Any news?? (stage 3: press coverage)

[roadkill]

I think it is probably better for us to pay it off over 4-6 years than in a lump sum unless some alums offer to pay it off early.

I believe the current contract calls for it to be paid off in equal monthly installments over the remaining term (3+ years at present). Pittmans's is the same way. I also recall Hewitt's was renegotiated so that we could get out from under the perpetuity clause. There's no reason to think that we couldn't at least try to renegotiate terms that are more palatable to our financial state, whatever that might be. For example, we could increase the total but extend the term.

 

[MACHETE]

You know what if we jsut fired him.... and took it to court argueing he was a major fraud?

I like the way you think.

 

[stylee]

Glad to see a thread that is actually talking about the core issue. When it comes to the transformation of CFB, the train has left the station. CFB is the farm team for the NFL. It isn't about academics any longer, unless you want to consider 'sports and sports management' academic disciplines (which I am not necessarily against). When you put this in the context of GT and the GTAA, we - as an institution - are never going to transform into a factory for the NFL. We are an international STEM school (and one of the best), who uses sports to advance the leadership and character of our students and our alumni.

This whole notion of bringing in a coach who was 'at the intersection of the Saban and Meyer coaching trees' and was going to win 'the Alabama way' through the acquisition of 4 and 5 star recruits, 10 figure investments in facilities and coaching staffs, and running spread offenses that generate the excitement to fill 80,000 seat stadiums, was and is completely ridiculous. You can bash Paul Johnson and the Option all you want, but under that system, we had an identity and, with a small incremental investment, could recruit kids for the system without having to go head to head with SEC schools that could spend fortunes to recruit guys like Arch Manning. That system would get us the occasional ACC championship and a win over UGA. With the right QB, we might even get into a 12 team playoff system.

Given where CFB is at right now, with the updated NIL rules, conference consolidation, massive amounts of money that is only more and more directed at the factories, I feel that the decisions that TS has made over the last few years, including the CGC hire, have put our program in a position from which it may never recover. Assuming that it can recover, TS and GC are not the guys to do it.

This is one of this broader issues I find fascinating - is there some point where the average college football fan will stop caring so much? That's not a rhetorical question.

Sure, we always scoffed at the legal fiction that every football player-qua-student-athlete is a "student" like any other. We knew that the goals of athletic departments often diverged from those of the educational institution itself - that the "program" wasn't equivalent to the "school." Etc. But what inspired greater loyalty and enthusiasm amongst college football fans is that these aspects were (a) not universal, and (b) at least tastefully swept under the rug, so we didn't have to think about them very much, and (c) we could still tell ourselves that the school was to some degree the "program." This is us, these are our guys!

Even now, we know that not every player is treating college ball as a pro tryout. But we also know that the free agency system - NIL and transfer rules - means the system as a whole is much closer on the spectrum to "NFL-lite" than it is to the opposite. Let's say we start getting rules allowing for midseason transfers, so that Ohio State('s boosters) signs Gibbs in Week 6 or something. Is that still "our guy" for Buckeyes?

Another thing that I've noticed is the effect of handheld sports betting. It's everywhere. I was watching some games with school teachers, and there was no enthusiasm for upsets AS upsets - instead, it was how it played out on the bets they placed. The games were less exciting in and of themselves, and more about picking up a few dollars. This seems like an erosion of interest in the sport as the sport.


Is there a breaking point? Is there somewhere between college sports in the purest sense (IDK, college volleyball teams duking it out for the hell of it) and lower-quality-pro-sport where college football ceases to be interesting in the same way for some large segment of fans? I ran some hypos by hardcore LSU fans this weekend: what if you found out none of the players were enrolled in school? What if you had midseason transfers? What if you had contract holdouts, open and public bidding wars for players, etc. About all that stuck was "what if the band didn't play" and "what if they changed the name of the team from 'LSU tigers' to something else entirely?"

 

[GTLorenzo]

I believe the current contract calls for it to be paid off in equal monthly installments over the remaining term (3+ years at present). Pittmans's is the same way. I also recall Hewitt's was renegotiated so that we could get out from under the perpetuity clause. There's no reason to think that we couldn't at least try to renegotiate terms that are more palatable to our financial state, whatever that might be. For example, we could increase the total but extend the term.

I'm fine with extending the terms, but if we increase the total, I would find TStan and fire him again.....

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

People are mad about CGC and taking it out on anyone associated with him.

Like I said earlier, it's a mob mentality right now.

 

[MACHETE]

Glad to see a thread that is actually talking about the core issue. When it comes to the transformation of CFB, the train has left the station. CFB is the farm team for the NFL. It isn't about academics any longer, unless you want to consider 'sports and sports management' academic disciplines (which I am not necessarily against). When you put this in the context of GT and the GTAA, we - as an institution - are never going to transform into a factory for the NFL. We are an international STEM school (and one of the best), who uses sports to advance the leadership and character of our students and our alumni.

This whole notion of bringing in a coach who was 'at the intersection of the Saban and Meyer coaching trees' and was going to win 'the Alabama way' through the acquisition of 4 and 5 star recruits, 10 figure investments in facilities and coaching staffs, and running spread offenses that generate the excitement to fill 80,000 seat stadiums, was and is completely ridiculous. You can bash Paul Johnson and the Option all you want, but under that system, we had an identity and, with a small incremental investment, could recruit kids for the system without having to go head to head with SEC schools that could spend fortunes to recruit guys like Arch Manning. That system would get us the occasional ACC championship and a win over UGA. With the right QB, we might even get into a 12 team playoff system.

Given where CFB is at right now, with the updated NIL rules, conference consolidation, massive amounts of money that is only more and more directed at the factories, I feel that the decisions that TS has made over the last few years, including the CGC hire, have put our program in a position from which it may never recover. Assuming that it can recover, TS and GC are not the guys to do it.

Ok fine but is beating the likes of Duke, UVA, Wake, BC, Syracuse, etc too much to ask for? No reason we have to be ACC cellar dwellers.

 

[WreckinGT]

I've said it elsewhere...I'm simply not on the "Fire TStan" bandwagon. His job is much more than winning football, but it does include winning football.

I think his problem (other than the date of the Jan 1 on the contract) is that he logically values Football as a single part of the overall athletics program. Unfortunately, logic has no place when it comes to college football fandom. He has made a huge error in not understanding his stakeholders as it related to football, and has devoted too little attention to managing / communicating with those stakeholders (which include all the potential contributors, not just the whales.)

It's a pretty common mistake amongst engineers who move up in responsibility...the things that got you there (management, intellect, hard work) are not the things that will make you successful in the new role (leadership, stakeholders, communication.) Or, more specifically...all six things are needed but their order of importance to being successful changes as you increase level of responsibility.
[management, intellect, hard work, communication, stakeholders, leadership] ---> [leadership, stakeholders, communication, hard work, intellect, management]

He has been here for 6 years and still has yet to watch a Football or Men's basketball game where GT was in the top 25. Im not going to look it up but I doubt any P5 program has gone that long without really any success in their two revenue generating sports. Those sports are the face of the program and even the school in some ways. What is he doing to improve them?

 

[ibeattetris]

Is there a breaking point? Is there somewhere between college sports in the purest sense (IDK, college volleyball teams duking it out for the hell of it) and lower-quality-pro-sport where college football ceases to be interesting in the same way for some large segment of fans? I ran some hypos by hardcore LSU fans this weekend: what if you found out none of the players were enrolled in school? What if you had midseason transfers? What if you had contract holdouts, open and public bidding wars for players, etc. About all that stuck was "what if the band didn't play" and "what if they changed the name of the team from 'LSU tigers' to something else entirely?"

I used to ride the Tech Trolley to class and Michael Johnson and (I think) Demarius Thomas would be on it as well. I had a lab partner that was a football player. My required humanities class had half the women's basketball and softball teams in it. I feel such a strong connection to the football team (and other sports) because they had to go through the same **** us students did, with the added burden of practice and game performance. I'd personally lose all interest if it ever became completely for hire athletes wearing a GT uniform. I rarely watch the NFL as it is, because I just don't care to watch professional sports much.

 

[roadkill]

Looking ahead, the

I'm fine with extending the terms, but if we increase the total, I would find TStan and fire him again.....

Understand your sentiment, but negotiating requires give and take and consideration of the relative strengths of each party's position. Right now CGC has the buyout terms in writing. That's our starting point. In order for him to agree to extend the term, he would want something compensatory in return. Similar situation to Hewitt's who basically had us over a barrel with his contract.

The next contract we give a coach had better incorporate some lessons learned. At a minimum, it should have 1. a shorter term; and 2. downside risk mitigation in the form of an automatically reduced buyout if certain performance standards are not met. Pittmans' buyout goes down 50% if he fails to win 50% of his games. Hard for a coaching candidate to argue with that. If we don't do these two things at a minimum, then we surely have a case of gross incompetence.

 

[GTLorenzo]

People are mad about CGC and taking it out on anyone associated with him.

Like I said earlier, it's a mob mentality right now.

I disagree. I think people are upset at a bad football coach AND the contract he was given based on the experience level. They are then, rightly in my opinion, trying to address who gave him that contract with the bad terms.

 

[roadkill]

I'm fine with extending the terms, but if we increase the total, I would find TStan and fire him again.....

Understand your sentiment, but negotiating requires give and take and consideration of the relative strengths of each party's position. Right now CGC has the buyout terms in writing. That's our starting point. In order for him to agree to extend the term, he would want something compensatory in return. Similar situation to Hewitt's who basically had us over a barrel with his contract.

The next contract we give a coach had better incorporate some lessons learned. At a minimum, it should have 1. a shorter term; and 2. downside risk mitigation in the form of an automatically reduced buyout if certain performance standards are not met. Pittmans' buyout goes down 50% if he fails to win 50% of his games. Hard for a coaching candidate to argue with that. If we don't do these two things, then we surely have a case of gross incompetence.

 

[GTLorenzo]

Understand your sentiment, but negotiating requires give and take and consideration of the relative strengths of each party's position. Right now CGC has the buyout terms in writing. That's our starting point. In order for him to agree to extend the term, he would want something compensatory in return. Similar situation to Hewitt's who basically had us over a barrel with his contract.

The next contract we give a coach had better incorporate some lessons learned. At a minimum, it should have 1. a shorter term; and 2. downside risk mitigation in the form of an automatically reduced buyout if certain performance standards are not met. Pittmans' buyout goes down 50% if he fails to win 50% of his games. Hard for a coaching candidate to argue with that. If we don't do these two things, then we surely have a case of gross incompetence.

As I recall (?), Hewitt's monetary terms weren't changed, just the time frame. If they gave Collins more money, one of AugustaJacket's "mobs" would burn the Edge Center down. Either the current one or the proposed one.

 

[90sJacketsFan]

Understand your sentiment, but negotiating requires give and take and consideration of the relative strengths of each party's position. Right now CGC has the buyout terms in writing. That's our starting point. In order for him to agree to extend the term, he would want something compensatory in return. Similar situation to Hewitt's who basically had us over a barrel with his contract.

The next contract we give a coach had better incorporate some lessons learned. At a minimum, it should have 1. a shorter term; and 2. downside risk mitigation in the form of an automatically reduced buyout if certain performance standards are not met. Pittmans' buyout goes down 50% if he fails to win 50% of his games. Hard for a coaching candidate to argue with that. If we don't do these two things, then we surely have a case of gross incompetence.

You bring up an interesting point: 1. a shorter term
Historically terms were drafted around recruiting classes, longer term = stability for that 8th grade prospect, but with the open market of the portal i wonder if shorter term could be achieved.

 

[bigrabbit]

https://law.marquette.edu/assets/sports-law/2020%20NSLI%20Conference%20%289.4.2020%29.mjg.pdf

I learned some things reading this, maybe you guys know most of it already. We show up as having committed to the #10 largest buyout on record at the time of this Sports Law Conference presentation in 2020 - hey we’re top 10 in something.

Does anyone know if we have mitigation provisions in our contract? Most contracts do apparently, requiring the coach to pursue opportunities at a similar level and whatever they make serves to offset the buyout. Have no clue how GC finds a comparable job however.

Other than the Pittman deal, I haven’t seen anything in the way of contracts contingent on winning at Div 1 level. I still think we were foolish to do the 7 year contract (I was yammering about that 3 years ago). Water under the bridge, but GTAA can’t keep making these mistakes and expecting wealthy alums to bail us out.

 

[Js-showman]

People are mad about CGC and taking it out on anyone associated with him.

Like I said earlier, it's a mob mentality right now.

If you believe that to be the case, you must at least acknowledge that he brought this on himself.

 

[roadkill]

As I recall (?), Hewitt's monetary terms weren't changed, just the time frame. If they gave Collins more money, one of AugustaJacket's "mobs" would burn the Edge Center down. Either the current one or the proposed one.

I don't have the details, but Hewitt had a perpetually renewing contract, which basically was equivalent to an infinite (or at least lifetime) amount of $. I think (?) we negotiated it to a capped term in return for something like a lump sum that was more than the normal annual amount. Not sure though. If I was Hewitt why would I agree to less?

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

If you believe that to be the case, you must at least acknowledge that he brought this on himself.

I'm all for firing CGC this year unless he somehow miraculously turns this around in a hurry. I've never stated otherwise. That has nothing to do with the mass hysteria going on here. I just refuse to allow CGC's coaching abilities to diminish my ability to think and act rationally.

 

[bobongo]

I don't have the details, but Hewitt had a perpetually renewing contract, which basically was equivalent to an infinite (or at least lifetime) amount of $. I think (?) we negotiated it to a capped term in return for something like a lump sum that was more than the normal annual amount. Not sure though. If I was Hewitt why would I agree to less?

Jackets finally swallow Hewitt's buyout

The reaction from Georgia Tech fans was not hard to predict. The relief, the resolved angst, the catharsis, all summed up in one tidy word:Finally.That was the subject of the first comment on this post at From The Rumble Seat, a Georgia Tech fan blog, and it was no doubt the reaction most Yellow...

www.espn.com

From the contract itself:

It is the intention of the Parties to create an automatic “rollover” provision so that the Term of this Agreement will always have six (6) years remaining after the automatic rollover occurs. Commencing April 15, 2005 and on April 15th of each year thereafter, the Term of this Agreement shall be automatically extended by one (1) additional year so that, on April 15th of each year, the Term of this Agreement shall be six (6) years unless the Association determines that an extension rollover not be made and notifies Hewitt of its decision in writing not less than thirty (30) days prior to April 15th in any year during the Term.

I don't believe it was reconstructed. Tech paid off six years, which cost $7.2 million.

Five years later, reconsidering Paul Hewitt's tenure

Isma'il Muhammad remembers the buzz around Alexander Memorial Coliseum, the Georgia Tech campus and the city of Atlanta.

www.ajc.com

"He left owed $7.2 million, the result of a contract that automatically renewed after each season and has constrained Tech’s finances since."

 

[roadkill]

You bring up an interesting point: 1. a shorter term
Historically terms were drafted around recruiting classes, longer term = stability for that 8th grade prospect, but with the open market of the portal i wonder if shorter term could be achieved.

The rationale for CGC's 7-year term (as opposed to the "normal" 5 years) was that he was going to need a couple of years to make the transition. I agree that nowadays the portal can allow a faster transition. That should be the thinking going into any future contract negotiations.

Another nuance that hasn't been discussed is that we assume all the contract terms are the work of ADTS. Yes, he signs the contract (along with Cabrera) and is ultimately responsible for it. However, we have a staff attorney for employment and litigation that no doubt is intimately involved in crafting the language. ADTS could be the type of manager that leaves the details up to the "experts", to his detriment. Again, I can't imagine he isn't regretting some of those details right now.

Unfortunately, GTAA has some history with incompetent counsel (see NCAA 2009).

 

[g0lftime]

This is one of this broader issues I find fascinating - is there some point where the average college football fan will stop caring so much? That's not a rhetorical question.

Sure, we always scoffed at the legal fiction that every football player-qua-student-athlete is a "student" like any other. We knew that the goals of athletic departments often diverged from those of the educational institution itself - that the "program" wasn't equivalent to the "school." Etc. But what inspired greater loyalty and enthusiasm amongst college football fans is that these aspects were (a) not universal, and (b) at least tastefully swept under the rug, so we didn't have to think about them very much, and (c) we could still tell ourselves that the school was to some degree the "program." This is us, these are our guys!

Even now, we know that not every player is treating college ball as a pro tryout. But we also know that the free agency system - NIL and transfer rules - means the system as a whole is much closer on the spectrum to "NFL-lite" than it is to the opposite. Let's say we start getting rules allowing for midseason transfers, so that Ohio State('s boosters) signs Gibbs in Week 6 or something. Is that still "our guy" for Buckeyes?

Another thing that I've noticed is the effect of handheld sports betting. It's everywhere. I was watching some games with school teachers, and there was no enthusiasm for upsets AS upsets - instead, it was how it played out on the bets they placed. The games were less exciting in and of themselves, and more about picking up a few dollars. This seems like an erosion of interest in the sport as the sport.


Is there a breaking point? Is there somewhere between college sports in the purest sense (IDK, college volleyball teams duking it out for the hell of it) and lower-quality-pro-sport where college football ceases to be interesting in the same way for some large segment of fans? I ran some hypos by hardcore LSU fans this weekend: what if you found out none of the players were enrolled in school? What if you had midseason transfers? What if you had contract holdouts, open and public bidding wars for players, etc. About all that stuck was "what if the band didn't play" and "what if they changed the name of the team from 'LSU tigers' to something else entirely?"

I have for the most part given up on pro football and definitely pro basketball. I do watch a little pro FB but never get through an entire game. I don't watch any pro basketball. They are overpaid, don't really play defense, and are just too good at what they do. I am sure there are some on here that love it and different strokes for different folks. I am still interested in college but becoming less. I watch GT and some of the "quote" big games. After Bama beat UGA in the SEC championship which I watched, I didn't watch the national championship game at all. If it continues so that there are only a max of 10 or so teams that can win a national championship, I will only watch the jackets. TV and the lack of oversight is ruining it for me.