A Thread to Rehash GT HC Comparisons

[SOWEGA Jacket]

Did I say that?

No. Just ranting cause I’m pissed about the game being cancelled. It was the first game I could make. Now, I have a free weekend to do yard work I’ve been putting off and that blows!

 

[ncjacket79]

Duke isn’t subject to oversight by a Board of Regents. That’s why.

That changes the argument though. You aren’t saying more support for athletics would diminish our academic rep but that people who control the university system won’t let us do to. That’s completely different.

 

[takethepoints]

None of the things we would need to do would have an impact on our academic recommendation. You think UNC has suffered even with the lengths they went?

Here's Tech's problem. This is an excerpt from John Thompson's posthumous biography:

"College sports has a lot of hypocrisy. I believe it’s time for the N.C.A.A. to stop pretending that education is its top priority and pay college athletes.

Universities are supposed to be educational institutions, but for too many of them, their self-worth is tied to winning. When you win, you make more TV money. The school receives more alumni donations and student applications. Local businesses fill up with more customers. Enrollment increases, which brings more revenue.

The N.C.A.A. is run by universities, so it has a conflict of interest between education and money. We all know how that conflict turns out. I once spoke to a meeting of athletic directors and told them, “All you administrators preach education, but you vote money. When it’s time to make rules, you vote for the rules that will make everybody the most money.” I’m not saying that voting money is bad. I’m saying let’s call it what it is. Capitalism is the system we operate in. College basketball is subject to the laws of supply and demand.

The amateurism of big-time college sports is antiquated and needs to be redefined. We shouldn’t act like going to college is a religious experience for everybody. The best basketball players right now are not going to college for an education. They are going to college for less than a year to make millions in the pros, which can be a smart decision. Pretty soon, very few of the best players will attend college at all. Most of them will go straight to the N.B.A., the G League or overseas — or just stay home and work out."

(I couldn't include the URL for this because the title of the post includes words on the forbidden list.)

This is true, even at Tech, but an open admission of it and adoption of what TheJuice is talking about would as good as guarantee that many students and faculty now coming to Tech would begin to think about MIT or CalTech instead. Admitting that winning in sports was at the center of Tech's reputation could - would is too strong - scare off a lot of the research money Tech currently generates for the state as well. There's no reason for Georgia to take that risk and I don't think that the people who decide these questions at Tech - the administration and faculty - would go along with it anyway. Most of the students probably don't care that much one way or the other, but they would rebel at anything that would diminish the value of their degree.

I admit that this is speculative; UNC has suffered less then I would have suspected for graduating illiterates from its athletic program. (I suspect that this is because it is the state's public flagship; sorta like Ugag where similar shenanigans have been overlooked for decades.) But I think the speculation is real enough at TStan's office.

 

[orientalnc]

I admit that this is speculative; UNC has suffered less then I would have suspected for graduating illiterates from its athletic program.

Yes, it is very speculative. And wrong.

We can argue about the quality of the education athletes earn at UNC (or other schools), but it is not correct to say UNC is graduating illiterates from its athletic program. If you are saying players leave the program unprepared for life in this economy I might agree with you, but your declaration is way overboard.

Did UNC deserve more sanctions than they received? Yes.

 

[TheJuiceIsLoose]

Well, here lies the crux of the problem. Not everyone is convinced that the first sentence is true. We all see and expect more improved recruiting. Whether that will result in a talent level high enough for this particular coaching staff to perform better than previous regimes is a huge unknown. For the 2021 recruiting class so far we are behind 6 other programs that we play annually. Some of them we are substantially behind. We will either need to improve that significantly or our gameday coaching is going to need to be outstanding, which so far it hasn't been.

Here's a fact that cannot be argued:

The Previous HC Recruited us into a hole so deep that in his last 5 Seasons as HC we were 1-4 vs Duke, what made it worse is that Duke ain't UGA or Clemson talent-wise, and then to top that off and pour more salt in our wounds, Duke was kicking our teeth in with Academic Qualifiers from GA HSs

Gameday Coaching is only abt 10% of what makes a Team win Games

80% Recrootin'
10% Player Development, Practice & Position Specific Instruction
10% In-Game Decision Making

Almost 100% of P5 HCs will tell you something very similar to what I listed above, with maybe slight variances in the percentages of the last 2 Areas

The Previous HC deluded our Fanbase into thinking that Coaching & Strategy & Fancy Playcalling wins Games, and that was never the case, it was always Talent

After Chan was fired we should've hired a Recruiter-first kinda guy, because when you have to fire that Guy, at least you have a Program that's attractive for the "right reasons"

You never want your Program to be attractive for the sole reason that is it a Pwr5 Job and there are only 65 of those Jobs in the Country, that's what the Previous HC left us with, we were only attractive because we are 1 of 65 Pwr5 Jobs in the Country

Think about that for a minute, after the 11 years on the GTAA Payroll, what did the Previous HC leave behind that would make GT FB attractive to the next guy?

 

[lastoption]

As an outsider it seems to me that whether Collins is a solid coach or not is still completely unknown given that he has to retool so much, but I think that at the end of the day unless GT gets more majors, does not require athletes to actually attend real school (at least those who do not want to do so), employs a bunch of bag men, etc., the overall number of wins in any span of years is not going to change much. i think whether it is Collins or another coach running a normal college offense system, GT is probably less likely to have the very good Orange Bowl winning seasons, and also less likely to have 3 win seasons, and will be a more consistent middle of the pack ACC team without as many highs and lows, but the wins over a span of years probably end up about the same. I think game to game this will be more true as well. There will probably be a lot fewer 50+ point games where the offense scores on every possession and the opposing defense looks clueless, but also a lot fewer blow out losses where the offense looks horribly inept. It is hard for me to see how the overall wins in any span of years changes a lot unless the off the field aspects change.

 

[JacketOff]

The Previous HC deluded our Fanbase into thinking that Coaching & Strategy & Fancy Playcalling wins Games, and that was never the case, it was always Talent

The biggest lie that gets told about CPJ’s career is that he was able to win with players “recruited for his system” and that it didn’t matter if the players weren’t highly recruited elsewhere. The 3 most successful teams in the CPJ era (08, 09, and 14) were all loaded with NFL quality talent. CPJ wasn’t going to the Orange Bowl with teams that had below average talent. The players on those 3 teams could’ve played for any coach in any system and been successful. Every other year CPJ had average to below average talent, and produced average to below average results. The 2009 team was legitimately better than the team Georgia put on the field, which hasn’t been said many times since the 60s, but that team still found a way to lose to them. That should be the most embarrassing loss when thinking about CPJs career. He had an opportunity to turn the tide in the rivalry and change the story in the state, but he fell on his face.

 

[TheJuiceIsLoose]

Unfortunately for you and "The Fanbase", Tech's administration, faculty, student body and, most important of all, the General Assembly don't share these goals. There is simply no way that we can do the kinds of things you are talking about without damaging Tech's academic reputation. That is not - I repeat, not - going to happen. Tech is too big a resource for the state to do so. And that, in a nutshell, is Tech's dilemma; it's like O'Leary used to say, "Tech wants to be Alabama on the weekend and Harvard for the rest of the week." Harvard will always win out in this contest. Collins knows that and says he'll adjust to it. He had better; the whole idea of a successful football program is that the program adjusts to the school, not the other way around. In a way, Nick Saban is the luckiest coach in America. At Alabama anything less then competing for a national championship is anathema. But that's not the way it has ever worked at Tech.

You need to get used to this. That and not poor-mouthing the best Tech season since 1990 would be a great reset for the rest of your postings here.

Has Noter(sic) Dame's Academic Rep been harmed in any way by Recruiting all those Academic Qualifiers from GA HSs?

Do you think that there are very many Ohio State Grads that don't get whatever good Fortune500 Jobs are available to recent Grads in Ohio?

I have a Niece that graduated from Bama during the Saban Run, and since she started there, Bama has been cherry picking Top Students out of Rust Belt States and NE States getting them to come to Bama with aggressive Fin Aid Pckgs, students are turning down Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin to go to Bama, in-State Kids in Bama & their Parents are mad about all the attention on out of State Students recruited to raise the Academic Profile of the Univ, how can this occur with Saban's Roster Mgmt & Processing going on?

In the last 25 Years UGA has gone from being a 75 to 80th ranked School to being Ranked 50th, while GT has been stuck in the Mid 30s for the last 25 years

Here's the uncomfortable truth that guys like you don't want to admit; 85 FB players and 13 MBB Players have no impact on the Academic Reputation of any University, Rich Jewish Kids from the NE still go to the University of Miami no matter how many times GT Fans like you call them "Thug U", they still get Jobs out of College and go on to fine careers & great lives

At some point the "Academic Snobbery" has to cease and stop being a crutch for GT FB and the GTAA doing things the wrong way in the past

CGC is trying to change that outdated mindset

In order to keep an Academic Scholly, you have to be good in Academics, I think the same should be true for FB & MBB Schollies, you have to be good in your Sport

I can't imagine a kid losing an Academic Scholly and then telling The Institute, " it was the committee's fault for not evaluating me properly when I came out of HS, I shouldn't lose a scholly due to their poor evaluation"

We would never accept that from a "regular Student", yet most around here are willing to accept that from a Scholarship FB Player that will still get a Free Education at a G5 or FCS level Program

It's time to grow up GT Fans and put on our "big boy pants"

 

[Vespidae]

He had an opportunity to turn the tide in the rivalry and change the story in the state, but he fell on his face.

I don’t think that was Paul’s goal. In fact, I think there’s a big disconnect between what fans want, what the AA wants, and what the Hill wants.

 

[Vespidae]

Has Noter(sic) Dame's Academic Rep been harmed in any way by Recruiting all those Academic Qualifiers from GA HSs?

Do you think that there are very many Ohio State Grads that don't get whatever good Fortune500 Jobs are available to recent Grads in Ohio?

I have a Niece that graduated from Bama during the Saban Run, and since she started there, Bama has been cherry picking Top Students out of Rust Belt States and NE States getting them to come to Bama with aggressive Fin Aid Pckgs, students are turning down Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin to go to Bama, in-State Kids in Bama & their Parents are mad about all the attention on out of State Students recruited to raise the Academic Profile of the Univ, how can this occur with Saban's Roster Mgmt & Processing going on?

In the last 25 Years UGA has gone from being a 75 to 80th ranked School to being Ranked 50th, while GT has been stuck in the Mid 30s for the last 25 years

Here's the uncomfortable truth that guys like you don't want to admit; 85 FB players and 13 MBB Players have no impact on the Academic Reputation of any University, Rich Jewish Kids from the NE still go to the University of Miami no matter how many times GT Fans like you call them "Thug U", they still get Jobs out of College and go on to fine careers & great lives

At some point the "Academic Snobbery" has to cease and stop being a crutch for GT FB and the GTAA doing things the wrong way in the past

CGC is trying to change that outdated mindset

In order to keep an Academic Scholly, you have to be good in Academics, I think the same should be true for FB & MBB Schollies, you have to be good in your Sport

I can't imagine a kid losing an Academic Scholly and then telling The Institute, " it was the committee's fault for not evaluating me properly when I came out of HS, I shouldn't lose a scholly due to their poor evaluation"

We would never accept that from a "regular Student", yet most around here are willing to accept that from a Scholarship FB Player that will still get a Free Education at a G5 or FCS level Program

It's time to grow up GT Fans and put on our "big boy pants"

I don’t think it’s academic snobbery. Studies show that schools with winning sports programs outperform those without.

I think its the frustration is the realization that the gap between top schools and the rest is widening.

 

[orientalnc]

The 3 most successful teams in the CPJ era (08, 09, and 14) were all loaded with NFL quality talent.

I mostly agree with your post, but one point I question. Those Tech teams beat uga in 2008 and 2014. I wonder how players from each of those teams were drafted by the NFL?

The 2008/09 uga teams had 11 players who were drafted to play in the NFL. Tech had 8. (all leftovers from 2007)
The 2014 uga team had 10 players who were drafted to play in the NFL. Tech had 6.

I do not think you are wrong that better players make better teams possible, but the offense was also a huge factor at Tech.

 

[orientalnc]

Studies show that schools with winning sports programs outperform those without.

Can you link one of those studies?

I have a friend who was a Dean at App State. He said applications increased when App had championship teams. He never bragged about the educational quality increasing. I would love to share that with him.

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

As an outsider it seems to me that whether Collins is a solid coach or not is still completely unknown given that he has to retool so much, but I think that at the end of the day unless GT gets more majors, does not require athletes to actually attend real school (at least those who do not want to do so), employs a bunch of bag men, etc., the overall number of wins in any span of years is not going to change much. i think whether it is Collins or another coach running a normal college offense system, GT is probably less likely to have the very good Orange Bowl winning seasons, and also less likely to have 3 win seasons, and will be a more consistent middle of the pack ACC team without as many highs and lows, but the wins over a span of years probably end up about the same. I think game to game this will be more true as well. There will probably be a lot fewer 50+ point games where the offense scores on every possession and the opposing defense looks clueless, but also a lot fewer blow out losses where the offense looks horribly inept. It is hard for me to see how the overall wins in any span of years changes a lot unless the off the field aspects change.

I agree with almost all your point. However, I do think GT as a program is higher than a middle of the pack type team because of location and history. When I think of teams that are exactly what you described- middle of the pack with little wiggle room up, I think of teams like NC State, BC, South Carolina, Vandy, Duke, West Virginia, Arkansas, Miss State, VT, and many others who have little history and aren’t in hotbeds for talented players.

GT resides In the largest hotbed metropolitan area that exists. No other city or suburbs has the depth of talent that Atlanta metro has. Not Dallas, not Miami, not Los Angeles, not DC. With all your points being valid and known to TStan and Colllins that is exactly why their plan is for Collins to 1) flip the script from the option, and 2) market the heck out of Atlanta. The plan is absolutely working already for those who it matters- high school players and coaches. The average sports fan doesn’t see it because they are too busy living their lives and half of them still think we run the option. Last years class is full of that Atlanta metro area talent depth that without Collins would have signed with the Arkansa’s, the South Carolina’s, and Miss States. Collins kept them here. This upcoming class we have players commited who were actively sought after by others. And in years to come we won’t lose those battles to Auburn, FSU, and others like we are today. Think about 3 Georgia QB’s that have left the state to play - Watson, Lawrence, and Fields. It’s ridiculous that neither P5 team in this state got them ( it’s even worse what UGA did to Fields). Somewhere in this state in 9th grade is the next Charlie Ward or Trevor Lawrence and you better believe Collins will be all over him. The wins will come with talent.

 

[Vespidae]

Can you link one of those studies?

I have a friend who was a Dean at App State. He said applications increased when App had championship teams. He never bragged about the educational quality increasing. I would love to share that with him.

It was a Harvard study. I think this is it:

https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/13-067_86a0b712-f29e-423f-b614-0165b770dd65.pdf

 

[TheJuiceIsLoose]

I mostly agree with your post, but one point I question. Those Tech teams beat uga in 2008 and 2014. I wonder how players from each of those teams were drafted by the NFL?

The 2008/09 uga teams had 11 players who were drafted to play in the NFL. Tech had 8. (all leftovers from 2007)
The 2014 uga team had 10 players who were drafted to play in the NFL. Tech had 6.

I do not think you are wrong that better players make better teams possible, but the offense was also a huge factor at Tech.

Here's another way to look at it:

GT's Offense under the Previous Guy, didn't have TE's and didn't have pass-blocking OTs, so for 4 of the 11 slots on Offense, there was little to no chance of the GT player being Drafted, maybe 5 out of 11 when you consider after Dwyer left the NFL started to perceive our B-Back position as more of FB type position vs the modern day "single back" that you see in CFB

When you make that "adjustment", then the Teams in question had almost the same number of NFL Players on it, so maybe the Offense wasn't the huge factor that you theorize it was

I guess the teams were more equal if you take into account that 5 of our 22 starting slots have a hard time getting drafted by the NFL (I forgot to mention QB above)

 

[JacketOff]

I mostly agree with your post, but one point I question. Those Tech teams beat uga in 2008 and 2014. I wonder how players from each of those teams were drafted by the NFL?

The 2008/09 uga teams had 11 players who were drafted to play in the NFL. Tech had 8. (all leftovers from 2007)
The 2014 uga team had 10 players who were drafted to play in the NFL. Tech had 6.

I do not think you are wrong that better players make better teams possible, but the offense was also a huge factor at Tech.

I never said the offense wasn’t a factor, it was. But it still relies on having good players, just like any other offense. Georgia is one of the top schools in the country at producing NFL talent. They’re always going to have NFL players across the field. But there’s a huge difference in having 4 fewer NFL caliber players than 10+ like there’s been since 2016. The main focus of my post was to point out that CPJ’s needed talent to produce results just like any other team. I’ve also pointed out that most of CPJ’s wins in the second half of his tenure were against teams that didn’t see the option regularly. CPJ’s record against annual opponents in the second half of his tenure was atrocious. But he dominated the Atlantic, and relied on G5 and FCS wins to boost his winning %. The Coastal had surpassed Tech and Georgia & Clemson were growing their leads. Not all of that falls on CPJ’s shoulders of course, but his offense wasn’t some sort of super power that turned below average players into a machine. For the most part, Paul’s records depended heavily on the players on the field, not his ability as a coach.

 

[ncjacket79]

Here's Tech's problem. This is an excerpt from John Thompson's posthumous biography:

"College sports has a lot of hypocrisy. I believe it’s time for the N.C.A.A. to stop pretending that education is its top priority and pay college athletes.

Universities are supposed to be educational institutions, but for too many of them, their self-worth is tied to winning. When you win, you make more TV money. The school receives more alumni donations and student applications. Local businesses fill up with more customers. Enrollment increases, which brings more revenue.

The N.C.A.A. is run by universities, so it has a conflict of interest between education and money. We all know how that conflict turns out. I once spoke to a meeting of athletic directors and told them, “All you administrators preach education, but you vote money. When it’s time to make rules, you vote for the rules that will make everybody the most money.” I’m not saying that voting money is bad. I’m saying let’s call it what it is. Capitalism is the system we operate in. College basketball is subject to the laws of supply and demand.

The amateurism of big-time college sports is antiquated and needs to be redefined. We shouldn’t act like going to college is a religious experience for everybody. The best basketball players right now are not going to college for an education. They are going to college for less than a year to make millions in the pros, which can be a smart decision. Pretty soon, very few of the best players will attend college at all. Most of them will go straight to the N.B.A., the G League or overseas — or just stay home and work out."

(I couldn't include the URL for this because the title of the post includes words on the forbidden list.)

This is true, even at Tech, but an open admission of it and adoption of what TheJuice is talking about would as good as guarantee that many students and faculty now coming to Tech would begin to think about MIT or CalTech instead. Admitting that winning in sports was at the center of Tech's reputation could - would is too strong - scare off a lot of the research money Tech currently generates for the state as well. There's no reason for Georgia to take that risk and I don't think that the people who decide these questions at Tech - the administration and faculty - would go along with it anyway. Most of the students probably don't care that much one way or the other, but they would rebel at anything that would diminish the value of their degree.

I admit that this is speculative; UNC has suffered less then I would have suspected for graduating illiterates from its athletic program. (I suspect that this is because it is the state's public flagship; sorta like Ugag where similar shenanigans have been overlooked for decades.) But I think the speculation is real enough at TStan's office.

I understand what you are saying, I just disagree completely. There are lots of schools with good academic reputations who put much more of an emphasis on sports than we do who have no problem attracting students and grant money. We just like to think we are different at Tech, but we really aren’t.

 

[Pointer]

The biggest lie that gets told about CPJ’s career is that he was able to win with players “recruited for his system” and that it didn’t matter if the players weren’t highly recruited elsewhere. The 3 most successful teams in the CPJ era (08, 09, and 14) were all loaded with NFL quality talent. CPJ wasn’t going to the Orange Bowl with teams that had below average talent. The players on those 3 teams could’ve played for any coach in any system and been successful. Every other year CPJ had average to below average talent, and produced average to below average results. The 2009 team was legitimately better than the team Georgia put on the field, which hasn’t been said many times since the 60s, but that team still found a way to lose to them. That should be the most embarrassing loss when thinking about CPJs career. He had an opportunity to turn the tide in the rivalry and change the story in the state, but he fell on his face.

So you think only the win loss column counts? For example 2011, 2012, and even 2017 and 2018 to an extent had respectable to great offensive output. The problem was always defense. Which was his responsibility as well. But let's not forget we always had the budget dc, and tech also can't get the big DT's. Collins is proving that still to be the case, even with his very respectable recruiting skills. And I think he's also suffering from the same issue of budget dc and oc.

To say that CPJ didn't do more with less talent, especially on offense, I think is a bit short sided.

 

[Pointer]

I understand what you are saying, I just disagree completely. There are lots of schools with good academic reputations who put much more of an emphasis on sports than we do who have no problem attracting students and grant money. We just like to think we are different at Tech, but we really aren’t.

I think one thing at can do more is to recruit nationally. That way we cast a wider net that can allow us to find those smart student athletes who have elite talent. Recruiting focused on only the south east because this is where lots of talent is, is a mistake when it comes to Tech.

 

[jacketup]

Uh huh. 2014 was a farse...well then so was 1990. We played a lot of weak teams and got lucky in some games.....please stop attacking our most successful coach since Dodd.

Our most successful coach since Dodd? A guy who went 53-53 vs FBS over his last 9 years? A coach whose only 2 consecutive winnng years at Tech vs FBS were his first 2--with players he didn't recruit? He is clearly behind Ross and O'Leary, both of whom walked into poor cultures and had to turn things around. Johnson turned things around alright, and not in a good way. We are living with that today.

Johnson is one of the best run blocking coaches ever to be on the sidelines. No question about it. I give him credit for that. But as a head coach, accolades of "great coach" and "best since Dodd" are not borne out by his record at Tech. If he is the best since Dodd then just shut the program down. You people who make such statements never back them up with facts.

And the 2014 team wasn't as good as the 2009 team. Go look up which team had more players in the Tech statistical top 10. 2009 was far more talented, and again, players Johnson did not recruit.

It's really very simple--his offense worked, but you can't recruit for it. Alabama, Texas, OU and others who ran the option figured that out in the late '70's. Our athletic board is not as smart, thinking that a school with recruiting challenges should run an offense that presented even more recruiting challenges. And, as I said above, we are still living with that today. That's why we played 16 freshmen against ND.