My father thought Coach Dodd was a great coach and a great recruiter but was a terrible AD. Tech has not done well since 2000 because the game has evolved and we have been unable to attract near enough good players to compete with the factories. We do not have the money, nor the mindset to become a professional football factory. IIWII
It’s the mindset only. Everything else flows out of that. When there is the will there is always the way. For the most part, GT ( school leadership as well as fan base/alumni) are content with what we are. If we weren’t things would be different.
You have no idea what you are talking about unless you are inside those programs.
There you go Y with your usual monkey business.Football teams need leadership to be successful. There are a handful of players which can make disproportionate impact on their own, but nearly all the time how the pieces coordinate determines success. Leadership can come from many places and in many different forms, not all of them psychologically ideal. But lacking leadership is lacking structure, motivation, and coordination. Sadly, some of the toxic hypocritical figures can be the most enticing, and becoming an idol can be a successful form of leadership, but false idols often leave a wake of skeletons behind them. Those skeletons can create systemic norms which are very difficult to modify even with a completely new staff and with significant turnover of personnel.
There's a funny and fictitious illustration of this principle:
Football teams need leadership to be successful. There are a handful of players which can make disproportionate impact on their own, but nearly all the time how the pieces coordinate determines success. Leadership can come from many places and in many different forms, not all of them psychologically ideal. But lacking leadership is lacking structure, motivation, and coordination. Sadly, some of the toxic hypocritical figures can be the most enticing, and becoming an idol can be a successful form of leadership, but false idols often leave a wake of skeletons behind them. Those skeletons can create systemic norms which are very difficult to modify even with a completely new staff and with significant turnover of personnel.
There's a funny and fictitious illustration of this principle:
Bobby Dodd was AD from 1950 to 1976. So I stand by point three.
Great Points.. the AD hire of Mike Bobinski was the #1 reason for lack of funding. I believe CPJ has even alluded to it.
The two people responsible fo Georgia Tech pulling out of the SEC are HC/AD Bobby Dodd and President Edwin Harrison, END of STORY!
Well, there was also a guy named Chip Robert who had a lot of power in AA back then.
Saban did it at Michigan State, LSU, and Alabama. I think he could do it at GT, especially now. Not a NC in 2-3 years, but the possibility in 5-6, for sure. He would immediately recruit Top 20 classes, maybe even Top 10 classes. But that's not going to happen, so it's not worth the thought experiment.
It wasn’t 4th down. It was 2nd and 26 which is why the DB had to play closer to the LOS which is why he got burned by the freshman receiver. If it was 4th down you can bet the coverage would have been deeper.
Quite so. Yet another senior moment. Seems like the Tide used Ripley as a decoy lining him up in the slot away from the play and ran a back in motion in that direction as well. The only guy on the left side was the speedster who went right past the UGA corner who I guess was expecting help from the safety on that side. Dynasties have a habit of making great plays like that.
You need better people to call friends
I'm no Bobinski fan, but he inherited a mess. Homer retired with money in the bank. Braine spent it and did little in the way of fund raising. Radakovich spent money we didn't have trying to keep up. Bobinski tried to get things under control, which put us behind other programs. We needed fund raising, which is what Stansbury is trying to do. The financial problems really go back to Clough's buddy Braine, who was a disaster of an AD.
Oh? I think this list shows how important head coaching is. Vandy was good under Franklin, BC under O'Brien, Purdue under Tiller, Duke under Cutliffe (let's give the devil his due here), WSU under Leach, California under Tedford, OSU under Erikson (he's a crook, but he knows good football players when he see them), and - most relevant example - Wake under Grobe and Clawson, have all given "better" programs fits. Then you can look at programs that fire really good head coaches - Tennessee and Texas A&M stand out - and suddenly find themselves up the creek without an oar.
Clough hated sports. Small group of us met him in LA for dinner, drinks, etc back in the Chan days. Think it was early ’06 and we had gone 5 years straight of 7-5. He spent about 30 mins talking academics, GTRI, etc then opened for questions. Started off with a football question, then another, followed by more football questions. There were some basketball questions & somebody asked about the baseball team. After about 90 mins he bolted, none too happy none of the alums wanted to talk about anything besides sports. I’m not sure there was a single non-sports question asked.
One could argue that Tulane was a power until their administration starting limiting football scholarships in the 1950s. Duke was also a power at one time under Wallace Wade. Both went through soul searching over how to balance football with academics.
Saban is the best of the best when it comes to creating a winning culture. No doubt. But in my opinion he was also lucky. He was never going to hit the upper echelons at Michigan State and caught a big break to get out of there when he could. Likewise he was not a great NFL coach where talent is a little more evenly distributed among teams. But going to a school like Alabama, where you already have a lot of advantages, was the perfect move for a coach of his ability. Compare Bill Curry’s record at Tech vs his record at ‘Bama to see how place can make a difference.