Auburn fans have a thread about GT on their board

Deleted member 2897

Guest
and are debating why we suck in all of the big three men’s sports. I’ve been a GT fan for 30+ years and I have to admit it seems we have hit almost rock bottom in the least three decades for combination of football, basketball, and baseball.
I’m most confident CPJ can right the ship, but no bowl games in 2 of 3 seasons is plain bad. I don’t know what to think of Pastner and BBall, seems scandalous and not sure he will work out. I could easily see us not making the NCAA tourney for the next 4-5 years. Baseball has been stuck in mediocrity for ten years sans a lucky run in ACC tourney. We are stuck like Clemson was with the last years of Jack Legget coaching them, we always joke fire CDH but until that happens I don’t see us winning a regional for a very long time and we used to do it at a pretty good clip.

I have numerous Clemson fans who have also recently asked me what has happened to GT in sports, we seem to be on same level as Weak Forest these days except they have a better baseball team.

How about we start a thread about how Auburn is the 200th best college in the country?
https://www.forbes.com/colleges/auburn-university-main-campus/
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
I think that is what they hire the AD to do. I also think that TStan is doing an outstanding job of energizing the donors and fans. It seems to me that he really understands GT. He is doing a lot of the things that people on here have been asking for, and he doesn't get enough credit on here for the things he is doing.

I’m glad we have Tstan. Our last one was horrid. Bad hire. Then no oversight or corrections by Bud to fix. We’d still be stuck with him if he hadn’t jumped to “greener pastures.”

None of it is worth praising Bud for imo. You can feel free to send him a letter of appreciation.
 

Blumpkin Souffle

Bidly Biddington III
Messages
1,367
I’m glad we have Tstan. Our last one was horrid. Bad hire. Then no oversight or corrections by Bud to fix. We’d still be stuck with him if he hadn’t jumped to “greener pastures.”

None of it is worth praising Bud for imo. You can feel free to send him a letter of appreciation.
I understood his departure as a soft firing, much like CTR.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,000
I’m glad we have Tstan. Our last one was horrid. Bad hire. Then no oversight or corrections by Bud to fix. We’d still be stuck with him if he hadn’t jumped to “greener pastures.”

None of it is worth praising Bud for imo. You can feel free to send him a letter of appreciation.

I wasn't praising Bud for the TStan hire or the work he had been doing. I was just pointing out that the things TStan is doing are the AD's responsibilities. Bud is ultimately responsible, but his job is to delegate and oversee not to actually do.

As to MBob's departure, it was obvious that either he or CPJ was going to have to leave. CPJ was in pretty open rebellion against the GTAA. I am glad that behind the scenes MBob is the one who left.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
I wasn't praising Bud for the TStan hire or the work he had been doing. I was just pointing out that the things TStan is doing are the AD's responsibilities. Bud is ultimately responsible, but his job is to delegate and oversee not to actually do.

As to MBob's departure, it was obvious that either he or CPJ was going to have to leave. CPJ was in pretty open rebellion against the GTAA. I am glad that behind the scenes MBob is the one who left.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Delegate and oversee. Delegate..check. Oversee / enable........form your own opinion but I see little evidence of it.
 

Skeptic

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,372
For starters we can't sign kids that can hardly spell their own name. Next we have had a nonexistent AD after DRad until now. PH was doing a lousy job with no incentive to be competitive with that outrageous contract and we are still paying him. BG tried with transfers but that doesn' work long term. We have been hamstrung with having to pay off fired coaches for a while. That can free up some money. PJ is not a great recruiter and has missed in hiring D coaches for the type of kids we are getting. It all seems to boil down to recruiting and $ plus we aren't running a semipro developement organisation either. Our kids have to actually do classwork.
It seems always to be the same rationalizations, mixing in a couple of snarky observations about "others". No question there are any number of things that need to be fixed, improved, instituted, whatever. But you can end any kind of "university" argument with a question: if GT is a university, then where is the "university" curriculum? Stanford is an engineering school, pretty good I'm told, but look at its course offerings. Clemson is an engineering school, pretty good I'm told, but look at its course offerings. I'm sure there are many such examples. Tech seems to want to talk to recruits about how much money they can make. As long as they want to do technical or engineering type stuff. In other words, something they don't want to do. And that is the nub of it. Knock it, condemn it, ridicule it, do whatever. But these schools are graduating players and said players seem to get jobs. Tech can and should do all the other things and the cold, hard fact remains: it is not going to be a Clemson, Miami or FSU. Blue chippers look at calculus and physics and say ... what do you think they say? I've been a fan a long time and want to see them do really well. But the scales are long gone from my eyes.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,000
Delegate and oversee. Delegate..check. Oversee / enable........form your own opinion but I see little evidence of it.

I you want to criticize Bud for not getting rid of MBob sooner, I think that is a fair criticism. I don't know what was happening behind the scenes between MBob and the GTAA trustees, but it should have been apparent that he was disenfranchising: The fan base, the GTAA employees, and the coaches.

However, I was responding first to criticism that Bud doesn't fund athletics enough, and then that he isn't the out front leader of athletics. My response to the first is that the school funds athletics to the maximum allowed. My response to the second is that the out front guy should be the AD instead of the school president. I have seen Bud at athletic events. When I have seen him he was engaging fans and donors. I don't know for a fact, but I suspect that he meets with donors to both athletics and academics at other times also. If he was as anti-athletics as some have said, why would he be at the events? Why would he be engaging the athletic donors? It just seems to me that some peoples general frustrations are aimed at people who might have some blame for issues, but aren't anywhere near as bad as people seem to believe.
 

augustabuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,412
It seems always to be the same rationalizations, mixing in a couple of snarky observations about "others". No question there are any number of things that need to be fixed, improved, instituted, whatever. But you can end any kind of "university" argument with a question: if GT is a university, then where is the "university" curriculum? Stanford is an engineering school, pretty good I'm told, but look at its course offerings. Clemson is an engineering school, pretty good I'm told, but look at its course offerings. I'm sure there are many such examples. Tech seems to want to talk to recruits about how much money they can make. As long as they want to do technical or engineering type stuff. In other words, something they don't want to do. And that is the nub of it. Knock it, condemn it, ridicule it, do whatever. But these schools are graduating players and said players seem to get jobs. Tech can and should do all the other things and the cold, hard fact remains: it is not going to be a Clemson, Miami or FSU. Blue chippers look at calculus and physics and say ... what do you think they say? I've been a fan a long time and want to see them do really well. But the scales are long gone from my eyes.
Good points. And to the gist of your argument, Tech is an engineering school, the others you mentioned have an engineering school.
 

pbrown520

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
586
I don't understand why people are having a hard time understanding that the school cannot legally fund athletics. It's pretty simple, you cannot nor should you be able to use academics funding to pay for athletics and that does and should include student fees. Getting pissed at the school president about not paying for our athletics program enhancements is misguided anger. The problem of athletics funding rests squarely on the GTAA and the fans.
 
Top