Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
60 years since GT left the SEC
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RamblinRed" data-source="post: 977692" data-attributes="member: 1776"><p>It may have been a terrible decision, but would GT be in a better position today than it is if it had stayed in the SEC? That's actually 2 separate issues. It's not an automatic that staying in the SEC would have made things better today.</p><p>That is a discussion that can be argued either way.</p><p></p><p>As someone who is a GT alumni, but didn't grow up in the South (at least not until my teenage years and not until after GT had joined the ACC), I'd argue that GT would not be in a better place if it had stayed.</p><p>IMO, GT likely would have ended up as a better version of Vandy. That is the only other school in the SEC that plays the game of college athletics similar to how GT does.</p><p></p><p>The introduction of pro sports to Atlanta definitely would have negatively impacted GT. Having it occur after leaving the SEC just made that worse.</p><p></p><p>IMO GT is still likely a 6-7 win team most seasons if it stayed in the SEC. It simply was not going to play the game the same way most of its conference brethren were, which would put it at a distinct disadvantage.</p><p></p><p>Going to the B1G would have helped our financial position, but based on the statistics from teams that have changed power conferences it is unlikely to have made GT win more games.</p><p>I have been working on that analysis. There have been 15 programs that have moved to a power conference between 2004-2014 (10 to 20 seasons ago). Out of those 15 programs only one has won significantly more games in its new conference (both overall and conference games) after moving - that is TX A&M. 7 of the 15 programs have won significantly fewer games in their new conference (both overall and conference - ranging from 10 to 30% lower winning percentages both overall and in conference play) and the other 7 haven't really seen significant change of winning percentages (though 5 of the 7 have seen their winning percentage drop by 1-7%, one is almost exactly the same - VT, and one has improved by 3% -Syracuse). </p><p></p><p>Overall 12 of the 15 programs have seen a decrease in winning percentage. 1 has been flat, and 2 have improved (Syracuse by 3% and Texas A&M +11.7%).</p><p></p><p>I think GT athletics largely are what they are. I don't think still being in the SEC or moving to the B1G would have significantly impacted that in a positive way. The data simply does not support that hypothesis.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RamblinRed, post: 977692, member: 1776"] It may have been a terrible decision, but would GT be in a better position today than it is if it had stayed in the SEC? That's actually 2 separate issues. It's not an automatic that staying in the SEC would have made things better today. That is a discussion that can be argued either way. As someone who is a GT alumni, but didn't grow up in the South (at least not until my teenage years and not until after GT had joined the ACC), I'd argue that GT would not be in a better place if it had stayed. IMO, GT likely would have ended up as a better version of Vandy. That is the only other school in the SEC that plays the game of college athletics similar to how GT does. The introduction of pro sports to Atlanta definitely would have negatively impacted GT. Having it occur after leaving the SEC just made that worse. IMO GT is still likely a 6-7 win team most seasons if it stayed in the SEC. It simply was not going to play the game the same way most of its conference brethren were, which would put it at a distinct disadvantage. Going to the B1G would have helped our financial position, but based on the statistics from teams that have changed power conferences it is unlikely to have made GT win more games. I have been working on that analysis. There have been 15 programs that have moved to a power conference between 2004-2014 (10 to 20 seasons ago). Out of those 15 programs only one has won significantly more games in its new conference (both overall and conference games) after moving - that is TX A&M. 7 of the 15 programs have won significantly fewer games in their new conference (both overall and conference - ranging from 10 to 30% lower winning percentages both overall and in conference play) and the other 7 haven't really seen significant change of winning percentages (though 5 of the 7 have seen their winning percentage drop by 1-7%, one is almost exactly the same - VT, and one has improved by 3% -Syracuse). Overall 12 of the 15 programs have seen a decrease in winning percentage. 1 has been flat, and 2 have improved (Syracuse by 3% and Texas A&M +11.7%). I think GT athletics largely are what they are. I don't think still being in the SEC or moving to the B1G would have significantly impacted that in a positive way. The data simply does not support that hypothesis. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What jersey number did Joshua Nesbitt wear?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
60 years since GT left the SEC
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top