Athletic Director's Update

684Bee

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,644
Ok, you’re totally moving the goalposts here. First, we couldn’t recruit at the level of LSU and UGA. Now, we can’t recruit at the level of lesser tier schools. I’d say UNC and NCST and UVA are recruiting at a third tier level, and your quote says even that is unrealistic for us.

And I don’t think it’s an unfair comparison. UNC makes fun of NCST as the “Ag” school and a bunch of rednecks. They still recruit well. No one goes to UVA games, but I guess that’s an unfair comparison too.

But, either in terms of recruiting or player development, we aren’t putting as many players in the NFL as we did under Gailey. That’s comparing us against not very good us. With the same academic requirements. And we’ve had a stable offensive system for 11 years. That’s enough time to work out solutions to your problems. Why did we have inconsistencies on offense the last few years?

CPJ pulled an upperclassman because he said the player was making the wrong calls on offense. Should that be happening in a scheme that’s been in place for 11 years with basically the same coaches?

Where is the player development? Or is he putting an unrealistic expectation on the player? It keeps happening, so it’s got to be one of those.

Jim Grobe developed solid lines at Wake Forest by using a lot of red shirting. Wake would trade our recruiting issues for theirs in a heartbeat, but a smart coach made things work.

Iowa State is playing well. I can’t believe we don’t have a better recruiting pitch than they do. Do I have to list 30 schools playing better than we are that aren’t factories to find one that you think we should recruit or develop better than?

It’s one thing to have some recruiting disadvantages (and no university is perfect, so all schools have some disadvantages and advantages). Eleven years is enough time to develop relationships and a pipeline of players to fit your system.

If you’re a high school coach, you want your kids on scholarship. Most don’t. Where are the coaches that are getting their players ready for Tech?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Not moving the goalposts. Just responding to where y’all are placing them and making comparisons to schools that aren’t a fair comparison.

GT is very unique in it’s situation. Even so, we’ve beaten teams of the caliber you guys bring up multiple times with this offense. What does that tell you? This O allows us to punch above our weight.

Now, you can counter with, “getting rid of this O would allow us to recruit better talent”. That may very well be the case, but then we are playing the same game as everyone else with incrementally better talent (for us) versus still superior talent for them. I think that’s a losing formula for a school like GT.
 

TechPreacher

Banned
Messages
258
Ok, you’re totally moving the goalposts here. First, we couldn’t recruit at the level of LSU and UGA. Now, we can’t recruit at the level of lesser tier schools. I’d say UNC and NCST and UVA are recruiting at a third tier level, and your quote says even that is unrealistic for us.

And I don’t think it’s an unfair comparison. UNC makes fun of NCST as the “Ag” school and a bunch of rednecks. They still recruit well. No one goes to UVA games, but I guess that’s an unfair comparison too.

But, either in terms of recruiting or player development, we aren’t putting as many players in the NFL as we did under Gailey. That’s comparing us against not very good us. With the same academic requirements. And we’ve had a stable offensive system for 11 years. That’s enough time to work out solutions to your problems. Why did we have inconsistencies on offense the last few years?

CPJ pulled an upperclassman because he said the player was making the wrong calls on offense. Should that be happening in a scheme that’s been in place for 11 years with basically the same coaches?

Where is the player development? Or is he putting an unrealistic expectation on the player? It keeps happening, so it’s got to be one of those.

Jim Grobe developed solid lines at Wake Forest by using a lot of red shirting. Wake would trade our recruiting issues for theirs in a heartbeat, but a smart coach made things work.

Iowa State is playing well. I can’t believe we don’t have a better recruiting pitch than they do. Do I have to list 30 schools playing better than we are that aren’t factories to find one that you think we should recruit or develop better than?

It’s one thing to have some recruiting disadvantages (and no university is perfect, so all schools have some disadvantages and advantages). Eleven years is enough time to develop relationships and a pipeline of players to fit your system.

If you’re a high school coach, you want your kids on scholarship. Most don’t. Where are the coaches that are getting their players ready for Tech?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

We don't have any 11-year veterans on the team. No player has been in this system 11 years. Every year, 15 - 20 new players have to learn the system. The "11 year" argument is a weak straw man, and almost all the stuffing has already been beaten out of that one.
 

TechPreacher

Banned
Messages
258
I disagree with your assessment that changing the head coach won’t change recruiting. I recognize we have some inherent limitations but CPJ isn’t exactly an exciting relatable guy for younger kids. If we got a younger guy in here that put a bigger emphasis on recruiting we might get better results without changing much else.

Look at UGA. Richt was able to recruit top 15 each year but with changing nothing but head coaches they now recruit in the top 3.

The head man does impact recruiting as much as some like to think they don’t.


More than the coach changed in the cesspool. $$$$$$$$$$ The bag man network opened up the pocket book for the new coach.
 

heyhellowhatsup

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
239
Tech has more in common in terms of curriculum, student body (read: international), etc. with Cal, Rice, Carnegie Mellon, and maybe Stanford than NC State, Wake, or other schools mentioned over the last few pages.

Of those schools, Stanford has been better but they’re also the most advantaged. Cal stinks, Rice stinks, and CMU is D3. Note: Both Rice and Cal have changed coaches recently and are both dumpster fires.
 

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
4,941
That may very well be the case, but then we are playing the same game as everyone else with incrementally better talent (for us) versus still superior talent for them. I think that’s a losing formula for a school like GT.

If we rewind the clock just a decade, GT was able to bring in enough talent to avoid losing seasons and go to bow; games annually playing essentially the same schedule. We had the same issues with academics and majors as we do now. Honestly, if CCG had found 1 QB and/or OC, I felt like we were much closer to breaking through to that proverbial "next level" than we currently are.

Yes, I know about the 51-7's and his record against Uga which got him fired. I do NOT want CCG back. But the TO once gave us a scheme advantage. But in the evolutionary game of college FB, it doesn't any longer (i point to 1-4 against Duke as my main piece of evidence). Losing seasons used to be outliers. Bowl games were a given as they should be in the current scenario of 85 bowl games.Now, we may be looking at 3 out of the last 4 seasons with records below .500. The game changes...we haven't. And I agree that some of this lies at the feet not just of our HC but the 3 stooges - our 3 previous AD's who were asleep during their watch.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,499
We don't have any 11-year veterans on the team. No player has been in this system 11 years. Every year, 15 - 20 new players have to learn the system. The "11 year" argument is a weak straw man, and almost all the stuffing has already been beaten out of that one.

We do have 11 year veterans. They’re on the coaching staff.

They’ve had 11 years to build relationships with coaches throughout the southeast. Do we have a better pipeline of players and high school coaching relationships than we had in 2008? (No, it’s possibly weaker)

A freshman in any academic program has a path they progress through. Any incoming players should be going through the same kind of development plan as players—growing in their knowledge of the playbook and the calls, developing physically, and becoming solid players.

Player development should be an automatic at this point. All the structure and support for development should be in place. TCU did it. Other schools have done it.

By this point, we should be consistent as a program, and should have hit our long term trend for this staff.

Now, you can say we were missing some thing from the AD, but after 11 years, you should have gotten things done in spite of the last AD.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,581
Now, you can counter with, “getting rid of this O would allow us to recruit better talent”. That may very well be the case, but then we are playing the same game as everyone else with incrementally better talent (for us) versus still superior talent for them. I think that’s a losing formula for a school like GT.

The current offense is not nearly the advantage people make it out to be. It isn't the great leveler allowing us to overcome huge talent differences consistently. We already play the same game as everyone else with worse talent. The option doesn't change that, especially now that so many offenses are using option concepts and mobile OLmen and QBs are becoming more prevalent. The big advantage it has in highschool is because of the, theoretical, lack of recruiting. When you can recruit that advantage largely goes away. It's a good offense, and Johnson is good at running it, but it isn't magic and doesn't hold the same advantage as it did 11 years ago.

We need to try and work through the recruiting disadvantage, not double down on it with an offense that recruits don't find attractive with a head coach that isn't a recruiter.
 

684Bee

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,644
A key point that is only mentioned seldomly is that most of the staff that came with CPJ is now gone. Monken, Spencer, and Bohannon were huge losses.

I do think this hurt.

I embrace what GT is. We ARE unique. That is good.

Our offense fits with that.

That said, it needs new blood and new life breathed into it. I think Monken can do that.

I’d bring him in, with the understanding that he will have an OC. That way, he can focus on big picture (I think he’d be a better ambassador as HC than CPJ), and the OC can focus on the O.

Our identity should be that we are the premier destination for option coaches. The service academies become our default farm system.
 

Jacket in Dairyland

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,053
If we rewind the clock just a decade, GT was able to bring in enough talent to avoid losing seasons and go to bow; games annually playing essentially the same schedule. We had the same issues with academics and majors as we do now. Honestly, if CCG had found 1 QB and/or OC, I felt like we were much closer to breaking through to that proverbial "next level" than we currently are.

Yes, I know about the 51-7's and his record against Uga which got him fired. I do NOT want CCG back. But the TO once gave us a scheme advantage. But in the evolutionary game of college FB, it doesn't any longer (i point to 1-4 against Duke as my main piece of evidence). Losing seasons used to be outliers. Bowl games were a given as they should be in the current scenario of 85 bowl games.Now, we may be looking at 3 out of the last 4 seasons with records below .500. The game changes...we haven't. And I agree that some of this lies at the feet not just of our HC but the 3 stooges - our 3 previous AD's who were asleep during their watch.
++++++ and +++++++
 

tmhunter52

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,449
I do think this hurt.

I embrace what GT is. We ARE unique. That is good.

Our offense fits with that.

That said, it needs new blood and new life breathed into it. I think Monken can do that.

I’d bring him in, with the understanding that he will have an OC. That way, he can focus on big picture (I think he’d be a better ambassador as HC than CPJ), and the OC can focus on the O.

Our identity should be that we are the premier destination for option coaches. The service academies become our default farm system.
Drop a classification and rule the world!
 

tmhunter52

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,449
Never said there are disincentives.... If we win 6 games this year and go to a bowl.. CPJ is safe and will get a bonus...

What I am saying is that anything less than 6 wins that is where the new contract allows the AD to exercise the new options if he so chooses.... (buyout, retirement options that are friendly to GTAA)
Good luck finding those 6 wins...
 

Jacket in Dairyland

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,053
A lot of the discussion has been about the TO and being able to recruit, or not, top talent. How does that explain our mediocre defenses for like forever ? We play a 4-3 or a 3-4 and those translate to skills that the NFL is looking for. Yet we almost never get D athletes drafted. Why not ? So our recruiting is very difficult for defensive players , and very,very difficult for offensive players because of a scheme ? Or is it that the defense practices against an offense they almost never play against ?
 

684Bee

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,644
A lot of the discussion has been about the TO and being able to recruit, or not, top talent. How does that explain our mediocre defenses for like forever ? We play a 4-3 or a 3-4 and those translate to skills that the NFL is looking for. Yet we almost never get D athletes drafted. Why not ? So our recruiting is very difficult for defensive players , and very,very difficult for offensive players because of a scheme ? Or is it that the defense practices against an offense they almost never play against ?

It’s also about lack of continuity on that side. We’ve changed DCs, along with some of the staff, every few years.

Recruiting is building relationships. Need continuity there.
 

THWG16

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
811
A lot of you folks will not like what I have to say in this thread. It needs to be said,m however. I also intend to write essentially the same thoughts in a letter or email to Stansbury.

By way of background, I am a GT alum and have held GT season tickets for over 30 years now. I have absolutely loved GT football over the years and been (imho, of course...LOL) a loyal supporter. I am not a big $ donor, but a consistent small $ donor.

I had the choice this past Saturday of attending the GT-Duke homecoming game....or the LSU-Georgia game in Baton Rouge. I decided to go to Baton Rouge. I am SO glad that I did. Judging from the comments and write-ups I have seen, it sounds like GT was the same old GT that I have grown so so tired of seeing. A one-dimensional offense....which like ALL one-dimensional offenses can look great when you are playing inferior teams but is in trouble when you play a defense with a pulse. GT simply must, must learn how to have an effective passing attack. Watching this team play without a passing threat is painful, and I find I simply can not do it anymore.

The contrast of being in a sold-out Death Valley and cheering on a team that plays big boy football (and can match the Dawgs in physicality) was amazing. It appears to my untrained eyes that GT can no longer match Duke in physicality. LSU was able to succeed, but ONLY because UGa was never able to know what the Tiger offense was going to do. Their balance between running and passing was key. While I am not saying that GT has to pass as much as a 'standard' offense, they must be able to pass much more effectively and at least a bit more often than they do now to establish that passing threat correctly and keep defenses off balance.

Overall, the GT football program the last 4 years has sunk to a level that makes it unappealing for me to attend anymore. While certainly, I put some of the blame on the head coach, the problems certainly look like they go deeper to me. Our inability to recruit in this modern age is a serious...no, an enormous handicap. It sure looks to me like we can no longer seriously aspire to be competitive with Georgia or Clemson......and in fact, by all appearances we have sunk below Duke and into the bottom tier of ACC football programs. I think most rational observers would say we are on our way to a second straight losing season without a bowl, but more importantly, we simply cannot beat ANY Power 5 football team unless we play error-free and execute crisply.

Many of the problems GT faces are not of this coaches making. I find it very frustrating to read posts that say simplistic things like "O'Leary could recruit better"....it was a different world back then, folks. Just stop it with the simplistic solutions. While I obviously have problems with our head coach as cited above, the bigger issues that are plaguing GT are NOT his problems and will NOT be solved by firing CPJ.

This school has to decide if it wants to play big boy football. Those of you in the fan base who argue that 'GT is different' and that 'we will never sacrifice academic integrity for football' should be prohibited from complaining about results, imho. You are dooming a once proud program with a long history to the doldrums of Tulane, or perhaps Vanderbilt. You will lose fans like me, over the course of time. It takes a lot for me to wander away from GT football, but when I realize we can no longer realistically compete at the top levels, I lose faith, interest and desire. Under Gailey, we were horrid on offense but with the athletes we had we were still able to compete with most teams on any given Saturday. (His inability to beat UGa was inexcusable and got him fired.)

GT has to make changes, starting with changes at the very top, things that only Peterson can shove through the BOR, to compete effectively. This team is not merely one decent QB away forn competing. One decent QB would make us competitive with Duke, and Virginia....but we need more than that to be able to survive and thrive.

GT is in a town with many alternatives. GT needs to be able to grow its fan base, both so it can grow its revenue stream, but also so it can make the home stadium an electric and exciting place to play. The way things have been going the last 4 years, the opposite is happening. Not only are we NOT attracting the sidewalk college fans who might otherwise take an interest and become GT fans, we are in fact, slowly losing longtime fans like me. Many simply decide they won't go anywhere. A smaller number decide they have a rooting interest with other teams (in my case, where I grew up).

GT needs to take a serious and deep look at itself. Four new guys helping with recruiting won't turn this around. Firing CPJ won't turn this around. Even Stansbury cannot solve this by himself. He is doing the right things in trying to raise much more serious money, but in fact until I see GT address its fundamental issues, I am not willing to commit serious money to this program. GT now must prove to me that it is serious about playing big boy football, and if it is not willing to do that...fine. But don't expect me to contribute to a program that is saying we will not compete at the highest levels because "we're different". Join Navy's conference and have fun. Continue down this path and drive away fans like me.

Oh, and by the way, LSU fans HATED having a day game as well :)
I agree with your point about the issues are deeper than our coaching, but people should realize & see that running a 3option system hurts recruiting even more . High school kids are not attracted to this . Service academies run it cause they have no choice. GT is bette than that !! But you’re right about the AD & the brass @ GT: they need to decide if we want to pony up & play big boy ball or join the ivy league& focus on being MIT of the south
 

THWG16

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
811
We don’t need fans like you. Actually you don’t count as a fan as fans are loyal to their team no matter what the outcome. Feel free to adopt a new team perhaps UGA since you’ve decided what it takes. If you do make sure you change the school title on your degree as well. Happy to watch you go and let the gates of Bobby Dodd hit you in the *** on the way out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don’t think he meant it that way
 

RiseUpATL

Banned
Messages
147
We sound like a girl in an abusive relationship making excuses for the abusive boyfriend and why she stays with him even though he treats her like **** because she feels like she can’t do any better. One day he is going to be man we want him to be.
 

THWG16

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
811
The current offense is not nearly the advantage people make it out to be. It isn't the great leveler allowing us to overcome huge talent differences consistently. We already play the same game as everyone else with worse talent. The option doesn't change that, especially now that so many offenses are using option concepts and mobile OLmen and QBs are becoming more prevalent. The big advantage it has in highschool is because of the, theoretical, lack of recruiting. When you can recruit that advantage largely goes away. It's a good offense, and Johnson is good at running it, but it isn't magic and doesn't hold the same advantage as it did 11 years ago.

We need to try and work through the recruiting disadvantage, not double down on it with an offense that recruits don't find attractive with a head coach that isn't a recruiter.
 
Top