want to argue that Tech should have changed its values back in Dodd’s day, or that we should change our values today. I would strongly disagree but at least that would recognize what we’re talking about here.

Joining the B1G would not have compromised our values, so that decision might be the worst one.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,235
I hear people on this site say all the time it was a bad decision. Bad or not, it was a principled decision. The current college football landscape today presents us with an almost identical choice. Do we hold out for the notion of true student athletes or do we go the semi-pro route? The SEC, beginning with Bama back in Dodd’s day, has continuously moved in a direction that is totally incompatible with Tech’s values. I’m OK if people want to argue that Tech should have changed its values back in Dodd’s day, or that we should change our values today. I would strongly disagree but at least that would recognize what we’re talking about here.

Joining the B1G would not have compromised our values, so that decision might be the worst one.

Given the fact that the reason Dodd left the SEC was eventually passed by all schools in college a few years later, and then we tried to get back into the SEC...well, it looks pretty bad for GT. IMO, GT leaving the SEC was the biggest reason for the rise of UGA over GT. Fans often forget GT's popularity before leaving the SEC. There's a reason UGA voted against GT re-joining the SEC. They were probably the biggest beneficiary of Dodd's folly. The last 20 years (1945-1964) GT was in the SEC, GT was 12-8 against UGA (with an 8 game winning streak). Some fans want to point to pro sports as GT's loss of drawing power, but GT's popularity plus fierce rivalries with 'Bama, Tennessee, Auburn, UGA kept BDS full every game...and that would have continued. Part of the reason for Dodd's calculus in leaving the SEC was our popularity in the Southeast and the ability to draw a crowd. People often forget Dodd's "Notre Dame of the South" pitch in convincing other GT decision makers approving the decision. That turned out to be a false assumption without the fierce SEC rivalries.

The B1G decision in 2012 may go down in GT sports as the worst decision in GTAA history depending on what happens when the GOR expires. The B1G media payout PLUS their academic profile was the perfect match for GT. I calculated GT's loss in revenue a few years ago and it was in the HUNDREDS of millions. We could have practically wiped out the entirety of GT's debt by now putting our program in a much better position than we are now. Given where the B1G's trajectory is going, and the uncertainty of the ACC after the GOR expires, turning down the B1G could be the decision that determines whether GT plays "big boy sports" or is just another college that fields a team.

I've always said GT's biggest liability has been our own business decisions. We keep proving it true year after year. Hopefully the Cabrera era will change that.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,755
Given the fact that the reason Dodd left the SEC was eventually passed by all schools in college a few years later, and then we tried to get back into the SEC...well, it looks pretty bad for GT. IMO, GT leaving the SEC was the biggest reason for the rise of UGA over GT. Fans often forget GT's popularity before leaving the SEC. There's a reason UGA voted against GT re-joining the SEC. They were probably the biggest beneficiary of Dodd's folly. The last 20 years (1945-1964) GT was in the SEC, GT was 12-8 against UGA (with an 8 game winning streak). Some fans want to point to pro sports as GT's loss of drawing power, but GT's popularity plus fierce rivalries with 'Bama, Tennessee, Auburn, UGA kept BDS full every game...and that would have continued. Part of the reason for Dodd's calculus in leaving the SEC was our popularity in the Southeast and the ability to draw a crowd. People often forget Dodd's "Notre Dame of the South" pitch in convincing other GT decision makers approving the decision. That turned out to be a false assumption without the fierce SEC rivalries.

The B1G decision in 2012 may go down in GT sports as the worst decision in GTAA history depending on what happens when the GOR expires. The B1G media payout PLUS their academic profile was the perfect match for GT. I calculated GT's loss in revenue a few years ago and it was in the HUNDREDS of millions. We could have practically wiped out the entirety of GT's debt by now putting our program in a much better position than we are now. Given where the B1G's trajectory is going, and the uncertainty of the ACC after the GOR expires, turning down the B1G could be the decision that determines whether GT plays "big boy sports" or is just another college that fields a team.

I've always said GT's biggest liability has been our own business decisions. We keep proving it true year after year. Hopefully the Cabrera era will change that.
So the SEC basically admitting that what they were doing was wrong, and that Dodd was right, proves my point that it was a principled decision. Every other aspect of that decision is judged by 20-20 hindsight. Including the fact that we absolutely no longer fit in the SEC culture. In any way, shape or fashion.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,831
It was not a bad decision when Dodd made it considering all the things that were happening at the time that would be affecting our football program in the future. It didn't work out like he planned, but I hate it when people try to judge him using their 20/20 hindsight in today's world.
20/20 hindsight is unfortunately how history gets judged

He should have kept negotiating instead of drawing a red line. Iirc a few years later the SEC abolished the 140 rule.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,831
So the SEC basically admitting that what they were doing was wrong, and that Dodd was right, proves my point that it was a principled decision. Every other aspect of that decision is judged by 20-20 hindsight. Including the fact that we absolutely no longer fit in the SEC culture. In any way, shape or fashion.
I think most members of the SEC agreed in principle with getting rid of the 140 rule. They just resented GT and didn’t like the way Dodd tried to force it on them, so they called his bluff.
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,570
20/20 hindsight is unfortunately how history gets judged

He should have kept negotiating instead of drawing a red line. Iirc a few years later the SEC abolished the 140 rule.
But was it that easy to see into the future? Did he have ample enough reason to think all he had to do was wait a few years? Or was it possible, for all he knew, that he would still be asking, hat in hand, the same questions 20 years down the road?
 

LT 1967

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
497
I certainly agree that Coach Dodd's decision was a principled and ethical move. He did not want to " run off unqualified players to stay below the 140 SEC limit". Plus, he wanted to graduate every player that he could. That would often take more than 4 years at Tech and Coach Dodd liked to redshirt to give players more time to graduate. That should always be the "TECH WAY".

One of the things that has concerned me over the last few years is shown in the attached quote from a Furman Bisher article in 1964 after the GT-UGA game. If the future of Tech Football outside the SEC was as clear to a Sports Reporter as demonstrated in this quote, surely the Tech Athletic board and Coach Dodd knew that leaving the SEC might be a significant risk to the well-being of the program. I know that Bisher was a supporter of Dodd.

I certainly don't blame Coach Dodd or Tech for looking out for the best interest of our student-athletes.

It is regretful that we didn't work within the NCAA to fight for a national standard. Nine years after we let the SEC, the NCAA instituted a national limit on scholarships at 30 per year and 105 total. Later reduced to 25/85.

During this period, there was a lot of national discussion and discussion within the NCAA about scholarship limits and "running off dead wood". Also, the scholarship limits varied greatly among the major conferences.

Big 10 and ND----30 per year
Big 8---------------45 per yea
Southwest---------50 per year
SEC----------------45 per year-Total 140 (FB &BB)

So, it appears that we may have made the SEC move prematurely. In the arc of college football history, nine years to wait for a national standard seems pretty insignificant now.
 

Bogey

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,716
I think most members of the SEC agreed in principle with getting rid of the 140 rule. They just resented GT and didn’t like the way Dodd tried to force it on them, so they called his bluff.
Dodd had Tech in the upper levels of college football and Tech was the darling of Atlanta. He knew with the scholarship limit he could not compete without yanking kids scholarships which he was not going to do. He had no reason to believe the rule would be lifted. There was no benefit at that time in delaying the decision to go independent with the Falcons soon to become Atlanta's team. Faulting him for not having a crystal ball is crazy.
Fast forward and we did eventually end up where we belong in the ACC with similar minded schools with shared values and not becoming another Vandy in the SEC. Looking forward, no one can say for sure we would be better off being in the SEC than the ACC when the big bang occurs. As several have pointed out, the biggest blunder by far was not taking the B1G offer when it was offered.
 

bigrabbit

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
296
Whatever, if you haven’t read the thread yet, just skip it.
I can maybe see having path dependency discussions - how does our history affect current decision making?
But regretful second guessing, looking back 60 years is a waste imo, and who cares what sec rednecks think anyway.
 

LT 1967

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
497
I certainly agree that Coach Dodd's decision was a principled and ethical move. He did not want to " run off unqualified players to stay below the 140 SEC limit". Plus, he wanted to graduate every player that he could. That would often take more than 4 years at Tech and Coach Dodd liked to redshirt to give players more time to graduate. That should always be the "TECH WAY".

One of the things that has concerned me over the last few years is shown in the attached quote from a Furman Bisher article in 1964 after the GT-UGA game. If the future of Tech Football outside the SEC was as clear to a Sports Reporter as demonstrated in this quote, surely the Tech Athletic board and Coach Dodd knew that leaving the SEC might be a significant risk to the well-being of the program. I know that Bisher was a supporter of Dodd.

I certainly don't blame Coach Dodd or Tech for looking out for the best interest of our student-athletes.

It is regretful that we didn't work within the NCAA to fight for a national standard. Nine years after we let the SEC, the NCAA instituted a national limit on scholarships at 30 per year and 105 total. Later reduced to 25/85.

During this period, there was a lot of national discussion and discussion within the NCAA about scholarship limits and "running off dead wood". Also, the scholarship limits varied greatly among the major conferences.

Big 10 and ND----30 per year
Big 8---------------45 per yea
Southwest---------50 per year
SEC----------------45 per year-Total 140 (FB &BB)

So, it appears that we may have made the SEC move prematurely. In the arc of college football history, nine years to wait for a national standard seems pretty insignificant now.
Apparently, I lost the attachment referred to in my post above. See Attached.
 

Attachments

  • Furman Bisher 1964.pdf
    312.5 KB · Views: 67

Tommy_Taylor_1972

GT Athlete
Messages
202
Given the fact that the reason Dodd left the SEC was eventually passed by all schools in college a few years later, and then we tried to get back into the SEC...well, it looks pretty bad for GT. IMO, GT leaving the SEC was the biggest reason for the rise of UGA over GT. Fans often forget GT's popularity before leaving the SEC. There's a reason UGA voted against GT re-joining the SEC. They were probably the biggest beneficiary of Dodd's folly. The last 20 years (1945-1964) GT was in the SEC, GT was 12-8 against UGA (with an 8 game winning streak). Some fans want to point to pro sports as GT's loss of drawing power, but GT's popularity plus fierce rivalries with 'Bama, Tennessee, Auburn, UGA kept BDS full every game...and that would have continued. Part of the reason for Dodd's calculus in leaving the SEC was our popularity in the Southeast and the ability to draw a crowd. People often forget Dodd's "Notre Dame of the South" pitch in convincing other GT decision makers approving the decision. That turned out to be a false assumption without the fierce SEC rivalries.

The B1G decision in 2012 may go down in GT sports as the worst decision in GTAA history depending on what happens when the GOR expires. The B1G media payout PLUS their academic profile was the perfect match for GT. I calculated GT's loss in revenue a few years ago and it was in the HUNDREDS of millions. We could have practically wiped out the entirety of GT's debt by now putting our program in a much better position than we are now. Given where the B1G's trajectory is going, and the uncertainty of the ACC after the GOR expires, turning down the B1G could be the decision that determines whether GT plays "big boy sports" or is just another college that fields a team.

I've always said GT's biggest liability has been our own business decisions. We keep proving it true year after year. Hopefully the Cabrera era will change that.
1700843802616.png

Thoughts of the day when the decision was made to withdraw from the SEC. I became a basketball scholarship athlete at Tech with a"full ride", which then meant at Georgia Tech a full scholarship until I graduated within 5 years (4 years of eligibility plus a redshirt year if the coach wanted it). I never even knew what the tuition was. Coach Hyder just said everything is paid for. The rationale for the President Dr. Harrison's decision to withdraw from the SEC is in the articles of the 1963-64 academic year, a much published and controversial topic. The non-highly rigorous academic SEC schools (probably all but Vanderbilt today) did not have the same admission and progression standards as GT. Same is true today. The NCAA later removed the upper limits (then 140) on total basketball and football scholarships and now is limited by year to 85 in football and 13 in basketball. Tech leadership used their slide rules and figured the math was not in Tech's favor. Coach Dodd's and President Harrison's goal was to provide scholarships until graduation, not based on continuous athletic abilities.

Things are entirely different with current NCAA rules like the portal and NIL. Georgia Tech's student-athlete recruiting and academic standards have changed very little since it's beginning, when it took deliberate decision making to even have football and basketball intercollegiate teams due to interference with school work. Even though most athletic scholarships are coach-decision renewable one year contracts, I know of no Georgia Tech student athlete being denied a scholarship for other than not meeting academic or behavioral standards. That will change the face of college athletics more so in bigger ways. I am sure happy the Georgia Tech 1964 decision was made, or I might have been bumped off scholarship when I got injured or when several of my teammates went on academic probation. Both were still there when I signed a letter of intent in 1968.

Of course, the transfer portal today is the NCAA method to move players around different teams and it make the 140 Rule controversy of 1964 a moot point. Both the players and the coaches get a vote on scholarship removals for under-performing players, voluntarily or involuntarily. And Notre Dame is still an independent for football. Last year, The sports teams at Notre Dame brought home $165,660,298 in revenue while shelling out $158,801,193 in expenses. But they do have a bachelors degree in sports and recreation management. Go figure. The Georgia Tech administration does have unique challenges. All in all, it's high reputation had sustained itself for over 138 years throughout all.

The 21st century monumental decision for Georgia Tech to make is whether to join the pay-for-play schools or continue with the NIL schools, some say within the next 8 years.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,235
So the SEC basically admitting that what they were doing was wrong, and that Dodd was right, proves my point that it was a principled decision. Every other aspect of that decision is judged by 20-20 hindsight. Including the fact that we absolutely no longer fit in the SEC culture. In any way, shape or fashion.

Two things here people accusing others of 20/20 hindsight need to recognize:

1. SEC vote was 6 for/6 against the 140 rule. 'Bama, with a promise from Bear Bryant to vote for the 140 rule, reneged at the last minute and voted against. 'Bama was ultimately the deciding vote. Dodd wasn't alone in his quest to even the playing field. There was close to even support there for what Dodd wanted. Not only in the SEC, but across the college sports landscape. Instead of working with his colleagues towards an equitable solution, he stormed out of SEC due to his "principles". Who did that ultimately hurt? I've said it many times before, Dodd had the opportunity (and support from other SEC schools) to work within the system to change what was supported by others, instead he cut GT's nose to spite the SEC's face.

2. Nine years after GT left the SEC, GT tried to rejoin the SEC. Who was the AD for GT at the time? Bobby Dodd. If the SEC was so bad and the playing field for GT so unfair, why did Dodd spearhead GT rejoining the SEC? How was the "principled decision" serving him to ask for readmittance to a conference he stormed GT out of? The only person Dodd hurt was GT...and that pain was felt financially, and in terms of eroding our fanbase for decades afterwards...and you can argue in terms of fans, we're still reeling from that decision. Dodd knew he erred by pulling GT out of the SEC, and trying to rejoin the SEC almost a decade later was his admittance of it.

Dodd was 100% correct in trying to usher in change for players, and even the playing field for schools who believed in doing things the "right way". There's a reason why Dodd's name is still legendary in college sports today, and there is a prestigious award named after him. However, that fateful decision in 1964 to pull GT out of the SEC only hurt GT. It's a decision that still impacts GT to this day. Not only the loss in revenue (GT was one of the most financially successful programs at the time), the loss in fanbase, and the ceding of fan support to UGA (GT was a more popular program than UGA at the time). Bobby Dodd was a great coach, but as an AD (i.e. business leader) he made a decision that sealed the fate of GT sports to this day. Business leaders understand the total implications of their decisions, and also understand that their decisions must represent the best outcome for their shareholders, not their own egos. For those that say GT doesn't belong in the SEC, just remember everything GT gave up and lost over the decades since then.

From a game theory perspective, I think other schools wanted GT to leave if the vote didn't fall Dodd's way. It wasn't a secret what GT's intentions were if 140 Rule failed. GT was a NATIONAL brand at the time, and Dodd/GT was a thorn to many in the SEC. GT famously dictated a lot of terms (hosting games due to the Atlanta market, not playing teams in Mississippi, etc.). If GT left the SEC, it was beneficial to numerous other SEC schools and coaches. It definitely benefited UGA (who blocked GT from returning to the SEC for good reason), Bear Bryant who the 140 Rule was basically designed to curb his actions, and schools surrounding Georgia that had to recruit against GT. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and Dodd had a LOT of enemies.

So here we are today. Will GT ever rise to the prominence we had as members of the SEC? We'll see...but that is a BIG mountain to climb to get there.
 
Last edited:
Top